I just came back from spending some time (21st to 24th March, 2011) with an awesome Church – Fahkram Church in Bangkok, Thailand. I first went there 23rd to 29th October 2010 with an Indian evangelist who was doing some crusades in the North of Thailand with the Church. I didn’t know anything about Fahkram Church or what to expect. I only knew the evangelist and wanted to follow him. In the end, I got to know the Church people well and made some very good friends there! I returned recently to speak with some good friends about some business opportunities.

Fahkram Church is such an amazing church community that I want to share more about them here and encourage those who visit Bangkok to visit the Church. If you’re in Bangkok, you can do so because they have services every night – at least from Monday to Saturday! On Sundays, the people are at the Church from the early morning till about mid-afternoon. The services I attended during my recent trip there started at 9pm and ended around 10:30pm! Here’s a picture of worship at 10pm on 22nd march 2011:

This is possible because probably about half or more of the Church (total number of probably 100+ people) actually live within the Church compound! And even many of those that don’t live within the Church compound live nearby (many moved from far away to live near the Church) and attend the nightly services every day.

Right now (today) the church is “on tour” in Chang Rai, the north of Thailand. They traveled about 10 hours to get to Chang Rai on Monday. Going “on tour” is when the whole Church (or most of them) travel to another location together for a few days – something like a mission trip within their country. They do this a few times a year. They go with their mini-trucks that carry the stage, musical and sound equipment, etc. Last October, we went for about 4 days to the town/village of Phayao on the mountains in the north of Thailand. The drive took us around 12 hours and we went in a mini-truck like this (one of about 40 mini-trucks owned by Fahkram Church members):

What does the Church do “on tour”? Last October, the following day after we arrived at Phayao, the church people unloaded the trucks and put the stage up in a school field:

During the day, Pastor Chairat (Fahkram Church’s pastor and visionary) preached and shared with other pastors who came to hear him.

The nights were evangelistic events where there would be musical and Thai-dancing performances (see below), worship and a message. The Church people pitched tents at night on the school field to sleep in them.

As I reflect upon this really unique Church, I think three things make this Church very special:

1) Community: I already mentioned that about 50 people or so live within the Church’s compound. And they have services every night. When they are not working, these people would be hanging around the Church and having fellowship with each other. They come together to pray at noon. And when they are not doing anything, you’ll see a lot of them just sitting around reading their Bibles (wow – what a culture!):

There’s actually a church member who cooks for the people every day – the members pay her for their meals. Here are some of them eating lunch together:

Going on tour is a big event and so they also spend time preparing for it during their free time. For example, the ladies would be practicing their dancing and some of them would be sewing and preparing the costumes. The guys would be preparing their music.

2) Prosperity: Probably the most distinctive message of Pastor Chairat and Fahkram Church is that God wants to bless His people. They believe God takes care of His children and wants to bless them in all ways – including financially. I believe they have a very similar view of God’s desire to bless His children and prosper them as say New Creation Church. Pastor Chairat’s wife and some members of Fahkram Church actually visited New Creation Church about 4 years ago and they have mentioned appreciation for his messages.

I’ve written a bit about prosperity on this blog. I believe in God’s desire to prosper His children. I believe in prosperity with a purpose and the fact that we’re blessed to be a blessing. Yet I also think that many in the Word of Faith movement and many “prosperity” advocates have given these truths a very bad name because of their excesses – Kenneth Hagin himself would agree with this – read The Midas Touch. In my opinion, Andrew Wommack is probably the best representative of this movement. He’s someone who’s lived in the same house for over 20 years and believes that prosperity is about how much of a blessing you are to others. I also think Pastor Joseph Prince and New Creation is more towards the moderate spectrum of this movement as compared to the typical prosperity preacher you see on TV.

But going back to Fahkram Church, I think what the Church has done is worthy of a deeper study. Many people say that teachings on prosperity is an invention of the rich Western world and it won’t work in the developing world. That’s why it’s interesting to see what Fahkram Church has achieved. The pastor preaches a message of hope, joy and prosperity. The God preached is not that of a strict father who is quick to punish his children the moment they get out of line. It’s not a message that glories in suffering as though being a Christian is all about suffering and sorrow or being poor. Rather, he preaches that God will bless and take care of His children. And believe it or not, many members have prospered under his ministry. I’ve heard how people have gone from debt to prospering richly and how those selling the food on motorcycles earn more than those outside of the Church who are doing similar things. Somehow, God’s favour is upon the Church and its members.

The pastor himself lives out his message. He helps his members to start their own businesses. For example, he’s made about 50 of these shops on motorcycles for his members to sell food (e.g. Pancakes) on the streets:

Many people who did not have a job before now do. Most of the people who live in the Church (who are not studying) go around selling food and other things like the above. They earn (profits) probably at least 20,000 Baht a month (about S$1,000). And they’ve prospered so much that about 40 members own one of those mini-trucks that cost about S$25,000 – they pay by installments over many years. One of the main reasons they buy those mini-trucks is to go “on tour” with the Church as those trucks are able to transport all their big equipment.

Pastor Chairat himself earns probably between S$5,000 and S$12,500 a month. This is possible because many of the members now have a job and are prospering themselves and thus can give to the Church. He’s not afraid to reveal his salary because he wants other Christians to know that God can and desires to bless them and he wants the world to know that God blesses His children. He doesn’t believe in being dependent on foreigners for money – his church is self-sufficient.

Because of all this, he and his church have been persecuted a lot, yet many churches have also been won over by his message and what is going on in his church.

However, he uses the money for the expenses of going “on tour” and for the Church. He’s definitely not prospering at the expense of his members or living “above” them in terms of the lifestyle of his family – they all live in the Church premises too.

3) Worship – Fahkram Church has one of the best worship bands I’ve ever heard. They are quite famous throughout Bangkok and Thailand for their music and performance/dancing. Their pastor has composed some famous Thai worship songs and they sing a lot of Hillsong – in both English and Thai:

Yet beyond the performance aspect of worship, there’s a real spirit of worship, freedom, joy and dancing during their worship. The pastor himself is a musician and plays the electric guitar and normally leads worship. The rest of the musicians are guys with an average age of probably around 25 years old.

Visiting Fahkram Church

If any of you visits Bangkok (they are actually located just outside Bangkok), do drop by Fahkram Church for a visit! Not many people speak English well there. But normally there would be at least two good English speakers at the Church every night. Let me know in advance and I’ll try and put you in touch with them.

I know many of them do desire to improve their English. They would even welcome people who would want to stay at their Church and perhaps teach them English. If anyone (especially Singaporean youth) are keen to visit them for a few months for the experience and to teach English to their members (and also to unbelievers, reaching out to them through free English classes), this could be arranged. Just drop me an email.

PS: I hope I have all the information above correct. This is based on talking to my friends there. However, a friend of mine is going to write a bit about the history of this Church and when she does this I’ll have it posted up!

On Wednesday during one of our regular Healing On The Streets (HOTS) outreaches, a friend and I were returning for a debriefing session at Plaza Singapura McDonald’s with the rest of the group. We were stopped outside Macs at the Vardi & Migdal booth by a saleslady named Tom (yes, a lady!) to try their Dead Sea products. This is one of the many Israeli companies selling their Dead Sea products in Singapore. After chatting a while about the products, we asked if she had any pain in her body. She was curious why we asked her that and we told her that we pray for people and God heals. We managed to pray for some rash or something on her hand and also that God will bless her with great sales the rest of the week – these people earn on commission. In all, we had a nice 10-15 minutes chat with her and I left her my contact, promising to introduce her to my Singaporean friends.

In June, another friend and I were stopped at Funan Centre by a saleslady from the Sea of Spa shopping cart (outside Polar) selling Jericho Dead Sea products. We chatted for about 20 minutes – about the products, Israel, etc – as she got us to try the products. My friend, a missionary, could not afford the products which were quite expensive. After the long talk, I didn’t really want to buy the products either because they were expensive. However, I also felt bad for taking up so much of her time – although I shouldn’t have felt bad about it! In the end I bought some stuff. We continued to chat with her and her guy colleague about their life in Singapore. We ended up praying for them too. The guy asked us to pray for his mother who is ill and so we did and also prayed for good sales for them. We invited them to church and they invited us to attend a Synagogue (although they are not devout Jews). I’m praying and hoping that this will take place as I know they are pretty busy with work.

These people work about 6 days a week for quite long hours each day. This is like an overseas work experience for them. Each would probably stay about 6 months or so. And they live together in a place with their colleagues. They get one day off a week (which is not fixed on any particular day), but they probably use that day to take a rest from the tiring week.

Since I’ve been involved in outreach to international students the past few years, this group of people caught my attention. They’re not studying here, but they are similar to the many international students in that they are young adults and they are not really assimilated into the Singaporean society. Like many international students here, most of these Israelis would not have any/many Singaporean friends – partly because they live with other Israelis and they hardly have time to have much of a social life as they work long hours.

They are the strangers in our midst: the young Jews selling Dead Sea products, international students studying in Singapore or low-income migrant workers here to earn money. God has brought the mission field to our doorstep and there are tons of foreigners out there who would love to get to know more Singaporeans. Because of the situation they are in – be it needing to work too long hours, having no/few contact point with Singaporeans or Singaporeans not accepting of them (low-income migrant workers) – it’s hard for them to get to know Singaporeans. Because this is our country, the onus is on us to be the ones to take the first step to show hospitality to them. Invite them to get to know our circle of friends – most would be totally delighted if we were to extend a welcoming hand to them. Those of us who have lived overseas before know how difficult it can be to get to know the local people.

There are about 100,000 (our government aims for 150,000 by 2015) international students in Singapore, most of them being young adults studying in private schools where there are few Singaporeans studying. Most, therefore, do not have close Singaporean friends and are very open to friendships. There are more than 1 million foreign workers in Singapore. About 250,000 are in the construction industry, which basically means they don’t really have Singaporean friends – except maybe their bosses or supervisors. Probably another 250,000 to half a million of these foreign workers are low-class/low-income workers in other sectors, which also means that they probably won’t have any Singaporean friends because we just don’t associate with them for various reasons.

Unlike many locals who have heard the gospel one too many times, many of these people may not have heard the gospel before. They are much more open to the gospel because they are in a new land and they welcome local friendships enormously. My heart is especially for the low-income migrant workers, especially the construction workers from South Asia. I’ve talked to many over the past few months and they are so open and friendly. Nowadays, I often pass construction sites and ask them if they have any pain or sickness. It’s such a joy to start a conversation with them. If only I could speak their language (most can speak basic conversational English but would be more comfortable in their mother tongue), I would definitely spend much more time reaching out to them.

For Christians who have a heart for the nation of Israel and pray a lot for them, how about going beyond praying for them to showing hospitality to many of these young Israelis all over Singapore. Embrace them, invite them out and if possible share Christ’s love with them. There are many of such stalls in shopping malls filled with Israelis. And I know there are many Christian groups that believe strongly in praying for Israel and also many Christian groups that visit Israel. I’m generally not into all this as too many of these groups are unconsciously tied to right-wing political agendas and I think money could be much better spent than going on a holiday to Israel! That’s my personal opinion that everyone is entitled to if they so desire. But regardless, wouldn’t it be great if these same Christians who are so passionate about praying for or visiting Israel come together to befriend and welcome these young Israelis in our midst! Personally, I think God would be much more pleased with us actually spending time with them, befriending them and reaching out to these Jews, than if we were to only pray for them or visit the Holy Land.

Anyway, we’re living in a really exciting time in Singapore. It’s only in the past 5-10 years that we’ve seen a huge influx of migrant workers and international students. I’m all for missions and I want to be a missionary overseas one day. But it’s exciting to be in Singapore now too. There are incredible opportunities to embrace the strangers in our midst and demonstrate and share Christ’s love with them. And you may just live a missionary life vicariously through the lives you touch in Singapore, for when these people return to their homeland they will be your missionaries – and a better one than any of us could ever be!

On to the conference and things after: The day before the conference started, I ended up bringing the three speakers to New Creation’s healing service by Pastor Henry (24th February). My friend who organized the event mentioned that they had heard about New Creation and wanted to attend the healing service. After all, the whole conference they were doing was all about healing (inner, physical) and this was the area that they were into. The leader of the group didn’t really know about Pastor Prince but wanted to check out New Creation because one of his close friends highly recommended Pastor Prince’s ministry, mentioning him as the “Apostle of grace”. Since no one was actually going to bring them to New Creation, I gladly gathered some friends to show them some Singaporean hospitality :) Of course, I was also greedy – greedy to learn :) I wouldn’t have passed up the chance of getting to know these people from whom I could learn much in the things of the Spirit. After all, I would never be able to get to know the leaders from my own 20,000+ member church and learn much from them personally. And New Creation did things quite differently from the typical charismatic church. The leaders of the cell groups I’ve been to were never taught to move in the Spirit in the kind of way I’d be learning in the conference – more on this in the next post.

So anyway, having got to know the speakers for just a few minutes and lining up for tickets to get into the main auditorium at around 5pm+, Ron (the leader of the three and the one with healing gifts) asks there and then in the queue if he could pray for a friend who was clearly in pain in her foot. He prayed a short prayer for healing, asked if my friend got better (there was a bit of improvement) and then asked if she would be willing to spend about 5-10 more minutes so he could pray for her complete healing. I was quite impressed. This is what we Christians should be doing, isn’t it? Praying for the sick and believing God will heal as we pray. We don’t need to wait to get into a healing meeting to receive our healing. And we could pray for healing anywhere. And Ron prayed really believing that God could heal my friend there and then. And even if it didn’t happen the first time he prayed, he believed that the healing would come as he continued to minister to her and pray for her in the next 5-10 minutes.

More on the pain in the foot and healing later, but during dinner in the food court at the basement, the speakers started ministering inner healing and deliverance to my friend. The food court was getting crowded and this was getting exciting. Exciting because I was already beginning to be in the midst of people “doing the stuff”, as John Wimber of Vineyard would say – i.e. doing the stuff Jesus did like healing and deliverance, etc. I wanted to learn and I was already learning even before the conference started. And this was a beautiful start to the rest of the week when I had ample opportunities to learn – observe, ask questions and practice.

It’s not that I had never encountered all this before. I had been a charismatic Christian for 15 years and had been to many charismatic services and attended a few charismatic churches. I had been to teaching sessions and knew a bit about all this stuff. But I never really practiced all this. Partly because even in the charismatic churches I attended all this was never a huge part of what a Christian ought to know and practice. Maybe the leaders knew and practiced all the stuff, but the laypeople were never equipped to move in this area.

And I learned a lot also because the group was really small. The average number of people who attended the 9 sessions over the three days was probably around 10-12 per session. This allowed me lots of time between and after sessions and even after the conference ended to get to know the speakers personally and to learn from them. Not only was I able to pick their brains and ask them hard questions, but Ron was like a mentor to me during this short time. He didn’t just do the stuff and pray for people. He got me to practice what I was learning. He got me to pray for the sick and taught me along the way. He even had little debrief sessions after ministering to people and explained what happened and why he did things the way he did. It was altogether an awesome learning experience that a layperson like me would never have been able to get if the conference was attended by 50 or 100 or thousands of people.

One of the highlights of the conference for me was on the first day when Ron started to pray for people. There was some time left after the teaching session and he decided to call people up to pray for them to show us how he ministered and prayed for people. I was the third person called up and he prayed for me and spoke words over my life that resonated deeply with my heart and were quite accurate. I didn’t feel anything great and there wasn’t any great manifestation. But I was touched by the words he said and felt it was God affirming my gifts. It wasn’t just some general words that could apply to everyone, but the words were quite specific and I knew he couldn’t have known them apart from really tapping into what God was saying. I’ve never had anyone speak over me like that. Maybe I’ve had some general words of encouragement which I don’t remember and which didn’t impact me that much, but nothing that touched my heart like this.

I also had other words spoken to me during the conference. Some are accurate, some not so and some I don’t know. But I’ve recorded in my prayer journal all the words spoken over me and will continue to pray through them and am open to see how God speaks to me through them.

The day after the conference, which was a Sunday, two of the Speakers wanted to visit Church Of Our Saviour (COOS). Unsurprising since COOS is definitely a church to visit with regards to healing – they have been greatly influenced by Bill Johnson and his church – Bethel Church. That Sunday, the focus of the service was on youth and youth ministry. Before the sermon, about 20 youth or so gathered in front of the church and gave Words of Knowledge regarding what God wanted to minister to. Many people went to the front and were touched by God as the youth prayed for them. The senior pastor, Derek Hong, also had this prophetic vision of someone nearly drowning years ago and God wanting to heal the person of that experience. This was of course a very specific vision and someone came forward to him to be prayed for. It was a great experience to see God using young people. I dunno if they allow the gifts to flow like this every meeting, but I think it’s wonderful to see lay people encouraged to practice these gifts and God using them to touch lives.

During the conference, I got to know a young guy who’s hoping to go to Bethel’s School of Supernatural Ministry this year. (I’m very envious of him – if I were much younger, I would probably go and who knows, God may make a way for me to go one day!) He’s a young prophet who’s being mentored by Rusty Russell. After the conference, I met up with him and talked a lot to him about the prophetic. He introduced me to a cell group he got to know and has been attending recently. The leader of this group is also a student of Rusty and was a cell leader at New Creation many years ago. His cell broke up when he left the church but recently many of them got back together and have been meeting at least once a month. It’s not your typical cell as the focus is just seeking God, receiving from Him and prophesying – and encouraging everyone to move out in the gifts and minister to each other. I’ve been there about twice and had some words spoken over me. I’ve also spoken a lot to the people there about the prophetic and healing. I’m quite excited to continue to attend and learn to move in the Spirit there.

Since the conference, I’ve been mostly attending New Life Vineyard (where the conference was held in) in the mornings and New Creation in the afternoons. New Life Vineyard is a really small church of about 10-15 people. I’ve been experiencing first hand how Vineyard does things and I quite like it. It’s nice to have a small community too, something I’ve been looking for for a while. I’m still not sure if I’ll attend this church but will see how God leads. I also don’t know if I’ll continue to attend New Creation because it can get quite tiring to attend two churches. If I’ve learned anything the past two months, it’s that I need to spend less time outside and more time with God alone if I’m to know more more intimately, hear His voice and move in the Spirit. Even if I don’t go to NCC so often, I’ll still continue to buy Prince’s sermon CDs. Anyway, the past two months or so I’ve had the opportunity to talk to a few Vineyard pastors (from here, Australia and Thailand) and have been asking lots of questions, discussing and learning a lot – and doing a bit of practical stuff too.

A bit about the Vineyard church association and tradition. Not that this conference was a Vineyard conference, but since the model of charismatic Christianity promoted during the conference I think is very Vineyard-like (and though two of the three speakers are not from Vineyard, they do have relationships with Vineyard churches) and it was held in a Vineyard Church, I thought I’d write a bit about it. I mentioned here that I thought John Wimber, one of the founders of Vineyard, would probably be remembered as the most balanced, respected and loved charismatic Christian of modern Christianity. I followed Vineyard from the earliest years of my Christian life until Wimber died in 1997. Vineyard’s worship at that time was awesome and like what Hillsong is today. But what was really so wonderful about Vineyard is that it brought together the best of the charismatic and non-charismatic Christian worlds by introducing a more biblically balanced form of charismatic Christianity to the Christian world. And this is what I’ve always admired of the Vineyard. It was probably them that stirred my desire for many years to become a Bible College lecturer specializing in bringing together the best of both the charismatic and non-charismatic worlds. But I have to acknowledge that from after Wimber’s death in 1997 until the conference, I hadn’t really kept in touch with what had been happening in the Vineyard. After 1997, I moved more into Reformed theology, then social justice issues and emerging church Christianity, then missions, then New Creation’s grace teachings – though all the while never forsaking my interest in charismatic Christianity. I’m pleasantly surprised that Vineyard has been going strong all these years and that one of their distinctives besides “doing the stuff” is their passion for social justice. There also seems to be some Vineyard leaders/churches quite progressive in their theology and into the emerging church movement – which I’m a bit surprised (pleasantly, I guess) because this means there’s a bit of diversity in the Vineyard. I wonder how the Vineyards which appreciate the emerging church tradition combine that with “doing the stuff”.

One thing I really appreciate about the Vineyard besides their balanced charismatic practices is that they are very strong on grace. In fact, my first encounter of teachings on the Father’s love came from Vineyard. The Toronto Blessing (closely related to the Vineyard because the church associated with it was once a Vineyard) I think was really an emotional/inner healing revival. Unlike many other revivals based on a strong conviction of sin, repentance and weeping, the Toronto Blessing’s characteristics were the focus on the Father’s love and laughter. Lives were transformed through encountering the love of the Father healing the wounds of people. And so the Vineyard form of charismatic Christianity is very grace-based and I was very happy when Ron (though not a Vineyard pastor) preached during the conference that Christians have even their future sins forgiven – good stuff! Of course, Ron just said that that’s no big deal as that’s mere classical Christianity – and the guy has a PhD from Oxford in Historical Theology so I think he should know! But still many Christians still don’t live with assurance that their future sins are also forgiven.

Yes, Ron moves in the Spirit and has a PhD from Oxford in theology – I really, really like that combination! We need more of such people strong in the Word and Spirit. I’m going to stop this post here because it’s getting long. If anyone is still following, my next and probably final post in this series would kind of bring together all my experiences regarding healing and the prophetic and offer some thoughts and questions – especially regarding the differences in charismatic beliefs and practices between New Creation and Vineyard (which I’ll take to represent many other charismatic churches).

It’s been nearly 2 months since I attended the Moving To The Spirit conference. I told myself that I’d post something about it and I think I better do so now before I procrastinate further and end up not gathering my thoughts and writing about the event and things related. This was meant to be just one post but my introduction (the necessary context for my experiences and thoughts on the conference and things after) became so long that it warrants a post on its own. So in this post, I’ll just write some thoughts on my pursuit of the things of the Spirit in general.

While I’ve had experience in both charismatic Christianity with its emphasis on the things of the Spirit and non-Charismatic evangelical (mainly Reformed) Christianity with its emphasis on good teaching of Scriptures, I know that my strength has been more on the Word and less on the Spirit side of things. As a left brain Christian, I love to read good theological books. I reflect a lot on what the Bible says and on Christianity in general and don’t accept what pastors say so easily without checking it with the Word and doing my own research. (That’s the reason I’m so eclectic in my beliefs). I appreciate good teachings because I’ve seen the abuses and excesses in charismatic churches and I’ve seen how so many Christians are easily influenced by these excesses because they refuse to use their minds to evaluate things. I also do know that the mind is important and it’s not there for nothing, as if spirituality is all about offending the mind and being in touch with the spiritual side of things. But I’m also aware of the areas I need to improve in. While I can always be stronger in my understanding of the Word of God (who can’t?), I know that this isn’t exactly the area I should be focusing on. (I don’t want to be seen to be seeing a dichotomy between Word and Spirit, but there’s a certain truth to that, if you know what I mean). I don’t want to be strong in one area, and so weak in the other. I would surely be missing out on something. It would surely be less than ideal.

I respect people like John Piper. He’s strong in the Word and he’s not anti-charismatic. There’s so much the church can learn from a person like him. But I wouldn’t wanna attend a church like his because I don’t think (I may be wrong) he encourages the charismatic manifestations of the Spirit. His focus is clearly on the Word side of things. There are a lot of churches like that – one that I can think of off-hand is Covenant Evangelical Free Church. Such churches aren’t anti-charismatic like fundamentalist Christians (e.g. the Bible-Presbyterians in Singapore) but they also won’t be promoting things like healing, prophecy and the like. They are so-called “open but cautious”. They’re not against these gifts if Christians practice them privately, but they wouldn’t encourage or promote such things during corporate worship times. This is of course much better than thinking of tongues as demonic, etc., but in my opinion it’s still not good enough. If you don’t teach, encourage and practice these gifts in a corporate manner, what’s the point? It’s as good as believing that these gifts are not important and therefore not needed. It’s a seemingly safe way to do church but I think it’s inspired more by fear and not having experienced genuine charismatic Christianity – which is understandable since there’s a lot of flaky stuff out there and I think very few good models that are strong in BOTH Word and Spirit. But I think this shouldn’t result in us keeping quiet about these things during corporate worship. We should seek the good and throw out the bad, rather than just remain silent about these things. After all, a safe and intellectual Christianity seems so far from the kind of Christianity I see in the early church and in the gospels. That doesn’t mean the extreme charismatics have got it right, with their disdain for anything intellectual. But there has to be a middle-ground somewhere.

For some time, I’ve been wanting to get out of my comfort zone of this kind of “open but cautious” Christianity – therefore, my many posts on hearing God’s voice. This desire has been gradually getting stronger and stronger – especially since the conference. Although New Creation church is definitely charismatic in a sense, because (perhaps like many other “charismatic” churches) it doesn’t promote a lot of the prophetic in corporate worship or cell groups, it’s not a lot different from a lot of “open but cautious” churches.

In a sense, I would say I’m very comfortable in the middle-class intellectual Christianity of Singapore. Actually, that’s not totally true. Give me a mix of not too charismatic intellectual evangelical Christianity with a dose of the emerging church passion for social justice (loving the poor, marginalized and oppressed) and I’ll be pretty satisfied and comfortable. Yet not totally because there will always be this sneaking suspicion that something’s missing and not right. But heck, I can live without that something and I won’t die. After all, so many Christians do live without that something else…

But then I won’t be truly satisfied. So I have no choice but to get out of my comfort zone. But getting out of it is not easy. It can be scary. It’s going into the unknown – into a place you’re not so familiar with, where you feel you’ve got so much to learn.

In recent years, I’ve talked to many prophetic people – especially recently during and after the conference. I’m very open to learning from them. But it can be difficult when I see a lot of them not particularly strong in the Word. You sometimes get the feeling that for them the ideal Christian worship service is one prophetic and glorious/glory experience after another. The preaching probably isn’t a particularly important part of the service for them and they would be satisfied with preaching that really… isn’t preaching at all – no depth, no great insight and just very superficial. I know the power and importance of strong  preaching and teaching and how that can transform lives – I’ve seen that in conservative non-charismatic churches with strong preaching and teaching of the Word. And of course I’ve seen that so beautifully in New Creation too. Yet for these prophetic people, you sometimes get the impression that they are just so far up there and just too “spiritual”. They don’t need good teaching or understanding of the Word – they just need a good experience.

I really wanna learn from these kinds of people and it’ll be so much more easier if they were to be strong in both Word and Spirit – and not only the Spirit – or at least recognize their lack in the Word area and that they have much to learn in that area – and thus are open to be corrected and recognize that they have so much to learn from other Christian traditions very different from theirs, rather than having mere disdain for Christian traditions different from theirs. Those who are so-called so in tune to the Spirit can often think they are totally correct and don’t have much to learn from non-charismatics because they’ve experienced something and such experience is valued over everything else – they can be just as dogmatic and judgmental as non-charismatic fundamentalists who firmly believe in their interpretation of the Bible. It’s hard to accept everything from such people because I’m not prepared to accept that charismatics have got it all correct, just as I’m not prepared to accept that the non-charismatics have it all right. It’s always easier to learn from people who recognize that both the Word and the Spirit are important and from those who have spent a decent amount of time in both areas and appreciate both sides of Christianity. One church I instantly think of with ministers and a tradition that is strong in both the Word and Spirit is the Westminster Chapel in London. And one family of churches is Newfrontiers. (Years ago, I would have included Sovereign Grace Ministries as a good model of Word – Reformed theology, in particular – and Spirit. However, I feel that they’re leaning more towards the Reformed/Word side than the Spirit side, which I think is quite sad. They affiliate themselves strongly with many anti-charismatic or “open but cautious” Christian leaders of the Reformed persuasion, but somehow don’t seem to work with ministries from the other side.)

So there aren’t many great models of good Word and Spirit balance in the Church. And I think that’s one reason why you still have such a huge charismatic/non-charismatic divide in the body of Christ. If there were many churches with that good balance, you’ll have many more churches learning from them and having that balance. But I think it’s because you see so much abuse in the charismatic circles that non-charismatics throw the baby out with the bathwater and refuse to touch anything too charismatic. That’s why you get many churches that profess to be open to charismatic gifts, but refuse to promote them corporately. They are fearful that abuses will occur. And the converse is true too: so many charismatic churches don’t care much for good teaching (other than teaching on the gifts) because they’ve thrown the baby out with the bathwater too and refuse to touch anything too non-charismatic.

Anyway, I was recently reading Rodney Howard-Browne‘s The Touch of God. I bought this book at the end of 1995 when he came to Singapore at the height of The Toronto Blessing. Rodney Howard-Browne’s meetings are full of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit – especially laughter. Not a whole lot of solid teaching/preaching in his meetings. Anyway, the book is about the anointing and I hadn’t actually read it yet but recently decided to read it. An interesting thought struck me when I was reading one of the chapters of the fivefold ministry. He wrote that Jesus stood in every one of the fivefold ministries – He was an apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher all in one. Then he wrote:

You and I do not individually have the ministry of Jesus because He never gave His ministry to one individual. He divided His ministry to the Body… I want you to notice that everyone who stands in a fivefold office collectively makes up the ministry of Jesus on earth today… You and I have the Spirit by measure, but corporately, we have the Spirit without measure. That’s why this last day revival will not come through one single group or denomination. (p. 14-16)

One ministry will emphasize healing, another preaching or teaching, another salvation, another the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is because of this diversity that we need to recognize the whole Body of Christ and to understand that we need each other. (p. 40)

Here’s what struck me. I’ve always thought that churches should strive for balance and be perhaps like how we envision Jesus to be like – strong in the Word and Spirit and good in all areas. So if New Creation is strong in grace, that’s great. But if they combine that with also being strong in social justice and missions and the prophetic, that would be even better and more biblically balanced. I’d think that Benny Hinn is anointed with healing gifts, but his meetings wouldn’t be a good representative of how local church services ought to be like because while you may get healed, you probably won’t grow so much in other areas as a Christian. Or that Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship (from where cameth the Toronto Blessing) would be great for renewal and revival, but not an ideal church. These are all specialized ministries, but shouldn’t we strive to see a local church have it all like Jesus, and not just focused in one or some areas?

Reading the above, it dawned upon me that maybe (I need to reflect on this more) we can’t really expect each local church to have it all – like I’ve been writing about above (“Where are the churches good in the Word and Spirit??”). Only the whole body of Christ is perfect in all areas. Maybe it’s OK that different churches specialize in different areas and are strong in different areas. Maybe that perfect balance and strength in all areas is only realized when looked from the perspective of the whole body of Christ? So maybe what we’ve been looking for and seeking in a local church is only fully realized and reflected in the body of Christ? I dunno…

Of course, I don’t think that gives any church an excuse just focus on one or two areas – and neglect others – and not seek to be as holistic as a church ought to be. But I’ve come to realize one thing. If I’m to learn more about the charismatic and Spirit side of things, I’ll probably need to go to people who so-called “specialize” in such stuff. And yes, they may be a bit extreme and not that balanced, but these are probably the people that you’ll learn the most from in this area. Trying to be balanced in all areas most likely means you’ll compromise in some areas. Ministers and churches are almost always stronger in one or some areas than others.

What that means simply is that I have to humble myself and learn from people that I may not think are very balanced. I can learn from their strengths, without giving up on the other side. I can take the good that I see and discard the rest. And sometimes even take in stuff which I may think is bad, because what do I know anyway? If I totally knew everything and totally knew what’s good and bad and all, I probably wouldn’t be in this state of lack or weakness in regards to this aspect of Christianity. So to learn, I have to be willing to be very open to things that I may not understand or even think it’s completely wrong. That’s not to say I need to throw out my mind completely. If erring on the side of caution prevents me from stepping out and learning more, then maybe erring on the other side may be the way to go sometimes!

So there’s where I am now…

I only started writing in this blog a lot about New Creation Church and theology related to grace the past 2 years or so. That’s because I started attending New Creation more regularly 2 years ago. I felt that because of my theological struggles and interest in the topic of grace (Lordship Salvation, etc.) that started years ago, I had something to contribute to the discussion and so I started writing all these posts related to grace. And the more I started to attend New Creation and the more I started to learn from Pastor Prince and New Creation and the more I started reflecting on everything I’m hearing at Church, the more I blogged on these topics.

But if anyone ventures beyond my blog posts on New Creation and grace to the other parts of this website with all my previous articles and biographical writings, you’ll see a different side of me. That’s the social justice / missions side which I’m hugely passionate about. Maybe it’s taken a bit of a backseat the past 2 years as I focus more on grace. But I’ve also purposely not mentioned a lot of things happening in my life on the blog because I know how controversial it is to write posts about New Creation. Most of the posts about New Creation’s theology has been more positive in nature. And New Creation Church is still very far from being accepted in many places – though things are slowly changing. Therefore, I’ve kept my identity mostly a secret here and not written about other aspects of my life because many Christians still can’t accept someone from New Creation.

I know a lot of people wonder why the name of this website is stillhaventfound. After all, haven’t I already found everything in Christ? Well, the reason for the name is here so I won’t elaborate further suffice to say that the reason has to do with my interest in social justice and seeing this world become a better place – and of course, Christians have a role to play in that. The truth is that a large part of my life concerns social justice (and also missions). Read my past articles on social justice issues like poverty (e.g. Encountering Peter Singer which explains my view of what the Bible says regarding helping the poor) and you’ll understand why some friends who know me from old wonder if I’ve lost that passion for social justice. They wonder about this because recently I’ve been writing so much positively about New Creation and grace and the New Creation message seems so self-centered and prosperity-centered and a contradiction to the altruistic, other-centered, social justice mindset I’d been advocating in my previous writings. What gives? Have I completely changed my mind on this issue?

Well, a big “NO”! The purpose of this whole post is actually to explain how I reconcile my recent writings in defense of New Creation’s theology with my old writings on social justice and helping the poor. To start, let me first talk a bit about the issue of prosperity (and blessings). I believe God desires to prosper us but it’s not always true that those who don’t prosper lack faith. I think a lot of it has to do with unjust social structures and I’ll leave a part of it to the mystery of God. But this doesn’t mean we have no responsibility to exercise faith and ask and believe – faith plays a role and a lot of times we don’t get because we don’t ask. (Regarding the issue of suffering, I’m still reflecting how that fits into the Christian’s life).

I’ve never written much in support of New Creation’s view of prosperity. Nor have I written much against it. I strongly disagree with using so much money on a new building, but what would I know anyway and you can still respect and honour the leadership while disagreeing with certain things.

I’m against Christians living extravagant lifestyles. I dunno about New Creation’s view on this. But I disagree with Christians being too rich not because it’s a sin to be rich. It’s definitely not! It’s just that it’s way better (i.e. more loving) to live more simply and give your additional money to bless those who need it. But if prosperity preachers could be faulted for living too extravagantly and not thinking about better ways of using their money (instead of using it on themselves) like using their money to bless others and reach the lost, let me just say that to be fair the same accusation can to be leveled against most Christians in the developed world – most of whom are middle-class and can easily do more to help the poor and contribute to missions. But of course we don’t look at it this way, do we :) We love to take pot shots at churches like New Creation and City Harvest (which, by the way, easily talks more about prosperity than New Creation), but the truth is that all Christians fall short of the ideal.

I may not be entirely comfortable with New Creation’s teaching on prosperity, but it’s not because they are like the extreme prosperity (tele-evangelistic) churches / preachers. They aren’t – they are much, much more moderate and those who lump New Creation in with the other prosperity churches / preachers have no clue what they are talking about. And there happens to be many such heresy hunters and self-proclaimed watchmen of God out there who have no understanding of the nuances involved, but just love to criticize New Creation and pronounce guilt by association. No doubt New Creation would claim to be of the Word of Faith (Prosperity) movement, but they are of a very different kind. New Creation doesn’t continually ask for money or manipulate Christians to give (see here). If it does, I wouldn’t be there listening to Pastor Prince and I would suspect the majority of the church wouldn’t be there too. We’re there because of the strong preaching on Jesus and God’s grace and love and this helps us see the beauty of Jesus. That’s why we’re there for.

Yet still I’m not entirely comfortable with some of the teachings on prosperity in New Creation. But neither am I entirely comfortable with the Methodist Churches (English speaking) which contain easily the richest Christians in Singapore. The preaching may not be prosperity-centered one bit, but it’s not about the preaching, but the lifestyles of the Christians.

Here’s the kind of prosperity teaching I believe in. While New Creation isn’t like the extreme prosperity preachers, I don’t think it’s up to this level yet either. I’ve spoken approvingly of Andrew Wommack’s view of prosperity (Wommack comes from the Word of Faith / Prosperity tradition) when he said:

Prosperity is how much of a blessing are you to someone else. That’s the way that God evaluates it.

When you get to where the priority on your finances isn’t for you, but rather it’s to bless someone else, then God will assume the liability of taking care of you.

I’ve also quoted approvingly of P.G. Vargis (another prosperity dude):

I live a simple life. Do not misunderstand me – I am not preaching a poverty gospel, neither do I practice it… I spend money if it is really necessary. I have not saved any thing [sic], money, land or a house for me or my children. Whatever I get for the ministry is put into the ministry… Live a simple life and give all the rest to the mission – that is my policy.

I think the above two people are wonderful representations of the so-called Prosperity Gospel. They may preach that God wants to prosper us, but that’s not wrong when they truly believe in prosperity for a purpose, money for missions and blessed to be a blessing. Now, these are wonderful phrases that many prosperity churches like to throw around, but I know very few that actually truly believe them to the extent that it’s so clear through how their lives are lived. From what I know of the above two people (admittedly not a lot so I may be wrong), I think they truly try to live those phrases out – at least to a much greater extent than other Christians, whether from the prosperity tradition or not.

In my opinion, a person who truly believes all the above phrases would live a simple life, just as P.G. Vargis put it. As I argued here,

In the light of almost unending poverty in the world and endless opportunities to help the poor, what justification do we have to live a luxurious lifestyle when by cutting down on such a lifestyle we could bless and love the poor?

I would add to the above giving to missions to reach the lost – not just helping the poor. To me, then, living up to the ideal that God calls us would require us to live a simple life. This doesn’t earn us favour or blessings or salvation for that is all for us in Christ. We ought to strive to such a life simply because we desire to love God and people. Even if we fail, that’s OK. We all will. God won’t punish us. There’s always grace available. So this isn’t something that’s meant to be legalistic. We will never attain the ideal because we’re not perfect. But, on the other hand, let us not deceive ourselves to think that we can be passive and it doesn’t matter how we live. We still ought to strive to be Christlike in every way, even though we will fall short. In this regard, prosperity church or not, we’ve all failed. The majority (if not all) of middle-class Christians in Singapore have fallen short of this ideal, whether your church is for or against the so-called prosperity gospel.

So me being in New Creation doesn’t actually reflect that I’ve changed my view from old that we Christians as a whole have failed terribly in helping the poor and reaching the lost and that we can and should do a whole lot more in this area. I still believe that. If I were in any other church in Singapore, I’d still be faced with Christians who live the middle-class, me-centered lifestyle, in spite of what is preached in the church.

(Perhaps the Christian tradition that most identifies with social justice and poverty issues is the emerging or emergent church movement. Their passion for social justice is admirable, but many verge on compromising the gospel and that’s something I can’t accept.)

I still have my passion for social justice and missions. I still wanna see more Christians standing up for the rights of the poor and marginalized and oppressed and giving their lives to reach the lost. I like the radical message calling people to give up their lives for the lost and dying. Oh, we need more preachers who preach the radical message of self-sacrifice and other-centeredness, who will preach on the Christian’s responsibility to missions and social justice. Surely that will transform the church into other-centered Christians who will do God’s work even if it cost them everything… Or will it?

And here’s the crux of the matter. This is what I’ve been reflecting a lot upon: If your preaching focuses more on calling Christians to sacrifice and to help the poor and do missions, will it actually result in that happening? I don’t think so. As I reflect on my life and talk to people, I find it’s not preaching such messages that will transform lives. It’s not harping on the fact that Christians should work out our salvation that will result in transformed sacrificial lives. I don’t even think that was the focus of the New Testament Epistles in the first place. Instinctively, we think that telling your members that they should do more will change their minds and their lives. But really, does it?

My passion for social justice came through reading secular books and understanding the world. My passion for missions came through understanding more about grace. I’m sure other people will have different experiences but I certainly don’t want to go to church and listen to the pastor telling me how much more I should do for the poor and the lost. Why not? Because I ALREADY KNOW THAT! And for those who don’t already know that and don’t have much concern for the poor and lost, I don’t think it’ll help if we keep on reminding them what the Bible says about this area. There’s a place I think to preach what the Bible says about all this every once in a while, but I think it’s really understanding and experiencing grace that empowers Christians to do the above.

Some people have told me they’ve appreciated some of the articles I’ve written on poverty as it’s challenged them. That’s all good. But challenging them to think is one thing. It’s a good start. But that doesn’t empower one to take action – the gospel does. And that’s why we go to church – to listen to the gospel that empowers us, more than to listen to what we should do and how short we’ve fallen (we already know all that).

I think together with the empowerment that comes through hearing the gospel of Jesus Christ, we need opportunities to experience serving. This is where I think New Creation is extremely weak in for a church of 20,000 people. City Harvest Church is a model for providing myriads of opportunities to serve. If we could somehow bring together New Creation’s gospel empowerment with City Harvest’s opportunities and passion for serving, that would be way awesome!

I’ve been reading Bill Johnson’s books and I came across this quote:

By nature love does not require anything in return, or it is not love… I have heard teaching on the subject of giving to the poor and needy that emphasizes our stewardship instead of compassion. It basically means that you don’t want to give to someone who will not use what was given properly. My opinion is that there is too much concern about giving something to someone who might misuse what is given. That didn’t stop God. While we do have a responsibility for good management of what God has given us, we are not responsible for what another person does with what we’ve given them. We are responsible to love, and love requires giving. Even if a person misuses the money or gift I gave them, the message of love has been demonstrated. Giving His love away is the goal. (Bill Johnson, Face To Face With God, p. 187-188)

Because the subject of helping the poor has been a big part of my life for some time, I’ve thought a lot about the issues that Bill Johnson wrote about above. Like him, I agree that in focusing on stewardship instead of compassion when addressing the subject of giving, we could miss the essence of what love and grace is about – actions which do not “require anything in return”.

We hear so much about that famous Chinese proverb:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

While I think there’s certainly truth and wisdom in it, I also think that pushing the implications of the above to the extreme can actually cause one to miss the essence of what grace and love is.

In 2003, while in Colombia (teaching English and learning Spanish), I was faced with the question of whether to continue to give money to a beggar and her family I met on the streets. Was it wise to continuously give them fish, or should I make sure that my money goes to teaching them how to fish? I pondered the above proverb and I reflected upon the meaning of grace. Below are my reflections taken from here:

“So I was confronted with the question of whether my helping Isabel and giving her family money was a good thing. Or perhaps, it was a good thing, but was it a wise thing? Or was it the wisest response in such a situation? In a way, it’s like when one meets a beggar. Should we give money to him/her? Giving to the beggar is just like giving to Isabel (she is after all begging for money) – in both circumstances, we would be giving a fish to the recipient rather than teaching him/her how to fish.

Should I continue giving to Isabel or somehow make sure that my giving to her would result in her working and thus earning her way to self-sufficiency? If I were to continue giving “fishes” to Isabel, rather than making sure she fishes for herself, would I thus be considered a bad steward of my money? Wouldn’t I be of better use if I were to somehow help her to get a job? Wouldn’t it be more right for her too if she were to earn her wages rather than depend on charity to survive?

Although the reasoning behind the “fish” quote is indeed true and wise, I realized that we could indeed take all this too far. What I mean is that we could start thinking that we should not give to the poor if indeed nothing comes out of it – if there is no long-term results to show for our charity. We could start thinking that we need to make them earn their wages and not rely on us for charity. In a way, we could fall into the spirit of the very famous saying (which many people think is taken from the Bible, but is in actual fact not) that “God helps those who help themselves” and thus think it wrong to help those who do not show they want to put in effort to help themselves. While all this in some sense no doubt true, I realized it is dangerous because this spirit could easily go contrary to the spirit of grace. That is, we could forget what grace means. Grace is unconditional giving. It is not conditional at all. By coming up with criteria to be fulfilled before we start giving, our giving ceases to be unconditional. Whether the criteria is imposed on the recipient or merely guides us as to whom we should be giving doesn’t really matter. As long as we don’t give freely – as long as we are being in any way conditional in our giving – we do not understand what grace really is. After all, Jesus didn’t die for the sins of certain people who fulfilled certain criteria, He died for all. When He loved us, he didn’t love only some but all. And when He called us to love others, He didn’t specify who we are to love – except that we are to love all without exception. When we give to others, we are called to give without expecting anything in return. We aren’t asked to give only to those who would use our money wisely. Rather, the only criteria, if any, which needs to be fulfilled before we give, is that those given ought to have needed it.

I came to this conclusion after much struggle within me. Initially, I had told myself that I should be giving for a good purpose. And a good purpose would be if my giving would help Isabel to get a job and thus support herself. There would thus be a long-term effect. In a sense, I would be leaving a little “legacy” of my giving. I would be proud in future to let others know that I gave to help this person who now has a job and is self-supportive. But I realized that this kind of thinking could go very much against the spirit of grace. I wanted to get something out of it – to get the satisfaction of having made a big difference to Isabel’s life. In a sense, my giving was conditional upon the fact that it would lead to something big. But I realized grace doesn’t make such conditions. Jesus loved us all and died for us all even if some would never have accepted His love. Or even if some would have accepted His love but still fail over and over again. That’s grace!

I’m not saying that using our money wisely is not something we ought to do. Obviously we should do that. The parable of the talents encourages us to be responsible for the use of our money. We should use it in such a way that it blesses others and that there are results to show. If we were to go by the parable of the talents alone, then the “fish” quote would indeed be wise and right and ought to be followed. Then we should think about using our money as best as we can and not just give unconditionally, but making sure that results follow. Indeed, the parable of the talents reminds us that we should not be lazy and thus when we give money to people, we need to make sure they are not just lazy and “consume” our gifts but they will invest wisely with it – preferably to learn how to fish, not just to buy fishes! The parable of the talents has a sort of “meritorious” feel to it.

I acknowledge that God does want us to be responsible with the way we use money. We need to put it to good use. But on the other hand, there’s the notion of grace. And grace has absolutely no “meritorious” feel at all! God is a God of grace. His love for us is more of reckless abandon than a calculative sort. The parable of the talents has to be balanced with the understanding of what grace is all about. When we think about grace, we banish all notions of merits or conditions. After all, in the bible there are hints of both capitalism (in the parable of the talents and such) and communism/communalism (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:32-35, 2 Corinthians 8-9). And let us not forget that the idea most prominent and preeminent in the bible is that of love and grace.

My point in all of this is that I realized how easily it is for one to forget the idea of grace. And in terms of giving and development, I believe remembering about grace should cause us not to think so much about how our giving produces good long term results, but should instead remind us that even if our giving were to produce nothing in the long term, but were only to be a short term and one-time expression of grace and love, grace would compel us to do it anyway.”

I want to talk about how Christians can show love to gays. And I want your opinions too – from Christians and non-Christians, gays and straights, fundamentalists and liberals. I’ve already mentioned in my previous post that I hold to a more progressive and liberal view of homosexuality than most Evangelical Christians. I’m not particularly dogmatic about my view because I’m quite open to the fact that I may be wrong. The issue is complex. But let’s just for a moment (throughout this post) assume I’m speaking as an orthodox (conventional) Christian – as most Christians in Singapore are. As such a Christian, I would still be thoroughly unsatisfied with how many Christians have related to gays and continue to do so. As I mentioned before, we can say that we love the sinner but hate their sin, but in general gays certainly don’t feel love from Christians.

My 4th and 5th point in my previous post was about the importance of showing love to gays. I mentioned how Jesus related to sinners, how he was known as welcoming and accepting, rather than judgemental and condemning. And I talked about how it was the power of His love that transforms lives. That’s how I feel we should relate to gays. We should be first and foremost known as a people who love them. But how would that work out practically? How can we demonstrate love to them and be known as a loving community? This is what I’d like to explore in this post – or more accurately, what I’d like you to explore with me because I don’t have a lot of answers.

Some Christians may say that when we tell them God is angry with their sin and they have to change, we’re not being mean to them but actually loving them because we’re being concerned for their souls. This argument is used very often. I reject that because that’s clearly not how Jesus related to sinners, nor the woman in adultery. Jesus didn’t use fear to drive them from sin to God. He used love to attract them to Himself.

Let me just turn a bit to another issue that’s very controversial – abortion – to illustrate what I mean by showing love. I hold to a more conservative view of abortion in that I think abortion is wrong. But like the issue of homosexuality, this is an area I’m thoroughly dissatisfied with the Church’s response. In both issues, the Church tends to talk a lot, but do very little. And if there’s any doing, it’s in the form of protests – i.e. the doing is negative. So the words and actions are negative, and they’re not backed up with positive actions of love. Is it any wonder gays and women seeking an abortion don’t feel the Church or Christians love them? Like the title of this post, I propose we Christians ought to speak softly and love loudly. At the moment, the Church is shouting (condemnation and judgement) and not loving at all. When we start speaking softly (i.e. you do not have to let go of your belief that homosexual acts are sinful or that abortion is wrong, but just tone it down a little) and loving loudly (doing positive actions of love that touches people and speaks louder than your words), I believe we’ll see more transformation in lives. Like I wrote before, love always wins out in the end simply because love is the most powerful thing in the world and love transforms.

Going to the abortion issue and how the Church can demonstrate love. There is so much we can do to try and prevent abortion besides protesting outside abortion clinics or trying to use political force to make abortion illegal. These things are hardly going to reduce the number of abortions. What can have the double effect of actually reducing abortions and also showing the world that Christians are a community of love?

The Liberals tend to focus on reducing poverty as a way to reducing abortion because one big reason (not the only reason, admittedly) for women aborting their babies is the inability (financially) to take care of the child. Studies tend to agree that reducing poverty will reduce abortion. So even if Liberals are wrong in placing women’s choice above the baby, at least their focus on poverty alleviation reduces the need for abortion. Conservatives (Christians), on the other hand, mainly focus on political action to outlaw abortion, thinking that this is the best way to do so. Christians are known for their anti-abortion political rhetoric, not for their actions to reduce poverty in order to reduce abortion. Yet, why don’t we focus equally as much, if not more so, on reducing poverty and helping women bring up their child? This, to me, would be an awesome demonstration of the love of God. If Christians focused most of their energies on doing these positive actions that would save babies and demonstrate God’s love, and less on political action against abortion, I think our actions would be closer to what Jesus would do.

Let me quote from this brilliant website called All Expenses Paid (hopefully it’ll be developed!) started by a friend of mine. He is passionately pro-life, but so different from most pro-life Christians. Just read on:

The vision:…a network of pro-life Christians across the USA who are prepared to cover any and all expenses (and to sacrifice in myriad other ways) to ensure that every woman has every reason to “choose to keep” her baby rather than to kill it. This includes readiness to open our homes to provide short or long-term food and housing, readiness to pay for all medical costs from prenatal checkups through birth through postnatal care, readiness to adopt 20 kids per family as needed, readiness to not adopt if mothers decide to raise their own babies, readiness to provide vocational and career training that a woman (rightly or wrongly) fears she might miss out on due to an unplanned pregnancy, and readiness for such generosity to be taken advantage of. Finally, this network of pro-life Christians makes its offer known continuously in front of every abortion clinic in America and through the media in such a way that no parent could ever again claim financial burden as a motivation for killing their baby.

Fuel for the vision: For those who have trusted in Him, Jesus Christ has already paid all the expenses (our infinite sin debt) on the the cross to make us right with God. Thus as beloved children of the Creator and King of the universe we have no need to seek our own in anything but rather are free to become slaves and servants to all men.

Wow! Can you imagine that? If Christians rose up like this against abortion, you can bet that the number of abortions will be reduced and people will stop thinking of Christians as hypocritical and judgemental. To be sure, abortions won’t totally disappear because there will still be those who choose an abortion for reasons other than financial reasons. But what a witness that would be! What an expression of sacrifice and love which I think would win the world over and reduce abortions.

I brought up the abortion issue here because I’m a bit clearer as to how the Church can show love in practical ways. The above actions are very radical, but that’s how we’re called to love others as Christians. It’s easy to shout and demonstrate and all. It’s so much more difficult and sacrificial to take the above steps. Yet if Christians are really as concerned about the dying babies as they say they are, I’d like to see them channeling their energy into something positive (like the above actions) that actually helps reduce abortions, win lives to Christ and brings glory to God.

If the above are good and positive ways of showing love to women who are considering abortion, what positive actions can be done by Christians that will demonstrate our love to homosexuals and see them won to Christ and transformed? I’ll mention 3 things we shouldn’t do because it doesn’t show love at all, but rather the opposite, then 2 things I think we should do:

1) Don’t use dishonest means. I will try not to say a lot more about the AWARE saga here, but the whole incident gave a really bad name to Christians. It’s a lesson in what actions shouldn’t be done. The ends do not justify the means. Even the Anglican Bishop Dr. John Chew said:

Their “takeover” actions, though not contravening AWARE’s Constitution, nevertheless raised ethical and proprietary difficulties and challenges even in the minds of many Christians.

Even if the means were legal, the spirit of it all was not. You don’t just want to be right, but to be perceived and seen to be right so that you don’t provoke anger in those you want to reach out to.

2) Don’t use fear and alarmist tactics. The accusation and fear that there’s going to be a generation of gays raised if we don’t stand up against the gays is plain stupid and dishonest. And it’s not a fear that was expressed only during the AWARE saga. Such imaginary fear is also what makes Christians dishonestly claim that there’s a gay agenda which seeks to to promote the gay lifestyle and make straights become gay. This is just so ridiculous. I hope we Christians think before we say such things. It’s dishonest, it doesn’t help and it’s not loving.

3) Don’t use the law unfairly. When some Christians rose up against the repealing of Section 377A (which criminalizes gay sex), what were they trying to achieve? Is that the way we show love to gays? Would Jesus have tried to get the law to criminalize adultery or prostitution or divorce? Do we want to win them with our love or do we just delight in getting rid of them and putting them into jail and seeing them suffer?

4) Understand gays. I don’t claim to understand gays fully even though I’m sure I have more experience with gays than the typical conservative Christian out there. I attended a gay-affirming church in Singapore for about a year or so and I’ve read a bit about homosexuality. But I’ve still so much to learn.

I think most Christians do not know what they are talking about when they think it’s so easy for gays to change or that the homosexual lifestyle is always a lifestyle of choice. We can debate whether there’s a gay gene or whether homosexual tendencies are a result of nature or nurture, but ultimately all these studies are inconclusive. I’m sure both play a part, and nature may play a bigger part in certain individuals, with nurture playing a bigger role in other individuals. Pure common sense tells me that because gays are a marginalized group, it would be foolish for gays to choose to become gays and thus become marginalized. Gays have committed suicide due to depression as a result of being gay and rejected by society. If it were so easy to turn straight, they would have done so already! Nobody yearns to become marginalized and rejected! Of course there are some who don’t struggle as much. But there’s no doubt that there are many who, if given the choice, would not choose to have such gay inclinations and for us to not recognize the struggles of the many is not being understanding.

As a Christian who believes in a loving and powerful God, I believe by faith that God can transform a person from gay to straight. I’m sure there are many of such testimonies, as there are wonderful testimonies of other forms of healing – physical and emotional. But again, a simple search on the Net will show us that it’s not as easy to change and remain changed as we’re made to think by most Christian leaders. Many who have gone through programs in ex-gay ministries have fallen back into homosexuality, even the leaders of such ministries. What does this tell us?

Remember that throughout this post I’m speaking as a conventional Christian. You can be such a Christian who believes that homosexual acts are sinful and yet still treat homosexuals with understanding and empathy. Some of the above facts are things that many Christians are ignorant of or things they choose to ignore. Ignoring them doesn’t help us in our understanding of the complex situation gays are in. Understanding the above would make us treat homosexuals with much more compassion. And I think gays would appreciate that we took the time to understand their situation and the difficulties they face.

5) Understand our God of love and grace. I think this is one of the most important things we can do – if not the most important thing – if we want to learn how to demonstrate love to gays. The more we understand how loving and gracious God is towards us, the more we will love God and others. The more we understand how much we’ve been forgiven, the more we’ll love God and others.

I already mentioned a bit in my previous post about how Jesus treated the adulteress woman and other sinners. To me, the way he related to sinners is a stark contrast to the way many Christians relate to gays. Love comes first, not judgement. Jesus was so empty of self-righteousness and so full of a non-judgemental, non-condemning and non-fear inducing attitude that sinners were not afraid of relating to Him. Jesus never condemned sinners but He rebuked the Pharisees who were self-righteous and condemned and judged others. They were the ones who were so concerned about rules and laws that they missed the whole spirit of love. They were the ones He rebuked, and not the sinners. If Jesus were here today, I have no doubt which side He’d be welcoming and accepting towards, and which side He’d be rebuking.

Love and grace are so powerful that it transforms. If we focus on God’s love and grace, it’ll transform us. And I believe if we tell gays about God’s love and grace, rather than speak messages of judgement, condemnation and fear to them, it’ll transform them.

[I didn't originally think of bringing in my church here but I'm going to anyway :) This is more for any gays - Christian or otherwise - who are reading, than for other straight Christians reading this. Christians who get easily offended may skip this part. But this is what I have to say: I would recommend attending New Creation Church for any gays who want to overcome homosexuality. It's not a perfect church, but it's the perfect environment to understand and experience God's love and grace. It's a place you will not get judged or condemned. I'm speaking here more about the message and the whole service, than about the people you'll meet. In a church of about 18,000+ people or so, you'll meet all sorts of people and many of us are still learning how to show grace and love and acceptance to others.

Pastor Prince believes that homosexual acts are wrong, but he also realizes that victory over sin comes through experiencing the love and grace of God in Christ, and not through feeling condemned and fearful. It is through hearing the gospel of grace that will give you power over sin and heal you of everything. So you won't get any condemnation there. You can just experience the message of God's love and I believe that's the best environment to be transformed.

In New Creation, you won't hear about what's wrong with you, about how sinful you are. The focus is different. It's not on sin or judgement or fear. And as Pastor Prince always says, we focus on Jesus, and not on sin, not because we make light of sin. Rather, it's because we make much of Jesus. If we focus on what's right with us in Christ, what's wrong with us will fall away. You'll hear a lot about Jesus in New Creation and very little about man and how sinful he is. The reason is because the more we focus on Jesus and understand everything about Him - the more we behold the glory of Jesus -, the more we'll be transformed into His image (2 Cor. 3:18).

I didn't forget what I wrote above about the difficulty of change. I believe change is possible, though a quick survey of people's past experiences tell me it's not easy. But if there's any place I'd recommend first and foremost for gays who desire to be transformed, then it'll be New Creation Church. I'm not ignorant that the whole issue is complex and change is difficult, but on the other hand I do believe in the power of love and grace and the importance of being in an atmosphere of love and grace so that it'll inspire faith. Condemnation and judgement don't inspire faith. Only the power of Christ's love does.]

I’d appreciate the opinions of others on more practical ways we Christians can show love to gays.

PS: Books & Culture just posted a review of Andrew Marin’s Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation With the Gay Community.  Andrew founded the Marin Foundation, whose mission is “to build a bridge between the religious and GLBT communities through scientific research, and Biblical and social education.” I don’t think it’ll definitively answer our theological questions (the book probably wasn’t meant to do that anyway), but I’m guessing it’ll be a good read for most Christians just to get to know more about the gay community.

I’ve been wanting to write about the AWARE saga for a long time. In fact, I’ve been wanting to write about a lot of things – not least the events relating to New Creation Church that’s been on the news recently. I can’t believe I’ve not written for over 6 months. I guess that’s the procrastinating me. I wanted to do at least two things with my blog and I’ve finally gotten down to doing these things. Next up is actually changing the theme and adding some widgets to this blog. I think I should be able to do this by this year :)

The AWARE saga has so thoroughly enthralled me because it has touched on so many issues that’s been so close to my heart for the past 10 years or so. Here are 5 things I want to say:

1) There is a great diversity of views among Christians. It’s important to note that this post is from the perspective of just one Christian. I don’t claim to represent the whole of Christianity. Nobody should. Nobody fully knows the truth and the true Christian position on every matter infallibly – only God who inspired the Scriptures. On fundamental and essential doctrines, we believe it by faith. On other matters and doctrines, it’s better for us to acknowledge that we’re not infallible in our interpretation of Scripture or view of what we think God wants us to do. No Church or Christian group or organisation – even the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) – should claim to be the true spokesperson of God. They can if they want to, and they often do so, but that’s just pure arrogance. All of us would like to think that God’s on our side. I like to think so too. But I know I may be wrong and thus nobody has to agree with me. Taking God out of the picture for a while, there’s a lot of diversity within Christianity simply because we’re not infallible. So don’t let any one person or group say that this is what Christians should do if they want to be good Christians or want to please God and all that nonsense. The issue is far too complex for simplistic solutions. We all have good intentions and we often have truth on our side. Whether it’s the full truth, I doubt it.

I’m writing my thoughts not because I want to tell every Christian how or what to believe. Rather, I write because I think I have some good things to say (it’ll be considered horrible and demonic to some I’m sure), but certainly I don’t claim to be infallible.

2) There are Christians who do not support Josie and gang. Perhaps my main reason for writing this post is to tell the world that there are Christians out there who are not like Josie and gang.

Before moving on with the rest of my post which is mostly about why I disagree with them, I want to say two things in support of them. Firstly, they ought to be congratulated for their courage. Now, courage to me is an amoral term. By saying they were courageous doesn’t mean I agree with them. It just means that I acknowledge that they had the guts to stand up for what they believe in. I happen to also believe that the way they stood up for what they believe was wrong. There’s a lot of talk about how they were “persecuted” during the EGM and in the media – both mainstream and non-mainstream ones. And this brings me to my second point. I do believe that the media was very biased against them. On the other hand, for Josie to say that she’s not sure why so many people are angry shows that she’s either very dishonest or really out of touch with reality. The media wasn’t fair, but I think Josie and gang deserved most of the flak they got, though not everything. Were they persecuted? I think it’s nice for their supporters to think that they were. But I think that’s stretching the use of the word too far – at least the Christian use of the word. Full marks to them if they were persecuted for doing what’s right. But I don’t agree what they did was right in the first place so I wouldn’t consider it persecution. Courageous they were. And yes, the media was biased against them. But they were not persecuted – at least not for doing good – in the Christian sense of the word.

So going back to my main point here. There are Christians who profoundly disagree with what they did. There are Christians out there who differ from Church of Our Saviour (COOS) and Cornerstone Community Church on their “official” attitude towards homosexuals. I stress “official” because it’s about the church leadership’s position, and not all the Christians who attend these churches. I believe the reason why a lot of the COOS emails and sermon videos were leaked onto the Net was because there were members there who didn’t agree with the church’s position and way of doing things. To me, it’s great to know that because we should never just blindly follow what our leaders say or tell us to do. We should never give so much respect to our leaders to think of them as infallible or as always leading us onto the correct path. For me, I respect Joseph Prince of New Creation, but I don’t think he’s perfect or agree with everything he says, as I’ve written in my blog. I accept what I see as the good (a lot of it) and reject things I don’t think is right. I’ve had some experience with Church of Our Saviour and I really like the church in many ways with regards to their physical and emotional healing ministry to heterosexuals – though I’m not too fond of their Choices ministry to homosexuals. But they are a great church with many positive things and I’m quite sure the same for Cornerstone. I’m not against these two churches. But I will state my profound disagreement with their attitude towards homosexuals and the stuff they’ve done to promote their agenda against homosexuals. (Yes, we all have agendas. If the gay has one, so do Christians).

It’s been very heartening for me is to see many Christians speaking out. I wanted to go to the AWARE EGM (eventually I didn’t) to speak out and let others know that being a Christian doesn’t mean we agree with the views or methods of Josie and gang. I’m glad to hear there were Christians out there (on the Net and in the EGM) speaking out to let the world know that Josie and gang are not representative of all Christians. I feel it’s important to speak out for the simple reason that I don’t want the world to get the wrong impression that Christians are all like that. I felt this same way during George Bush’s time as President. Many people thought then that all Christians supported George Bush when that was just plain wrong. And I thought it was right then to let the world know that Christians are not all like that. Not all Christians supported the wars, inhumane treatment of terrorists or are narrow-minded unilateralists.

Why bother speaking out on this issue? Why criticize other Christians and churches? Why not just be quiet even if you think other Christians are wrong? Wouldn’t it harm the unity of the Church to speak out? And, for goodness sake, isn’t it more loving just to keep quiet rather than criticize?

In this blog I’ve tried not to criticize other churches or Christians. That’s because I hate blogs who criticize every small little thing about other Churches or Christians. But if I do criticize, I try to do so in as objective a way as I can (and I know I’m not 100% objective and no one is). I’ve always had this belief that sometimes you can’t be on both sides. If you keep quiet because you don’t want to confront the side that oppresses, you end up allowing the oppression to continue and are doing harm to the oppressed side. If you think that by keeping quiet you’re being loving and gracious to the side that oppresses or does wrong, you have to realize that this act of “love” is actually doing harm to the side that is oppressed or wrong. So sometimes we can’t have it both ways.

For small matters, there’s no need to be so critical.  But the AWARE saga was not a small matter. There were many people watching and there were many gays and others who may have been given the impression that Josie and gang represent true Christianity. I couldn’t just let this distorted representation of Christianity as a religion of judgement, condemnation and dishonesty go unanswered and that’s why I’ve written this post.

I speak out because the world needs to know that there are Christians who have a totally different view of God from Josie and gang. The world needs to know that God is first and foremost a God of love, grace, mercy and compassion, more than anything else. Jesus came to save the world, not to condemn it. The most defining characteristic of God is that of love and that’s what I want the world to know of God and Jesus Christ. And I want especially homosexuals and transexuals to know this. Jesus loves you… And if any Christian gives you the impression that God is a God of anger, condemnation and judgement, then please disregard what they say because I believe that God’s first word to you is not of judgement, but of love. And I would gladly invite you to attend church with me – a church where I believe you’re experience the wonderful love of Jesus Christ that will transform your life – and come to see and experience a different view of God than the one that is so often portrayed by Christians.

3) The issue of disagreement wasn’t really about one’s view of homosexuality. Yes, I have a more progressive and liberal view of homosexuality than most Christians. My view on homosexuality is free for all to read here (if you don’t want to read my four posts there, then just read this article written by another Christian which I mostly agree with). Many Christians would disagree with it and that’s fine. Nobody has to agree with it, but they have every right to be challenged by it. But my view is not the (extreme) liberal view. That’s the reason why I left Free Community Church (FCC) – although I’m quite supportive of a lot of what they are doing. They hold to a more liberal view than me. But I won’t deny that my view of homosexuality is more liberal than most Christians.

But let’s just discount my view of homosexuality because I don’t want Christians to say, “Oh, you’re just a liberal (or hold to a more liberal view than most Christians) and that’s why you disagree with Josie and gang.” Even if I held to a totally orthodox and conservative Christian view of homosexuality, I would still very much disagree with Josie and gang. I think many Christians who hold to an orthodox view of homosexuality were upset with what they did and the way they did it. Much disagreement had nothing to do with one’s theological view of homosexuality. And I think that’s why even Christians who may view homosexual acts as sinful and come from COOS were quite upset with Josie and gang. Why? Other Christians on the Net have already written about it. See especially Gwee Li Sui’s take here that has been making its rounds.

4) Christianity is primarily about love. My biggest disagreement with Josie and gang is not a theological one about homosexuality. It’s simply that, in my opinion, their actions do not represent the God of the Bible, nor the love that He is. To me, the most important thing in Christianity is the gospel of Jesus Christ – the cross of Jesus Christ. Everything has to be evaluated by that event. The whole of Christianity is about Jesus and Jesus dying to take our place. Paul refused to boast except in the cross of Jesus Christ (Gal. 6:14). The gospel and the cross of Jesus Christ is love exemplified. That’s what the whole of Christianity is about. But is that what the world sees that Christianity and Christians are all about? No!

Christianity has an image problem. And this is fueled by the kind of things that Josie and gang have done and said. This is actually the kind of thing you expect of conservative Christians in America. It’s nothing new in America. And that’s why young people view Christians as anti-gay, hypocritical, judgemental and not like the Jesus of the Bible. At least, I’m thankful that unbelievers know that Jesus, the Christian’s true leader, wasn’t about judgement!

To me, I think part of the problem stems from a misunderstanding of the Bible and a lack of depth in one’s understanding of the grace and love of God as demonstrated in Jesus Christ. There’s just too many theological issues related to all this. But the most important issue relating to all this is a really simple one. It’s about love. The whole Bible is all about the love of God. No, I’m sorry, but it’s not about the judgement of God. It’s not about a righteous and angry God who wants to judge sin. While these are legitimate messages of the Bible, it’s no way the primary message of the Bible. God’s innermost essence is that of love, not judgement.

And yet Christians in America (and slowly in Singapore too) are known more for what they are against, than what they are for. Jesus wasn’t known for what He was against, but what He was for. That’s why He attracted sinners to Him. If Jesus was known as a person who came to judge sin, the sinners wouldn’t dine with Him. If we get our focus correct – the focus on the love and grace of God – then we’ll talk more about God’s love and grace than speaking against homosexuality or abortion or euthanasia or whatever. Don’t get me wrong. I think those are legitimate issues to talk about. But when the Church is known more for her opposition against these things than our love and acceptance of all people because we have first been loved and accepted by God, then I think we’ve missed what the Bible is really all about and are misrepresenting our God of love.

Again, this isn’t about one’s theological view of homosexuality. You can be totally conservative on this area, yet act like Jesus would towards homosexuals.

Jesus did not seek to influence the political sphere so as to stop the sinful tide of the nation of Israel. He wasn’t interested in power, nor was He interested to let everyone know how angry His father was about their sins. He welcomed and accepted the prostitutes and tax collectors. He welcomed them and talked with them not to tell them how angry God will be with them and how judgement awaits them if they don’t stop sinning. No, he welcomed them to show them love so that love could transform them. He made sure that such sinners were accepted and loved. This is such a contrast. How do Christians treat gays? We can all go on about the fact that we love the sinner and hate the sin and hide behind such a theologically correct (in the conservative Christian’s opinion, as I’m putting myself in their shoes now) phrase, but just go out and ask gays and transsexuals whether they feel loved and accepted. Sorry, but I’m truly sick of hearing that phrase sprouted by conservative Christians because the assumption is that they’ve been loving the sinner when they so clearly have not. Homosexuals certainly do not feel their “love”. I’m sure Jesus who certainly acted in love in all He did would not treat homosexuals the way many conservative Christians treat them.

Jesus didn’t go to the adulterous woman to make her feel guilty and bring God’s judgement upon her. That’s not love. Jesus came to accept her and through his word of “no condemnation” gave her the power to “go and sin no more”. Love comes first, then transformation. Love transforms. Meanwhile, we Christians get it the other way round, just like the Pharisees. Jesus had his harshest words of judgement not for sinners, but for those who thought they were better than others and judged others. The way Jesus treated the adulterous woman, and not the way the pharisees treated her, is a model of how we’re to treat sinners .

When he said, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, it was sure to anger the Pharisees and those who were so focused on judgement and condemnation of sin. But Jesus was more concerned that his actions and statements welcomed sinners to Him, not scare them away. To me, that’s the litmus test. The way we act and speak is very important. If it causes gays and sinners to move further away from Christianity because they feel that we’re judging them, then we’re acting like the Pharisees. If it causes gays and sinners to be drawn towards us because of our love and acceptance of them, then we’re acting more like Jesus. We Christians can say that we love the sinner but hate the sin, but if the result of what we say and how we act puts sinners off, then we’re not acting in love like Jesus did.

5) Christians have a love of power; Jesus understood the power of His love. I had an argument with a friend who is the leader of one of the biggest Christian organizations in Singapore. He insisted that while Josie and gang made some mistakes, we Christians should stand against the gay activists who are promoting homosexuality. I disagreed that homosexuals wanted to promote homosexuality, saying that I believed they only wanted acceptance. And I still believe that now. I don’t think gays are out to make straights become gay the way that many straights want to see gays become straight. Maybe I’m wrong, but to me, it doesn’t really matter.

You see, the way I see it, love is the most powerful thing in the world. If the gays are well-organized and have an agenda to make the whole of Singapore gay or the whole world gay, then my response would just be to overwhelm them with the power of God’s love. No, I’m not going to fight power with power because that’s not how it works in God’s kingdom. If you want to defeat me and destroy my values, do that even if it means killing me, but I’ll still love you. And I’ll win you over to my side through my love. Ridiculous? Well, it sounds like the gospel of Jesus Christ…

Jesus didn’t use power to win over the world. He let the power of His love, the power of His death, transform the world. I think this is perhaps the most profound truth in the whole of this post. And this is so often lost among Christians. We love and crave political power so we can defeat the other side. So we can overcome the other side’s agenda. That’s why so many Christians called for Christians to attend the EGM – to show their power and strength. That’s why some Christians rallied other Christians against the decriminalization of homosexuality in Singapore.

We think the world’s power can transform the world. Jesus thought differently. He knew that the greatest power is the power of God’s love. Sometimes showing love means we let the world’s power overcome us. That didn’t matter to Jesus. We human beings like to fight for our “rights” and stand up for our “rights”. Jesus didn’t stand up for His right eventhough as God He had more rights than any of us! His agenda was love even unto death. There’s something more important than demanding our “rights”: to show love. Jesus let the power of His love – which involved letting the world’s power overcome Him to such an extent that he died – transform the world. But guess what? In the end, He won. You don’t win by power; you win by giving up power. You don’t win by asking others to serve you; you win by serving others. You don’t win by showing you are stronger; you win by suffering. You don’t win by coming first; you win by coming last. That’s the upside down kingdom of Jesus.

Putting another way, we want power to win the battle. The tragedy is that we end up losing the war because in the long run with all our “standing against the gay agenda” and “standing against the decriminalization of homosexuality”, we will fail to reach homosexuals with Christ’s love. Instead, like Jesus, we should learn to let go and show love even if it means losing the battle, for in the long run we would win the war, because love always wins out in the end. That’s the way the Kingdom of God works…

I’m an Obama supporter. Not a huge one. But if I were an American, I would vote for Obama. I have my own reasons (and they stem from my Christian convictions) and I’ve done my own research. But I try not to make politics too divisive an issue and so you’re not going to get me to convince you to be an Obama supporter, although I’ll try to explain why I am one.

I’m passionate about social justice. But politics? I try not to be too passionate about it because both sides of the political divide are all imperfect and play the game of politics well. Neither McCain/Palin nor Obama/Biden are going to be our saviours. And I’m sure God is neither a Republican nor a Democrat.

Recently, I got into a little email-conversation with someone who was totally anti-Obama. I was meant to receive Christian emails from him. But in addition to that, he thought it necessary to also send his mailing list anti-Obama emails – probably to make sure that we Christians become on the side that (he thinks) God is on. I endured this for a while but after receiving more of such emails (than the Christian mails that I signed up for to receive), I wrote to him and told him I was offended by the emails because they were not balanced. I said I didn’t mind discussion and debate on the issues, but the articles he sent were just too one-sided. One promoted an awful Focus on the Family letter that’s mentioned here. I told him that I wanted to receive his Christian emails, but not his political ones. Too much passion and too little substance. That’s politics. Just like some of our theological debates.

I’m all for conversation and discussion about politics, just as I’m all for conversation and discussion about theology. However, I’ve seen theological and political discussion become too dirty and un-Christian. I’ve tried to make sure that the theological discussions here don’t go overboard. So far, I don’t think it has. But I know how often it can. People talking past one another. People just trying to show that they are right and everyone else is wrong. People starting to attack the character of others.

To be sure, I think discussing political and theological issues are important. But there are some rules I think we should all abide by when we have such sensitive discussions. In the first place, don’t start to attack people’s characters who differ from you. Don’t denigrate their intelligence because they differ from you. And please don’t insinuate that others are a lesser Christian than you because they hold to a different theological or political stance. Instead, we should focus on the issues. And do so in a level-headed way and without inciting fear and hatred against those you disagree with, like the above article.

While I’m very interested in politics, I don’t see the need for it to be divisive simply because there are much more important things than politics in this world. The church is not called to take over the world or any government. We’ve already seen how that worked out in history and I don’t think we want to go back to that. But of course, there are Christians who think that God is on one side of the political divide in America. It’s only recently that more and more younger Christians are recognizing that God is not a Republican. That doesn’t mean He’s a Democrat, either. I think He’d rather us channel our passion into preaching the gospel and loving others.

But because so many Christians still think that a Christian has to support the Republican candidate because it’s God’s will, I’ll list some points (and refer to other websites) on why I think it’s OK for a Christian to support either side (even the Democratic side) and why we shouldn’t let such politics divide us:

1) Let me start with John Piper on the “prophetic perspective” and the “gospel” which he shares here.

The prophetic perspective is what the church needs here. By that I mean, we don’t live for politics. We don’t base our confidence about the future on whoever gets elected… Let those who vote and do politics do it as though they were not doing it. Which means there’s a kind of engagement that is not all-consuming. There’s a kind of voting, a kind of doing politics, a kind of advocacy which is not investing our whole selves into it. Because we’re not here fully. We have a foot in heaven and a foot on the earth. We’re citizens of two kingdoms. This is not our main home. This world is passing away… This system is disappearing so therefore we shouldn’t be so worked up about our opponent getting elected that it’s going to undo our life… So the prophetic perspective says, “I am God’s child. Jesus is my King. America is not my allegiance. God and heaven are my allegiance and God can turn this for good no matter who gets elected and I will always be pursuing his kingdom first and let the political chips fall where they will.”

…We need the gospel. We need to say the reason we’re on planet earth is not to advocate for any political party. We’re here to advocate for Christ and Him Crucified. And that gospel may run a thousand times better during the worst of economic times than it does during the best of economic times.

There’s no need to invest so much in this election or in one’s candidate as though it’s a life and death matter. It’s not. We need a proper perspective here. For this, understanding (see point two below) what it means by us being “citizens of two kingdoms” is imperative.

2) The White Horse Inn is an excellent radio program that has shaped a lot of my Christian thinking since about 10 years plus ago. This program addresses things from a Reformation perspective. In fact, the people of this program (e.g. Michael Horton) have been instrumental in me forming the kind of view of grace and the gospel which I hold to now. I may not agree with everything they say but they are definitely one of the better Christian ministries out there of an intellectual bent that keep the central things (the gospel) central.

In a recent two-part series (part one & part two) on Christianity and Politics, the program tackles this “from the vantage point of Reformation Christianity where there is a whole history here that has a lot to say about the two kingdoms, about the way the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world relate to each other, about our citizenship in both kingdoms.” They bring a Democrat and a Republican to the table.

3) One of the major reasons why Christians have traditionally voted Republican is because of the party’s anti-abortion stance. As Christians, we should no doubt be against abortion. But does that mean we automatically support the Republican candidate? I don’t think it’s an automatic choice and more and more Christians are starting to realize that.

As with most issues, this is more complex than many Christians make it out to be. All Christians ought to be united against abortion, but also against poverty and racism and many other issues. Traditionally, the Republican side is strong on the abortion issue, but weak in many others in which the Democratic side is strong. It’s thus a tricky question as to which side we ought to support. Those who say that the abortion issue is more important than other issues may have a strong argument. But then again, it’s not as easy as that. There are lots of other issues to consider in terms of implementing one’s ideal, which John G. Stackhouse Jr. does well of addressing in his Christianity Today article. Check out his description of three kinds of people who undertake political action: ideologue, pragmatist and pluralist:

The ideologue has it easiest. He simply asks himself, in any situation on any issue, what’s ultimately right. Then he does everything he can to realize that ideal. That’s the way many Christians have engaged in political action, whether on the Left, Right, or whatever.

…The pragmatist also starts with the question of what’s ultimately right. But then she carefully appraises the situation and works for what she deems currently possible. If abortion is wrong, but the best she can do is get a ban on partial-birth abortions, she works for that. If gay marriage is wrong, but the best she can do is see “civil unions” instituted instead, then that’s what she aims for.

The pluralist asks what’s ultimately right and what’s currently possible. But he interposes a third, admittedly odd question between those two: What is penultimately right? Might it be God’s will that what is ultimately right not prevail immediately?

The pluralist Christian might have strong views about x. He is also pragmatic enough to know that a total ban on alternatives to his views of x is unlikely in his society. But he is also willing to consider the possibility that in God’s providence, it is better for there to be more than one view of x allowed in society. He might see that, yes, ultimately God’s will is to get rid of this or that, but penultimately it serves God’s purposes for society to allow this or that to remain.

Let’s consider an easy example. It is ultimately better that all speech be accurate, eloquent, and edifying. But most of us Christians think it’s best for our societies to allow for considerable freedom in speech. For some good things to happen, we concede, some not-so-good things and even some bad things must be allowed to remain.

Understanding the above, one would understand how a Christian who is against abortion can still vote for a party that is pro-choice. John tackles the issue of same-sex marriage/civil-unions here:

She (the Christian politician) might also, however, ask the third, intermediate question as to whether it is best, all things considered (including the face that Christians want to present to the general public on behalf of the gospel), for Christians to push for their own view of marriage. Might the values of the kingdom of God be advanced better by Christians compromising on that question at least somewhat, while preserving state support for such values as covenantal faithfulness between people, mutual support, and so on? Or will the gospel go forth better and more shalom be made even if Christians are widely seen as homophobic and imperialistic, rather than accommodating and tolerant of some things they clearly don’t like?

Thus, the Christian politician might vote for the state to call same-sex unions “marriages,” while preserving the rights of religious groups to reserve their own marriage ceremonies only for those unions they can conscientiously bless. Or she might want to take the word “marriage” out of the state’s vocabulary entirely and endorse “civil unions” or “registered domestic partnerships” instead. Or she might well decide instead that traditional Christian teaching about marriage is exactly what is needed in her society, and so she votes that way.

The crucial thing to note is that she might well have done her job properly to come out in support of any of those three alternative policies. She has voted according to what she felt was the way to secure the most shalom for her constituencies and for her country, and according to what she thinks will best advance the redemptive plan of God.

Understanding the complexity of the abortion issue, we’ll refrain from accusing others of being a bad Christian if they don’t support the Republican Party. If one can get over the fact that it’s OK to support a party that is pro-choice, then I think the choice should be clear – at least to me! :) In my opinion (see below), in terms of integrity, honesty, temperament and policies (especially as it relates to the poor), there’s just too much in favor of Obama. Obama’s campaign has not been perfect and like every other political campaign, there’s been dishonesty involved. But that can’t be compared to McCain’s campaign, with even many Republicans criticizing the level he’s been stooping to in order to win people over. We’re all for good discussion and debate, but using fear tactics just don’t win many people (especially the younger crowd) over. However, I do acknowledge that a Christian can still vote for McCain for his policies (especially his stance on abortion), eventhough I do hope they disavow some of his more extreme and un-Christian tactics.

(A point to note here in relation to integrity, honesty and policies is that the McCain of old is widely acknowledged to be much better than the recent one we’ve seen. In terms of policies, he was more independent of the Republican party (he WAS a true maverick) and in terms of integrity and honesty, he wouldn’t have stood for a lot of the politically motivated and dishonest attacks on Obama that his campaign has made up recently. But that’s what running for an election can do to one. Politics is dirty and it always will be. I’ve also been disappointed with some of Obama’s campaign stuff but they haven’t been as extreme or dishonest as some of McCain’s stuff. Ultimately, this is politics and no doubt the two of them have played the game of politics. That’s how it’ll always be for in politics it’s often about the ends justifying the means – which as I state here that while I’m not a fan of such an approach, I recognize it may sometimes be necessary.)

Again, the point is not that Christians should vote for Obama, but rather that there’s a legitimate case for both candidates. We wouldn’t be any less of a Christian if we voted for Obama or McCain.

4) Here’s a list of links that state the case for a Christian supporting Obama. This is only because I think many Christians don’t understand how a Christian could support him. There are far too many pro-McCain/Palin Christian articles that we need to hear the case for the other side too. At least then we’ll have a better grasp of the issues involved. Again, even if you don’t agree, you wouldn’t hear me tell you you’re not a good Christian. I’ll just say, “That’s great. Now, let’s focus on the gospel together!”

- The Pro-Life Pro-Obama and Matthew 25 website. Naturally biased. Read with a pinch of salt as when you read pro-McCain websites. But at least one will understand the complexities of the abortion issue.

-  Read some thoughts by Don Miller, the evangelical leader who prayed during the Democratic National Convention: his blog and Christianity Today’s blog.

- Read why two Christians in Singapore support Obama. One is Tony Siew, a NT lecturer in Trinity Theological College (who has a series on “Barracking 4 Barack” if you search his archives) and the other is Kenny (aka Blogpastor) who pastors a church in Singapore.

- Let me also add a link to theologian Ben Witherington’s An Evangelicals Voters Guide which I don’t think is pro-Obama, but definitely worth a read. Also The Seattle Times has  an article that describes why many young evangelicals are moving away from supporting the Republican party.

5) Lastly, I want to end with some of my own thoughts. Brothers and sisters, even if you disagree passionately with my support for Obama, explain your disagreement with level-headedness and substance, not just raw passion. It’s stuff like what Focus on the Family put out that makes many Christians (both McCain and Obama supporters) cringe. There’s a way to debate and there’s a way not to debate.

As for my thoughts, they are not cast in stone. I believe many Christians believe the same way as me, and so if you’re a Christian that think that other Christians should only vote Republican, I invite you to read what the above people have to say and what I have to say below.

Firstly, I’m very sympathatic to Christians who share the same sentiments as John Piper when he said here:

No endorsement of any single issue qualifies a person to hold public office. Being pro-life does not make a person a good governor, mayor, or president. But there are numerous single issues that disqualify a person from public office… I believe that the endorsement of the right to kill unborn children disqualifies a person from any position of public office.

I’m very sympathatic to what John Piper says here, though this doesn’t convince me to deny my support for Obama. In the first place, Obama isn’t pro-abortion; He’s pro-choice. He may have a different view about abortion from many Christians, but that doesn’t mean he is pro-abortion, and this needs to be recognized. He made his pro-choice decision after taking into consideration many complex factors. Personally, he’s said he’s against abortion, and I believe that. Still, most Christians may differ from him, but that doesn’t make him a person who is happy to kill unborn children as many Christians make pro-choice candidates out to be. To portray pro-choice candidates as happy murderers without also acknowledging the complexity of the issue involved is as simplistic as thinking that voting Republican would reduce abortions or eventually result in the banning of abortion, and also as simplistic as thinking that banning abortion will solve the abortion problem. It’s as simplistic as viewing Obama or McCain as the saviour or devil incarnate.

Being too simplistic is not being honest. And speaking of dishonesty, there’s also been a lot of dishonest stuff about Obama’s views on abortion going around. But eventhough one acknowledges the above complexities involved in the abortion issue, I still think there’s a good case for Christians taking a much stronger stance against abortion than Obama has taken. So I’m sympathetic to the view of many Christians who say that they can’t support Obama. But that still doesn’t convince me not to do so.

Maybe I’ll be convinced when the Republican party actually does more to reduce abortions than the Democratic candidate. It’s one thing to hold a theoretical stance against abortion (and for the most part, it’s merely a theoretical stance at the moment), but another to actually create policies that help women choose to avoid abortion. I don’t see the point in endorsing a candidate/party which is pro-life in theory but doesn’t do much to actually make a difference in terms of reducing abortions now. Ultimately, it’s about the number of lives saved, not about theoretical beliefs, not even about one’s ideals and goals if they face very little possibility of being achieved. And I think one must recognize that even if one day abortion is banned throughout America, the problem won’t be fully solved. Rather, it will actually create a whole lot of other problems (e.g. underground abortions), not the least of which is how our Christian witness would be affected. This IS a big deal because we Christians have a really huge image problem of being judgmental and anti-this and anti-that and I think that’s way off from the image Jesus portrayed. Kinda contradicts the message of love and acceptance that the gospel is all about. I’m not saying this is a reason not to try and get it banned, but clearly whatever we do, we can do it in an infinitely wiser, more thoughtful and more compassionate way.

So looking at things from the perspective of now and the near future, I can’t see how the Republican policies can actually do a better job at reducing abortions than the Democratic policies, which are more holistic and comprehensive in nature. And even if the Republican policies do a better job at saving lives now, they would only do a slightly better job. Probably not enough to win me over because I see the Democratic party as offering so much more overall – in terms of a better foreign policy (that incites less hatred and war), better creation-care and better help for the poor. All these are consistent with my Christian values. In fact, my Christian convictions demands that I be concerned about promoting peace (and not war), that I care for God’s creation and that I help the poor.

So I’m sympathetic with “single-issue” Christian voters who harp on abortion. I’m not going to say this single-issue is only one of many, because it may be true that it’s the biggest of all and it’s the most important one. But unless the Republican party can really make that great a difference in terms of saving so much more lives than the Democratic party can, I’ll refrain from giving my support based on any single issue, but would consider a wide range of issues that appeal to me as a Christian.

(I just want to say here that I would also like to see Christians not just talk about abortion being the greatest evil, but actually sacrificially contribute to reducing abortions. We Christians are known for a lot of rhetoric about abortion and that doesn’t do our witness good if we’re not willing to walk the talk. Not just in supporting more and better government policies that help prevent women from making the decision to abort their babies. But are we willing to personally get involved? For example, would we be willing to support greater taxes (even if it’s just on Christians – since after all it’s seen as a great evil to us, not non-Christians) so that the money can be used to support adoption or even house unwanted babies? Would we personally sign-up to adopt an unwanted baby? If we really believe in the preciousness of such lives, we would not hesitate to do all this. I’m not saying that if we fail to commit to such sacrificial efforts then we should stop talking so much about banning abortion. But rather, we should do both and it’ll greatly help our witness and give us credibility if we’re willing to walk the talk.)

I said above that I may be won over to the Republican side if they actually do more to reduce abortions and not just talk about it. However, I would also hope to see the anti-abortion party (be it the Republican or otherwise) actually care for the poor and not just the rich. I’m stunned to see Christians latching onto Obama’s plan to distribute wealth to the less well-off and taking this opportunity to label him as a socialist, which to Americans at least (see below) is meant to be an insult. Though I’m not surprised. In recent history at least, Christianity hasn’t been known for its heart for the poor. I think Christians shouldn’t make a big deal when the rich are taxed higher so that the poor can benefit. I’m wondering what the world thinks of us Christians if we get so worked out when that happens. Sure, the NT supports voluntary giving and sharing, not compulsory redistribution by the government. Although I do think that there’s a huge case to be made that the OT laws, while not directly applicable to us as we’re under the New Covenant and no country is a theocracy, have a lot to say about compulsory redistribution by the government.

Whatever the case, how exactly does it reflect upon us Christians if we boast in not wanting our tax money to help the poor? Are we so self-centered that we’d rather claim our “right” to our hard-earned money (I’m not sure what “rights” we have as Christians at all – we ought to have it all surrendered unto the Lord), than see the poor be helped by allowing the government to redistribute some? And what does it say when most of the people who accept such redistribution (traditionally and still a Democratic value) are actually non-Christians – as most voters to the Democratic party have been non-Christians.

While to many Americans, socialism is a dirty word, it’s striking to hear how Singapore’s Vivian Balakrishnan actually sees it as something positive. He said very recently:

We are still socialist. If you go anywhere in the world and you pick the poorest 10 per cent and you compare their homes, their schools, their hospitals and their jobs, we have done better than all Communist countries and all capitalist countries. Don’t ever let the opposition paint us as people who do not care about those who are less well-off.

I’m no fan of the PAP government, but he’s absolutely right. An extreme socialist government (hardly what America would be under the Democrats) is of course no good, but a bit of redistribution is actually a good thing for the poor! Yes, it’s not good for the rich. But since when would God support the rich over helping the poor?

While I agree that at least in terms of position (and not actual results), the Republican party’s stance on abortion is the one that evangelicals ought to support, on almost every other important issue that relates to Christianity (healthcare, taxes, foreign policy, creation care & poverty), the Democratic side is, at least in my opinion, clearly more in line with the values of Christians. Therefore I believe both parties have their strong points and that’s why I believe that a Christian can vote for either party. For me at least, it’s not become so clear that one party is overwhelmingly better than the other. I disagree with Christians who say that the Democratic party is overwhelmingly a better choice for Christians, just as I disagree with Christians who say the same of the Republican party. I wish for a party that adopts the anti-abortion stance of the Republican party (though adopts it in a much wiser and results-driven way) and the anti-poverty, pro-creation care, healthcare and foreign policy stance of the Democratic party. Till that happens, I can’t passionately support any party. And even if that happens, I would be wise to remember to temper my support for such a party, for politics ought never to evoke more passion from a Christian than the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Ultimately, whatever happens in a day’s time or so will be good for the church as we (hopefully) get our focus right once again, uniting on the gospel and loving the world to Jesus Christ!

UPDATE: He won :) The world is very happy and I am too. Maybe a bit guilty for being so happy. Haha. After all, I have to remember that it’s all about Jesus and His kingdom. I know Obama has a lot on his hands, but I’m confident that he will be a great President, though my hope is not in him, but Him! I don’t think I’ll be disappointed because I don’t expect the world from him. He’s still a politician after all. The world is still complex (if not more), and decisions are always going to be difficult to make – and not all will be popular. While he’s not perfect and he’s definitely no savior, I do believe that deep inside he’s someone who cares and truly wants to help people. I did believe (more or less) the same of George W. Bush (I think we should always try to give people the benefit of the doubt!), but the difference I think is that in Obama we have a more intelligent, more thoughtful and a wiser person with much better policies for America and the world.

I’m glad to see more Christians are moving over to support the Democratic party. I do NOT support Obama’s pro-choice policies or views on abortion and a lot of us progressive evangelicals who supported Obama are pro-life and still care much about this issue – just that we do so in a different way from the religious right.

I do believe the many progressive pro-life evangelicals that supported Obama will continue to put pressure on him on the abortion issue. I’ll definitely be praying for great wisdom for Obama in this area, but also that he’ll be a great president for the poor countries and people around the world by doing more to help them.

Yesterday night, I went out with a group of Christians for an exposure walk around Geylang. For those not familiar with Singapore, Geylang is Singapore’s infamous red-light district – although also famous for its good food! Each group spent about 40 minutes walking along 4 streets. We also entered the alleys. It was definitely an insightful experience for me.

This group was a bunch of progressive-leaning Christians from the Student Christian Movement (SCM) and Free Community Church (FCC).They’re hoping to start a ministry to the sex workers in Geylang and so this was an awareness trip organized for people interested in the ministry.

I brought an East-Timor missionary friend I met at the YWAM gathering I attended two weeks ago. Incidentally, YWAM has also been working with sex workers. Just before that gathering took place two weeks ago, YWAM held a mooncake party for sex-workers in the same room. Both FCC and YWAM are situated in Geylang and so it’s good that they’re working with these people.

Anyway, this group hopes to use some form of English classes to reach out to the sex workers. That’s definitely interesting and it’s been done before. For example, there’s an x:talk project in London which gives “free English classes for sex workers by sex workers”. A Thai NGO, Empower, also offers English classes to sex workers. From a Christian bent, you have Rehab Ministries.

For these people, improving their English empowers them:

Many foreign sex workers struggle to string a sentence together when they are negotiating prices and sexual acts with clients. When men put pressure on them to provide sex acts without a condom, it is much harder to refuse when they are unable to cajole punters into accepting something safer. The language barrier means they also fail to secure themselves the best possible deals and working conditions with brothel owners.

But of course there are many important issues to think about. For example, by teaching English, are we thus “encouraging them to do the work”, which was a criticism of the Thai NGO Empower (see Robert Preece’s “The Edge of ESP: English for Sex Workers” article in the Aug/Sep 1997 edition of TESOL Matters). That is, are we legitimizing their kind of work?

And if we see this as “ministry” to sex workers, what is the purpose of our ministry? What are we trying to help them for? Should we even be seeing what we do as trying to “help” them? Is that being too condescending? Or should our work been seen as more of coming alongside them? x:talk quoted Australian Aboriginal activist Lila Watson in their website:

If you have come here to help me you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.

How do we define our success? Do we seek that they quit their jobs and find a new one? But what if they can’t find a better job – in their home country or here? The problem is definitely more complex than just getting them to quit their job, if indeed that is one of our goals.

Do we see this from a moralistic (“oh, sex work is really bad and it’s a sin!”) point of view, or do we see this from another perspective? And very importantly, because we’re Christians, how does the gospel of Jesus Christ fit into all this? A lot of tough questions to think about. And how we answer, I would argue, depends a lot on our ideology and Christian beliefs. The more progressive SCM/FCC would view their ministry differently from how YWAM views their ministry. I’m sure both will have similarities, but also differences. For me, I’m more progressive in relation to most evangelicals, but more conservative in relation to SCM/FCC.

Anyway, this last month or so has opened up my eyes to the opportunities in using teaching English to reach out to people beyond international students. I’ve been working with Christian friends over the past few months to start a weekly free English class for international students. That’s been going well, but we still need more support and help so if you’re reading this and would like to be involved in any (however small) way, do get in touch with me! But along the way I’ve come across people who have asked me to consider free English classes for migrant workers and now I’m thinking about how such can be done for sex workers. I’m not sure I’ll really get into working with migrant or sex workers just yet because working with international students and working with migrant/sex workers is very different. At least I can relate better to the international students who are around my age and with whom I have a lot in common. But I definitely want to move towards working with the migrant and sex workers in the (hopefully near) future.