Takjub oleh Anugerah

Morally justifiable

septian — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:28:06 +0000

When I think about SOPA, I remember a story in The Return of Sherlock Holmes, where Holmes and Watson were engaged in house burglary to steal a document from the villain. Watson at first was aghast hearing at such idea, but Holmes responded that they were doing something which was “morally justifiable, though technically criminal.”

I am not sure whether anti-piracy is still a hallmark of ISCF’s orthodoxy, but I used to think that piracy is basically stealing and stealing is immoral, irrespective of its legality. Back then I disagreed with my friends who thought that although piracy is illegal, it is still moral because it is indeed the anti-piracy law itself which is immoral. Now I am not as dogmatic as previously. I still buy original products, but I can understand where the opposing view is coming from. The issue is much more complex than “piracy is basically stealing.” It is not a matter of convenience, where I buy the originals only when I could afford to. We need to appreciate the efforts of those software engineers or film makers, but on the other hand corporations can indeed trample upon you. It is, then, not only a matter of intellectual property, but also an issue of social (in)justice.

Perry

septian — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 08:53:22 +0000

What disturbs me about the conservative Christians in the US is similar to what disturbs me about the conservative Muslims in Indonesia: their silence when their counterparts do something stupid. (Does it apply to the liberals as well?) They are quick to denounce any slightest liberal tendencies (e.g., theologically, Enns, Waltke, Bell, Licona, or politically, on the issue of abortion & gay marriage) but are eerily silent when one of them pushed the limit at the other direction. The person in case is Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, self-proclaimed evangelical, and a Republican presidential candidate (i.e., the second coming of George W. Bush, inclusive of his intelligence or the lack of it), and his recent remarks about Turkey, where he commented that Turkey is led by “Islamic terrorists”. Admittedly, Perry is not a theologian but a politician and a politician will say anything to appeal to the electorate, but given the marriage between political and theological ideology in America, I expect some kind of denunciation from the evangelicals on this highly divisive remarks, no?

“The relentless self-criticism”

septian — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:48:40 +0000

I love these two posts on the theology of Rowan Williams:

I think I should read his writings more, although I suspect I must labor really hard to find the gems within. His Arius almost suffocated me.

Price tag

septian — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:32:59 +0000

Some thoughts on the ministerial salary debate:

1. Getting a 40% discount doesn’t necessarily mean that you get a good deal, especially if the original price has been marked up astronomically. It applies when you want to buy gadgets or clothes or jewelry (have you noticed that jewelry stores offer discounts all-year long?), and it also applies here.

2. Aljunied MP Chen Show Mao doesn’t need to argue to prove his point. His existence in the House alone is enough as a counter-proof to PAP’s argument that you need high pay to attract ‘talent’.

3. In Indonesia, we used to pay our civil servants badly, and many people said that this was the cause of corruption in Indonesia. After the Soeharto era, we increased the salary of our civil servants accordingly and I believe the salary now is pretty competitive if compared to the private sector, if not even better. Nevertheless, corruption remains and gets even worse. Singapore is not Indonesia, of course, but I guess it shows that criminals will be criminals no matter how handsome their salaries are. Does the opposite thing apply, though, that good men will be good men no matter how low their salaries are?

4. (Not really related.) I just realized why PM Lee loved to wear pink recently. It is supposed to symbolize the pink IC of Singaporeans.

Prosper

septian — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:36:04 +0000

Yesterday I went to the Jade Buddha exhibition at Ngee Ann City. And there was this notice board above the donation center area, where you can donate rice or money or flower. The notice board said (roughly, I couldn’t remember the precise wording):

“…health, wealth, and prosperity for the Year of the Dragon as you make a donation…”

This is of course only a tiny part of the whole exhibition and thus does not do justice to the organizer (go and see the exhibition for yourself, you can learn a little bit about Buddhism from their own perspectives), but I found this little quote to be profoundly similar to what you would find in churches who held to prosperity theology. It confirms my suspicion that prosperity theology, at least in Singapore scene, basically echoes the mainstream local Chinese belief that our ultimate aim is to have good fortune (福) in life. So what happens is you find your way to achieve it, whether it is through the Buddha or Jesus or any other god/no-god. It becomes the battle of the gods, really. Jesus, then, becomes not the goal in himself, but becomes a mean to achieve another end. Of course, it is not the only reason why mega-churches who holds this teaching have become so popular, but at the very least tapping into popular folk religion will not hurt your cause.

(Conversely, prosperity theology in Singapore must be understood within the Singapore context. It is, to use the cliché, uniquely Singapore.)

Gandhi and Hitler

septian — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:01:51 +0000

I came upon this “Why I Hate Religion, But Loves Jesus” video from various shares on Facebook and I noticed that the user has also posted a video which was a remake of Rob Bell’s Love Wins video. Here they are:

You know, the funny thing about these videos are they conform perfectly with the typical questions about universalism. While Rob Bell asked, “Are you sure Gandhi in hell?”, the reply is, “Are you sure Hitler in heaven?” I think I will explain more in a later post, but let’s just say that my own position in this matter is a mix of C. S. Lewis’ story in The Last Battle and Tom Wright’s emphasis of the kingship of Jesus. I believe in universal judgment (we won’t be spared either — all of us will be judged) and I believe in the second coming of Jesus. Jesus will come again as a king and will claim the world as his territory and everyone as his subject. Will there be anyone who will eventually refuse to be his subject? Perhaps, I can’t say that for sure. Will everyone submit to his kingship? I don’t know that, either, but why not? Or, to rehash what Paul has written, shall not every knee bow and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord?

(Comment on the religion vs. Jesus video: This is typical of low church evangelicalism, where people loves to say, “I don’t have religion, what I have is a relationship with God/Jesus.” Well, you know what, every religion claims not to be a religion. A Muslim says that Islam is not a religion but a way of life. A Jew will say that Judaism is not his religion — he is a Jew by birth. And a Buddhist might say that Buddhism is not a religion but a philosophy — or not. You get my point. What you really want to say is “My religion is not like the other religions.” Of course it is not. That’s why we have different religions in the first place.)

Vie

septian — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:56:58 +0000

1. My supervisor wants me to graduate as soon as possible. The problem is I just can’t make myself to work my lazy ass off. My friend is ready to graduate, but his supervisor seems to do anything to prevent that happening. C’est la vie.

2. Being a Chinese, honor-shame culture and filial piety imply that I must graduate no matter what. (Not to mention the hefty sum of $20k that I have paid to the school for my school fee, and I totally don’t want to let the investment to go bust.)

3. Today my school will hold a screening of Captain America at 430pm in LT26. At almost the same time, there will be a screening of PhD Comics The Movie at 5pm in LT2A. And somehow the idea of watching Captain America is more appealing to me.

Alive

septian — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:27:44 +0000

“The Church is alive because it is the theatre of this life of the Word, because it participates in the movements of this life, because by faith it says Yes to these movements, seeking its own salvation only in the fact that they take place, imitating them in so far as its worship and fellowship, preaching and confession occur in the following of these movements. Because this happens, the Church can as little perish as the Word of God itself. In its discipleship of the Word, it shares in the imperishability in the transitory world.” (I/2, 690)

Whip

septian — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 04:15:28 +0000

Perhaps this is purely coincidental, but I find it amusing that the current ruling party Whip, who needs to make sure that the MPs will vote according to the party line, happens to be a Presbyterian as well. You know, ‘church discipline’ is one mark of the true church according to the Reformed/Presbyterian principle. There is a reason why 1 Cor 14.40 is our battle cry: “Everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way!”

Grace

septian — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:51:54 +0000

“The Church, like the created world as a whole, lives by the divine creatio continua.” (I/2, 689) This is what we believe in the doctrine of providence. If left to ourselves, our default existence is death, or at least in the process towards death. Being alive is not by default; it is actually by the upholding and sustaining grace of God.