Christian Living

What is Worship? Theological and Liturgical Outline

In response to my post, “Loud Music in Worship?”, one question invariably arises: What is worship? The following outline seeks to provide a balanced account of God-centred, holistic Christian worship, integrating theology, liturgy, and lived response.

A. What is worship?
Ralph Martin defines worship as: the dramatic celebration of God in his supreme worth in such a manner that his ‘worthiness’ becomes the norm and inspiration of human living.

Worship is heart-occupation with Christ. Worship is the overflow of the heart that has no request to make. To worship God is to quicken the conscience by the holiness of God; to feed the mind with the truth of God, to purge the imagination by the beauty of God, to open the heart to the love of God, to devote the will to the purpose of God. (William Temple)

Worship is the activity of the new life of the believer in which recognizing the fullness of the Godhead as it is revealed in the person of Jesus Christ and His mighty redemptive acts, he seeks by the power of the Holy Spirit. Biblical worship is holistic as it is centred on the Triune God and it ministers to the whole person. to render to the living God the glory, honor, and submission which are His due. (Robert Rayburn)

Biblical worship is therefore holistic: It is Trinitarian, Christ-centred, and directed to the whole person’ s mind, will, affections, and body.

Continue reading “What is Worship? Theological and Liturgical Outline”

Van Dyke’s “Joyful Joyful We Adore Thee” is (Religious) Universalistic. A Rejoinder

I have already left behind my thoughts on van Dyke’s hymn posted several days ago & moved on to other issues. Re: Loud Music in Church Worship? However I received two challenges to my understanding of van Dyke’s hymn.

Both essentially argue that I am unjustifiably over-reading & attributing universalistic elements (“eisegesis rather than exegesis!”). Even if it is granted that my theological “rebuttals” in content are correct BUT “there is no such intent in this case. If you assume Van Dyke wrote this with the intention that it be sung by believers, everything is pretty sound.”

My Response:
First, I am not legislating whether someone may or may not sing van Dyke’s hymn. Continue reading “Van Dyke’s “Joyful Joyful We Adore Thee” is (Religious) Universalistic. A Rejoinder”

Loud Music in Church Worship?

Someone posed to me a question regarding the dominance of loud music in contemporary worship. Sharing here a very concise response since this is the first time I have put down my thoughts on this issue in words.

First, Christianity should be fun without being frivolous as Christians come together for fellowship and worship.

1) Worship must be governed by what God has commanded in Scripture, not by human preference or popular culture. When music becomes the central focus, it sidelines prayer, preaching and sacraments. There is a risk elevating human creativity and sensuality above God’s ordained means of grace.

2) Word-Centered Worship – Excessive reliance on music can shift attention from what God has revealed in his unchanging Word to fluid emotional experience. Worship becomes more about how we feel (human centredness) than what God has said. A word-sacrament centred worship will be God-centred and Christ-centred even as we rejoice in God’s presence.

3) Reverence vs Performance – Dominance of (loud) music distracts us from the simplicity and reverence that ought to accompany our encounter with the holy God. Performance ‘worship’ undermines corporate and individual participation in worship even as individuals come to worship meetings to 1) nourish their faith by participation in the Lord’s Supper which is a means of grace and a renewal of our covenant with God, and 2) to have our faith nourished by the Word of God.

In short, while music is a good gift from God to enrich our worship, it must remain a secondary element and not the dominant element in worship.

Good and bad theology in hymns and worship songs Continue reading “Loud Music in Church Worship?”

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

Video Recording of Talk on Bible and Homosexuality by Ng Kam Weng

You can view the one hour video at:
The Bible and Homosexuality

Outline of Talk

A. Getting the Facts Right
– possible causes of homosexuality and homosexual life-style.
– Can homosexual change?
– What the bible says about homosexual practice.

B. Relevant Biblical Texts
– Matt. 19:1-6 – God’s creation order of heterosexual marriage.
– Gen. 19:4-8; Jude 7 – Judgment on Sodom.
– Lev. 18:22; Lev. 20:13 – Homosexual practice as an abomination to the Lord.
– 1 Sam. 18 – Were David and Jonathan in a homosexual relationship?
– Rom. 1 – Homosexual practice is “contrary to nature” or disordered desire.
– 1 Cor. 6:9-10. Homosexual practice, along with other sexual sins condemned..

C. Affirmation
1. Sexual complementarity is good.
2. Marriage is good.
3. Sex is good – Sacramental reminder of the joys of first love.
4. Family Reproduction is good. Learning to love and give.

D. Final Challenge
– Fulfilment in Christ beyond sex.
– We seek humbly to share the wholeness found in God’s grace that brings liberation and substantial healing to our brokenness.

Genuine Revival and Signs of the Spirit According to Jonathan Edwards

The current revival at Asbury University, Kentucky, has caught the interest of Christians worldwide. However, some of my friends who have disappointing experiences in “revival meetings” organized by visiting “global prophets” have asked me how we know if a revival is genuinely a work of God.

I am certainly not an expert in matters pertaining to revivals. However, I can’t help but be impressed by how the Asbury revival seems different from many “revival meetings” which I have come across. Judging from the videos which I have seen, I am impressed that no one is seeking to dominate the stage to garner limelight attention, unlike “revival meetings” where a vociferous leader seeks to arouse the passion and prayers of the participants so as to “catch the fire” of the Holy Spirit. What I see are small groups of people quietly praying for one another in front as the congregation continuously sing both praises and meditative worship songs. Sometimes, someone would give a testimony on how his life is touched. I am also impressed that the leaders of the revival declined offers of news coverage by big news Networks. The Asbury revival does not seem to be humanly controlled, much less manipulated. I am personally impressed and touched by what I see. The Asbury revival is still at an early stage, but if it is a genuine work of God, many lives will be touched and transformed by the Holy Spirit. Time will tell.

However, the question from my friends regarding how we recognize a genuine revival remains. Continue reading “Genuine Revival and Signs of the Spirit According to Jonathan Edwards”

Paul Teaches that Election to Salvation is Individual, not Corporate. Ephesians 1:3-14

The Augustinian view of election of believers outlined in the comments on Eph 1:4 in particular has come under challenge recently from scholars who defend a view they term “corporate election.” Brian J. Abasciano explains:

Most simply, corporate election refers to the choice of a group, which entails the choice of its individual members by virtue of their membership in the group. Thus, individuals are not elected as individuals directly, but secondarily as members of the elect group.… Individuals are elect as a consequence of their membership in the group.… On both the individual and the corporate level, election is contingent on faith in Christ.

This view is proposed over against the historic Augustinian/Calvinist view, which, we are told, “refers to the direct choice of individuals as autonomous entities” and leads to a “maverick Christianity” of isolated individuals rather than to a healthy, unified church.

Furthermore, we are told, the insights of the “new perspective on Paul” (NPP) have bolstered this corporate view of election as consistent with E. P. Sanders’s homogenized view of Second Temple Judaism, in which corporate Israel was elected gratuitously and individuals enjoyed this election and predestination only insofar as they maintained their status within the group through personal covenant fidelity, i.e., obedience to the law. It should be noted that not everyone agrees that the radically diverse groups in Second Temple Judaism can be homogenized quite so easily.

The argument for corporate election as it relates to Ephesians concentrates on Eph 1:4a (καθὼς ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς ἐν αὐτῷ, kathōs exelexato hēmas en autō, “insofar as he chose us in him”), where ἡμᾶς (hēmas) (“us”) is said to refer not to individuals but to “the church as a whole, especially as it was uttered in a collectivist cultural milieu in which the group was seen as primary and the individual as secondary, embedded in the group to which he belonged and referred to as a result of his membership in the group.” Continue reading “Paul Teaches that Election to Salvation is Individual, not Corporate. Ephesians 1:3-14”

Sovereign Grace, Regeneration and Humble Calvinism

Salvation is Solely the Work of God
One of the hallmarks of Calvinism is monergism, that is, the biblical conviction that we are born again by God working alone (mono = one). God is the only active agent in our rebirth because the depravity of sin has rendered fallen man totally unable to believe in Christ. God’s sovereign grace actualizes salvation, beginning with effectual calling and regeneration, the process whereby the gracious sovereign action of the Holy Spirit recreates fallen human nature and enables sinners to believe in Christ. In this regard, regeneration precedes faith. In contrast, synergism (Arminianism) teaches that we are born again by divine-human cooperation, each contributing its part to accomplish regeneration (syn = together). Synergism is possible because sinners retain sufficient ability to believe in Christ. Effectively, this mean that God offers potential salvation which is actualized only when a sinner believes.

The Canons of Dort (1618-1619), which is one of the foundational doctrinal documents of the Calvinist Reformation, resolutely rejects synergism in one of its affirmations. Continue reading “Sovereign Grace, Regeneration and Humble Calvinism”

Predestination and the Beginning of New Birth – Pelagianism-Arminianism-Calvinism

The expiatory work of Christ which is sufficient for, adapted to and freely offered to all men, being presupposed, the question of questions is, How, by what agencies and on what conditions, is it effectually applied to any individual? The Scriptures make it plain that the condition of its effectual application is an act of faith, involving real spiritual repentance and the turning from sin and the acceptance and selfappropriation of Christ and of his redemption as the only remedy. But what will prompt a sinner in love with his sin, spiritually blind and callous, thus to repent and accept Christ as the cure of the sin he loves? The first movement cannot begin with man. The sinner of himself cannot really desire deliverance from sin; of himself he cannot appreciate the attractive beauty, loveliness or saving power of Christ. The dead man cannot spontaneously originate his own quickening, nor the creature his own creating, nor the infant his own begetting. Whatever man may do after regeneration, the first quickening of the dead must originate in the first instance with God. All Christians feel this as the most intimate conviction of their souls. Yet it involves necessarily this very doctrine of eternal predestination or election. If God begins the work, if our believing follows his quickening, then it is God, not man, who makes the difference between the quickened and the unquickened. If we believe, it is because we have been first quickened. If any man does not believe, it is because he is yet dead in his natural sin. God’s eternal choice therefore cannot depend upon foreseen faith, but, on the contrary, faith must depend upon God’s eternal choice. Continue reading “Predestination and the Beginning of New Birth – Pelagianism-Arminianism-Calvinism”