stillhaventfound.org

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 dunno whether I’ll continue to write much here this year. I think it’s a sign that I’m living closer to my dreams if I read and write less! It’s about living the life after all, not just thinking about it.

No doubt, the mind is important. The two most important and fascinating intellectual pursuits over the past few years for me have been Theology and International Development. Interest in the former dates back at least 10 years when I truly became a Christian, while that of the latter started from around 2001.

I do have a great interest in going into the more academic arena. I love to read and do research, and I also love to teach. I love to reflect and think - and also to challenge people (especially youths) to do that.

Some people who know me well have encouraged me to further my studies and get my PhD. No doubt, that’s been a bit of a temptation, but never much. I’ve never really believed in furthering my studies. In a way, it goes against my principles. It’s too costly and time consuming and I don’t think it’s what the world needs.

I know people will say that your PhD and your certificates get you places. It gives you the credibility you need and allows your voice to be heard. No doubt that’s true. The world looks well upon such degrees. But that doesn’t mean we need to conform to what the world wants. I don’t think God gives a damn about whether you have a PhD or even whether you have a basic Bachelor degree. I don’t think God cares even 1% as much as we do about our titles, awards and certificates. These are all wordly concerns, things we easily put our trust in - to the detriment of our own faith in God.

(I’ve always believed that the greatest in the Kingdom of God aren’t those we hear about - be it that great theologian, that great pastor or that great leader. All the greatest have probably never been in the limelight. They probably don’t network as well or have as many friends as the leaders we know. The greatest are simply those who fear God - not man - the most, those who seek the praises of God first, not that of man.)

Make no mistake. I am all for thinking critically. I think Christians would practice their faith better if they were more critical (and holistic!) in their theological understanding. I think development practitioners and NGOs would better be able to help the poor if they were more critical in their understanding of development issues. Furthermore, as a Christian, Jesus also asked us to worship God with our minds. So using one’s mind is very important.

But having said that, I think we have too many people who only read, talk and write. Too many people who read too much, talk to much and write too much - and live too little. There’s just too little living of the life.

The Christian world doesn’t need more theologians, it needs more missionaries. It needs to de-emphasize the importance of academic requirements for entry into pastoral or missionary ministry. Since when in the early Church did missionaries or pastors need to go through theological training to qualify? The focus on all other matters but living needs to decrease. And I’m all for young Christians [in terms of both their spiritual or physical (age) maturity level] becoming a pastor or missionary.

I spent the last 6 months on a huge charity project, and as meaningful as that may be, it’s not something that truly satisfies me. In fact, it leaves me deeply unsatisfied - just like my life for as long as I can remember.

I don’t really care about my “career”. I am not interested in making as many friends as possible or networking widely to get places. I don’t really care about my reputation or name. People seek comfort in all these things. People take years to increase their stature in these areas. But to me, I’ve always wanted something different. None of these ultimately satisfies.

To me, the most important thing is to serve the poor and lost together with a person I can love and treasure. Even if that meant leaving blogging, leaving writing, leaving reading, leaving my family, leaving my friends, leaving the modern and developed world to start really living the life - that would still be more than satisfying.

There is no greater meaning or satisfaction than to serve the Father of my Lord Jesus Christ wholeheartedly - even if it means dying for Christ. Many in this world are lost and dying. Billions are in poverty. If only I could leave Singapore this year and serve Him wholeheartedly with someone I love. It’s not about whether one is ready. The time is always now…

That would be my new year’s wish…

My work with the pastors and laypeople there deepened my resolve to lead a public life, but it also forced me to confront a dilemma that my mother never fully resolved in her own life: the fact that I had no community or shared traditions in which to ground my most deeply held beliefs. The Christians with whom I worked recognized themselves in me; they saw that I knew their Book and shared their values and sang their songs. But they sensed that a part of me remained removed, detached, an observer among them. I came to realize that without an unequivocal commitment to a particular community of faith, I would be consigned at some level to always remain apart, free in the way that my mother was free, but also alone in the same ways she was ultimately alone.

(Barack Obama, My Spiritual Journey)

I don’t like to suck up to people, as in go there and tell them, ‘Oh, did you wait very long? I’m really sorry to keep you waiting.’ I’m not that type lah. I will just say, ‘Thank you for supporting me.’ That’s the most I feel is appropriate for me ‘cos I’m not that type.

I wasn’t all out to garner votes. I was just too much of being myself. But I’m glad that I left because I was myself. I wouldn’t want to be someone else.

…I can never be an Idol. I’m too hardcore, I’m too rough… I’m not clean enough, not safe enough.

…If I lie to myself, that’s when I really get pissed. That’s what I really don’t wanna do. I want to be me. What I seek, what I do, I wanna breathe me.

…I hope that the contestants would be a lot more sincere. All the love, the smiles and stuff, some of it may be strategic, some of it may be genuine… We mingle a lot, but somehow I feel that some of them aren’t exactly sincere about it. I hate the feeling.

That’s why I’m kind of relieved to leave the competition also. I sincerely cannot take all this kind of act.

(Rahimah Rahim, quoted from She’s hit rock bottom)

I hadn’t heard of Rahimah Rahim before I came across the above article while searching the MediaCorp TV website to see if the Liverpool vs. Chelsea Community Shield match would be televised on Channel 5. As of this writing, I still haven’t seen or heard any of her performance.

Yet, I don’t need to hear her sing to admire her. It is not her singing that I respect of her, but her strength of character. What do I mean? The above article says it all: she’s kind of an Outsider, and I think Meursault/Albert Camus, Howard Roark/Ayn Rand and Colin Wilson would agree.

I say kind of because a true Outsider would never seek to be the Singapore Idol in the first place. He would never seek the praises and acceptance of man, but live for truth - and that alone would be good enough for him.

Full credit to her though, for she tries to live like that. As the writer of the article said, she stands for honest truth. Not fame, not love, not money - but truth. A man of lesser character would seek fame, power, love of man and riches. Not her. Just truth will do, thank-you-very-much. Yes, she’s also got a bit of Thoreau in her…

My dear Rahimah, for the sake of living consistently according to your principles, for the sake of living life first hand and not second, for the sake of being true to yourself and your values, I’m glad you’ve left the competition. For if you had not, you’ll only face the temptation to win the approval of man stronger and stronger each week - i.e. the temptation to lose your soul to gain what cannot satisfy you.

Do not compromise. Live your life as who you are, live your life true to yourself. The world may not like what they see in you. They may even end up disliking you, hating you. But if you stand firm and live an authentic life, you will win in the end…

A long time ago, I summed up The Outsider in a sentence which I realized is extremely paradoxical: “In our society any man who doesn’t cry at his mother’s funeral is liable to be condemned to death.” I simply meant that the hero of the book is condemned because he doesn’t play the game. In this sense, he is an outsider to the society in which he lives, wandering on the fringe, on the outskirts of life, solitary and sensual. And for that reason, some readers have been tempted to regard him as a reject. But to get a more accurate picture of his character, or rather one which conforms more closely to the author’s intentions, you must ask yourself in what way Meursault doesn’t play the game. The answer is simple: he refuses to lie. Lying is not only saying what isn’t true it is also, in fact especially, saying more than one feels. We all do it, everyday, to make life simpler. But, contrary to appearances, Meursault doesn’t want to make life simpler. He says what he is, he refuses to hide his true feelings and society immediately feels threatened. For example, he is asked to say that he regrets his crime in time-honoured fashion. He replies that he feels more annoyance about it than true regret. And it is this nuance that condemns him.

So for me Meursault is not a reject, but a poor and naked man, in love with a sun that leaves no shadows. Far from lacking all sensibility, he is driven by a tenacious and therefore profound passion, the passion for an absolute and for a truth. This truth is as yet a negative one, a truth born of living and feeling, but without which no triumph over the self or over the world will ever be possible.

So one wouldn’t be far wrong in seeing The Outsider as the story of a man who, without any heroic pretensions, agrees to die for the truth. I also once said, and again paradoxically, that I tried to make my character represent the only Christ that we deserve. It will be understood, after these explanations, that I said it without any intention of blasphemy but simply with the somewhat ironic affection that an artist has a right to feel towards the characters he has created.

(Albert Camus, 8 January 1955)

I’m not good at respecting elders or submitting to authority. Whether that’s a good thing or bad, I guess that really depends.

It’s not that I don’t respect anyone or that I will never submit to any authority. It’s just very hard for me to find people I can truly respect and look up to. And trust me, I wish I could find such people. It’s always good to find mentors and leaders you can look up to and learn much from. For me, I can’t say I’ve found anybody like that. And I think it’s simply because I’m very idealistic and have high standards. I’m a perfectionist. I demand a lot of myself and same for others. That doesn’t mean that I don’t have time for those who fail to reach those standards. For indeed, I myself fail my own standards most of the time. I am my worst critic.

So for me to really respect someone, the person has to be truly outstanding - in my eyes, at least. There are many wonderful people out there. But very, very few I can really, really respect.

One thing that really irks me about those older than me is that, in the presence of the young, they always have to talk a lot about their life, their vast experiences and through all that give lotsa advice to the young. Now, I have no problems with receiving advice. But age and experience alone does not qualify one to give advice to another. Elders need to stop thinking they have all the answers to the problems. They need to stop speaking to the young in a condescending way as though they know everything. Seriously, I am not impressed. Many others may be, but not me.

Why can’t old people learn to talk less and listen more? I think I’m more inclined to respect someone who listens and takes an interest in the life of the young, rather than one who always wants to advice the young.

Old people do have more experience, no doubt. Experiences they have gone through may be worth a lot when say a 60 year old one hundred years ago is advising a 20 year old. But in this rapidly changing world, their experiences are worth less because things aren’t the same anymore. The young learn fast. So old people shouldn’t assume that the young are as ignorant as they were at their young age.

Perhaps the most irritating thing I hate about the advice of the old is that they are supremely pragmatic people, giving supremely pragmatic advice. Most old people are like that anyway. They lose their idealism as they grow old and that’s a sad thing. Most of the old look down on the idealism of the young. And that’s what I can’t stand about old people. They have lived for long and know how the world works and so their advice is very often to be pragmatic, not to be too idealistic and that one should sacrifice one’s principles because this is just the way the world works.

I really liked what OCBC Bank chairman Dr. Cheong Choong Kong said at his convocation speech (22/04/06) at the University of Adelaide. His first advice was:

Don’t do what is expected. Be contrarian. No one’s ever achieved greatness by following the textbook or meekly obeying orders.

Now, here’s an elder’s advice that is worthy of respect. We need more of such people. We need more of such advice. We hear too little of such advice. Actually, sorry, we do hear a lot about such advice. Such advice was printed in Singapore’s mainstream newspaper. We constantly hear people telling us to be different, non-conformist and creative. But most people who say it’s good to be such don’t usually mean it, do they? That’s why most people don’t live like that. It’s cool to say we should be like that. It’s totally uncool and frowned upon if one were to actually live like that.

We hear a lot about creativity being something that only a non-conformist possess. For a confomist and someone who is too willing to listen to the advice of others and submit to authoriy would never do anything different. Asians, in particular, face the problem of too much conformity. Their culture values conformity and frowns upon individualism.

Now, I’m not being pro-western, I’m not idealizing individualism. I do think there is a place for both. We don’t want to go to the extreme on either end. Being different or a non-conformist is no great thing on its own. Being rebellious against authority isn’t a virtue.

But I just wish to see a bit more non-conformity around here. We can start by not giving a damn about what most of our elders think of us and our lives and saying “no thank you” to their advice. We need to stop giving so much respect to the advice and words of our elders. Especially so in an ultra pragmatic place like Singapore.

Dr. Cheong’s second advice is that life is confusing:

Outside the university, very little is plain and simple, black and white, and there is no all-knowing professor whom you can turn to for unambiguous answers.

There’s an important link between his first and second advice. Only if you realize that the world is complex and confusing and that many things aren’t so black and white - only if you realize that would you be be able to accept his first advice. If things are so black and white for you, then you may as well go to seek the “wisdom” of elders because surely they would have sorted life out after so many years and would have good advice for you. But if you know life is more complex, then when you listen to an old man’s advice, you’d take it with a pinch of salt and would realize you still need to figure a lot of things out for yourself and do things your own way.

So who are the people I respect? I respect people who hold strong to their ideals without compromising them - of course their ideals have to be worthy and good! Especially those who suffer because of them, because it shows they truly believe in them - however impractical they may be. Like Henry David Thoreau said:

Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth.

People with good principles and ideals are most worthy of respect. These are people who are hardly pragmatic. People like Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and Aung San Syu Kyi. Even people like Jorge Mario Bergoglio. As for people closer to home and to my life, I admire opposition politicians in Singapore like JB Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan. Regarding the later, I don’t agree with everything he says or does but I give great credit to him for standing up for what he believes and sacrificing so much for his cause. It takes guts to continue to do what you believe in despite so much opposition and humiliation. That’s what I admire about him. Singaporeans are too pragmatic a people to appreciate someone like him. As for someone I know personally, it would be my friend Zach and his wife Angie, whose faithfulness to God and the ideals of the Bible and His will put almost every Christian I know to shame.

And of course, regarding submitting to authorities, I try my best to submit my life to the authority of God. Yes, to God, and not to church leaders. Church leaders have to earn people’s respect. With most of them thinking they have a direct line to God and thus are somehow more spiritual than normal church members, with them thinking that their advice ought to be taken as that of God’s and that their interpretation of Scripture always the right one (a bit funny since so many church leaders and pastors disagree with one another’s interpretation of Scripture), it’s hard for them to earn my respect. Give me a Church leader who is humble, non-dogmatic, more keen to listen than talk and lives the Christian life out and you’ve found yourself a follower in me.

And for those who think all I’ve written sounds like the foolish idealism of a young person, I’ll end here with the last words of advice by Steve Jobs’ 2005 Convocation speech at Stanford:

Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.