Featured

Islamic Rejection of the Crucified Messiah

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ recorded in the four Gospels is supported by impeccable testimonies of multiple eyewitnesses. The historical factuality of the cross is further attested by reports found in authoritative non-Christian historical sources like Josephus and Tacitus. The Christian witness to the crucifixion is plausible since it is inconceivable why Christians should invent the crucifixion which declares that their founder died an accursed death under divine judgment on the Cross. As such, an outright denial of the crucifixion would amount to a willful blindness to historical reality. Some Muslim critics therefore grudgingly acknowledge that historically a crucifixion did occur. However, they suggest that someone other than Jesus was crucified. They argue that Christians have misunderstood the significance of the Cross because they are victims of an illusion. God, they claim, replaced Jesus with someone that bore his likeness.

Muslim scholars bypass the historical record with an appeal to the Quranic revelation: Continue reading “Islamic Rejection of the Crucified Messiah”

The Rise & Dominance of LGBT Movement. Homosexual Practice & LGBT Sexual Revolution. Part 4/5

The Rise & Dominance of LGBT Movement. HPLSR. Part 4/5

Question – how did the Christianized West abandon biblical morality & how did the LGBT movement become the dominant social-cultural revolutionary movement today?

A. Historical Developments
Pre-modern world mindset: “Mimesis” – discover meaningful moral order instituted by God & conform to it vs Poiesis – Modern technological mindset: “Poiesis” – sees the world as raw material out of which meaning and purpose can be created by the individual.

B. Prioritization of the individual’s inner psychology (Rousseau) – we might even say “feelings” or “intuitions” – for our sense of who we are and what the purpose of our lives is.
Result: Expressive individualism (Charles Taylor) and autonomous self, plastic people who make and remake personal identity at will.
Judith Butler: gender is not identical to biological sex. It is rather, “acts and gestures which are learned performance.

C. Contestation: Biological sex vs claim that gender identity is determined by one’s inner feelings (and beliefs), not by physical reality. Premise: Disorders in sexual development (DSD) do not constitute a third sex. Rather, DSDs are disorders in the development and formation of the male or female body.
Problem with Sex reassignment surgery (SRS).

D. Revolutionary imperative against sexual distinctions
Wilhelm Reich claimed that sexual distinction is a form of social repression. Transgenderism is a rebellion to overcome sexual distinctions.

Herbert Marcuse – To transform society politically, then, one must transform society sexually and psychologically. Logical outcome – the revolutionary imperative in response to the view sexual distinction is repressive.

You can view the full video at:
The Rise & Dominance of LGBT Movement. HPLSR. Part 4/5

Collated posts on Bible and Homosexuality

Paul’s Teaching on Homosexual Practice. Homosexual Practice & LGBT Sexual Revolution. Part 3/5

Paul’s Teaching on Homosexual Practice. HPLSR Part 3/5

A. Rom. 1:22-27 The traditional interpretation of Rom 1:26–27 makes the following points: (1) homosexual and lesbian sex result, as do other sins, from rejecting God’s truth; (2) same-sex sexual relations are a judgment upon those who engage in them (“God gave them over”); (3) same-sex sexual relations are contrary to the ordinances for sex and marriage revealed by God in Scripture (Genesis 1–2) and in nature itself; and (4) thus, such sexual activities are immoral and disobedient to God, i.e., they are sinful.

B. The following LGBT claims are rejected
Claim 1. Paul talking about pederasty (sex with boys). No relevance to loving, consensual, monogamous, same-sex relations.

Claim 2. Paul talking about heterosexuals having homosexual sex – no relevance to people born with homosexual orientation. BUT para physin refers to unnatural relations contrary to nature.

C. Paul underscores his rejection of homosexual practice by using the Greek words for “male” and “female” rather than the more common words for “man” and “woman.” He is quoting from Gen. 1:27.

Meaning of the phrase “homosexual acts are ‘intrinsically disordered’ and ‘contrary to natural law’,” means.

D. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1Tim. 1:10
Meaning of the phrase, “men who practice homosexuality [oute malakoi oute arsenokoitai.”
Meaning of the terms, arsenokoites, ἀρσενοκοίτης and malakos, mαλακός

E. Homosexuality is contrary to the creation order of God. Hence, it is condemned by God, but it is not the last word of God. The message of the Bible: God’s grace and salvation is extended to everyone – to both heterosexuals and homosexuals who believe in Christ and repent from their sins.

You can watch the video at
Paul’s Teaching on Homosexual Practice. HPLSR Part 3/5

 

Metaphysics of Knowledge and Empirical-Mathematical Science. Jacques Maritain’s Three Degrees of Abstraction

The earlier post, Models of Integration of Science and Faith – Science and Christianity: Part 5/6, analyses different models for the relationship between of science and Christianity: conflict, independence, complementation, dialogue, integration and transformation. However, the absence of discussion on the epistemological foundations underlying the typology of models gives the impression that it is based on pragmatic and arbitrary criteria. What is missing is a philosophy of nature and metaphysics of knowledge to ensure that the process of integration is empirically well founded and logically coherent . The purpose of the present post on Jacques Maritain’s Three Degrees of Abstraction is to fill a lacuna found in the earlier discussion.

===============================
Many scientists today assert that modern empirical science and the “scientific method” is the best, if not the final arbiter of any truth claim about the world and reality. The premise of this assertion is that physical reality is the only reality and all truth claims must be empirically verifiable. Continue reading “Metaphysics of Knowledge and Empirical-Mathematical Science. Jacques Maritain’s Three Degrees of Abstraction”

OT & Jesus’ Teaching on Homosexual Practice. HPLSR Part 2/5

A. Can Homosexuals be changed? Difficult to change, but possible. Therapy gives relative success: 30 percent experience freedom from symptoms and 30 percent experience significant improvement.

B. OT teaching– Homosexuality viewed as a grievous sin. All forms of homosexual practice were rejected. 1) Gen. 19 Sodom and Gomorrah. Exegetical refutation of revisionists who alleged that the sin in Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality, violent gang rape vs consensual sex. 2) Lev. 18:22, 20:13; Deut. 23: 17-18. Homosexual practice is the only specific sin singled out as an abomination and given death penalty. 3) Lev. 18:24-30. Prohibition against homosexuality is universal & not just restricted to Israel.

C. NT teaching Jesus was silent on the issue, but silent does not mean approval.

Continue reading “OT & Jesus’ Teaching on Homosexual Practice. HPLSR Part 2/5”

LGBT Ideology & Activism in Social Context. Homosexual Practice & LGBT Sexual Revolution. Part 1/5

LGBT Ideology & Activism in Social Context. HPLSR Part 1/5

A. Two Opposing Reactions to Homosexual Practice
1) Inclusivist Liberals: Emphasis on LOVE with a loose attachment to biblical law.
2) Historical church 2000 yr Tradition.

B. Application – Welcoming, but not affirming
Speak God’s truth in love BUT no place for self-righteousness.
Differentiate between people struggling with same-sex attraction from militant homosexual activists.
Main focus on homosexual practices tho’ may make reference to the sexual dysphoria and transgender debate.

C. Basic Facts
Relevant statistics about homosexual practices today
Multiple causes of homosexuality.

D. Biblical Focus on Acts, Not ‘Orientation’
The Bible knows nothing of “homosexual orientation.” The church’s moral focus is not fundamentally with homosexual orientation, no matter how it is supposed to develop.The church’s moral concern is with what an individual does with his or her experiences of same-sex attraction.z

You can watch the video at
LGBT Ideology & Activism in Social Context: HPLSR Part 1/5

Related Posts:
Collated posts on Bible and Homosexuality

In Defence of Secondary Causation Against Occasionalism

So, if created things have no actions productive of effects, it follows that no nature of anything would ever be known through the effect. And thus, all the knowledge of natural science is taken away from us, for the demonstrations in it are chiefly derived from the effect.  (Aquinas SCG 3.69.18)

Secondary Causes: Their Relation to the Primary Cause (God)
The Primary Cause (God) is the uncaused cause, the source of all beings and existence.1“For Scholastics, in order to be caused (whether caused to exist or caused to undergo some change), a thing must in some way be a mixture of act and potency, since to change or come into being is to go from potency to act. But then what is pure actuality and thus devoid of potency not only need not have a cause, but could not have had one. Hence it is false to say that everything has a cause. The principle of causality says that what changes requires a cause, that what comes into being has a cause, that what is composite, contingent or merely participates in being needs a cause, and in general that what goes from potency to act requires a cause. But that is very different from saying that absolutely everything has a cause. When the Scholastic says that God is uncaused, that is not because God is being made an arbitrary exception to a general rule. It is rather because God is taken to be pure actuality, non-composite, non-contingent, and so forth.” Edward Feser, Scholastic Metaphysics: A Contemporary Introduction (editiones scholasticae, 2014), p. 107. God continues to sustain the universe at every moment to ensure its continued existence and operation.

Secondary Causes like finite living beings and natural forces possess causal powers. For example, fire has the power to heat and a human has to power to make choices and initiate action. Everything must have a cause. A thing’s nature must be caused by another, that is, it is causally dependent on another agent in a chain of causes. Since these agents are dependent, there are accordingly regarded as secondary” causes. This chain of causes operates as an interactive system established by God. However, each “secondary” cause is ultimately dependent on the power of the Primary Cause (God).

What is the relationship between primary cause and secondary cause? The relationship between a craftsman and his tool provides a helpful analogy: The craftsman (God) is the primary cause of the artifact but this does not undermine the genuine role contributed by the tool (secondary cause) in the production of the artifact.

In Defence of Secondary Causation Against Occasionalism
According to occasionalism2Occasionalism was a dominant philosophy school in medieval Islam. Its prominent advocates included Al-Ash’ari (10th C), founder Ash’arite occasionalism and following him, Al-Ghazali (12th C) and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (13th C). According to Islamic occasionalism, what appears to be causal relationships in nature are merely God’s habit (’adah) of creating certain events after others, with no necessary connection between them. “God has decreed as a matter of habit (’adah) that the succession of accidents shall correspond to a certain pattern… But it is clear that God who is the ultimate Agent could alter this course of habit freely.” See Majid Fakhry, Islamic Occasionalism (Routledge, 1958, 2008), p. 30, created substances do not have intrinsic power of causation to bring about changes or events. There is no secondary causation since all events are directly caused by God.  The discussion below defends the necessity of secondary causation by highlighting some weaknesses of occasionalism. Continue reading “In Defence of Secondary Causation Against Occasionalism”

  • 1
    “For Scholastics, in order to be caused (whether caused to exist or caused to undergo some change), a thing must in some way be a mixture of act and potency, since to change or come into being is to go from potency to act. But then what is pure actuality and thus devoid of potency not only need not have a cause, but could not have had one. Hence it is false to say that everything has a cause. The principle of causality says that what changes requires a cause, that what comes into being has a cause, that what is composite, contingent or merely participates in being needs a cause, and in general that what goes from potency to act requires a cause. But that is very different from saying that absolutely everything has a cause. When the Scholastic says that God is uncaused, that is not because God is being made an arbitrary exception to a general rule. It is rather because God is taken to be pure actuality, non-composite, non-contingent, and so forth.” Edward Feser, Scholastic Metaphysics: A Contemporary Introduction (editiones scholasticae, 2014), p. 107.
  • 2
    Occasionalism was a dominant philosophy school in medieval Islam. Its prominent advocates included Al-Ash’ari (10th C), founder Ash’arite occasionalism and following him, Al-Ghazali (12th C) and Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (13th C). According to Islamic occasionalism, what appears to be causal relationships in nature are merely God’s habit (’adah) of creating certain events after others, with no necessary connection between them. “God has decreed as a matter of habit (’adah) that the succession of accidents shall correspond to a certain pattern… But it is clear that God who is the ultimate Agent could alter this course of habit freely.” See Majid Fakhry, Islamic Occasionalism (Routledge, 1958, 2008), p. 30

On the Pope Dotting the Eye of the Dragon

In response to my earlier post on Redeeming the Lion Dance for the Glory of God, I was asked about my view on a video which shows the Chinese Dragon Dance being performed in the Apostolic Palace and the Pope dotting the eye of the dragon. Re: link given in the comment section.

My understanding of the dragon dance in Chinese culture:

The dragon in Chinese culture is not inherently evil. It is actually a wise & benevolent creature. No surprise, many Chinese parents plan to have a (male) child in the year of the dragon. I asked many Chinese scholars whether the Chinese dragon exists & I get a blank look in their eyes. Their answer – the dragon is just a symbol, although to me religious symbols have spiritual consequences. Finally, the dragon was also used to symbolize the Emperor in ancient China. In the light of the positive perception of the dragon in Chinese culture, it is questionable whether the Chinese dragon should be associated with the evil dragon in the Book of Revelation and in Western culture. The application of the same English word to these two creatures is a historical accident or coincidence in literary translation.

However, with all due respect, I have problems with the Pope & the Catholic Church blessing the dragon dance as it is. Continue reading “On the Pope Dotting the Eye of the Dragon”

Redeeming the Lion Dance for the Glory of God?

What would be an appreciative, but critical perspective on the Chinese lion dance?

It is undeniable that the lion dance contains superstitious elements. For example, the dance is often performed to bring good luck to business owners and to ward off evil spirits. These superstitious beliefs are inconsistent with Christian belief in the sovereign providence of God. Hence, some Christians have expressed uneasiness when they witness lion dances within church premises. It must be acknowledged that these churches sponsor lion dance in their premises as an initiative of good will to build bridges to the Chinese community. Sponsoring lion dances during the Chinese Spring festival or Chinese New Year provides a most fitting occasion for churches to demonstrate the fact that Chinese Christians need not abandon their cultural heritage when they embrace the Christian faith.

On the other hand, one wonders whether these churches may have unwittingly committed religious syncretism, the process where the Christian community uncritically adopts superstitious beliefs which are contrary to the fundamental tenets of Christianity. Continue reading “Redeeming the Lion Dance for the Glory of God?”

Should the Church Adopt the Chinese Ritual of Ancestor Worship/Veneration?

I have been asked several times about my view on a Tik Tok video which shows a church conducting its Chinese New Year or Spring Festival worship which seems to follow the form of the Chinese ritual of ancestor worship or veneration.

My response to this video is based on how practitioners of this kind of rituals normally justify their adoption of the form of “ancestor worship or veneration. It is also based on my personal experience of similar worship during my younger pagan days.

One may argue that offering incense is in the Bible. OK, I can give some benefit of doubt on this matter. That is, putting three incense joss sticks is debatable and defensible – assuming worship & acknowledgement of the Triune God in heaven with NO images. Context matters.1[Additional footnote added on 14/04/2025 as clarification – Context matters. I wont approve putting a joss stick in front of an ancestral tablet, or the earth god tablet etc.- because according to pagan beliefs, the spirits of the ancestors or the spirit of the earth god resides within the tablets. This is idolatry even though there are no images. Conceivably, someone may just put joss sticks in an urn to offer incense to the “heavenly god/God” without a tablet or images – well, we can discuss to find out what exactly the one who puts the joss stick has in mind & decide accordingly. However, in reality (except for a Chinese cult, which existed briefly in the 1970s), 99+ % of the people put the joss sticks in front of some kinds of tablets  which are understood to be residences of spirits. This would be idolatry. The case of the tablet in the video is ambiguous because I don’t know what is in the tablet – but if what is written in the tablet encourages or is in line with the customary idea of tablets being places of residence of any spirit(s), then it would be idolatry. The presumption is that the presence of the tablet is likely to become a stumbling block  and therefore is best not  used at all].

Does the tablet in front of the table contain only Bible verses praising the Triune God without images? If there is no image, then the ritual could be discussed. But I doubt it as bible verses tablets have not become common place in church worship rituals. What is written in the tablet would make a crucial difference to the nature of the ritual as it could be some Chinese characters describing the “sky god” Tian (天), the “earth god” Tudigong (土地公), and the “kitchen god” is known as Zao Shen (灶神). The presence of these references would certainly be problematic. Looks like this video pertains more towards some form of ancestor veneration/worship. Continue reading “Should the Church Adopt the Chinese Ritual of Ancestor Worship/Veneration?”

  • 1
    [Additional footnote added on 14/04/2025 as clarification – Context matters. I wont approve putting a joss stick in front of an ancestral tablet, or the earth god tablet etc.- because according to pagan beliefs, the spirits of the ancestors or the spirit of the earth god resides within the tablets. This is idolatry even though there are no images. Conceivably, someone may just put joss sticks in an urn to offer incense to the “heavenly god/God” without a tablet or images – well, we can discuss to find out what exactly the one who puts the joss stick has in mind & decide accordingly. However, in reality (except for a Chinese cult, which existed briefly in the 1970s), 99+ % of the people put the joss sticks in front of some kinds of tablets  which are understood to be residences of spirits. This would be idolatry. The case of the tablet in the video is ambiguous because I don’t know what is in the tablet – but if what is written in the tablet encourages or is in line with the customary idea of tablets being places of residence of any spirit(s), then it would be idolatry. The presumption is that the presence of the tablet is likely to become a stumbling block  and therefore is best not  used at all].

Liberal Scholarship can be Sophisticated and Erudite (John Barton), but “Liberalism is not Christianity. It’s Another Religion Altogether” (J.G. Machen)

 

Some readers of my earlier posts on Liberal theology have challenged me to explain what I mean when I refer to Liberal theology. It is claimed that the word “Liberalism” has been abused to disabuse and slander other believers simply because of some ‘minor’ theological differences. Truth be told, liberalism is no minor theological issue. It is a dangerous distortion of biblical Christianity precisely because it uses familiar theological term but invests in these terms meanings that are contrary to what the Bible originally teaches.

Liberalism is the reigning paradigm among biblical scholars and theologians teaching in Western secular universities today. I recommend my readers read John Barton, A History of the Bible: The Book and Its Faiths (Penguin, 2020) to become acquainted with contemporary liberalism.

A cursory reading of Barton’s book shows that doubts about the historical reliability of the Bible run through the whole book. Given below is a small sample of Barton’s skeptical conclusions: Continue reading “Liberal Scholarship can be Sophisticated and Erudite (John Barton), but “Liberalism is not Christianity. It’s Another Religion Altogether” (J.G. Machen)”