100th Birthday

This week I attended my aunt’s 100th birthday. She does not have any ailments – no high blood pressure, no diabetes, no high cholesterol, no arthritis, no rheumatism, no Alzheimer’s, no poor eyesight, no insomnia, no loss of appetite, no aches and pains! The only drawback is some loss of hearing, and she has to use a wheel chair as she fractured her hips by walking too much! Her back is straight, and her mind is very alert, probably because she played a mean game of mahjong!

Her children and grandchildren, plus spouses, and great-grandchildren number close to 50, of whom 40 came from all over the world to celebrate her birthday. Two congratulatory certificates came from the government, one from the Governor-General of Canada, the other from Queen Elizabeth. One of the granddaughters sent a request to Uncle Ray, a DJ in Hong Kong who airs a very popular music nostalgia radio show, who also happened to be one of her late husband’s students, and he dedicated a number of golden oldies in her honor.

Whenever I ask people whether they want a long life, many would tell me “only if they are healthy”! When it comes to a choice between “quality” versus “quantity” of life, most would choose quality over duration. Yet contrary to the perception of many, long life is a blessing from God:

* Job 12:12 Is not wisdom found among the aged? Does not long life bring understanding?
*Ps 91:16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation.”
*Prov 3:16 Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor.

But the blessings come with conditions attached:

*Deut 6:2 so that you, your children and their children after them may fear the LORD your God as long as you live by keeping all his decrees and commands that I give you, and so that you may enjoy long life.
*1 Kings 3:14 And if you walk in my ways and obey my statutes and commands as David your father did, I will give you a long life.
*Prov 28:16 but he who hates ill-gotten gain will enjoy a long life.
*Eph 6:2-3 “Honor your father and mother“–which is the first commandment with a promise– “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.”

Fearing God, keeping His commands, hating evil, and doing good is still the way to go. And when you do that, it doesn’t matter whether you enjoy a long life or not. For then you will have a precious life, treasured by God. And that’s what really counts. Have a happy New Year!

Can’t I Co-sign for My Children?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* Co-sign?
* Caution

(Continued from yesterday)

There are spiritual risks too. When a guarantor guarantees the debt of a borrower, generally he assumes that the borrower will earn sufficient income to service the debt, and that the lender will not call upon him to repay the loan. He may be assuming too much, based on James 4:14-15, Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” Neither the borrower nor the guarantor can guarantee that circumstances won’t change, and that they will be able to discharge their obligations. That’s why the Bible is negative on debts in general. When you agree to act as guarantor, the danger is that you are not focusing on what the Lord said, but on your present financial security, which you are not in a position to assure will continue.

If that’s the case, what are the options if you really want to help a friend out? There are alternatives, depending on your friend’s debt capacity and your own resources. If the bank is unwilling to grant the loan based on your friend’s credit rating, perhaps they would be willing to lend a lesser amount based on his ability to repay. Or the debt to equity ratio is too high. In either case you can provide the difference between the amount that is required for the project and what the bank is willing to finance, either in the form of an interest-free loan, as an equity injection, or as an outright grant. Lk 6:35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. If you can lend to enemies without expecting to be repaid, then you can certainly do that for friends. This would encourage your friend to service his own debt based on his repayment ability, and limit your exposure to the full amount required.

It may be that the bank is unwilling to lend at all, based on your friend having no credit record or a bad credit record; in that case you would have to advance the entire amount yourself, provided you have the financial resources. In either case, you are assisting within the limits of your capacity, and not presuming on the future.

My last point concerns exceptions. Since Proverbs are principles and not law, are there exceptions when we can act as surety? I believe there are. The Hebrew word for surety is ‘arab, and appears 22 times in the OT. 10 times it is translated as surety or sureties in the KJV, and 12 times as other words demanded by the context. Of the 10 times in which it is translated as surety or sureties, besides the verses in Proverbs, they are:

* Gen 43:9 I will be surety for him; of my hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame for ever.
* Gen 44:32 For thy servant became surety for the lad unto my father, saying, If I bring him not unto thee, then I shall bear the blame to my father for ever.
* Job 17:3 Lay down now, put me in a surety with thee; who is he that will strike hands with me?
* Ps 119:122 Be surety for thy servant for good: let not the proud oppress me.

You will notice that twice it was Judah acting as guarantor for the safe return of his brother Benjamin, and twice it was Job and the Psalmist asking God to be their surety. None of the 4 involved monetary guarantees, but guarantees of safety and reputation. My deduction is therefore when the guarantee involved close relatives where you know the persons, and when it’s a matter of life and death, we can act as surety. For example, there is no prohibition against cosigning between husband and wife, since the two have become one (Mt 19:5, Mk 10:8, Eph 5:31) already.

I would extend the exemption to members of the immediate family, but stop where the Scripture stop with respect to friends and strangers. And of course God can be surety for anyone He wishes, since He is omniscient and omnipotent and can always deliver on His guarantee. We are finite and simply do not have the means to guarantee beyond what God allows. I hope that helps to clarify the Bible’s position.

Should I be a Loan Guarantor?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* Guarantor
* Co-signer

Q. Why is the OT so negative about being a guarantor? If a relative or friend needs a guarantor to get a bank loan to start his business, or a co-signer to get a mortgage, what’s wrong in giving him a helping hand? Aren’t we supposed to help a brother in need?

A. You are probably referring to:

* Prov 6:1 My son, if thou be surety for thy friend, if thou hast stricken thy hand with a stranger,
* Prov 11:15 He that is surety for a stranger shall smart for it: and he that hateth suretiship is sure.
* Prov 17:18 A man void of understanding striketh hands, and becometh surety in the presence of his friend.
* Prov 20:16 Take his garment that is surety for a stranger: and take a pledge of him for a strange woman.
* Prov 22:26 Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts.
* Prov 27:13 Take his garment that is surety for a stranger, and take a pledge of him for a strange woman.

Before we analyze the details, I like to point out that all the negative references are from Proverbs, which is in the Writings section of the OT. The OT is divided into 3 sections: The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. Since they are not part of the Law, they are not outright prohibitions. They belong to wisdom literature i.e. they are principles, generally true wise sayings and the best course of action to take. But it is not a sin if you don’t follow them; you just have to suffer the negative consequences. There are exceptions, but we will look at them later.

Next, let’s examine these verses. “surety” means you put up security, provide collateral, or guarantee for another’s debt. “Strike hands” is simply the custom in ancient times to “seal” an agreement, similar to our “shaking hands” to a deal. Regardless of whether one is acting as surety for his friend (6:1, 17:18) or a stranger (20:16, 27:13), he lacks judgment (17:18), has trapped himself by his foolishness (6:2) and will surely suffer (11:15). The best thing for him to do is to beg to be released from his obligation immediately (6:3). That’s a very negative assessment. Why?

Financially, the reason why your neighbor needs you to put up security is that the lender deems him to be a poor credit risk and low ability to repay. So they would not grant him the loan unless there is a credit-worthy guarantor who will promise to repay when the neighbor defaults. Essentially, the guarantor has stepped into the shoes of the borrower, whose liabilities became his. For him, there is only downside, but no upside. This is particularly so in the case of a continuing guarantee, where he has ceded control of his future to another party. Both the amount of the liability, and timing when the loan might be called, become unknown and beyond his control. However, for the borrower, he gets the loan which he is otherwise not entitled to, plus the guarantor will repay for him if he fails. He has therefore only upside but no downside. So, just from a business point of view, it is poor judgment for the guarantor, worse if the borrower is a “stranger”, a mere acquaintance, someone he does not know well enough.

Emotionally, there are similar considerations. The likely reason a person would agree to be a guarantor is to help out his friend, and often it is difficult to say no. If the lender’s assessment of the poor credit risk comes true, not only will the guarantor lose financially, but often he will lose the relationship he hoped to maintain as well. Most likely the borrower will feel guilty about what happened and avoid the guarantor, and relationships will be awkward and strained. So again there is no upside but only downside.

(To be continued)

Mercy, Not Sacrifice

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* Higher laws
* Aerodynamic forces
* Order of laws

I like to wrap up this mini series with some final comments on Mt. 12:5-7. Why is it that the priests desecrate the Sabbath day and yet are innocent? In reality, the Sabbath day was the busiest day for priests, just as Sundays are for pastors. They broke the fourth commandment; why were they innocent?

To understand this, we need to realize that there are higher and lesser laws, Mt 23:23 Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices–mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law–justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. Let me give a couple of examples to illustrate what I mean.

* We are all subject to the law of gravity. If you let go of a heavy object, it will fall. However, a plane can fly because there is another law at work – the law of aerodynamics. When the thrust of the engine is greater than the wind drag, the plane moves forward. And when the plane’s speed is such that the up-lift of the air under the wings is greater than the downward pull of the weight of the plane, the plane will take off. Did the law of gravity stopped working? No, but a higher law in operation over-ruled the effect of gravity.

* Cars are supposed to stop on red light and go only when the light is green. Disobey this traffic law and you will get a ticket. However, in an emergency, ambulances, fire-trucks, and police cars can cross red lights without fear of getting a ticket. Does the Highway Traffic Act cease to apply in such cases? No, but the higher law to save life overruled the lower law and those vehicles are not guilty for running red lights.

Jesus said you should have practiced the latter, the more important matters of the law – justice, mercy and faithfulness – without neglecting the former i.e. tithing. Notice the progression in Mt 12:

1. Unimportant – tradition of the Pharisees
2. Important – the Sabbath laws, sacrifice
3. More important – mercy (love your neighbor)
4. Most important – greater than the temple, the Son of Man (love the Lord your God)

The sad thing is that many of us are stuck at the man-made rules and ceremonial law levels, doing what looks good on the outside. Sometimes we even hinder or discourage others from advancing to higher levels, because they don’t meet our standards. No wonder Jesus reserved the most severe rebuke to the Pharisees, and present day legalists. I hope you never fall into this category.

Situation Ethics

Q. Can you explain What situation ethics is? I don’t know what it means and did not follow your last post.

A. Sure, I’ll try. Traditional Christian ethics primarily focuses on keeping God’s law, which could degenerate into legalism. In reaction, situation ethics rejects rule-keeping and focuses on the situation, context or circumstances of moral actions. It emphasizes:
1. Self-giving love (agape) in doing the most loving thing in ethical decision-making,
2. Autonomy (self-determination) in moral judgments as opposed to rule-keeping, and
3. Living a moral life.

Superficially, not taking up inherited moral attitudes uncritically seemed like a good thing. However, when the freedom from obedience to impersonal laws is extended to God’s moral law, this becomes antinomianism. Putting people first is good, but putting people before principles becomes very dangerous, as the two are not opposed. The problem with situation ethics is that it is so subjective and relative. When you do away with God’s rule over one’s life, the result is often selfishness instead of self-giving love, because that’s human nature. As well, when you opt for autonomy, invariably you end up with “every man for himself”, because why should I accept your judgment over mine, what authority do you have? So looking at the consequences sounds good in theory, but does not work well in the real world because of sin.

Furthermore, God’s laws are designed to protect people, so the unthinking abandonment of laws could produce the very opposite effect of hurting instead of helping people. In fact:

* Mt 22:36-40 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
* Rom. 13:10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Properly understood, love and law are complementary, and to discard laws as a rule of life is short-sighted.

Does Jesus Endorse Situation Ethics?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* Situation ethics – doing the most loving thing
* Lord of the Sabbath
* Surpassing righteousness

Yesterday we concluded that Jesus not only did not condone David’s breaking God’s law, but used the incident to rebuke the Pharisees for their hypocrisy in having a double standard. One question remains – does Jesus endorse situation ethics?

The Pharisees overlooked David’s transgression, but jumped on the innocent disciples (Mt. 12:7). They strained out a gnat but swallowed a camel (Mt 23:24). In fact, they are the ones who practiced situation ethics.

Jesus did not play favorites. He did not justify David’s actions, even though he had real needs – he was hungry, and Saul was trying to kill him. If ever there were circumstances that justified lying or breaking the law for self-preservation, David had it. But Jesus did not relax the law or excuse David because of his situation. His life principle is clearly articulated in Mt. 5:17, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” And He practiced what He preached. Using David’s situation as an example:

* After fasting 40 days and 40 nights, the Son of David was hungry, but when tempted Jesus did not turn the stones to become bread. Instead, He said, ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’ (Mt. 4:4)
* When Jesus sent out the 12, He warned them they will be arrested and all men will hate them because of Him, but he who stands firm will be saved (Mt. 10:22). He did not give them an out by allowing them to break the commandments when the going gets tough. And He set the example for them by going to the cross Himself.

In fact, the Lord said in Mt. 5:19, “Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Doing the Father’s will is paramount in Jesus’ life. To accuse Jesus of endorsing situation ethics is really distorting His position. He did exactly the opposite.

Why am I dwelling on this? It’s because, sad to say, many Christians have compromised with situation ethics. In principle they are supposed to follow God’s law, but in practice many are like the Pharisees. They make up their own rules and policies and define for themselves what they would do, patting themselves on the back as to how much they are sacrificing, but forget about the greater issue of God desiring mercy over sacrifice. Many can recite the Greatest Commandment, Jesus’ New Commandment, and the Great Commission, but they don’t put them into practice. They know a lot about Jesus’ teachings, but they excuse themselves by saying that it’s too difficult; God doesn’t expect them to do it in this day and age; He’ll understand. But has God lowered His requirements because we can’t or won’t do it? No, that’s why He sent His Son so that we can trust Him; that why He sent the Holy Spirit so that we can rely on His strength. But we would rather make excuses than depend on God. No wonder we are powerless. I hope your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and the Pharisees, or you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Mt. 5:20). Those are not my words, but the Lord’s. Think them through carefully.

Verbal Judo

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* David and Ahimelech
* Priests serving on the Sabbath
* Judo – overthrowing your opponent with his own strength

Yesterday we showed that Jesus did not condone David breaking God’s law, not even when he had legitimate needs. He did not show favoritism towards David, but pointed out that he was wrong. Today we continue to explore what was Jesus’ point. Let’s analyze what happened closely:

* 1 Sam 21:6 The priest gave him (David) the consecrated bread, since there was no bread there except the bread of the Presence that had been removed from before the LORD and replaced by hot bread on the day it was taken away.
* Lev 24:8-9 This bread is to be set out before the LORD regularly, Sabbath after Sabbath, on behalf of the Israelites, as a lasting covenant. It belongs to Aaron and his sons, who are to eat it in a holy place, because it is a most holy part of their regular share of the offerings made to the LORD by fire.

David did take the consecrated bread. Was he supposed to? No, it was for the priests. Some argued that Lev. 24 did not say the bread belonged to Aaron and his sons only, so technically Ahimelech was not wrong when he gave David the bread provided the men were ceremonially clean. Men are looking for loopholes in technicalities, but Jesus’ verdict in Mt 12:4 (that it was not lawful for them, only for the priests), is final. So David was guilty. Now, did the Pharisees have anything to say about David’s breaking the law? No, not a word. No one raised a fuss about it.

Let’s continue with Jesus’ second illustration before I draw the conclusion:

* Mt 12:5 Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent?
* Num 28:9-10 On the Sabbath day, make an offering of two lambs a year old without defect, together with its drink offering and a grain offering of two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil. This is the burnt offering for every Sabbath, in addition to the regular burnt offering and its drink offering.

While Sabbath is a day of rest for everyone else, it is the busiest day for priests, when they did more work than on any other day. Did the Pharisees accuse them of breaking the fourth commandment? No, they didn’t.

What’s the point? Jesus is the Master communicator. Anyone familiar with rabbinic debates would have recognized Jesus’ moves, similar to verbal judo in turning the opponents’ arguments against them. He was not just defending His disciples; He was on the offense by returning the Pharisees’ question with another question to expose their inconsistency. He was killing two birds with one stone. If I may paraphrase the Lord’s point, it is:

“You guys honor David as the great king, but don’t you know he broke God’s law by eating the consecrated bread? You didn’t condemn him, did you? Or take the case of the priests who work twice as hard on the Sabbath. Did you condemn them for working on the Sabbath? No, of course not! In contrast, my disciples did not break any of God’s laws, only your traditions, rules you make up yourself. Yet you come after them and condemn the innocent (12:7)! What inconsistency! What hypocrisy!”

I might have exaggerated a little, but that’s the essence of the Lord’s reply. Tomorrow we wrap up with whether He endorsed situation ethics.

(To be continued)

Did Jesus condone breaking God’s law?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Pictures show:
* Lord of the Sabbath
* Pharisees accuse Jesus’ disciples
* Ahimelech gave consecrated bread to David

Q. Did Jesus condone David breaking God’s law in Mt. 12:1-8? Isn’t he practicing situation ethics? David was hungry, so it justified him eating the consecrated bread. Isn’t Jesus showing favoritism?

A. The answer is no for all three questions. Let me back it up and explain why. This “Lord of the Sabbath” incident is recorded in all three synoptic gospels (Mt. 12:1-8, Mk. 2:23-28, and Lk. 6:1-5). Jesus’ disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain to eat. The Pharisees accused them of doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath. Did the disciples do anything illegal? Was the accusation valid?

First, according to Deut. 23:25 “If you enter your neighbor’s grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain.” This was a provision to care for the poor. People can eat the produce, but can’t abuse the privilege by taking large quantities away. So what the disciples did was permitted under the law. Then what’s unlawful? The Pharisees were accusing them of breaking the fourth commandment:

Ex 20:8-10 Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates.

According to the Pharisees, picking heads of grain is work. The Law says you shall not do any work on a Sabbath; therefore the disciples broke the Law. But is picking kernels with your hands “work”? No, only according to the Pharisees’ tradition. So the disciples did not do anything wrong, and the accusation was not valid. Then why did Jesus answer by citing David eating the consecrated bread? That incident is recorded in 1 Sam. 21:1-6, but the key question is: Did Jesus condone what David did? The answer is no:

* 1 Sam 21:1-2 David went to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest. Ahimelech trembled when he met him, and asked, “Why are you alone? Why is no one with you?” David answered Ahimelech the priest, “The king charged me with a certain matter and said to me, ‘No one is to know anything about your mission and your instructions.’ As for my men, I have told them to meet me at a certain place.
* Mt 12:4 He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread–which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests.

David was running for his life as Saul wanted to kill him. He lied to Ahimelech to protect his own life, and to cheat him for bread. Jesus clearly stated that it was not lawful for them to eat the consecrated bread. Jesus did not condone David breaking God’s law, even when he was hungry and needed food. Hunger does not justify breaking God’s law, not then, and not now. Even though David was a man after God’s own heart (1 Sam. 13:14), when he was wrong, Jesus did not gloss over it. He was not showing favoritism. Then what was Jesus’ point? Why bring David up?

(To be continued)

Christmas Worship

We had a joyful worship this Christmas morning. There was no choir and orchestra, not even the usual band and singspiration team, as everyone was given a day off to worship with their family. There was only one worship/song leader, 1 pianist, who played beautifully, and 1 guitarist. They started by leading the congregation in singing several classic Christmas hymns. Then there was a video clip “Retooning the Nativity” which dispelled some of the myths built up by tradition. This was effective and enjoyed by all.

The highlight came when the worship divided the congregation into 12 sections, each with over 100 people, to sing the Twelve Days of Christmas. Each section was assigned a day: first day, second day etc. When it was their turn, the entire section stood up, sang their “gift”, and then sat down again. This produced an effect like a “wave”, similar to when you watch baseball in the stadium. Poor section 1 got to stand up 12 times! You don’t expect to do the “wave” in church, but everyone got into the spirit and sang to their hearts’ delight.

Then all the children are invited to come up front, sit on the carpet, and listen to the story of “Why Jesus Came”, written by Gloria Gaither. Pictures were shown on the screen as visual aids. The service closed with the congregation singing Joy to the World again to lift up their praises to God, and everyone left with a big smile as ushers distributed candy canes to young and old alike.

As I reviewed the service while driving home, two things that made it a heart-warming, spirit-lifting experience stood out. The first is that it was a very participatory service. While we all enjoy good music and like to learn something from the message, people come first and foremost to worship God. And we did just that. True the congregation did not sound as harmonious as the choir, but everyone lifted their voices and hearts to sing praises to God. I think God enjoyed that more than only a select few singing and the rest listening.

The second is that the children were together with their parents and the whole family worshipped together. I remember the time Jesus was angry when His disciples prevented the children to come to Him. Mk 10:13-14 People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” Sure there were a couple of infant cries, but this is Christmas, and I’m glad that the whole family was able to worship together.

Happy Birthday Lord Jesus!

Are You a Good Person?

Many of us try to witness and encounter lots of intellectual objections. Instead of getting bogged down by answering all kinds of questions, here is a way of bypassing the obstacles and addressing the conscience directly. It is developed by Ray Comfort and is called “The Way of the Master”, because when he analyzed the Lord’s evangelistic method he found that Jesus always used the Law. A couple of principles underlie why this method works:

1 Most people think of themselves as a good person. They think they can manage on their own, and therefore do not need God.
* Prov. 16:2 All a man’s ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the LORD.
* Prov. 21:2 All a man’s ways seem right to him, but the LORD weighs the heart.

2 However, when they realize that they are really in deep trouble and can’t help themselves, they are inclined to listen. How do you let them know their true condition? By using the law to compare them to God’s standards, not their relative standard.
* Rom. 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
* Rom 7:7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “Do not covet.”

Once they know their plight, you can present the good news as the soil of the heart is ploughed by the law and prepared to receive the seed of the gospel. Try it. I’ve tried it and it works.