akiro3.com

One of the main outcomes of this economic down is that everyone is redefining what they value and what they need. We as people had become so overinflated in our personal value as consumers that we had to reach a point that the obese belly of our economic system would trip itself up. A society built around giving people whatever they wanted without any reasoning other than profit could not be sustained.

It’s more than a little scary that much of the prosperity that has spread around the world this decade was fueled by those who had been trained to buy to show their value. Around the world people lied and borrowed and created the belief there was money that didn’t exist. Money that the market came to rely upon as each man sought for himself a slice of the profit. Rural workers in China migrated to the urban manufacturing hubs to share in the expected wealth that would flow from consumers abroad whom themselves had overborrowed, and often falsified their financial position, to provide for themselves a lifestyle they deceptively believed to hold their path to fulfillment. Different from the bubbles of the past that were attached to industries or regional markets, it was only a matter of time that this global, psychological bubble would burst.

As soon as our source of money is threatened we only purchase what’s important and the things of value to our hearts are revealed. Thus many companies are seeing massive reductions in their sales since much of their product range is nothing more than fluff in light of the certain needs to support life and culture. Much of my work with electronics and advertising companies is no different. Most of the items I’ve worked on do not add as much value to one’s life as we advertise. The cheaper we can make a product whilst tricking you into separating with more money is whether we’re successful at branding or not. Also, as many industries are discovering, the internet has completely changed the playing field and many of our electronic products stand as obsolete at production and are laying stockpiled in old distribution channels. It’s interesting that we have been crafting our own downfall. By training consumers to constantly need products with new and more features (subsequently our products are hackneyed and confusing) through telling them that they are deficient without it, they have grown weary thanks to successive unfulfilling experiences. Without a basis of human needs rooted in that of our purpose for existence then business will continue to deceive our desires for profit.

What is telling is people’s sadness. If you’ve been told that your success in society is your increasing capability to aquire goods and status then you have good reason to be be sad when the immediate economic future looks bleak. If your relationships are based on your ability to provide value to those around you, then when you have less to barter with you will have a sour view of the coming months. If your value is based on your ability to achieve, such an economic shock as we are experiencing may prove too much. It has to the lives of too many business people.

Thankfully our ultimate value is not based in our economic outlook or our status amongst those around us. It’s based in the fact that above and in control of this entire system and earth is a righteous and loving God, who created you in his image and that knowing your desire to believe your fulfillment is in places other than Him (sin) chose to send His own Son into this world to suffer the wrath that we deserve and rise triumphantly so that we can experience His goodness and grace that runs counter to the values of this world.

I know that the sad thing is that there are many people who will run to a selection of concepts at the core of God’s character only to support their hope of attaining a better financial position - thus attaining their functional savior. They even tell you to your face that they don’t love the money more than God - “God wants me to have the money” - but they’re the ones you run into later in life who are jaded and unfaithful, “Jesus didn’t work…He didn’t give me what I wanted”.  It’s so great that God desires us to be taken with Him not to serve our own ends but because He is good.

One day I went to the shop to get some water. Whilst I was taking a look around it’s many aisles and shelves I was alarmed when I saw someone start a fire in the corner of a shop. I’ve been burnt before and know the consequences of such arson. I immediately began yelling “Fire”. Soon a staff member appeared and scolded me for scaring the customers, how were they going to stay in the shop if someone’s yelling “Fire”? I was confused and showed them the fire that was at this stage kindling. This staff member insisted that it wasn’t anything to stop normal shopping. I then grabbed a fire extinguisher and began to fight the flames whilst still yelling “Fire”. By this stage the fire was taking hold and my cries were gathering quite a crowd. The staff member grew agitated with me and proceeded to stop me from using the fire extinguisher. I continued yelling “Fire” and asking them why they weren’t doing anything. Then the manager appeared “Who is this fool yelling ‘Fire’. Yes there’s a fire, but it’s not going to hurt anyone” as the fire engulfed another aisle. By this point I gave up and began to run for the exit and the staff then turned on me and began attacking me. Somehow, even though I was being pelted with goods by the staff, I made it out the front door. As the occasional customer escaped behind me, the rest remained at the request of the staff. When I looked back the store had become a raging inferno and the staff were staring me down through the door whilst continuing to invite customers in. I didn’t stick around to watch it burn down but I’m glad I escaped with my life, without too becoming enticed by the fire. Their failure to do anything began to make me doubt if I’d seen a fire but the staff themselves had admitted it was there and I have burns to remind me.

I then continued on to find water for the fire burning inside of me.

Often quoted, Prov 29:18 usually gets pulled out when a church is setting new directions or launching a building program but is that what it’s really about?

Rarely do you hear this verse in full which becomes apparent when you think of the context people are trying to use it in.

King James - “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.”
ESV - “Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law”
NIV - “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; but blessed is he who keeps the law.”

English comprehension time! The King James sets it really well. That colon in the middle means that the first half equals the second half. That means that when people keep the law then people won’t perish. Inversely when people have a vision they’ll be happy. This means that the Law was a revelation! Whoa that’s not some aspiration. Ok lets continue understanding this. A ‘revelation’ is what? we can see that the ESV has chosen “prophetic vision” as a fitting translation of revelation. If we look into what a revelation is throughout the Bible we find that it’s when people come to see God. So what does this mean? Without a vision of God, without knowing God, without having God revealed to you, without having Jesus Christ revealed to you - you perish. So now what does this whole verse tell us about Jesus.

This verse tells us that the one who keeps the Law is blessed. But then if we bother to read our whole Bible we’ll become well aware that we don’t! Shit we’re screwed. Now we’re going to perish. But wait who kept the law? Who was the sole man who kept the Law? Jesus. This verse has nothing to do with your aspirations of worldly means, this verse is all about how Jesus saves you through revealing Himself to you.

So does this mean every time your church leader stands up there and says “We’ve got a vision for a new building and you know the Bible says without a vision the people perish, so we want to get you on board today.” they have no idea what they’re talking about? Yep. Stand up right there and then and leave. Go to a church where they can show you Christ in every passage. Yes, even the one’s where God kills people. Yes, even when he kills people in the “New Covenant” parts. Even Deut 25:11? Yes, even there (I’d love to see that). Yes and amen.

What started with watching Kurosawa’s - Seven Samurai whilst I was flat on my back sick the other week has turned into a revival of my ongoing interest in Japan. Last night I saw the triptych Tokyo! which whilst being odd was certainly rewarding - more on that later. Then this morning care of (the Firefox crashing) TOKYOMANGO I came across these short films by Kosai Sekine and had to share.

This first one is called Right Place and perfect for those with anally retentive/OCD tendencies:

This second mesmerizing video clip is a kaleidoscopic look at Tokyo:

Tokyo! was certainly an interesting set of films where the common thread was the city. After experiencing what it’s like to be a gaijin (foreginer) for a month in Japan, I found that I was better able to understand what many of the underlying messages of the films were. If you were to just watch these films without any  understanding of Japanese culture then I’m sure that there’s still something of interest in each but they’re quite rich in symbols to those with some exposure or interest in Japanese culture.

Also I’d recommend anyone with an interest in film to get a full special edition copy of Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai. The one I got had the full length film which apparently has been hard to get until recently. Then it had 2 commentary tracks from people that whilst sounding like a media student’s dissertaiton offered some great additional information on the background of the film and it’s creators. It also unpacks some of the secondary messages and cultural etiquette.

Then there was a 2 hour interview with Kurosawa and another biographical documentary of Kurosawa. It was relly quite rewarding to see what he achieved in his life, how he went about it and his insights on film and artistic expression. If there were a few simple take home points it was:

- Directors need to write. Whilst there is the art of actual production, writing is the staple.
- Writing regularly is beneficial.
- If a film (or product) is driven by financial motives rather than artistic the outcome is usually bad.
- Extreme experiences are the basis upon which we can form our values and future expression
- Timing and pacing are of great value in film. It’s essentially the difference between a book and a film.
- Music for film is different to music for the sake of music.

I then watched a few episodes of a recent anime adaption of the Seven Samurai and one could immediately see the changes in values and culture (and also the trivialness) of Japanese popular culture. Kurosawa’s original film had a depth and understanding of his immediate culture and that of humanity that is very hard to replicate or rarely do we see it in popular films today.

It does inspire me to delve into how we express what humanity is in the face of a rapidly changing culture. There is the constant need to analyse the culture around us and reveal it against that which it timeless.

Been meaning to blog more and thought that it was about time for a new skin. Can’t take credit for this one because I just grabbed it from Smashing Magazine/Design Disease. It’s a case of being capable of making it from scratch but when someone else knows it so much better why not use their handiwork.

Hoping to have more posts up here soon!

I think I only just came to the realisation that culture is swinging towards a yet further liberal position as a whole. I’ve generally held the position that people are corrupt no matter the time period and that what happens openly in society itself just changes. I’m slightly rethinking that since what happens in the open places of a society is intimately reflecting , and ultimately also directing, the individuals.

There’s an interesting chain to why I’m rethinking this.

I’m at a conference which whilst priding itself on being a free-thinking innovative brain storm for the interactive industry has a number of sessions that one would think to be slightly out of place since they are focused on or prominently feature sex. Sure sex is an integral part of life yet it’s the deviant nature of how it’s included here. One talk is on protecting our sexual privacy online (presumably so you can do what you like in a second life), another on the rules governing porn in this new web age, another that whilst being focused on interaction design uses sex toys as the case study to mention a few.

I think what really banged this cultural shift home is that in a session I attended, a behind the scenes look at the Onion (which is a contemporary of Australia’s own Chaser), showed a clip that’s censored from their live site (which I swear the Chaser guys have done too but maybe not as far) where a news anchor quizzes a ’specialist’ about the increasing amount of sex in the media as they roll through some stock of sexual imagery. It made use of a common comic device of the irony having people discussing the evils of something whilst they perpetrate it themselves. They also used a sense of ascension to it by raising the level of inappropriateness of the imagery. Now what got me wasn’t how this was so inappropriate (I must say that I’d had this false conception that Americans are so conservative that it wouldn’t go beyond what you’d see on the Chaser) but moreover how people found it so funny. I probably spent more time studying the room as what would be considered as imagery that was increasingly sexually perverse was gaining more and more laughs. At no point did the room ease into a state with a few guys laughing over a silent majority. What this meant was that this imagery was familiar to the majority of the room so much that they could derive humour from its escalating perversion, since it was setting an expectation that it continued to meet.

What I found shocking was the familiarity. Sure at an arts conference you’re going to find more than your average bunch of liberal minded folk yet to have the majority of a crowd being so familiar with such perverse imagery was not my expectation. I guess it just rings home the roll of stats presented by a wide variety of sources about the prevalence of America’s (and since it is just the same in many ways - Australia’s) porn culture. Sure I can see it’s attraction and understand why it’s so large a market yet I also know how destructive it is.

I can’t say that I’m above anyone in my moral standing but it just makes me long for monogamy and makes me want to run from anything as crude and dysfunctional as what is held up for fulfilment. I know the ruinous consequences of any amazing aspect of life that is ruled by desires and that it is not the removal of such desires but placing them in submission in worship to their Creator that truly fulfills.

I’m all too aware of my folly for accepting cheap substitutes but it does pain me to see others unwittingly yet adamantly traversing the path to diminishing fulfillment in which it it will eventually cease all together.

How do you wake people up to a set of affections that’s going to kill them, where they’re like frogs in heating water? I know the answer is the Gospel but how do you tell them without it just being ignored? I guess it has to connect with their understanding of their unmet satisfaction whilst not promising that by acting a certain way you’ll have ultimate fulfillment since Christ says he will be our fill. He said that he who believes in him shall never thirst again. John’s revelation of heaven is that those who have faith in Christ now shall hunger no more nor thirst. It is my understanding that the usage of thirst in these passages relates directly to our personal spiritual fulfillment, the one we unsuccessfully seek to be met by things of this world. It is yet so hard to believe sometimes, to not tell yourself that you need the vain experiences of this world to meet your burning desires but that it is Christ that fills these. Whilst I think that this is what we are to constantly grapple with for our lives on this earth I want to do it, since I want to experience the fullness that Christ speaks of as without him I don’t have a hope on this earth. Also when I do use what I’ve been given by him in worship of him, including my sexuality, it’s then unlocked to be fulfilling in a way that it couldn’t be otherwise.

I want to see people being fulfilled and I’m eager to see the cultural renewal that comes when people are given the grace to experience the satisfaction that is Christ.

Well I realise that this might not sound all that amazing to most but I made it to Seattle, which in being part of the US of A means I’ve accomplished something I’ve dreamed of as a child. Woot!

Hmm. The first thing that surprised me is how much it’s like Melbourne. It’s population is about the same and the downtown has a similar feel to it. I’ve been up in Fremont which is also a lot like Fitzroy, boutique indie style shops mixed with a lot more chic places to eat all with it’s anti-authority feel (including their statue of Lenin) and the odd exhibitionist homeless person to boot. Yeah Fitzroy it is.

Now since I’m autophile I’ve been paying a keen eye to what’s on the streets and yes it’s big. There are loads of trucks and 4WD/SUVs. I mean loads and they’re very industrial. Form follows function and also rather inefficient. Big motors, big noise for not really doing all that much. Like what I can’t get over is how they have these tiny buses yet they’re very wide and have the proportions of a bodybuilder. An old Toyota town minibus would do the job just as well yet I’m guessing for less cost financially and environmentally. What I do like are new Mustangs, Vipers other forms of American Muscle thundering themselves around. Also love to see our Commodore’s being given grand handbrake turn showings on adverts here as the Pontiac G8. There’s a rumour running around that Ford’s new CEO loves the Falcon enough that he’s going to be using that as his personal ride.

Now here the mass transit should really be called micro-transit because there’s pretty much little coverage of trains, buses and no subway or even an link out to the airport. On a different note the airport is a visual abomination looking like it was designed by someone who specialises in concentration camps but in Seattle they do like their planes. There’s almost one in the sky whenever you look especially the sea based variety with the pontoons projecting from the bottom. It does have good reason too since most of the world’s airliners originate from  hometown icon Boeing.

Seattle’s urban layout is according to a grid and whilst occasionally alters to suit the terrain the terrain is very much subject to it. That’s certainly a task with the rolling hills and abundance of watercourses that are often passed over with trusses and drawbridges. It really does look like Sim City. Architecture is unfortunately not all that adventurous and very utilitarian with traditional forms as a surface treatment. Wood abounds in these parts thus too cladding. If it could be done for the same cost yet with some clean lines and nice form, it’s not. Seen the odd Frank Lloyd Wright knock off but they lack any of the glory he bestowed on his designs. Yet it is amazing to be able to look out across this city and see it teeming with so much life.

It really is a city shaped by it’s industries, where it flaunts it’s difference to the rest of America (as I’ve heard someone say it’s the closest the US gets to Canada) and holds tight to autonomy and free thought. Ok that’s my first impression. Let you know more later!

It’s been 3 weeks since I disrupted small group because I disagreed with what John Chiong was teaching that night - in short “Name it - claim it” theology. I had come with the intention to leave the group at the end of the night giving an account for my reason yet it became apparent that I was going to be denying my responsibility to challenge false doctrine. Something that when I did, I did a shithouse job of it. I need to apologise for how I made a mockery of the truth for allowing my personality into the argument. If it’s my distrust of authority, my lack of humility, my thriving in conflict then for that I apologise. Yet if it’s confronting to be told that such teaching as “Claiming blessing (school marks or promotions) because you’re God’s children” is the type of false gospel that Paul warns against, I do not apologise at all because “Name it-Claim it” belittles God and has nothing to do with him. What really amazed me was how blind we had become such teachings, myself included.

For the period through which I was attending COOS I went along to the Sonic Edge Cell on Wednesday’s and the Saturday Night Youth Service which the majority of the Sonic Edge people attended and also the monthly Sonic Edge MSG meeting. I’m very thankful for the way I was welcomed in. I deeply identify with these guys because I grew up in a similar music culture in Adelaide and it’s comprised of a great bunch of people. Marcus went out of his way from my initial contact through a myspace message to help out and make me feel at home. I really appreciate it still.

I came to Church of Our Saviour (COOS) in mid-september and chose to stop attending just prior to Christmas after having discussions with John Chiong and Jennifer Heng. Both discussions centred on my interest as to why we didn’t hear very much about Jesus at church and when we did it was really in passing or “In Jesus name”, that kind of thing. Both leaders retorted that they believed they had and that they couldn’t teach the Gospel every week and that people needed meat. John went as far as saying people would leave if the Gospel was preached every week since they need something more.

Upon hearing this it immediately revealed something to me which I found to be huge, that somehow in the mix the Gospel had been shuffled to a role of getting people in the door of Christianity and then the real transformation of life would begin as we conducted our lives according to God. I’m not sure where or how it started but I believe this is the conviction of the leadership at COOS. I’ve repeatedly listened back through the Podcast to sermons preached by a variety of leaders and to make sure I’m hearing what the teaching is saying. I’ve appealled to John Chiong and Jennifer Heng to further explain themselves, I’ve even gone as far as contacting the administration to speak to Mr. Hong yet they didn’t reply.

Unfortunately that perspective is false. The Gospel is the centre of the Christian faith and absolutely nothing else. The meat that Paul was talking of was that of Jesus Christ’s mutilated, defiled body dripping blood and dying a murderous death on a cross to appease God’s wrath for your sin. That sin is not your school marks. In that act he allowed you for the first time to be directly in touch with God through faith because without Christ’s atonement you are vile and utterly depraved to God. That act that Christ did, did not make you perfect. Nor will it allow you to become even close to perfection in this life. Since Christ took the fall for all sin yet since He is completely holy He is able to impute his righteousness before God to those who He desires, which the bible says is those who truly believe in him. That’s a massive step. Not one that you can be talked through by repeating the “sinner’s prayer” because it’s about you believing that Jesus Christ is who He said He is. You can only come to understand what the righteousness you have on your own is worth when you look into who Christ is and what He did. He is perfect and holds true righteousness that is imparted to you in grace. Your personal righteousness, the one you attempt on your own, is shit (Phil 3:9). It’s a load that you leave behind in the toilet. That is your righteousness before God. Through the prophet Isaiah God declared any attempt of yourself at righteousness as a filthy rag. As in a girl’s bloody tampon. Dwell upon that for a moment, that is what every attempt of you to make God love you is. That is what every attempt to do something good so that God blesses you or loves you more looks like.

It smacked me across the face like a cold punch and there is no way at all, absolutely none, that I could follow through with Jennifer Heng’s repeated calls “not to give up because you’re worth it”. To the contrary that’s all I could do, fall on my face in shame over the state of my heart. My flesh, my innate broken heart, wills against God’s. It uses every single desire that God gave me for good against him as it attempts to find fulfilment in every place but him. It seeks to heap honour upon myself for every act. It seeks to exchange the truth in His words to endorse my sins, of which “Name it - claim it” is yet just another form. Even though He is the only thing that can save me, my heart seeks to place the value only He deserves upon things that will not save. My mind dwells upon the vain fulfillment my functional saviours will bring that only results in my death.

As I crawl on my face which is not even honourable to be lifted before my creator. I cry out for mercy, my voice raspingly bleats out my repentance. Overwhelmed with shame before him who is utterly holy, yet is lovingly gracious, he then bestows his righteousness upon me no matter what I have done, what I do today and tomorrow. I just can’t sing along with the lyrics “I love you endlessly” since I know my humanity cannot make such a boast (Mark 14:29-31). I am limited, I am sinful, yet I am in awe of my Saviour’s love.

I’m amazed that such a creator then places new desires in my heart that begin my transformation into that like Christ. He begins to renew my mind through the gift of faith in Jesus Christ, which is accompanied by his Holy Spirit, that compels me to do his bidding upon this earth yet this transformation does not occur overnight or entirely by my own hand since it’s only as I dwell up on Christ that I then have my affections changed one by one to pursuing the Christ that gives life.

Since I haven’t heard even a hint of such words preached at Church of our Saviour yet oppositely such aberrations of God’s word and teachings that endorse sinfulness or deny God’s supremacy I can no longer attend such a church.

I believe at the core of this lies a very low view of scripture that interprets things through the desires of those preaching, listening or to fit the cultural context rather than seeking what God is actually saying. This is a matter of experience shaping our doctrines rather than the infallible word of God to which nothing can be added or detracted.

There are a number of things that have alerted me to understanding that what is preached at COOS is not quite right.

-There have been teachers that say they need to be filled with the Holy Spirit separate to faith in Christ.
The Biblical standpoint is that the Holy Spirit is imparted upon faith in Christ not in a separate situation. Any other teaching would be false and misleading. See Baptism and Fullness by John Stott.

-I’ve repeatedly heard preaching that some spiritual gifts (separate to Salvation) are given by another with that gift.
The Holy Spirit is the medium through which God gives the gifts. No man is involved other than Jesus Christ. God gives as he wills. Everyone who believes in Christ gets gifts but not all are given the same gifts since they are for the edification of the Church, the integration of the body of Christ.

-The usage of tongues discounts Paul’s teachings in 1 Corinthians to not being applicable to COOS as somehow they are “different”.
1 Corinthians 12-14 outlines teaching on how tongues is to be used in the Church as a whole (along with a lot of other things about what the church is to do) yet I have been told that for reasons from either the Corinthians being nut jobs who just talk in tongues all the time through to the fact that people can’t exegetically reconcile the latter section about women being slient unless it’s literal thereby writing off the whole book (which I would contest it’s not and just some basic comprehension by reading the whole thing in context clears it up). For the exact reason that Paul stipulates in that passage, the confusion of those not part of that church, a friend I brought was certainly turned off by the irreverent use of tongues at COOS. I’ve also been told that tongues is never used as preaching yet ministers regularly trails off into tongues toward the end of sermons and I have absolutely no idea what they are saying especially since they doesn’t translate. All I can understand is that it’s building an image of themselves as the Holy Spirit inspired leader who then proclaims “God’s word” (usually prophecy) which I don’t believe is right. Either way at COOS this gift is a clanging symbol because it’s not being exercised in love for the edification of the Church.

-Basically teaching a self-reliant relationship with God
When Jenn Heng gave her 3 point sermon on Nehemiah 2 she made the points - Admit you’re wrong, weak & worth it. It belittled sin down to “being wrong” and that was equal to you being discouraged (even Jesus was so that wasn’t sin). Also far more time was spent explaining to admit your failings to your friends and family, sin and God only got a very nominal mention as she read from the passage, it wasn’t even a point. She constructed a concept of self-esteem which leveraged the situation of Christ’s death for our personal worth since he did that must mean we’re worth it. That makes me really uncomfortable without also revealing that Christ died because it was also for God’s glory. It’s like Jenn was using the effect to determine the cause rather than the cause then effect. In the same sermon series there was a quote “How could you do this to me. I’ve served you all of my life and this happened….” attributed as Darlene Zschech’s reaction to her miscarriage, the attitude was just a side point to a story that focused on her choice to then worship God by singing a song. It’s actually great to hear her praising God in the middle such a situation but that left us with a concept that we deserve something for serving God. I’d be far more comfortable with saying God’s way of using this really painful situation was to reveal that no matter what we do he’s our fulfilment and doesn’t owe us anything. So in the midst of that we totally need to praise Him. I felt cheated that the crowd was left to think that God does owe us something.

- Not teaching what is in the Bible
Jennifer Heng preached a 4 week series on Nehemiah that was completely based around the fact that we, as in you and I, are the equivalent city of Jerusalem that needs rebuilding and that by looking at the deeds Nehemiah did that we too can be restored. I have argued that a correct reading of that passage is that the City of God, Jerusalem, has an equivalent in the New Testament of the Church and that we, Christian individuals, are the dwelling place of God care of Jesus death on the Cross and the subsequent gift of the Holy Spirit upon faith. So that would mean Nehemiah is actually about the reconstruction of the church using the existing rubble (us). Sure that God wants to sanctify and transform us yet that is not what that passage is about. At the core we are rubble and broken people that the only reason that together we are viewed as a beautiful city by God is through Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Thus the life application of Nehemiah is around the construction of a church not our personal transformation through persevering with our worldly struggles. Now it’d be different if the whole sermon was a character study on all of Nehemiah’s Godly qualities that we should aspire to learn from but it wasn’t (even then without the Gospel link it’s not Christian teaching - you may as well get along to your local Mosque or Synagogue). Just the problem is that in the sermons that were preached only the suitable qualities were picked for supporting the lifestyle of a Singaporean school student. That’s not preaching from the Bible. That’s adapting the Bible to your ideology.

-Derek Hong believes his word is equal to the Bible
In a sermon that Derek Hong preached at the beginning of 2008 “Getting the most out of Church” (title alone sent shudders down my spine) he preached from Proverbs 4:20-27. To paraphrase what Solomon wrote as God breathed instruction - listen to my words that you’ll find throughout this passage and you’ll be righteous. Derek then took that passage and said that his word being preached from the pulpit is indeed such “words” and then gave a number of directives to maximise your benefit from church; which is apparently is turning up to church on time, avoiding conflict on the way and taking notes. Unfortunately for Derek it’s heretical to then place yourself in the Author’s role to say that your sermon is God breathed instruction since it clearly wasn’t since only one of those three things even remotely appears in the bible and I have to say that really it was a load of rubbish since turning up to church with a selfish consumer attitude is a massive mistake.

- Misuse of prophetic gifts
At the end of the same sermon Derek Hong then called people, through a prophecy, to come to the front who have a demon in them that makes them fall asleep when reading their bible. That is not edifying the church. That is using fear to control people. That’s what demagogues do. I personally think the appropriate way to use such a gift if you did receive such a prophecy, since demons torment people so they theoretically could (yet I’m still skeptical), is to then ask people to come to the front with the aforementioned issue and not introduce demons into it at all and then deal with that when praying for them if that is indeed what the issue is. Also I didn’t see any deliberation with other church leaders to give me confidence that this wasn’t just something he made up. I didn’t see love being exercised there at all.

- Derek Hong teaches that he can release God’s forgiveness
In a sermon preached on the first weekend in Feb 2008 Derek told of a story where someone came to repent to him for acting against God. Derek said that he then released God’s forgiveness to him. What? Only Jesus Christ can forgive our sin. Now I’ll assume that he really meant that he was expressing to this guy that Jesus forgives him but these small comments are really important since they can completely mislead people. There also are other situations where such wordings leave the glory of healing upon individuals and not Christ.

-COOS’s approach to sin (the Homosexuality position)
The church has chosen to single out the sin of sexual immorality with a focus purely on Homosexuality in a way that is contrary to Jesus own teachings on Sin. I do not at all disagree that the church of today’s world faces a challenge in engaging culture as it’s mores have changed to endorse Homosexuality as as lifestyle, yet stigmatising it as a sin above others contradicts what Jesus taught on Sin in Matthew 7:1-5:

“1Judge not, that you be not judged. 2sFor with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and twith the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but udo not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye”

When Homosexuality is discussed it is done so in a very judgemental manner which can be summarised by this quote from the COOS Statement: “Homosexual practice is contrary to God’s Word”. That could be casually rendered in the form “because God said so”.

It therein fails to bring sexuality under the Gospel as a part of our fallen character to be renewed. It fails to start with Jesus prior to creation and God then creating gender and marriage and His declaration that this is good. It fails to show that it is indeed this form of sexuality that is sanctioned by God for our joy and his glory. It fails to show that when our forefathers sinned it forever distorted history, corrupting all that was good. Thus it fails to glorify Christ when he died for our sin so we can be restored to God and through relationship with him experience the full joy of transforming our desires and will to his.

In a sermon on the topic that one can find on the website Shawn Tay’s guide to gay proofing your kids was subjective, experiential “advice” which I think was wrong to teach, since a parent cannot control a child’s sin. The true focus of the sermon was reducing the shame that parents experience for having children with “sensitive” tendencies, that according to Mr. Tay, are more likely to become gay. The content then descended into lifestyle related gender misconceptions (eg. Don’t let your boys play with dolls) which actually leads people to confusion about their sexuality as it it inflates false gender stereotypes (this sort of perspective went the way of shock-therapy long ago). Not only was this painted as the reason as to why one becomes gay but it was also totally focused on male homosexuality yet applied to homosexuality as a whole (as each gender has very different reasons for undertaking). It also left the whole matter of sexual abuse out of the discussion, which in my experience is the most common predisposition to sexual confusion. It was completely preached out of Mr. Tay’s personal experience of his childhood and what he attributes with confusing his sexuality yet applied to all.

The real criticism was that absolutely none of it was Biblically based and it never said that people chose to deal with their desires in a sinful way by not submitting it to Christ so desiring after fulfillment elsewhere thus depriving Him of his deserved glory. It did not ever mention parents taking responsibility for their children’s spiritual growth and teaching them about Jesus Christ as the best thing you can do to see your children grow healthily into maturity.

In the same sermon Derek Hong’s tirade about a gay supremacy movement with an agenda to legally force churches to employ them was an abuse of office since it was merely scare mongering and was only going to create hostility from those in attendance toward those who call themselves homosexual. I do not think that through the way it was handled that anyone in attendance would have been motivated to love all people of all nations with the heart of Christ (since the case in point was supposedly occurring in the US not even Singapore).

The Church website places Homosexuality as of higher importance than the Church’s belief statement (thus Jesus), Ministries, Sermons and Testimonies according to the menu structure. There are no church statements on Hetrosexuality, Greed, overworking to feed your functional saviour, materialism or the heresy of prosperity doctrine. If Homosexuality is equal to other sins as the statement disclaimers at the end then why aren’t other statements there? But such statements in themselves are deeply flawed for they cast a vision of works above grace.

Also none of the testimonies linked to from that Homosexuality statement page attribute Jesus Christ with their Salvation. However their cultural change, the church environment or the Choices program is responsible for their functional salvation: hetrosexuality and the acceptance of a community (and probably their parents and greater culture). The Homosexuality statement itself calls people to be saved for comfort and strength not because of Christ himself.

Not only is this approach defaming the name of Christ by maligning his name with hollow teachings and lifting the self-righteous sin stained lives of COOS members above those of fellow sinners, it is a massive turn off to those outside the church that creates a stumbling block to the clear reception of the Gospel. The way that COOS approaches the issue is most likely to be read by most people as “I can’t go to God because I’m Gay” or “God hates me because I’m Gay” since they fail to integrate the Gospel into their stance. It’s a massive irony that COOS is willing to proclaim to the homosexual community “you can change” yet not be willing to incorporate that into the message for themselves.

It’s the sort of hypocrisy that Christ called the Pharisees to:

Matthew 23:13-15
13“But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in. 15Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”

Now the big question is why is homosexuality such an issue at COOS? Is it just because it’s the one sin they’ve chosen to highlight to make their community feel better about themselves alone as they appear to be one of the few churches in Singapore that gives it any airtime. Yet I think it runs deeper because you usually make such sins important since your church is really struggling with other endemic sin.

So I close rebuking the leadership from straying from the teaching of the Gospel and call for those who are committed to this community to call their leadership to theological reformation.

For those who are not committed to Church of Our Savior in the wake of the uncertainty surrounding Sonic Edge get your ass into a church that cares about the centrality of the Gospel, which includes staying true to the Bible and Jesus teachings. Do not prioritise churches by criteria like how good the music is, potential life partners, if the sermons make you feel all warm and fuzzy and whether they say “the presence of God is moving here”. Look for the true signs and that it is indeed the triune God, who’s defining feature is Jesus not us, that gets all of the glory out of every song, every sermon, every testimony and every word. Look for preaching of Christ and Christ crucified and leaders who aren’t afraid of Sin, Hell and explaining the great love Jesus had to choose us out of that.

Once again I apologise for my pride and lack of humility that I displayed in the way that I interrupted the small group and please bring it to my attention if you think there things I need to rectify.

I really feel that we as a global Church do not educate people on what the decision they are making is before we ask them to make it. This results in people having an ill formed image of God that they commit to so when that image is expanded upon in their Christian walk then they run into difficulty understanding how what they are learning fits next to what they believe. Also there is so much peripheral teaching within the Church and the rest of this world that doesn’t align with the Gospel that often the Gospel takes a secondary position to that in their priorities.

when are you going to get dry?
can you ever stay dry?
every swig you put away
drives the ever deeper the pain
As I stand here outside this life looking in
my eyes obscured by tears rolling from the damage I see
If you need some empathy you’ve got it
If you need attention you’ve got it

If you need some empathy you’ve had it
If you need attention you’ve had it
It wasn’t enough for you
Now it’s time to walk away