One day too late-Skillet

Tick tock hear the clock countdown
Wish the minute hand could be rewound
So much to do and so much I need to say
Will tomorrow be too late

Feel the moment slip into the past
Like sand through an hourglass
In the madness I guess I just forget
To do all the things I said

Time passes by
Never thought I’d wind up
One step behind
Now I’ve made my mind up

Today I’m gonna try a little harder
Gonna make every minute last longer
Gonna learn to forgive and forget
’Cause we don’t have long, gonna make the most of it

Today I’m gonna love my enemies
Reach out to somebody who needs me
Make a change, make the world a better place
’Cause tomorrow could be one day too late
One day too late
One day too late

Tick tock hear my life pass by
I can’t erase and I can’t rewind
Of all the things I regret the most I do…
Wish I’d spent more time with you

Here’s my chance for a new beginning
I saved the best for a better ending
And in the end I’ll make it up to you, you’ll see
You’ll get the very best of me

Your time is running out
You’re never gonna get it back
Make the most of every moment
Stop saving the best for last

Objective truth? You think that is possible?

I think that truth is a very subjective thing. Your truth is contextualized by your social and cultural capital. How you see situations is often through a certain veil. That veil or perspective is never objective but very subjective built upon various agendas and motivations. Anyone that says his version is the perfect version or his version or account of something is the most objective one in the process of emphasizing that particular truth in fact subjugate the objective stance that it tries to take.

I'm thinking about pastoral workers. I think that pastoral workers cannot see a lot of tangible benefits usually in what they are doing. As such, there is a form of coping mechanism that these people need to engage in. They are dealing with intangible concepts and theories that seem very difficult to be proven; eg. the existence of God. Due to that, they need a form of structure in their lives. Like a certain sociological professor who mentioned in his blog that pastors preach because they need a form of tangible routine to cope with the intangible product that they are developing. I think perhaps I could bring that idea abit further?

Pastors preach to cope with the intangible product development and they preach a certain version of truth and required it to be an unquestioned version of truth because that version of truth, though socially constructed, becomes a form of psychological pillar that they can build their self-worth on. But like what I mentioned, when there is an overt emphasis on what they believe to be true, are they not in fact de-emphasizing the objectification of the truth?

And I think that's why church organizations around the world try to have more activities during the week. The church is becoming a social organism because the people running it needs these structures to increase their level of self-worth. Can we allow ourselves such a perspective, to think of church in this way? Are all the events that are run by the church a form of coping mechanism to deal with the need for the development of self worth and aid in the development of identity? So when you look at the sociology of the church life, you get the idea that apart from the spiritual education that the congregation may receive through structured events but in fact could such structured events be the manifestation of the need for pastoral workers to cope with the intangible product development that they are engaging in?

I believe that the church life or christian life is a very fascinating phenomenon. And I don't think that we should just accept what we perceive as the norm..but we should in fact embark on a process of deconstructing it. I think when you do that..you are left with more questions than answers and that's what makes God so amazing and so unfathomable. If at the end of the day we are left with even more questions and doubts than answers I think we are definitely on the right track. Isn't that what God is like? If you have an answer to everything then you are defining God..which in fact isn't the very concept of God undefinable? I feel that this journey with God needs to be built on more doubt than absolutism.

Living in the moment

Went for a relaxing run to Sembawang beach. It's really wonderful to live in this part of Singapore..even though people always joke that it is very "ulu". Hahaha...but "ulu" is good because over here there's a lot of forested areas, places to explore, and really wonderful running routes. I'm a person who always feel God the closest when I'm surrounded by nature. Nothing beats standing on a rocky platform staring into the open sea as the sky cracked with lightning and the strong wind massaged your cheeks. Yep..Sembawang is the place to be.

But that's not why I'm blogging...yea I went for a run. Haven't done that regularly for some time..and it felt awesome! Had a conversation with God in my mind as I was walking back. The whole conversation revolved around living an abundant life. The conclusion basically is that I had a revelation, or more like an impression that...we got to really live life in such a way that we know that we are in the moment. You know how sometimes you are on stage, giving a speech then suddenly you got this deja vu or this feeling whatever you call it that it feels so right to be there doing what you are doing? Or for the sports fanatics out there how sometimes when you are running, swimming, whatever.. you know you are engaged in the activity and it feels so right that you know you are in the moment? The kind of feeling seems to be inexplicable but you just know that you are at the right place, doing the right thing, at the right time.

In that moment, you are contented, things may not be totally alright around you but you know that this is where God wants you to be. I believe God is found in that moment. Anyway just feel very refreshed now!

Discerning between the command and the promise

The bible stated in John 15:1-5..

I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away;and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me. “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.

Some preachers like to interpret this verse in the way that if you do not bear fruit, you will be cut away. As a result of that people go away feeling condemned, thinking that they are not good enough because they are not bearing enough fruit. I believe that verse is misinterpreted. The focus was never on the fruit. If we are so focused on the fruit all the time, the fruit becomes the idol. If a focus is continually on growth, or success, then if you are not careful..you make growth and success to be the idol. I believe that was never God's intention.

The words, "takes away" or in some other versions "cut off" in the Hebrew meaning is really "lifted up". In Israel's vineyards, when a branch is not bearing fruit, the branch is lifted up to a higher position so that it can be exposed to more sunlight and bear fruit. That is the proper translation of the words "cut off". There would be preachers around that would say that you need to bear fruit, and use the negative experience of being cut off as a tool to get you to work harder. But that is not scriptually accurate. Therefore people who say things like we need to chop off those unfruitful has got it all wrong. Those unfruitful Jesus will lift up and edify so that they can be fruitful as you abide in Him.

We need to discern between the promise and the command. The promise is "bear fruit" and the command is "abide in me". As you abide in Jesus, you would bear fruit in the right season and at the right time. Therefore you are not working for the promise, but rather you are entering into a promise. We make bearing fruit to be a law, a system of rules and regulations if we focus that as the command. We turn the gospel of salvation upside down by saying that you need to bear fruit to be qualified. These are erroneous teachings that put people into bondage. 

Therefore in the same way, we are not blessed because we give to God but we are already blessed by God. This was the Abrahamic promise that was given thousands of years ago. A will once it is given, in this case a covenant, cannot be nullified. Therefore you are not working for the promise of the blessing but you are entering into that promise. 

In the right season, at the right time you will enter into these promises.

Le Reveillon

The sky is laced with fitful red,

The circling mists and shadows flee,

The dawn is rising from the sea,

Like a white lady from her bed.

And jagged brazen arrows fall

Athwart the feathers of the night,

And a long wave of yellow light

Breaks silently on tower and hall,

And spreading wide across the wold

Wakes into flight some fluttering bird,

And all the chestnut tops are stirred,

And all the branches streaked with gold. 

-Oscar Wilde

Nature of history

History is never a linear process but a multi-faceted one at that. You know how it is when you remember an event, what one person said but as time passes you start to have a different perception of the same event as when you were first confronted with it. Ask a person how he sees a particular event as compared to when he is first confronted with it and he will have a different perception of it. Time heals all wounds but time also distorts certain details. The distortion happens due to external influences. Therefore there is a likelihood to use time as a platform of minimizing and marginalizing the severity of certain actions. History is a social construction of many external opinions trying to gain dominance with their different perspectives. History is never objective but always subjective. The accessibility to facts and its consistency play a very important role in determining accuracy. One of the ways to impose an influence can be the use of time. Time provides with it a form of vagueness, a form of ambiguity that mystifies and distorts what has happened. Time interrupts the linearity of a historical process and if used negatively to serve a certain agency may distort the perception of circumstances. In understanding a situation, one has to see it with a form of objectivity and self reflexivity. History can be subjective, but subjectivity need not be contamination. Agency and consistency are considerations to bear in mind when considering the accuracy of a historical account.

Tolerance for ambiguity

Just woke up not long ago. It's the second day of Chinese New year! Spent the whole day sleeping..eating..watching movies. Was really tired yesterday because went out with a few friends before that day to catch a movie and chill out till 5am in the morning.

I have been thinking about something I read for some time. I found out that in every culture there is a different degree of tolerance for ambiguity...and that is one of the causes for airplane crashes. During investigation of air plane crashes, the black box is often analyzed as it contains the recording of all the conversation between the pilots with the control tower. They found out that the Korean culture has one of the highest tolerance for ambiguity. What do I mean? It means that in a conversation with a Korean, it is never a bad thing to be indirect. Even in trouble, before you are going to crash, a particular case saw one pilot not daring to tell the control tower what is going on directly. The reason is that in their culture...the person in command at the control tower is reputably very strict and authoritative. Pilots are usually afraid of the person in command. In an exchange that was recorded...when the pilot mentioned that he thinks that they are running out of fuel and may have to land soon..the response was that they had to wait a bit longer as the ground was still not ready. The pilot interpreted that the person at the control tower was angry with him and decided to keep quiet. Eventually that particular plane crashed. Sounds absurd? But it's true.

Tolerance of ambiguity can be both a good or bad thing. It is a tactful way of communication but you never know what the person really means. You need to read into his words. It is a cultural thing in some countries. Especially when dealing with another culture which is not ambiguous, there is a high likelihood of miscommunication. It can be very frustrating as well as the conversation is built on hints. On the other hand, Singapore rank among the top as one of the least ambiguous culture. Singaporeans are more direct in conversations and communicating intentions.

I thought this is a very interesting observation. The tolerance for ambiguity I feel goes beyond just in conversations as mentioned in the book. I think it is an important aspect of life. Ambiguity is often experienced when people are afraid to ask questions. In the the particular incident with the air plane crash..the pilot was afraid to ask for help directly because he has been socialized into thinking and behaving a certain way. He has been trained to tolerate ambiguity in his culture. An American  expert was employed by the airline to come and help rectify the problem of air crashes and this phenomenon of ambiguity was one of the observations he made. The Koreans were put through a de-socialization process where they were de-socialized from ambiguity in communications in the air. Ambiguity can be something that some people can live with more than others because they have been brought up that way.

In the context of Singapore, we are trained in critical thinking skills in secondary, junior colleges and universities. Especially in universities and even junior colleges there is an inclination towards the skill of deconstruction. I think our tolerance for ambiguity should not discourage us from thinking and objectively appraising any situation. A tolerance for ambiguity is not faith. Faith is not contradicted but sometimes ambiguities have contradictions.