Family Vacation 1

To celebrate our 40th anniversary early, our kids and their spouses treated us to an extended family vacation to Disney World. It was the first time the Liu clan (with the Pui’s) vacationed together, and a lot of fun. The weather was cold for Orlando, dipping down to 10-12 deg C., but still 30 deg C. warmer than in Toronto, so we’re not complaining! Here are a few clips of the grand kids. For us, just watching them is entertainment enough!

NCP enjoying Disney Jr. live show:

Meeting with Winnie the Pooh characters:

Cousins arguing over whether water bottles are Mickey or Minnie

Let there be Light

I just finished reading “Let there be Light – A history of SEND International in Taiwan” by Roland Friesen. The author was the former Taiwan Area Director from 1981 to 1993, and very honest in depicting both the success and failures in the field. Since we came back from two short-term mission trips to Taiwan last year, it helped to put everything in perspective. As Friesen himself said, “unless a person knows from where he came he most likely won’t know where he should be going“.

For us, who just completed a consulting assignment to help put their ministry handbook together, it was especially interesting to see how the current mission, vision and strategies developed. For example, prior to Far Eastern Gospel Crusade (FEGC, as SEND International was called before 1981) entering Taiwan, the 1965 feasibility survey identified that:
1. The Taiwanese (Fujianese) and Hakka should be the target groups.
2. FEGC should concentrate on evangelism and church planting.
3. FEGC should not start a new association of churches.
4. FEGC should relate closely to an existing evangelical group of churches.
Then, in 1980, the mission’s statement of objectives added, “Do evangelism through like-minded churches where they exist … We will seek to relate the churches we start to other like-minded evangelical churches.”

The current mission statement is as follows: The Mission of SEND International in Taiwan is to glorify God by partnering with like-minded believers to establish reproducing churches among the least reached Hakka, Hokklo, and Asian Expatriates.

The Hokklo or Hoklo is the same as Hokkien or Fujian. Asian expatriates were added later because of the high immigration of foreign brides for Taiwanese men, as well as foreign workers for factories and care-givers for seniors and children. Ministry to Asian expatriates is an effective means to the end of establishing Hakka and Hokklo churches. The definition of like-minded partners has broadened from specific named denominations and independent churches who had chosen to work with SEND, to those whose passion is to see the completion of Vision 119 (calling 119 workers to plant 60 churches along old Route 1 and Route 19 in Taiwan), and agree to SEND Taiwan’s vision, mission, and values. So while there is fine-tuning because of changing circumstances, and struggles due to limited resources, disunity and human frailty, the mission stayed the same, and form follows function, as it should.

In contrast, here in Toronto I see some churches losing sight of their mission, even though they have adequate human and financial resources. Sadly, some are caught up with internal “politics”, with different departments jockeying for power and defending their “turf”. They place a low priority on the Lord’s Great Commission to make disciples of all nations, and shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces, not letting those who are trying to enter come in (Mt 23:13-14). The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers (2 Co 4:4), but sometimes he blinded the minds of believers too, so they are doing the enemy’s work instead of the Lord’s work. May the people living in darkness see the great light (Mt 4:16).

Why Didn’t God Elect All?

Q. If God is love, then why didn’t He save all? Doesn’t He love the non-elect? Why create them to suffer eternally in hell?

A. Yes God is love (1 Jn 4:8, 16). He loves the non-elect too:
• Ezk 18:23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?
• Ezk 33:11 Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, people of Israel?’
• 1 Tim 2:3-4 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
• 2 Pet 3:9 … Instead He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Then why didn’t He save them? The short answer is I don’t know. This is one of those “deep things of God” (1 Co 2:10), whom the Spirit had kept to Himself and not revealed to us in Scripture. Theologians have suggested clues, which I found to be not fully satisfactory:
• Rom 9:13-24 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory—even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

What theologians deduced is that election depends:
• on God’s mercy, which is His sovereign choice,
• not on human desire or effort,
• His desire to make the riches of His glory known to the called.
Few would dispute God’s sovereignty. If God is not sovereign, then who is? Arminians would argue that to some extent that it depends on man’s positive response to God, but there are enough passages to prove that even that is due to God’s grace. So it boils down to the third point.

Normally, at least in human decision-making, we choose one thing over another because we want that thing more. In this case the choices seem to be:
• condemning the non-elect to hell to make His glory known to the elect, or
• saving all but giving up the magnification of His glory to the elect.
In this instance God values His glory more than saving all, hence His choice. I understand the logic of it, as espoused by Calvinists, but not the heart behind it. My feeling can be paraphrased from Mk 14:21, “It would be better for him (the non-elect) if he had not been born.” I accept it because it’s in the Bible, and I’m grateful because I know the Lord, but my limited capacity does not comprehend it. That is just one of the mysteries I have to accept by faith.

Brain Games

The nursing home where my mom is staying encourages residents to play mahjong to keep their minds active. They also have group games like bingo to keep the seniors alert and exercise their brains. Some who play brain games daily vouched by them, claiming that the games helped them to think faster, improve their memory, and become better in problem-solving.

http://www.lumosity.com/

https://brainhq.positscience.com/default/start?

However, for those who do research in the neurosciences, the jury is still out and there is no definitive answer. Some see benefits in staving off deterioration in brain functions due to aging, but others see little or no value in such mental exercises other than giving the practitioner a general sense of well-being that they are keeping their brains active. A few examples are included for your consideration:

• http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/apr/21/brain-training-online-neuroscience-elizabeth-day

• http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2400859,00.asp

• http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/03/16/lumosity-brain-training_n_1245345.html

• http://thestochasticman.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/why-brain-training-doesnt-work/

For myself, while I have absolutely no interests in shooting games on my smart phone or iPad, I don’t mind trying out some mental exercises for 15 minutes a day that might help with my thinking speed, attention, or flexibility etc. I’ll decide after a few weeks whether these games work for me, or are they just a mindless digression to occupy and amuse you for a few moments each day.

Grand-kids

Besides serving the Lord on mission trips, what gives us the most joy is playing with the grand-kids. The ice storm forced us out of our home for 3.5 days as there was no electricity and heat, and we and our son’s family had to take refuge in our daughter’s home which by God’s grace was not affected. So the silver lining was that the whole family spent some time together, for the first time since our children got married and moved out. Here are two clips of what the munchkins had been up to:

Silly siblings:

Sophia the slide:

Ice-Storm Practical Lessons (Part II)

[Continued from yesterday]

3. Electricity. When hydro was knocked out, we were waiting helplessly for power to be restored, not realizing that it would be a long wait of days. In contrast, our neighbor who is in the building industry, quickly wheeled out his standby generator from the garage and was able to keep some essential electrical appliances going, such that he did not have to evacuate from his home. However, to do this safely, you need an electrician to set up a transfer switch for you properly. Don’t think that all you need to do is to buy a generator and start the motor. Here is the proper procedure if you are interested:

http://www.wikihow.com/Connect-a-Portable-Generator-to-a-House

http://powerequipment.honda.com/generators/connecting-a-generator-to-your-home

http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/survival/gear/home-generator-101-how-to-power-on-when-the-power-goes-out

Of course you need flash lights and plenty of batteries. Our friends recommend LED lamps as the brightest and most durable.

4. Food and Water. Most households have a pantry of canned food, pasta and bottled water for the snow storms that come every winter. But a means of cooking when there is no power? This is where Chinese families might have an advantage because of their lifestyle. Some are in the habit of enjoying “hot-pot” with family and friends on cold wintry days. We heard that as soon as power was out, all the hot-pot stoves and propane bottles became best sellers at Chinese stores and were soon out of stock. Others tried using their BBQ inside the house, which is dangerous because of possible CO poisoning. Even in emergencies, safety is paramount.

5. Cash. In crisis situations, cash is king. You may have a very good bank balance, but with ATMs down you can’t get your funds out. Or the electronic cash registers don’t work, so people are backed into the most basic cash transactions. Have a few days operating expenses on hand to tie you over smaller emergencies.

I need not dwell on having a battery-operated radio to get news updates, or keeping your gas tank filled as there may be runs on gasoline. We need to be prepared before the next storm hits, and by looking at how erratic the weather had been it may be sooner rather than later.

Some Practical Lessons from the Ice Storm (Part 1)

When the ice-storm hit, we were forced to leave our home which had no electricity or heat. We thought we were well prepared with emergency food supply, but we weren’t. One real test showed up all our vulnerabilities. But better late than never, here are a few things we learned and are preparing:

1. Communication. Our Rogers land-line did not work and our cell phones were gradually discharging, quickly shutting down our means of communication, even our calling for help. Our family and friends who are with Bell were unaffected, even though they too lost power. We have decided to switch to Bell, for peace of mind.

2. Heat. Those we knew who toughed it out even without the forced-air furnace generally have a gas or wood-burning fireplace or propane burner to keep one room warm. But what if you don’t, and you want to minimize the risk of CO poisoning? Here is a simple heater you can build for yourself using flower pots and candles:

http://www.hubberts-arms.org/self-reliance-resources/keep-warm-this-winter-just-by-burning-one-candle!/

And if your gas fireplace goes out, here’s how to get it restarted:

(To be continued)

Old Earth? Young Earth?

Q. Science tells us the earth is 4.5 billion years old, but the Bible says it’s only a few thousand years. The Bible is just old wife’s tales and can’t be trusted.

A. Yesterday we discussed why creation scientists believe the earth to be young based on the chronology in the biblical genealogies. Today we continue with why they don’t believe the earth to be 4.5 billion years old based on radiometric dating.

When scientists claim the earth to be 4.5 billion years old, invariably they base their calculations on radiometric dating. This is a method of dating geological or archeological specimens by determining the relative proportions of particular radioactive elements in a sample e.g. potassium-argon, rubidium-strontium, uranium-lead etc. Before I comment on their validity, let me give you an analogy to illustrate the principles behind the method.

Suppose you entered a room and saw an oil lamp burning brightly. You knew by the markings on the oil can that there was still half a can or 500 cc of oil. An hour later you looked again, and this time there was only 440 cc of oil left. Now if I were to ask you, how long has the lamp been burning since it was lit, would you be able to give me an accurate answer? Well, it depends. Depends on what? At least three things:

1. How much oil was in the can initially? 1,000 cc i.e. full? 500 cc i.e. the lamp was lit just before you walked in? Anywhere in between?
2. The rate of combustion i.e. how fast was the oil burning away. In the hour you observed, 60 cc was burned off, or 1 cc per minute. However, had it always burned at this rate? Before you walked in, had there been the same level of oxygen such that the combustion rate was constant? Was there enriched oxygen so that it burned faster, or low oxygen so that it burned slower?
3. Did someone disturbed the initial volume of oil by adding or removing some before you entered the room? If he added oil, the lamp could have been burning longer than the initial amount would sustain it. If he removed oil, it would have been burning for a shorter period of time.

You can see from this simple illustration the key assumptions behind radiometric dating. Regardless of how sophisticated the technology is, all radiometric dating depend on 3 assumptions:

1. The initial condition – how much was the initial amount of parent and daughter elements in the sample? No one was there when the rocks were formed, except God. So you just have to assume the initial composition. The assumption may be close to actual, or totally off, but the further it deviates from the truth, the greater will be the error.
2. The rate of decay – typically it is assumed that the decay rate is constant, and tests have been conducted over varying conditions of heat and pressure to show that the decay rates don’t change. But if we play along and the calculated result happens to be billions of years, during which the rocks could be under extreme seismic conditions over long periods many times over, are you still so sure of your assumption? It’s not the same as testing it for a few days or even months in a lab, you know.
3. Contamination and disturbances – again over supposedly billions of years, a lot of disturbances could take place by water leaching, magma mixing, or heat contamination, which could add or remove the parent and/or daughter elements disproportionately.

One famous example of radiometric dating producing erroneous results is that of rock samples from Hualalai Volcano, Hawaii. Radiometric dating using the potassium-argon method estimated the rock’s age to be between 160 million to 2.96 billion years. The actual age from historical record of the volcano eruption was 200 years. You draw your own conclusions as to the dating’s accuracy.

Is the Bible old wife’s tales? Read it for yourself to find out. Millions have, and became the better for it. Don’t short change yourself.

Bible Genealogies Prove the Bible is Wrong?

Q. When you add up the ages of Adam’s descendants from generation to generation, you get only a few thousand years to Jesus. The earth is much older than that, so the Bible is wrong!

A. The Bible as the Word of God is never wrong, and you can always trust the Bible. It’s man’s knowledge of the age of the earth that is faulty. When men start with evolutionary cosmology and geology as their basis, they invariably end up with wrong conclusions as the premises are wrong.

Let’s examine this question in two parts:
1. How does the Bible come up with the age of the earth and are there any flaws in the calculation?
2. What is the basis of claiming the earth is 4.5 billion years old and what’s wrong with this claim?

The Bible does not directly state that the earth is 6,000 years old, but if you add up the years in the genealogies of the Bible, you get approximately that age. Over the years a number of chronologists have done this, the most famous of which is Bishop James Ussher in the 17th century who determined that the world was created in 4004 BC:

Later critics who support uniformitarianism and believe that the earth to be ancient jumped on him, claiming his methodology to be unscientific, and that there are gaps in the genealogy which would throw off his calculations.

To the first charge our response is that Ussher did not use the scientific method to conduct experiments, instead he used the historical method which is valid for determining historical events and dates. In fact, no scientists were present to make observations when God created the universe. All they are doing now is to take measurements on some current processes such as radioactive decay, make assumptions about the starting conditions and the rate at which the process takes place, and infer the starting date based on those assumptions. We will show in our next post this had led to erroneous conclusions.

With respect to gaps in the genealogy, we need to know several things. First, how do we know gaps exist? Because elsewhere in the Bible it filled in the details. Otherwise, we would not even know as there are no secular family trees for us to compare. For example:
• Gen 11:10-12 This is the account of Shem’s family line. Two years after the flood, when Shem was 100 years old, he became the father of Arphaxad. And after he became the father of Arphaxad, Shem lived 500 years and had other sons and daughters. When Arphaxad had lived 35 years, he became the father of Shelah.
• Lk 3:35-36 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech.

According to Gen 11:12 Arphaxad was the father of Shelah. However, according to Lk 3:36, Arphaxad was the father of Cainan, who was the father of Shelah. Usually there are two reactions from skeptics – either there are gaps in the genealogies which can’t be used for dating purposes, or the Bible is full of inconsistencies and contradictions and can’t be trusted. Neither conclusion is correct when you understand that the Hebrew word for “father” is yalad, which means to bear (a child), bring forth, or beget. Similarly, the Greek word for “son” is huios, which means offspring, a descendant, or one of the posterity. In this case Arphaxad is the grandfather of Shelah, which is allowed by the language. And if the “gap” in one passage is filled in by another passage, is there still a gap? No, the blended genealogy would be complete. And there are no inconsistencies or contradictions.

Secondly, you need to distinguish between genealogy and chronology. The two are related but not the same. A genealogy may contain gaps when the author, in recording the descendants of a grandfather, jumped over the son and went straight to the grandson, as in the example above. However. there would be no gaps in the chronology. When the text said “when Arphaxad had lived 35 years, he became the father of Shelah”, the interpretation is that “Shelah was born when Arphaxad was 35 years old”, regardless of whether Shelah was the son or grandson of Arphaxad. Note that the genealogies in Gen 5 and 11 are also chronologies i.e. both the names and ages are given. Gen 5 gives the line from Adam to Shem, while Gen 11 takes it further from Shem to Abram. So between the two you have the chronology from Adam to Abram, from 4004 BC to 1996 BC according to Ussher, with no gaps in between.

Are there flaws in Ussher’s calculation? Not logically. His methodology of cross-referencing all relevant bible passages, and correlating biblical events to archeology and history, is mathematically sound. Small differences arise depending on which version of the Bible you use. Ussher used the Masoretic text of the Hebrew OT. Others used the Septuagint LXX version of the Greek OT and come up with 5490 BC as the year of Creation, with the earth at approx. 7,500 years old. Many other chronologists have attempted to redo the arithmetic, using more recent archeological discoveries as reference points, but all come up with similar results dating the age of the earth to between 6-14,000 years old, a far cry from the 4.5 billion years popularized by evolutionary biologist and geologists.

[To be continued]

Marrying Unbelievers?

Q. Two unbelievers from traditional Chinese families asked whether they can be married at church. I don’t think the church should be the venue to marry unbelievers. Those who desire a ceremony could arrange a civil wedding elsewhere. However, I offered to share the gospel and the Bible’s teachings on marriage with them. Would you marry two unbelievers at church? If yes, would you do anything differently than marrying believers?

A. My own position is that I would marry:
1. Two believers, because that’s God’s will;
2. Two unbelievers, because there are many more non-believers than believers and their marriage are acceptable to God too; but
3. NOT one believer with one unbeliever, because that’s not God’s will. 2 Co 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

For 1 and 2, I would also require them to take pre-marital counseling, either with me or another pastor, or a Christian counselor, before I would marry them. The failure rate of marriages is so high these days that it would be irresponsible for me to marry them without giving them the tools to build a strong marriage. That in itself does not guarantee success, but at least it gives them a fighting chance. I would definitely explain God’s plan for marriage, and in 2’s case also share the gospel with them, but I would not insist that they believe before I marry them. It is better that they be exposed to the gospel than simply being turned away. Belief is up to God, not me.

For 3, I would tell the believer plainly that what he/she is planning to do is against God’s will. I would warn them about the dangers when they don’t share the same faith e.g.
• use of time – one wants to go to church on Sundays while the other one wants recreation,
• use of money – cheerful offering vs. donating hard-earned money to God,
• raising children – based on God’s word vs. secular world view etc.
Whether the Christian listens or not is his/her choice. They are adults, responsible to God for their actions. It’s not my job to run their lives.

Although I would officiate unbelievers’ weddings as a public service, I would not conduct the ceremony in church. Some might argue that it’s only a building, why make such as distinction? While we know that the church is people, not a building, the building is dedicated to God, and I do not wish to use what’s devoted to Him for secular use. Why would non-believers who have yet to acknowledge God as their Lord and Savior expect the same use of God’s facilities as His own children? Non-Christians are welcome anytime to learn about and worship God, but the church building is primarily for God’s family’s use, not for public use as a community center. Besides, I do not wish to give the wrong impression, to Christians and non-Christians, that there is no difference between the sanctified and the secular.

This brings me to the ceremony itself. I would conduct a Christian ceremony in its form, as I am a pastor and do not conduct any other, but there are similarities and differences. The processional, singspiration, Scripture reading, exchange of vows, rings, lighting of unity candle, signing of registry, declaration of marriage and recessional would be the same as that for believers. Even though the couple is non-Christian, they are entering into a covenant relationship and their vows are still binding before God and men.

What’s different is in the prayer, exhortation and benediction. I would not be able to offer up the same prayers for them and give them the same benediction of the Lord as I would give to God’s children. I would also adapt the exhortation to a non-Christian audience and include elements of the gospel, but I would not turn the occasion into an evangelistic meeting. To do so would be unethical. All of God’s common grace are available to the new couple, and I would encourage them to seek God and follow the Bible as best as they know how. He will draw them in His time.

I do not have chapter and verse for the above. They stem from my philosophy and theology of ministry which is to operate from grace rather than law. Hope this helps.