"Scripture Alone"

Explain the concept of "Sola Scriptura" and inerrancy of Scripture.


"Sola Scriptura" is a Latin phrase. To find out what it means, let us look at what each individual word translates to.

We can quite easily make a guess on what "Scriptura" means. If you said, "Scriptures", then you're pretty accurate! It actually translates to "writings", but refers to the Scriptures.
"Sola" as a noun, can be translated to "bottom", "ground" and "floor". As a verb however, it carries the meaning of "single", "alone", "having no companion" and "unique".
Put together then, we get "Scriptures Alone".

"Sola Scriptura" is a Christian doctrine that the Bible alone is authoritative for the Christian faith. It is complete, infallibale and inerrant, and contains all necessary knowledge for salvation and holiness. "Sola Scriptura" was a rallying cry of the Protestant Reformation against the rule and practices of the Roman Catholic Church of the time.


Inerrancy in Christianity is another doctrine that holds the Bible to be accurate and without error. Most Evangelical Christian denominations hold to this teaching.

Who Are You, God?

"If God exists, what would be the description or idea of God?"

God does exist. He must. Scientists and evolutionists who try to explain him away will soon discover or at least admit (if they are honest enough) that their theories must arrive at an uncaused cause. Let me explain.

In a nutshell, evolutionists say that complex organisms (like ourselves) are the result of evolution from simpler life forms (such as a single-cell amoeba). They continue to trace further backward, breaking simple forms to even simpler forms. Not too long ago, the tiniest particle ever thought possible was the atom. But even then, the atom was split open to contain neutrons, protons and electrons. More recently, the proton was discovered to contain quarks. Perhaps science will continue to discover smaller and smaller particles, but the one fact they cannot escape, is that all matter must come from something. From my point of view, that something is God.

So assuming that God does exist, what is He like? History paints God in many pictures. He is a heavenly being, rests on clouds, controls weather and the elements, even flanked by other demi-gods. Greek and even Asian mythology describes him (or them in this case) to be subject to mood swings and even bound by certain limitations.

Our idea of God is shaped by our worldviews. Even the Christian worldview will see God as either the jealous, angry, judging deity of the Old Testament, or the gentle, loving and obligated father of the Gospels. The problem with our situation is that He cannot be one without being the other. God is one, and the Scriptures tells us that He is and always will remain the same (Heb 13:8). So, will the real God please stand up?

We must be careful in allowing different worldviews to project ideas into our understanding of who God is. The real God is the one revealed to us through the Bible. Unless we study it and know it well, we don't know our God well.

This post intentionally left blank

*blank*

"OooOo... Heaven is a place on Earth..."

Anyone remember that song by Belinda Carlisle? Probably not, it's kind of old. But has anyone ever wondered what Heaven would be like? What is heaven for?

Considering that the average born again Christian believes that he or she will be spending an eternity in heaven, it is surprising how relatively little is known about heaven. The term "heaven" itself is used in 3 different ways in the bible. The first of which is cosmological, where the expression "heaven and earth" is used to describe all creation. The second is used as a synonym for God in such phrases as "the kingdom of heaven". Thirdly, it is used as describing the abode of God, and this third definition is the one that I will want to focus on.


"Road to heaven" by lightproofbox.com

Since heaven is where God is, it is also where believers will be for all eternity. We are told in the bible to make preparations for heaven (Matt 6:19-20). Heaven is essentially the presence of God and where believers will dwell with him (Rev 21:3). Even from the very beginning, God's intention was to have fellowship with the human race. Heaven is often depicted as a place where everything we have desired on earth is fulfilled to an ultimate degree.


"They say in heaven, love comes first" - Belinda Carlisle

The presence of a perfectly holy God also means that heaven is a place completely void of sin or evil. And since glory is of the very nature of God, heaven will be a place of great glory. There will be no need for any other source of light for the glory of God shall be the source that illuminates heaven (Rev 21:23).


"Since glory is the of the very nature of God, heaven will be a place of great glory"

Sounds good so far? Sure, but what does one do there? Well, besides being completely filled with joy (and feasting), we are told very little about the activities in heaven. For one, we know that there will be a rest. This rest is not to mean that we will be idle, but rather the rest of after having accomplished something; or reaching a goal. Heaven then, will be the completion of the Christian pilgrimage (Heb 4:9-11). Personally though, I can see how not doing anything can be pleasurable. Haha! Ok, next is something that is all to familiar to us. We also know that in heaven, there will be worship. A pretty good description is given us in the book of Revelations chapter 19 in the first few verses, as well as in other scripture passages too. And from these, it seems that praise and worship is something that we'll be doing a lot of too! So how about it? Are we getting enough practice now?

Based on Christian Theology by Millard J. Erickson. Chapter 60: Final States

Of Hell and Its Eternity

There is a famous saying by Benjamin Franklin that goes, "In this world, nothing is certain but death and taxes." Although Mr. Franklin made the comment with tongue in cheek, his comparison of life's uncertainties to death is pretty accurate. We all will at some day in the future (unless Christ returns before) face death.

So death is certain, but what is not so certain, or at least often an issue of debate is a place called "Hell". The word is actually translated from the Hebrew word "Sheol" which more or less means "grave", and from the Greek words "Gehenna", "Tartarus" or "Hades" which referred to a place or state of death and/or misery. In the bible, Jesus also spoke of the existence of such a place where both the soul and the body can be destroyed. (Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:4-5). So, hell is very real.

But now, even Evangelical scholars have begun to debate on the duration of hell. Some are arguing that it is unfair of a loving God to punish for eternity the sins committed in a finite time on earth. Therefore, they argue on the position of Annihilationism, where the soul just ceases to exist... a "poof" if you will.

However, we cannot ignore the part of God that is Holy and Just, and sins are committed against an eternal God, and as such require eternal punishment. We also cannot ignore the words of Jesus in Matthew 25:41, 46 that teach on the eternity of punishment of the sinners. Also found in Mark 9:48 is a description of what happens in Hell, where there is an 'undying worm' and an 'unquenchable' fire, both of which suggesting eternal punishment. The book of Revelations, in chapter 20:10 also describes the fates of the devil, the beast and the false prophet, where they shall be tormented in the lake of fire forever and ever.

So not only is Hell very real, it is an eternal punishment, forever and ever.

Water Baptism by any other means besides Immersion?

Water Baptism by Immersion

Water Baptism is something practiced by Christians to symbolise the believer's commitment and union with Christ. It is not something to be taken lightly. In fact, some converts seem to consider this as the turning point of a person's life more so than they do the act of accepting Christ into their hearts. In addition, some non-Christian parents I know think it's ok for their kids to attend church and be a Christian, but put up a tremendous fuss when they want to be baptised. (Mine included! So this is based on experience and not some random thought! Hehe).

Anyway, that was just a thought. Here's the main issue of this post: I know and believe in Baptism by Immersion to be not just popular, but also the most adequate method in symbolising the meaning of baptism. (By the way, I'm assuming you already know the symbolism of Baptism. But just in case, it symbolises the death - through immersion, and resurrection - through emergence, of Christ and our union with Him). It (immersion) also appears to be the method that was used in the New Testament. It was indicated so in the case of Jesus in John 3:23 and Mark 1:10, as well as in the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch by Philip (Acts 8:38-39). So here's the big question: Just because it was done in the OT, does that mean we have to do it now? Can we use any other methods or modes of baptism? Should we allow for modes to be used?

Emergence from the water symbolises a resurrection into a new life without sin.

To be honest, I don't know of many other forms of baptism. I do know of the Sprinkling of water over the believer, and possibly also the pouring of water over one's head. But frankly speaking, it doesn't quite do justice to the symbolism of Baptism, does it? Therefore, in my opinion, no, there shouldn't be any other methods allowed other than immersion. But the next issue is this, what of those who are terribly terribly sick and cannot get out of the bed, the terminally ill, or those in a coma? What about young infants who can't swim? Do we then just exclude them from the priviledge of making this commitment?

Well... *sweat*... baptism does NOT affect one's salvation. Regardless of whether a person is baptised or not, as long as he or she has placed their faith in Christ, they can be assured that they are saved. Choosing to be baptised is making a commitment to follow after Jesus and it should be a decision made by no one else other than the candidate. Therefore, this rules out the case of the comatosed person and the infant.

Next, what of the person who is terribly sick or terminally ill? The simplest answer I can think of for the sick person is why not just wait til they are better? Again, baptism does not affect one's salvation, so if the sick person wishes to be baptised, just be patient. Now, here's when it gets really tricky. What about those who are bed-ridden or who are terminally ill and still wish to make a declaration of their commitment to Christ? Well, I suppose arrangements can be made with doctors or nurses for the baptism of the patient. But I understand that this is not always possible. Perhaps then we can encourage the person to declare their commitment to Christ in some other form? Living a life of faith, writing a statement of faith, and remaining faithful til the end can all be forms of commitment declarations. But don't just take my word for it. What do you think...?

Would've loved to have been baptised here, no?

Church Evangelism in a Pluralistic Society

Happy 51st Merdeka, Malaysia!

Ever thought about the society we're living in here in Malaysia? Since we just celebrated our 51st Merdeka recently, I doubt anyone could have let slip the fact that we are a nation of different races and cultures. You don't have to be around the past 51 years to have known this, and should have noticed it even if you had just arrived at the airport yesterday. We celebrate our diversity, and at the same time promote unity.

If one of the purposes of the Church's existence is to evangelise, how then does she make herself relevant in such a society? If unity is to be promoted, then maybe a general all-inclusive approach is used. But the problem with general approaches is that it may be just that: Too general! Specific issues or needs are not tackled, and the church is accused of being shallow and imitating the Western style.

The other approach then would be to take a more targetted or specific approach, where churches are called to reach specific groups. Various ministries begin to mushroom targetting at different age groups, at different languages, at various social concern needs. The problem then is the lack of unity, lack of labourers, and lack of funds.

It would seem then that there is no ideal approach for evangelism for the Pluralistic Society. Let me suggest then that the church needs to be certain of her call from God if she is to target a specific group, and to trust that He will then supply for whatever needs that may arise. But the keyword here has to be "certain" of her call. As for the general approach, really, there can only be one general language that is understood by all, and that is the universal language of love.

Let the Church then seek to speak this language to whichever society she belongs.