1 John 1:9

1 John 1:9 (NIV)
"9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."

Most Christians read this verse to be: God is faithful and just to forgive me and He will purify me when I confess my sins to Him.

I used to believe that way. However I realize how weak and helpless I was as a Christian! Each time I have done something wrong, I feel condemned. I need to ask God for forgiveness. Each day I have 1001 sins to confess. Or perhaps even more. Does God keep track of my sins? Or do I have to remember them?

And what happens if I don't confess (maybe I was angry with God that day) or if I had forgotten one sin unintentionally? Will God still forgive me? Or will He say "Nevermind"? But God is not frivolous, isn't He?

Deep inside I know He forgives me. So why do I need to confess? I can never feel worthy enough to receive His love and be in a perfect fellowship with Him because I can never know if I still had that ONE sin unconfessed.

Most Christians understand or were taught that if we confess our sins, God will be faithful and just in accordance with his good character and He will forgive us as He said He will.

Does it mean that when I don't confess, I fall out of fellowship with God? This does not make any sense or make me secure in God at all. Does it mean that Christ's blood is only good and active if we confess our sins? In God's point of view, either Christ has done the perfect work to keep us in fellowship with God, or Christ hasn't.

What about the verse that God will remember our sins no more? Isn't it an insult to remind God of our sins again when He literally said He does not remember them?

If we confess our sins, are we also saying we now have BROKEN fellowship with God? Because acknowledging those sins means we are now in darkness (apart from God). Darkness has no part with God who is Light.

And we are then to seek forgiveness to restore the relationship back and bring us back into the Light? But then, isn't Jesus' blood continously flowing to keep us in the fellowship? I mean, who wants a relationship of this nature? Surely not I.

An example of a husband-and-wife relationship in a marriage covenant. If my wife does wrong, can she be 'downgraded' to my girlfriend? That is not secure to her because I can ditch her anytime. And only when she says sorry that I will bring the relationship back to wife status. Now, who will want to marry me?

Furthermore if we have an everlasting covenant together in marriage, how can we be in unbroken fellowship if I keep 'downgrading' her? The marriage covenant sustains us, reminding me as a husband that my wife is always part of me. And no matter what she does, she is still part of me! And I am faithful in keeping to the covenant of marriage. It does not depend on how good she is (of course I would want her to be a good wife) but in that marriage covenant, I love her as she is.

Likewise, how can we downgrade ourselves each time we sin and we need to confess our sins to God in order to be in fellowship with him again? How can sin be greater than Jesus' blood?

I kept having this niggling feeling that something was either not right with me. Or that my understanding of the Word was not right. I think it's the latter. So I began to read deeply, trying to understand God's love and heart for me. I also read the the preceding and after text of 1 John 1:9 to get the whole picture.

Let's read it slowly (1 John 1:5-10, Amplified).
"5And this is the message [the message of promise] which we have heard from Him and now are reporting to you: God is Light, and there is no darkness in Him at all [no, not in any way].

6[So] if we say we are partakers together and enjoy fellowship with Him when we live and move and are walking about in darkness, we are [both] speaking falsely and do not live and practice the Truth [which the Gospel presents].

7But if we [really] are living and walking in the Light, as He [Himself] is in the Light, we have [true, unbroken] fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses (removes) us from all sin and guilt [keeps us cleansed from sin in all its forms and manifestations].

8If we say we have no sin [refusing to admit that we are sinners], we delude and lead ourselves astray, and the Truth [which the Gospel presents] is not in us [does not dwell in our hearts].

9If we [freely] admit that we have sinned and confess our sins, He is faithful and just (true to His own nature and promises) and will forgive our sins [dismiss our lawlessness] and [continuously] cleanse us from all unrighteousness [everything not in conformity to His will in purpose, thought, and action].

10If we say (claim) we have not sinned, we contradict His Word and make Him out to be false and a liar, and His Word is not in us [the divine message of the Gospel is not in our hearts]."

Bham, the truth just hit me! It blew my mind and shed light into my dark room of confusion and dilemma.

Oh how wrong can we be! How little we understand God's great love for us. We have misinterpreted His Words!

With this new knowledge of truth, I am now assured of God's love for me. Let me share what the verses mean:

v5-7
How can we walk in fellowship with God when there exist sin in our lives? God is Light and Truth. If I walk with Him in the Light, that means I am 'perfect' as He is. This is God's holy standard - either we are of the Light (sinless) or of Darkness (sinful) as the passage tells me. Those of darkness cannot walk with Him.

To be in the Light and having UNBROKEN fellowship with God, I need to be without sin or sinless. Am I? Let the next few verses tell me whether I am a sinner or I have committed sins in my life.

v8
If I say that we are walking in the Light (as perfect as God is) because we have NO sin, we are wrong! The Word says we are lying when we say we do not have sin. Of course we have!

Right from the beginning, Adam sinned and all mankind fell because of his one act of disobedience. The Gospel tells us we are all like sheep and have gone astray... you know the rest.

v9
If we admit that we do have sin and conclude that we are sinners, we are right! But how can we sinners walk in UNBROKEN (keyword) fellowship with God? How can sinners be partakers with a holy and righteous God, let alone be in fellowship with Him?

By confessing our sins? It's like a see-saw fellowship!

This is the part many Christians misinterpret - God's faithfulness. The verse in Amplified says God is faithful in keeping us cleansed so that we may have UNBROKEN fellowship with Him at all times, everyday, every hour, minute and second!

Now isn't this good news? It is to me! Who keeps us cleansed? Who sustains the unbroken fellowship? Yes it is God!

Do you see this even more powerful part? It is not God being faithful to our confessions of sin(s) but it is God being faithful to what Christ has done! It is God being faithful to the ever-cleansing blood of Christ! Wow...

When we sin, God is faithful to the ever-flowing and ever-cleansing properties of the blood of Jesus to keep us walking in the Light with Him. Each time we sin, the blood cleanses. And it continues to cleanse. Thereby keeping the fellowship - UNBROKEN! Hallelujah! Isn't that wonderful?

It's like this drop of black ink (representing sin) falling into this huge, fast-flowing river (representing Christ's blood). It's is more than enough to wash away all of my sins!

v10
If we say we DO NOT sin, we are the real liars, not God. We indeed have committed sins everyday as the Word says.

The Truth
In this new truth, these very verses say that God is the one keeping the fellowship with us UNBROKEN in Christ. How? By the continous cleansing blood of Christ! When God sees the blood, He is faithful to His promise that the shed blood is more than enough to keep us in fellowship with Him.

Now that brings a whole new truth and security. It creates an awesome awareness of God's love for me. He loves me so much that He desires and wants to have fellowship with me - ALL THE TIME. UNBROKEN!

Initially God cannot do so because of the presence of sin in our lives. But now it is made possible by Jesus' blood. It doesn't matter to Him now that I am a sinner or that I have committed and unconfessed sins because each time He looks at me, He does not see sin.

He sees me perfect as He is. Christ's blood is ever-flowing, ever-cleansing! It is cleansing me continuously.

That's why we can have unbroken fellowship with Him! And walk in the Light with Him!

I can rest assured in His love for me. I can rest in Christ complete work at the cross. God has redeemed us and He is faithful to His promise in keeping us redeemed in Christ continuously and eternally! Now, those are some powerful words!

"The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not be in want;
He makes me lie down..."

Rest, O my soul.

It hurts when I saw this video

I forced myself to watch it (original link). Initially I thought it was one of those propaganda videos - you know the kind to stir up dissention against the government during National Day.

However towards the end (after 10mins) of the video when the old man by the pavement started singing a song with his guitar, I was totally glued to the screen. I felt helpless and sorry for those folks who once gave their all for the country. This is how the country gave back to them.

See for yourself and make your own conclusions.

Law vs Grace

My wife told me I was wasting my time and money going back to this 'doctor'.

"Why are you so stubborn?" she said curtly. "He cannot help or alleviate your sickness. Go see someone else who can."

"But I want to know what's wrong with me," I replied indignantly.

"You already know what's wrong with you. He gave you a report, didn't he?"

"Yeap!" I showed her the report. "And...?" she asked.

"And what?"

"Where is the prescription to help you?"

Duh.
---
But this is precisely what is happening to us as Christians. We try to keep the Law and return to it even though we know the Law cannot help us (see my previous article).

It points us to our weaknesses and our shortcomings that we may never be as perfect and holy as God is. The truth: we are not even close. It's like jumping on this earth, hoping one day we'll jump high enough to reach the moon.

What's worse is that the Law does absolutely nothing to lift a finger to help you! Nor does it tell us how to reach God. Nor does it have the power to save us.

Rather it condemns us all. It tells us we are going to die, sheep waiting to be slaughtered! The more we read the Law, the more we are aware of our sins and the more we draw God's wrath to ourselves.

The Law brings death. It makes us Christians weak. So why do many Chrisitans keep going back to the 'doctor' who cannot heal them? Why do we want to preach and uphold the Law? Surely there is something else?

Remember the parable of the new wine in new wineskin? See Luke 5:36-39.

36He told them this parable: "No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old. 37And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. 38No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins. 39And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, 'The old is better.' "

Most interpretations agree that this parable refered to Jesus' new teaching which will not fit within the Jewish religion, or within the religious structures of the time. Many Christians have also interpreted it as the start of a new religion separate from Judaism, and from that of John the Baptist.

Let me suggest this interpretation:
The old wine in old wineskin represents the Law and the Law-bidders. The new wine in new wineskin represents Grace and Grace-followers.

Jesus said nobody is foolish enough to mix both (old patch in new garment and old wine in new wineskin will ruin both).

Isn't it true you cannot mix Law and Grace? Think about it.

The Law
The Law demands everyone to follow it to the 'T'. You cannot miss a step nor can you break one without breaking all. And how God blesses you is based on your efforts in fulfilling the Law - "Thou shalt...".

You shall. You shall not. You.

It focuses on YOU - your efforts and your faithfulness to observe all of it to be right with God. It is called self-righteousness - reaching God with your own efforts. And that's what Jesus calls the Pharisees.

Failure to comply means curses, poor harvests (results, outcomes), distance from God, etc and many times early death.

The only way out is someone must die and blood must be shed in order for the sins committed to be covered. That's why the animal sacrifices in the Old Testaments. Someone must pay for the sins committed and usually it is the innocent lamb or dove.

Grace
In grace, however, Jesus said He fulfilled the Law. He was the spotless, sinless Lamb who paid the sacrifice for our sins. When he was on the cross, he cried out, "It is finished!"

Jesus has done it all! When he was flogged and whipped, every lash on His back was the stroke of the Law demanding blood. When he hung on the cross, he was a cursed man and He carried all our sins according to the Law. That's why He cried asking God why He had turned his back on him. Jesus was so disfigured and marred by all the world's sins that God had to look away.

And God's anger burned upon Jesus. That's why Jesus, for once in his life, felt the separation from God. He had always called God his Father but for once, he cried Eloi, Eloi (my God, my God) instead!

And Jesus was the Lamb that was slain. There was a divine exchange (more of it later). He took all our ugliness, impurities and in exchange, gave us his beauty and perfection.

So that we might have forgiveness when he was judged; we might have long life when his was short. So that we might have wholeness in mind and body, wheareas he was anguished and stricken, carrying all our diseases and sicknesses (Isaiah 53:4). Jesus died alone and apart from God so that most importantly, we now have acceptance before a holy God as required by the Law.

Did we ever deserve such love and kindness from God who is not only holy yet loving, righteous yet merciful?

Absolutely no! But we got it freely. That's amazing grace! That's unfailing love! Because God so loved us that He gave... His only begotten Son that whomsoever believed in Him shall have eternal life. Well, this is another topic by itself.

Justice and mercy kissed for the first time. The demands of the Law were exacted, God's justice was met and His anger was exhausted. The perfect Lamb was sacrificed. The sinners are freed.

The curtain before the Holy of Holies was torn apart so that Man for the first time may enter freely into God's presence through His Son. Grace gives life wheareas the Law condemns.

Life Through the Spirit (Romans 8)
"1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. "

What powerful verses and statement that draws us to Christ!

Back to the old wine in old wineskin and new wine in new wineskin. We cannot mix Law and Grace.

Either we try to reach God through our efforts in observing the Law and pay the consequences when we fail to meet to the requirements, or we wholly and freely rest in the finished work of Christ - that He has done everything required of the Law.

Which life do we want to live in? A life of worry when you may 'fall out' of God's favour based on your observing the Law, or a life where you know your standing in God is always secure because of the finished work on the cross?

Your efforts vs Christ's finished work.

As Jesus says, no one is foolish to mix the two. No one can follow the Law and yet say he is in grace. You cannot do both at the same time.

I say to you, choose the new wine. That is the power of grace. That is the gospel.

---
Hope this has bring a new light in where you want to go in your walk with God. Coming up next (hopefully) is 'Christ's death - what does it give me?'

God bless.

The Ten Commandments: the before and after

I've realized that many people still think that God is angry with them. Especially when we foul it up or 'sinned'. Or when we had done something that we shouldn't do and the bible clearly states that it's wrong, we deserve what we get.

And we should expect bad things to happened to us. Should we?

Yes, this is the kind of mentality I'm talking about. I'm sure many Christians (and non-Christians) can identify with these few thoughts:

• "Er, perhaps I've done something that God is displeased with."
• "I deserve it."
• "There must be some sins I've accidentally done and have yet to confess and be forgiven."
• "If I had more faith in God, then this wouldn't have happened."
• "This is my fault because I was angry with <someone> or I had bad thoughts about so-and-so."
• "Karma, what you had done comes back to you."
• "You reap what you had sown."
• ...etc

The basis is that:

1. I've sinned
2. Bad consequences should result. I deserve them.
3. God (or whomever or circle of life or karma) is right in allowing it to happen

Perhaps in the next few posts I hope, I can banish some of our misconceptions and what the bible says about 'our sins'.

---
Let's start with the Law (or the Ten Commandments) first. This was in response to Mr Wang's blog but I disgress.

A lot of Christians hold the Law in the highest regards. Even non-Chrisitians and boy, can they quote it better than we Christians do! It is like the pinnacle, the epitome of the bible - THE LAW. Don't play-play.

It is what God demands of a person to be right with Him, to be holy and pure. Failure means bad consequences. And it is righteous and just for God to zap anyone as a result of that sin.

If one didn't die but had misfortunes, it's called mercy. In doing so, God is righteous and merciful.

And that was what happened in the Old Testaments. God's anger and justice were shown through fatal deaths by the thousands, sicknesses, curses, calamities, failures, etc.

Before the Law (or 10 commandments) was given, God gave grace and mercy. It doesn't mean God allowed sin to reign over the land. But there wasn't any 'guide' to let man know what was expected of him to be holy and righteous. There was no 'yardstick' to measure how much 'sin' the people had committed.

People lived with different standards, or had different kinds of moral values. Man has a conscience (or in-built moral values). However this conscience can be seared and numbed through repeated doings and habits till the act becomes 'right'.

Yet God is slow to anger and abounding in love, wanting all to repent and turn back to him. On the other side, His holiness and righteousness demands a punishment.

It's like God was in a fix. He loved the sinner but hated the sin. How could He destroy one without destroying the other? (This is another topic I hope to cover in later posts.)

But what about Sodom and Gormorah? Didn't they live before the Law? God wiped them out, didn't He? So your argument that before the Law, God gave grace to the offenders is moot, right?

God's destruction on Sodom and Gormorah was because the people in those cities were so hardened in their hearts that they no longer hear God anymore. If you read carefully, God didn't want them wiped out.

In fact He waited for them to repent. He allowed Abraham to intercede for them. He was even ready to withhold His hand if there were only 10 righteous men in the whole city (against maybe a ten thousand population?).

Wow, that's a lot of grace and mercy for a city where the word 'sodomy' comes from!

And if only Abraham had counted down to 1 man, God would have spared the 2 cities. That's because Lot, his nephew, was amongst them. But Abraham didn't. Maybe he knew there wasn't much to hope for these 2 cities.

The point is before the Law was given, people didn't drop like flies or die because of God's wrath. He was slow in meting out the justice though His anger burned. Yet He was abounding in love and mercy to give the people to turn back to Him.

There were many instances when God could have zapped people but He didn't. Cain didn't drop dead for the first murder recorded in the bible. He murdered Abel in cold blood (that's why Abel's blood called for vengence, justice).

Well, Adam and Eve didn't die too! Abraham lived in spite of lying twice (mind you). Jacob lied too!

You see, people started to die in great numbers after the Law was given. Such was the power of the Law to give death.

3,000 died (remember this number) when Moses carried the Ten Commandments down Mount Sinai and saw the Israelites worshipping the golden calf. These very same people had previously boasted in their effort that they were able to do whatever God told them.

Wasn't it interesting that before the Law was given, they murmured in front of the Red Sea and didn't die? And even after they complained while in the desert, God still provided for them?

Yet immediately after the Law was given, the very first command - to worship the Lord God and Him only, was broken. It was an end to man's effort in trying to reach God's holiness and righteousness.

And the first murmurings had people dying again. And again thereafter...

This is what Paul wrote in the Romans. Before the Law was given, man lived by God's grace and mercy. However, when the Law was given, it pointed that man was imperfect. The Law itself is perfect and holy according to God's standard. It demands perfection and the keeping of it to be blessed.

Failure to keep it usually results in death, curses, diseases, etc. And these were rightly so as mentioned in the many deaths and misfortunes in the Old Testaments.

The breaking of 1 law = the breaking of 10 laws, ie if one lies, he is also guilty of commiting adultery.

That is God's standard for us! There is no big or small sin in God's eyes.

Alas! Tell me then, who can be righteous and stand before this holy God? Indeed the Word said we all are like sheep gone astray, waiting to be slaughtered.

The Law exposes that no man can boast of his works and efforts to enter the Kingdom. Yet it does not tell man how they can reach God's standard of holiness which is perfect.

It cannot save man but can only point to his weaknesses through Adam's sin.

That's why we need a Saviour. We need someone who identifies with us (must be a man), and must also perfect and sinless to fulfill the Law (divine like God). This someone will stand in the gap for us and also fulfil God's demand of perfection and holiness.

We all know his name - Jesus.

And when He died, His blood called out for grace and mercy (not justice and vengence as Abel's blood cried out). When the Holy Spirit fell upon the disciples and Peter preached, 3,000 people were saved! Remember that 3,000 died when the Law was given.

Grace gives life, the Law gives death.

Those who think they can (by their own efforts), He cannot save them. Just like the Pharisees. Only those who say "Lord, I cannot but You can" will be saved. These are evident with those 'sinners', outcasts and tax collectors whom the Pharisess scorned. Those people who know they cannot help themselves.

That's why Jesus says I've come for the sick and lost, not the well and self-righteous.

This is the New Covenent.

...more coming up in the next few days.

Mr Wang's blog on Christianity and TAR (part 2)

… continuing from below:

The truth is what you believe actually influences how you perceive things and how well you believe things will work for your favour.

So in a personal capacity in regards to self-belief, Mr Wang is right in saying so. But when it starts to link to Christianity, this good God who loves me works outside my self-belief.

He works in spite of myself and what I think Him to be.

PS. Will love to hear comments about what you think and your belief.

---
This is the part where I respond to ~[z][x]~ a Christian.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Very strangely, I am very much more inclined to Mr Wang's understanding than kaffein's, albeit being Christian myself. I apologize to Mr Wang and the other readers, but I would like to have a go, (yet again) at the Prosperity Gospel:

> Kaffein:
Prosperity gospel? Hmmm never heard of it. I have only heard of THE GOSPEL, which means GOOD NEWS. Whether one thinks prosperity is good or not, it's up to each individual.

For me I choose to believe my God will supply all my needs according to His riches in Christ Jesus. That includes material things.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Kaffein wrote: "I must disagree. Perhaps writing on God, when you don't know Him, seems a bit sweeping."

I don't quite get it, kaffein. What is it about Mr Wang's highlighting of the story of Jonah as an example of the common belief - "God's thoughts might be different from ours, our desires might be different from his" that you are disagreeing with, exactly?

> Kaffein:
Erm, I never remarked about Mr Wang's comments on Jonah. I was saying Mr Wang's perception of how one receives from God is based on how he believed it to be given to him. I just disagreed when he used the Christian faith link to it.

As for Jonah, you know what, God can pick another person to preach to the Ninevites. It wasn't God 'mis-using' his force, power& will to make Jonah follow his plans and purposes. Jonah was a prophet of God. He had made his life to be the God’s mouthpiece or whatever God told him to say. But he chose otherwise.

You know I’d zap Jonah for disobeying me if I’m God and I'll get another prophet to do his job. That’s why we make lousy gods. The God I know gives everyone a free choice to listen to or follow Him. Jonah's case was an example of how God loves even the wicked person and not just the Jews.

You see, God had a distinct plan when He did what He had to do to Jonah. Yet Jonah still had a choice throughout! But there was a deeper meaning why God ‘moved’ to get Jonah to preach to the Ninevites.

Jonah, being a Jew, didn't like the Gentiles. Even worse, he was hoping the message didn’t reach them so they wouldn’t repent and God would have to zap the Ninevites!. God's hand moved and ‘forced’ Jonah was to show Jonah that He loved the Gentiles as much as the Jews.

So did Jonah learn finally? Was he a better prophet after that? Don’t you think Jonah now understands God’s love better?

So to entirely say God distinctly had other plans/ideas for Jonah is true. Yet God gives everyone his free choice. God, who is not limited by space and time, knows Jonah will finally realize and go to the Ninevites to preach. And the Ninevites will repent.

That is the story of Jonah.

In the past, God's thoughts and ways were unknown and a mystery. But Jesus has said, the fullness of God has been revealed through Him. Who God is, Jesus is. So I think this verse about God's thoughts are different from ours is a bit misquoted. If you had known and received Jesus, the Holy Spirit in you will reveal God's purposes in your life. This is a different topic entirely now.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Kaffein wrote: "And if you think God has a different plan if people ask for materialistic gains, status, etc. I'm quite sure you don't really know Him."

There are MANY poor, faithful Christians living in third-world countries today. Why is it that these Christians never become as rich as say, many from the mega-churches in Singapore? You might think they lack faith. Many of them, however, would realize that they have received a contentment that no materialistic gain can offer. They do pray to get rich, but they might not, and they do not mind because they know God knows what is best for them! And that, I think, is what Christianity is about.

> Kaffein reply:
I never said there aren’t any poor Christians. They could have lived poorly because of the country, social, politic and economic reasons. They are there because they were born there. There are many reasons.

But frankly speaking, do you think they want to be in that situation? Don't say just Christians, even non-Christians will want to leave that country given a choice. I’ve never doubted a Christian’s faith should he wish to leave the 3rd world country.

Yet do you think the norm of selling one's daughters to become prostitutes because the country is in poverty is good? So do you think it is a blessing and glorifying to God to be poor? Yet I don't understand why Christians think poverty is good (IMHO). Prosperity gospel? Nope, just plain common sense.

I’m not interested in any prosperity gospel. I am interested in THE prosperity and provider. His name is Jesus.

There are many members in the body of Christ, living and serving in different locations and at different capacity. Some live in the 3rd world countries, others more affluent countries. Some are called into 3rd world countries to live amongst the people, to reach to them, to be the hands and feet of the body of Christ. Some are called into wealth mgmt, investment (Joseph, Abraham, Solomon, etc) and so through the financial wisdom God had given, the riches are used to bless the orphanages and ministries to help these missionaries. Others are called to be the mouth (eg. pastors, preachers, evangelists), the ears, the eyes, etc.

Let's not limit how Christians should be. If your believe being poor glorifies God, it’s your choice. For me and my house, I choose to want to bless others, be it spiritual or material things.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Kaffein wrote: If you read the bible, no one who calls upon Him was poor or needy. In fact, they were rather rich: Abraham, King Solomon, David, Joesph, Job, etc.

Was Job a typo? Because Job had like, everything taken away from him. Job's tragic story, his questioning, and his coming back to faith stand as countervailing evidence to your Prosperity-Gospel theology: God DOES NOT need to bless us with material wealth to be GOOD.

> Kaffein reply:
Did you read the whole of Job, ZX? Or did you only liked the part where Job was poor and lost everything?

1. Firstly, Job wished there was someone who could stand in the gap for him. In his time, he didn't have Christ to mediate on behalf of him. Now we have Jesus Christ who is our great High Priest and Mediator. So can Satan stand before God and accuse Christians now and take all blessings from them? That’s was what Job (and David) was hoping to have!

2. Second, did you ever read the end of Job story? Everything that was taken was given back to him, and even much more. So the question is not whether God had blessed Job with material wealth (my bible says he did), but whether Job took it or not. My bible says Job was the richest man alive then.

3. Thirdly, if you read carefully, who was it that blessed Job? It was God. If according to you, Job should give all away. Or did you believe that Job was struck down because he had so many things? If I’m reading the correct bible, it says God was the one who blessed Job and protected him.

4. If going by what you say again about God not needing to bless us materially, that means God shouldn't even bless Job after taking everything away from him, right? My bible tells me God blessed Job even more than what he had at first before Satan took them away! If I follow you, that meant Job should tell God, “No don't give me anymore stuff!”. Erm, that's not what my bible tells me.

5. Lastly, it was Satan who made a bargain with God. He lost. According to the book of law, Satan had not only to pay back what he stole from Job, but much more. So it's always a risk when Satan attacks a Christian.

I'm not sure if you can use Job as a good example because it's a one-off situation. I can see more richness and blessings of many others than the one-off Job in the Old Testaments. Yet in the end, Job was even richer. So somehow your support for Job doesn’t stand.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Yes, these 'wealth-promising' verses have often been misunderstood. Especially when Christians forget Jesus' reminders in Matthew 6:19 and 6:32-33.

> Kaffein reply:
Look at the context and whole chapter in Matt 6:19. He's talking about the Pharisees who often are showing off their fasting, flaunting their wealth and giving tithes to let everyone see how holy they are. I don’t believe Jesus was calling us hypocrites at all.

The LOVE of money is the root of evil. It is not money itself. A man with $10 can be greedier than a multi-millionaire. The problem isn't about money but our hearts.

The key verse is found in v21 "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." Jesus didn't say you shouldn't be rich, but if you put riches before God, money is your god. I'm quite sure you have misquoted.

Matthew 6:32-33.
"32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."

Again the key verse you've missed out is your Heavenly Father knows you need them. Them means material things which the pagans run after. Seek first his kingdom and His righteousness: what do these refer to?

Jesus refered the Kingdom to the new covenant God is going to make with the people. Many times, Jesus said: The Kingdom of God is here. His righteousness? Only one qualifies that name and that’s Jesus.

So this verse means seek God through Jesus, and all these things (includes material things) will be added unto you. Because the things he referred to were the very material things that pagans run after.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Kaffein wrote: If He had already given His best, why shall He withhold other things that He knows you need - financial, health, prosperity, wholeness of mind, etc?

Because He knows that these other "needs" can so very often, distract/blind us from his 'best'? If not, why in the world would Jesus have said "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24)?

> Kaffein reply:
Again you have misunderstood what Jesus said.

Jesus wasn't saying the rich man couldn't enter because he had great wealth. The rich man had great wealth and he did not want to let go of it. That was his god. The rich man also boasted in his works: honouring his parens, not murdering and loving his neighbours as himself. The man was basically proud because he boasted in many things - he thought himself better than others.

So Jesus pointed to him his weakness. That is his love for his great wealth. And the trust in his own efforts to enter the kingdom of God.

Remember Jesus said anyone who wants to follow Him must deny himself and his family? Yet I don't see Christians denying parents or their wives for the matter? Isn't it contradicting the law which says to honor your parents?

Jesus said if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out. If your hand causes you to sin, chop it off. Better to enter the kingdom maimed than to be thrown outside.

So why don't we all gouge our eyes and chop our hands? Which of us can safely say we don't have envious, jealous and wandering eyes? Or our hands have never done anything wrong?

What Jesus is saying is no one, by their own efforts can enter the Kindgom of God. That's why we need a saviour.

If I take Jesus' meaning literally, that means I should be poor and maimed and blind. Yet Jesus healed the blind! Why would He do that since the eye caused me to sin and not enter the kingdom? Likewise, God should not bless Job, or David or anyone of us at all? Yet again why am I working? Better if I go to the countryside and be a farmer and grow just enough for me and family.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
Kaffein wrote: And He gives freely to all who call on Him, by grace.

But surely, He showers his grace as well, in many other ways, to those who are not materialistically 'blessed'. Hebrews 13:5 - "Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, 'Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you'"

> Kaffein reply:
Ahhh the key word is LOVE OF MONEY. Not don't have money. I can have $10 in my pocket, yet I'm not satisfied. I can be a multi-millionaire, yet I'm not fulfilled. So it’s not the money but the love of it.

> ~[z][x]~ said...
No offense meant, kaffein. It is just that I really disagree with what is being taught in many churches in Singapore today. And you sounded uncannily like them. Would love to hear what you have to say, though. Thanks.

> Kaffein reply:
None taken. To each our own understanding. I just think you have missed out much of what God has in store for you.

You see, if I'm wrong, I'm still saved by grace, be it I’m rich or not. Well, if you are wrong, then you suffer needlessly on this earth.

Cheers,
Kaffein

Mr Wang's blog on Christianity and TAR (part 1)

Well, you can read the comments published in Mr Wang's blog.

I love a healthy debate. At the end of the day, it isn't a matter of right and wrong. Everyone has a choice. :)

---
This part where I respond to Mr Wang's comments:

Hi Mr Wang & ~[z][x]~
This discussion can get long, ardous and theological. I have no intention to lead this to a heated debate about the Christian faith for I'm certain this is not Mr Wang's intention. I am also not here to convince or convert anyone. To each individual person, whatever you believe is your choice and I respect your decision.

This will be my last reply. If anyone wants to continue, do so at my blog. I’m most happy to discuss further.

Now back to some points I want to highlight.

>Mr Wang wrote:
"In other words, if you deeply believe something (whatever that something may be), then it will appear in your reality. And faith is simply another word for "deep belief".

In other words, if you deeply believe that you are going to receive X because you asked God for it, then yes, X will appear in your reality."

>Kaffein reply:
There is a difference between Christian faith and personal faith.

*** Christian faith NOT equal Deep belief ***

To put it simply, Christian faith is "when I see God's faithfulness through Jesus Christ, God sees my faith". I cannot, therefore God can.

Deep belief doesn't move God's hand. Many of the Pharisees in Jesus time had a deep belief in God and their laws. But God was not moved by their efforts. Nor was He impressed.

So I disagree with trying to put personal belief with the Christian faith. It's totally opposite. The more you trust in yourself, the more God steps back. I'm not sure if many understand this part.

However if you are saying in the capacity in personal belief and motivation, I agree totally. What I belief can somewhat affect how I want the outcom to be. That's one of the basis of positive thinking, motivation.

> Mr Wang Says So said...
Kaffein wrote: "I repeat, always. In other words, my prayers are always answered."

.... sure, I have no difficulties with that. If you have been following my previous posts, you would know that. Thoughts affect reality; and deep thoughts affect reality deeply.

In other words, if you deeply believe something (whatever that something may be), then it will appear in your reality. And faith is simply another word for "deep belief".

In other words, if you deeply believe that you are going to receive X because you asked God for it, then yes, X will appear in your reality.

> Kaffein:
Again if you say this in a personal capacity by my effort or strength and thoughts, whatever a man puts his mind, his hands and believe in it, I'm sure it will come to pass.

However, with the God of the Christian faith, it is quite the opposite. This is what I wish to communicate. The more one trusts in his works and self-beliefs, the more God withdraws. yes you can achieve, but you will have to sustain it. It is those who say I cannot that God says I can. And He will.

As for the Father-earthly parenting, all I'm saying is God is NOT like us. We, earthly parents, can be selfish in our desires and think best for our children. However God is far from it. And God always gives us the free choice to choose our wants and desires (be it selfish or magnanimous).

And yes God has his own personality and ideas. However He does not impose them upon you. The choice is up to you.

... now to reply to ZX's comments.

Cheers,
Kaffein

More photos but mine will have to wait

If you just wanna see Rachel's photos just before we left for Melbourne, you can visit QQ*Librarian's blog. Both her husband and her are our best friends.

And she misses Rachel... awww.

---
More pertinent issues at hand. Just read an article on Mr Wang's blog (Christianity and TAR).

I really value and dig his opinions. More often, his advice are eye-opening and they give a different perspective to questions in life (though I prefer his analysis on the current politics).

I didn't comment on Buddhism or other 'forms' of thinking, meditation, etc purely because I am in no position to comment.

But here are my comments revised with a bit of grammatical corrections (I hope he publishes my comments in his blog though):

"I respect your opinions, Mr Wang.

But in terms of Christianity, I kinda disagree with lots of your statements and will like to comment on some of them.

"The other big difficulty is that God, as seen from the Bible, has His own distinct personality, ideas and plans. He doesn't necessarily give you what you want - instead He may have his own very specific plans on what you should be doing and where you should go (think Jonah and the whale)."

I must disagree. Perhaps writing on God, when you don't know Him, seems a bit sweeping. Perhaps it's your POV, so you are entitled to them.

My family and I are Christians first and foremost. Not that I am in a position to speak on behalf of God, I can only write about Him as much as my experiences with Him go. For me and my family concerned (though I cannot say for other Christians), my God always supplies all my needs according to His riches in Christ Jesus.

I repeat, always. In other words, my prayers are always answered.

And if you think God has a different plan if people ask for materialistic gains, status, etc. I'm quite sure you don't really know Him. If you read the bible, no one who calls upon Him was poor or needy. In fact, they were rather rich: Abraham, King Solomon, David, Joesph, Job, etc. He met everyone according to their needs and their desires. But that is another topic which I shall not dwell upon.

Oh one might say, that's >2000 years ago. Look at the Jews today. See how this small tiny race are movers and shakers, impacting the world we live in. How many are well-known scientists, inventors, nobel-prize winners, etc?

"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened."

It has been misquoted. If you read the context, esp before those verses, what Jesus is saying: God is NOT like this.

You don't need to knock, seek and beg to be let in or for God to listen to you and then supply. Just as a father already knows his child's desires (I'm sure you already knew what your children wanted before they asked), God is even more loving and concerned about our wants and desires than we can ever imagine.

And pray tell me, Mr Wang, why do you want your child to ask of you? Do we need to be formal with our kids that they must ask to receive? Or are we as adults playing hard to get? Or perhaps they must earn it to ask?

Or do we, as earthly parents, freely give even before their asking?

Yes, if we as earthly parents can feel joyful when we are able to provide, how much MORE does our heavenly Father longs to give? Actually had He already not given His best - Jesus His Son?

If He had already given His best, why shall He withhold other things that He knows you need - financial, health, prosperity, wholeness of mind, etc?

Of course, this is one of the basis of Christianity: we cannot because He can. And He gives freely to all who call on Him, by grace.

On a personal note, I long to hear my daughter ask of me. Why? Because I love her and she loves me. And even before she can utter the first words, I have already given it to her.

Cheers, Kaffein"

Well what do you think?
---

Ok, ok, I'm sorting out my photos and I hope to publish them asap. Some people are already complaining why my updates are so slow.

*sigh* Singaporeans...

LifeHack? Read on...

I wouldn't classify 'LifeHack' as self-improvement, positive thinking, conventional wisdom or reinvention.

Rather it's a 'geek' approach of making routines more efficient, productive and satisfying…perhaps there is a gem or two we can each apply individually or as a group.

• Hacking Toward Happiness (Time article by Jeremy Caplan, 21 Jun 2007)
  
  Beneath the bits and bytes that shape the character of Silicon Valley, there's a booming digital subculture committed to the art of self-improvement, geek style. It's known as life hacking, and it's all about sweating out the best ways to crank through e-mail, sabotage spam, boost productivity and in general be happier... (read more)

LifeHack sites to read more:

• 43 Folders
• lifehack.org
• LifeHacker

Delivered as promised

I know most of you are saying, "Cut the chase and give me the good stuff." Yeah, who cares about Mum and Dad anyway.

So to appease you hungry fans, lots of Rachel photos for you.

On her new Dora the Explorer kickscooter. Vroommm...

At a nearby playground

Family photos time!

Selene & Rachel, Princess Fiona & Shrek the Beautiful

Met up with Naomi (sister-in-law's sister in Melbourne). She brought us to CityLife Church where we are worshipping now.

Rachel with her distant cousins (Bella, Zoe & Skye)

We took a train to the Melbourne with a family whom we befriended in church. Remember I mentioned about Rachel praying to have friends about her age to play with?

Yeah Anthea is one of her playmates. Prayer works... everytime!

Anthea and Rachel along Yarra River
with Melbourne City in the backdrop

A shopping arcade in Melbourne City
Quaint, tudor-court, English-style setting

Selene befriended the mother of one of Rachel's classmate.

Rachel and Nickhil in the 'ark'

There are lots of birthday parties to attend. And they are BIG in Australia (the bigger and more elaborate the party, the more the mums look up to your family)! It's like a subtle 'class' system, in my opinion.

This is Zoe's birthday party. It was very well-coordinated and successful. Drawing on aprons, clay molding and painting, fun outdoor games, blowing bubbles, lots of cakes, cookies, sweets, chicken nuggets, jellies, barbie doll cake, party bags...

It was so much fun that the children all didn't want to go home. They all forgot their parents. Rachel included :)

See all the happy children and working parents

So you see, we have been tremendously blessed. God has indeed met to our needs more than we can ever hope or dream of!

Sure, there are tough and challenging times. Sometimes I do wonder if I've made the right choice. But seeing Rachel having so much fun (she is so adaptable and trusting towards God to provide), I can only look forward to a better future.

He has a plan for me and my family, indeed; plan to prosper us and to give us a hope and a future.

Stay tuned... more pictures coming up.

Phone bliss, Hwa Chong student: where is he now?

I know many of my friends are coming to this site to check the photos I have promised to upload.

Please be patient... I'm in the process of doing so.

Some are in the new laptop I've brought over from Singapore, some are in my new Nokia 6300 mobile phone (I truly dig this phone, it's so cool!)


For you phone freaks out there:

• It's stylish, lightweight, slim. In order words, sleek and lithe, oozing with charm.
  
• Has matte-silver stainless steel cover with black top. Feels like designer toy. Neat and cool.
  
• Big screen, large soft-key buttons. You must press to feel it! Oooo-la-la...
  
• 2 megapixel camera + video recording
  
• Music player, FM stereo radio, ya-da, ya-da...

Why the fuss over the phone, you'd ask?

I've been using the Nokia 6100 for about 3 years. It's hardy and lasting. Even now, I still have it in my drawer in a workable condition. Never did change it coz I'm particular about the look and feel of a phone.

Basically I hate FAT phones. Technical features are secondary too.

So you can imagine my joy when I finally moved on to a sleeker, designer phone.

Bliss...

---
I've been wondering: whatever happened to the Hwa Chong student. Yeah the one who beat up the SBS bus driver.

It was an outrage amongst the netizens in the online community. I was one of the culprits with strongly worded arguments posted both on mrbrown blogsite and within my own blogsite (here and here).

So I decided to do a quick google search: "hwa chong student beat bus driver"

I was stumped. Literally my jaw dropped as I blinked my eyes several times. I could hardly believe it:

Kaffein-nated site was in the top 10 google search result for "hwa chong student beat bus driver"! Yeah just above mrbrown.

Can you believe it? Er, no I'm not bragging, just shocked.

Every mother son of a blogger knows mrbrown. But who the zonkers is Kaffein? It's not like I have fans or I am a celebrity for the matter. I know mrbrown is an online Singaporean celebrity and top Asian Progressives @ #16 as far as I'm concerned (proof here).

This site, however, is for me to air my views/thoughts, update my friends about my (family) life previously in Singapore and now in Melbourne, post photos of beautiful Rachel and basically rant.

Gee, I hate sending emails and then receiving those failure messages coz those emails accounts no longer exist. So using the blogsite seems to be the best tool.

Yeah go on, say it. I AM A QUITTER. So?

Anyway, it made me wonder.

My opinions/words can actually influence/impact people. It can bring life or death (in the biblical sense in Deut 30) to a situation. The power of the tongue. No wonder the .sg government will like to 'control' the media and the online blogging community. Especially podcast publishing during the General Election.

Rumors (and truths) can sure spread like wildfire. What a scary yet powerful medium!

And then I have these political views posted. Nothing defamatory but sometimes strongly opinionated.

---
I have digressed.

So anyone wanna tell me whatever happened to the 'show-off-to-girlfriend-kena-backfire-hide-behind-father-skirt' student?

Connected... finally!

My home internet connection has finally been installed.

About time too. Didn't realise how much I had missed the online community - reading blogs, updating my blog (with lots of pictures soon), signing up with Skype, retrieving and replying emails, etc.

Perhaps it's because I'm so far away and all alone (Selene and Rachel don't count) in a distant country that I want to feel... connected.

So first thing I'm going to do is to put up new pictures in this blog. I know many of you have been asking me about my settling into the country and new house. There is so much to share, so much to thank God for!

So stay tuned...

---
Hurray! My left eye has also stopped twitching. Guessed I'm not feeling so stressed now that I have settled in nicely.

Maybe it's the shock when this burly guy threatened to beat the living daylights out of me for winking at his gal.

Perhaps it's simply more sex.

*wink*

Twitch, twitch, twitch...

Arrghhh... my upper left eyelid keeps twitching!

At first I thought it was some kind of neural joke my body is experiencing. After a week or so, it's not funny anymore. It's happening like every hour or so and lasts about 5 - 10 seconds nowadays.

In the past, the twitch never lasted more than a couple of seconds. And it was so infrequent that I could hardly remember the last time I had it.

Even while I'm typing, it goes *twitch twitch twitch* It's not impairing my vision and I'm not feeling any pain.

It's just simply annoying!

Sometimes I wished I had a spoon to carve the eyeball out! To add salt to the wound, I meet customers nearly every day. I'm not sure if the customers whom I speak to are looking at my face or staring at my twitching eyelid!

Yeah I have this kind of weird feeling. So I checked the mirror while the eyelid was twitching. Nope I couldn't see any twitching movements.

It would have been totally embarassing! It's akin to having a pulse on the left eyeball. Eek!

I've tried washing with water (cold, warm, both), using eyedrops, closing to rest my eyes, rubbing my eyes, rotating my eyeballs, winking the left and right eyes, blinking hard, etc.

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Then I did a Google search on "twitching eyelid". The common medical causes are stress, fatigue, dry weather, too much caffeine, or vitamin deficiency (usually potassium). Some say it's the lack of sex :P

Ahh...

The recommended treatments are to reduce stress, get more sleep, nix the coffee, eat more bananas and B-complex pills.

Or, just wait for it to go away on its own.

Not sure about the vitamin deficiency and lack of sex part but yes, I have been experiencing lots of stress and fatigue lately. Moving house, change of environments, culture, weather, climate, new workplace, facing customers, etc. In addition, I have been drinking lots of coffee. Darn Aussies drink coffee just like they drink beer.

Guess they all contributed to the twitch.

Anyway, I don't see myself sleeping early. Nor can I help reduce the stress I feel at work. Eradicating coffee? Nah. Reducing? Perhaps. Oh, I don't take Coke so I guess that's reducing the caffeine intake.

Looks like I'm going to wait it out.

If only I have a handy spoon right now....

Call a spade, a spade

Let me try to clear some of my comments I've written:

1. Whatever the case, whether there was a misunderstanding or not, the boy should not raise his hand against the bus-captain.
   
   Period.
   
   He can kick up a ruckus, make a scene in the bus, escalated up to SBS, LTA, call his dad, whatever.
   
   No matter how else you turn here and there, the student has no business to hit anyone. Law has to be mete out. Think road bully. The one who hits out is the one who will pay.
   
2. Second, the bus-captain (whether he is rude or not) is doing his job. He can, within his authority, confiscate the card.
   
   And the bus-reader does not tell lies: the card was an invalid card. Period.
   
3. His father whether out of love, pity, disappointment, failure as a father, should actually teach his son basic principles:
   a. Don't raise your hands against anyone.
   b. Be a man. Live with your actions.
   c. Don't be like me, son.
   
   Let me ask some basic questions: Why did the father beg for forgiveness? Did you think the father is afraid that his son will go to jail? Or did you think the father was thinking: wah my son future gone liao?
   
   Do you think the father is sad becoz the bus-captain who was doing his job got beaten up? Do you think he cares how badly the old man was beaten up? Or was the father more concerned that the bus-captain will press charges against him?
   
   You tell me.
   
   Stop there and think: What if the bus-captain was your father? Will you forgive the son or will you too bash him up?
   
   Stop being chivalrous and noble here. Put yourself in the bus-driver's shoes. Or his family for the matter.
   
4. What if the article had reported: Primary 8 student from 'lousy school' beat up bus-captain?
   
   Will we say, this student deserves punishment and go to boys' home? Get rid of this society outcast, he shouldn't be on our streets?
   
   What made this news interesting is that a student from such school should have the BRAINS and CHARACTER (though oft they don't go hand in hand nowadays) and not act like a hooligan?!!
   
   Do you think we'll listen to the Primary 8 student's response to the assualt? You tell me, huh?
   
5. School counselling? ROFLMAO!
   
   Do you think the boy actually learn anything from it? Or have we just created a worse person when he thinks the society will be 'light' on his kind?
   
   Think Michael Fay? Perhaps another stroke of cane or two may do him more good.
   
   See what happens when his father, the media, the president cover his ass literally? He beat up his father. Did he learn anything actually?
   
   It's like a US article I've read: The counsellors send the school bully and hooligan for paid holidays because he was abused in his childhood. He needed to find his 'life' back.
   
   Get real! I want to be a bully too!
   
6. Lastly, we don't need to be 'smart' people who try to look here and there, at different angles, defend the boy.
   
   Do you know what the word assualt means? Yeah it means assualt.
   
   So don't try to 'theorize' the episode, or blur the lines. Oh look at boy's side, his father's side, see he's got a lot of stress in top school, etc.

Spare the rod and spoil the child.

Call a spade, a spade.

Though at times, an IR is not a casino (in Singapore terms).

Parallel Similarities?

Just read about SHOCK OUTRAGE SHAME (Newpaper article about the Hwa Chong JC student assualting the bus driver).

Sorry for being slow in Singapore news. Australia doesn't give much coverage about Singapore. Not unless it's about Ministers' salaries. No joke!

I really wished the boy would get expelled from Hwa Chong and go to jail for the violent assualt. And the father should kick himself for not teaching his son properly. And the school should close down.

Imagine it's your father whom the boy hit. No qualms about it, you'll beat the living daylights out of him!

Going down to beg forgiveness for his son? Sacrificing - yes! Stupidity - absolutely!

So what did the son actually learn (or if he ever learnt from this episode)? That his pop can cover him anytime. That he can continue to 'whack' people because his father (maybe) has lots of $$$ and/or will get down on knees to plead for him.

Don't get me started about the school. Elite school, so what?

I don't see the boy being remorseful anywhere. Reminds me a lot like the Elite Girl Wee Su Min and her father.

I'd say let the court jail the boy. He's 17, damnit people! Stop covering his ass! He's eligible to be a father. He's close to holding a gun in NS by the time he reaches 18. He's chargable by law.

Boy = terrible,
Father = worse,
School = worst of the lot

What are we teaching our kids these days? Focus on academics, get a good job with money. You've made it in life. But just don't get a 'black record' with the police. Even if you did go wrong, papa and mama will cover you. I do know that if you have criminal records, you have very, very limited options for government posts.

Reminds me of Indian movies I've watched. A rich, well-educated boy rapes a farmer's girl. The father of the boy throws $1 mil to the farmer to settle the matter. Police and politicians side with the boy and father.

Sigh. Where is the sense of justice, we ask ourselves?!!

Sick... just sick!

I don't know the validity of this blog article (thanks to mrbrown). If it is true, I'm dumbstruck that even though we are considered a developed nation, such 3rd-world mindset still exists. Injustice, inhumane and just sick!

On a side note, Singapore has never known to be a haven for workers. I have been 'abused' with long working hours with the same pay. Yet I have to swallow it lest I lose my job.

Even though our pay is close to the global standards, most of us are working 2x man's work.

Employers' benefits? Absolutely.

Employees? Dream on.

Is this one of the reasons why I left Singapore? Heh... doesn't take a rocket scientist to piece the puzzle together.

A Must-See by Dick Lee

This is absolutely hilarious! See in YouTube -> here.

Funny thing was that Singaporeans laughed so loud.

*ahem* I did too! You rock, Dick Lee!

Danish citizen responds to MM Lee's "mediocre government" comment

Fantastic, insightful comments taken from another blog (read here) or below.

Firstly, we shouldn't undermine other countries to highlight our success. This is definitely not gracious of a 'first-world' country.

Secondly, how can you compare a tiny island's success with larger countries? I'd think it would have taken a long time, perhaps months, for a policy to reach the far end of the country, let alone enforce it.

Thirdly, our good geographical position and safe waters were huge advantages. They were not created by the government. I acknowledge it took a wise man his vision and foresightedness to leverage on it and sell Singapore. No disrespect for their dedication and effort but isn't it stretching a tad bit far to attribute every success to the old guard?

My advice for PAP is to move on. Stop dwelling in past glories and success. To me, they have become 'crutches' for our future, broken record harpings and simply 'scare tactics'. So much that if they are unmentioned/removed, you would have us believe Singapore will collapse.

We are living in the NOW.

If only we learn to be humble.

---
Mr. Gregory Glen Holstebro, Denmark

I read with interest Mentor Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s remark in Singapore’s Parliament that Denmark, Finland and Switzerland can afford mediocrity in the remuneration of their ministers.
I shall restrict my observations to Denmark and Finland.

These 2 Nordic countries reward their leaders, in both the private and public sectors, somewhat less handsomely than Singapore. Despite this, I would suggest that both countries’ governments are by no means mediocre, and neither have they evinced any indication of being able to afford it.

Finland has managed to weather the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90s, a market for 20% of its exports, in no small part due to its successful transformation from a resource-based to a knowledge-based economy. Its leading multinational, Nokia, is the market leader in the mobile telecommunications industry, with a global market share of 36% in the manufacture of mobile phones (Q42006) and revenues of €41.121 billion (2006). While most of the credit for this success story can be attributed to the Finnish private sector, Finland’s government had a significant role to play in creating the optimal framework for the flourishing of the technology sector. From the mid 1960s onwards, there were special efforts to expand higher education, with a law on higher education passed in 1966, the result being that Finns are some of the most well-educated people in the world.

The Finnish government was also instrumental in pushing for the promotion of GSM as the European mobile telephony standard, based on the Nordic countries’ experience of NMT, an earlier, pan-Nordic standard. The early adoption of GSM in Finland provided the platform for Nokia’s global breakthrough. Decades before the global liberalization of telecommunications markets in the 1990s, Finland’s telecoms market had already been liberalized, and thus had possibly the world’s most competitive market for telecom operators and equipment makers. Credit for this is in no small part due to the role of the Finnish government. Finland devotes a higher percentage of its GNP to research and development than most countries, and the role of the government has been critical, especially in the early 90s, where public-funded research increased despite recession.

In the case of Denmark, the government made the decision in the 1970s to intensify research into renewable energy. Important research was carried out at Risoe, the government research centre, into wind energy. It took political courage to subsidize feeder tariffs for wind turbine-produced electricity. That decision has paid off handsomely. Today, Danish-based companies have a global market share of ca. 50% in the manufacture of wind turbines, an industry with global annual growth rates of 30%, and estimated revenues of €10 billion (2006, est.). Indeed Denmark’s Vestas has recently set up engineering and research facilities in Singapore.

In more general terms, I would submit that both countries’ systems and governments are not mediocre, and are like Singapore’s, acutely aware of not being able to afford it. Rather than Europe being there to catch Finland and Denmark should they falter, both countries have been net contributors to the European Union budget since their accession. Mediocrity is not a hallmark of either society either. In the last 30 years, both countries, despite their small populations, have produced individuals who have won Olympic gold medals, Oscars and Nobel Prizes. They have produced New Economy pioneers, for example Finland’s Linus Torvalds, the creater of Linux (an open-source operating system and competitor to Microsoft’s Windows) and Denmark’s Janus Friis, co-founder of Skype (a peer-to-peer telephony application).

In conclusion, both countries’ positions as globally competitive economies and high-achieving societies have been attained against the backdrop of low corruption levels, and high levels of trust between citizens and government, and seemingly despite high taxes and comprehensive welfare states. This has not required stratospheric levels of remuneration of government leaders and officials (bold mine).

Friendly banter

From p65 blogsite: To Increase or Not To Increase? speech by Michael Palmer

Urge you to read. Pretty good points he had highlighted about the timing, etc. Comments from bloggers came in fast and furious.

I wrote to Michael about the pay hike. I've commended his speech. However, guessed some pro-PAP supporters decided to get personal. Here are the exchanges:

whybegay Says: April 16th, 2007 at 1:27 am
Kaffein,
since you have mentioned that you have migrated away from Singapore to Australia. Then I don’t think you should be more concerned with Singapore affairs rather than Australia’s. For instance John Howard’s recent anti-HIV migration suggestion.

Easternwind Says: April 16th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Whybegay,
Gd logic why shld a former sporean be so concerned abt the island matters, if indeed he was so concerned he wouldnt hv left in the 1st place. Hahahahahah

Easternwind Says: April 18th, 2007 at 12:32 am
oh yeah kaffein was the one who criticised me for being overly aggrsive lest I forget well may I remind kaffein hving quitted spore u r not entitled to speak ur mind here, being a foreigner i woudl see u interfering with local politics and finally let me WARN u anyone out to block spore path towards success must be politcally eliminated no wonder what u included

Kaffein Says: April 20th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
To whybegay and easternwind,I’ve decided not to debate with you here. This blog belongs to the p65 MPs.
PS. Have a question for you both. Am I a foreign talent if I decide to come back after 5 years?

whybegay Says: April 22nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Kaffein,
this blog is exactly for debate and discussion since the MPs are here.
To answer your second question, the answer depends on whether you have any talents that Singapore wants.

Easternwind Says: April 23rd, 2007 at 12:22 am
Y did kafein refuse to debate with me, the reason is is simple, far from being logical and constructive, he has long labelled me as a PAP lackey (but dared not say so openly).

Hving quitted spore what makes u come bk, hao ma bu chi hui tou chao, u must hv hated the PAP so much (me included) thts y u left spore. U must hv wished LKY a speedy death for he was nvr in ur list of top leaders who shld run this place.

The issue of foreign talent has long been debated, far from “selling spore out” as claimed by opp, this foregniers actually value add to oor economy but this is a highly emotive issue and opp wasted no time in capitalising on it for its own political gains.

No great empire in the world make it without foreigners, li si who served in the state of Qin was not born there. Li Kashing was originally from chaozhou but fled to HK, microsoft employed many foreigners whose names I doubt u knw how to pronounce.

U really think with ur own pple u can flourish, prosper, etc etc i doubt so. What if the chap u intend to hire dont belong to 1 of u and u shut the door to him but u knw he can bring u millions if u hire u.

I urged sporeans to look wider and clearer tth hving foreigners in our economy is to help us not robbing jobs away from us. If u believed in the rubbish uttered by opp then spore would go down the drain in no time. Thks u!!!

Kaffein Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. April 23rd, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Probably my last attempt here:
To whybegay“this blog is exactly for debate and discussion since the MPs are here.”

Kaffein>I disagree. This blog is NOT my blog. There is no reason to debate about ME. I should not be the focal point but real issues/concerns highlighted by the public. But then again why not have some interesting debates here since this speech is going to get archived.

“To answer your second question, the answer depends on whether you have any talents that Singapore wants. ”

Kaffein>*sobs* other countries want me. Go figure.

To Easternwind,
Y did kafein refuse to debate with me, the reason is is simple, far from being logical and constructive, he has long labelled me as a PAP lackey (but dared not say so openly).

Kaffein> Truth? Can you handle it? I didn’t take you seriously. But then…

Kaffein>I could sue you for libel and making assumptions that I have never said. But blogs aren’t not to be taken seriously. Or are they? Perhaps ex-EDB chairman Philip Yeo might want to expound on this. Seems to be one rule for a group, and another for the common.

Kaffein> Anyway, you have declared that term yourself. I did not disagree. I will like to think many posters tend to agree with what you have declared about yourself.

Hving quitted spore what makes u come bk, hao ma bu chi hui tou chao, u must hv hated the PAP so much (me included) thts y u left spore. U must hv wished LKY a speedy death for he was nvr in ur list of top leaders who shld run this place.

Kaffein> Again you are putting yourself at risk for putting words in my mouth and making bold statements. Do you feel rich today?

Kaffein> I have openly declared my email, my blogsite. Have you? There is no credibility in your posts, btw.

Kaffein> If Singapore can accept ‘ungrateful sons’ from foreign countries who come here, get their milks’ worth from the country and then return back to their home, I can’t see why I cannot do likewise.

Kaffein> Also can you also repeat what you have said to SM Goh’s daughter, or ex-Minister Yeo’s daughters? What if they decide to come back? What will you call them? Patriots, loyal citizens? Awww, c’mon. I think the narrow, shallow thinking does not stem from me.

The issue of foreign talent has long been debated, far from “selling spore out” as claimed by opp, this foregniers actually value add to oor economy but this is a highly emotive issue and opp wasted no time in capitalising on it for its own political gains.

Kaffein> Again, the issue wasn’t an opposition’s political gain. It was raised by our very own sons (think NS and you are not far off) of Singapore. The opposition just highlighted a very true concern many have felt.

No great empire in the world make it without foreigners, li si who served in the state of Qin was not born there. Li Kashing was originally from chaozhou but fled to HK, microsoft employed many foreigners whose names I doubt u knw how to pronounce.

Kaffein> Your point is?

U really think with ur own pple u can flourish, prosper, etc etc i doubt so.

Kaffein> Yes I can. Can you? I doubt so.

What if the chap u intend to hire dont belong to 1 of u and u shut the door to him but u knw he can bring u millions if u hire u.

Kaffein> I’m not stupid. But then again, are you saying that Singaporeans cannot bring in millions but foreigners can? If yes, gosh, your popularity just took a nose-dive.

I urged sporeans to look wider and clearer tth hving foreigners in our economy is to help us not robbing jobs away from us. If u believed in the rubbish uttered by opp then spore would go down the drain in no time. Thks u!!!

Kaffein> And thks u 2!!!

Wow, you must be kidding, right?

Someone posted me what MM Lee said in the St James Power Station. I was stumped.

Let me try to understand what he said. All respect to him for modern Singapore, I think he is missing the point(s). The people of Singapore are not saying that there should not be a pay hike. It's just that:

• The government has just raised the utilities fees, transport fares, GST hike, etc over the past year. Is this a right time with another hike again?
• The ministers' salaries are already so well-paid, highest in the world. It still is a laughing stock, considering the impact to the world should a Singapore PM step down.
• The income gap is widening so fast. The government has recognized the gap but nothing has been done about it. Or is it purposely?
• The middle- and lower-income group have not seen a significant pay rise over the past few years to move with the increasing cost of living. Don't you think it's a bit far off to give yourself >50% pay raise?
• There is so much wealth in our reserves and the government keeps telling Singaporeans that it isn't enough. Really?
• To help the poor and those living from hand to mouth, there was even a debate if the mere $40 increase from $250 was justifiable. Ridiculous and absurd, in my honest opinion! Those people once gave their all to contribute to the economy.
• The Straits Times newspaper put up 8 pages of comments, articles, etc to justify the pay hike. Necessary?
• Do a blog search on the words 'minister pay hike' and you probably get >80% disapproval.
• With so many disgruntled voices over the pay hike, I strongly believe the government will carry it out. So why need a debate/discussion then? Isn't it like the casino issue?
• Etc...

(Do yourself a favour. Read those blogs. Many have given valid reasons why the pay hike should not take place. Perhaps my MPs are afraid to bring those reasons up in parliament debate.)

So which part does MM Lee NOT understand?

Anyway, article here:

MM Lee: Why fuss over ministers' pay when it's your own future at stake?

Really? I'm unconvinced. Still.

MINISTER Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, 83, has issued a heartfelt appeal to Singapore's next generation. As you reap the benefits of your higher education and global mobility, he said, be

I have not seen my pay rise by 10%, let alone 100% like what the government has proposed for the ministers. What benefits did I receive when the cost of living keeps going up and my salary does not match it?

mindful of those who made those opportunities possible - fellow citizens who stayed behind and toiled for the good of the country, and capable leaders who stepped forward to run it and made it prosper.

Again, opportunities for whom? There were the p40s, p50s who stayed behind and toiled to see Singapore as what she is today. What did they get?

Crap loads like "Your CPF contributions are not enough for retirement", "No more pension for you" (yet you give yourself pension?!!), "You can't retire so early now, people live longer, etc"

He was speaking to over 40 Young PAP members at a 2.5-hour dialogue at St James Power Station on Saturday.

Labelling the recent brouhaha over ministers' pay hikes as 'completely unreal', Mr Lee said: 'You have a dumb govt in Singapore, you are done for. And you want to quarrel about $20 million over a $4-trillion economy? I say, rubbish... You mismanage this, it's not your

We don't have a dumb government. We only have dumb Singaporeans. At least 66.6% of them. You want to quarrel with me about the $250 to $290 justification debates?

Also the $20 million is shared by only a small percent (the ministers only) as compared to the whole population? Do you think it is fair?

shareholders who will lose money, 4 and a half million people will suffer - of whom 3 million plus are Singaporeans, of whom 80 per cent cannot migrate.'

Pointing to the often-heard wish of the highly-educated young to migrate to greener pastures, Mr Lee urged them to consider the plight of their fellow citizens who are not so mobile.

Question: Who are the REAL shareholders of the $4-trillion economy, pray tell me?

Also by saying 80 per cent cannot migrate, you acknowledge the fact that a whole lot of people want out?! Perhaps you should rethink your policies. They could be the push factors.

In spite of the Singapore success, people still want to leave.

Migration statistics of Singapore that we don't see in our newspaper.

'As a government and personally for me and my colleagues, my responsibility is to look after those who cannot migrate. Without them doing the hard and the dirty work, I would not have had a decent life, I would not have been a leader, my children would not have been educated, you would not have been educated, so I owe them a responsibility, an obligation... Can you in good conscience say, "Goodbye! Thank you very much?'

Yes sir. I have just migrated.

Perhaps SM Goh can also share with my fellow Singaporeans why his daughter is in London? And why isn't his son-in-law living in Singapore?

Or can ex-MP Yeo Cheow Tong explain why his daughter did not reject New York's offer? Read below:
"Yeo Cheow Tong told me that JP Morgan, a leading Wall Street investment bank, recruited his daughter before she even started her final year in a top US university. Upon joining the bank after graduation, she was assigned to a corporate finance team that executes billion-dollar projects. Apart from the pay, such a first job excited and challenged her.

I asked Cheow Tong whether his daughter would come back to Singapore. He could only say, "I hope so." I hope so too."
excerpts from SM Goh's nation day rally 2001

His daughters are still in the US today.

The MM's bottomline: Singapore is an honest meritocracy that relies on hard-nosed decisions and proven individual talent - and that applies to everyone, including even Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Alluding to critics who accuse the Lee family of nepotism, he countered: 'I have not created this Singapore to have it ruined by my son. If he can't do the job, I would have stopped him faster than anybody else. It's as simple as that. Why? Because the future of Singapore is more important than his future.'

'Let's be blunt about this. At stake is not the PAP losing a few seats. At stake is you losing your future.'

Puffing Billy and family photos

Sorry for the delay on the photos.
Long story: I had to transfer the photos from my camera to the laptop (also editing them to smaller sizes for viewing), copied to the thumbdrive and then to the current PC which does not belong to me.

'Nuff said. Let's not bore you with the details.

Here goes:
1. At our beautiful rented house.

2. Visited Puffing Billy (last visit was 5 years ago, without Rachel, of course!)

- Drove through a 'scenic route' along the way to Puffing Billy Railway.
- Grants Picnic Ground to feed the birds

- Puffin Billy train

- Family, Rachel and with her carriage friends (Mitchell, Abigail, Rachel and Sarah)

Nice, good, worthwhile family time!