[Commercial break: Reflections with a Kit Kat]


I haven't even finished my series of the demented mind... but oh well, need a break anyway. The New Year is coming and I wished to update something relevant.

Les Réflexions

4 years of Christian journey.
4 years of joy and pain.
Joy that is true and lasting,
Pain that comes with meaning.

19 years of existence.
19 years of facing the world,
61 years left to change it.

1 day more to a new year,
1 day more to victory.

Win the youth today, win the world tomorrow.

Have a break, have a Kit Kat.

[The Return of the Demented Mind: número dos]

I mentioned something in last post about an interesting note to ponder about: Even if God was not good, people will not question why good things happen to them, only demanding an explanation for the bad things. I was very intrigued by this idea myself and thought it might be worth developing.

Have any of you paused to wonder before what if God was not good?

Let's not overwork our imagination and just start with the basic alternatives to the above question.

What if God was bad?

I think this is rather straight forward. We would all be doomed. In case some of you don't get the full picture, allow me to attempt to draw you a better perspective by using the method of human comparisons. A bad person is bad enough on himself. However, no matter how bad he is, it should not be an issue to me because he is the one that is bad, not me. However, as humans, we are affected and will be affected by other's "badness" because we are fundamentally relational creatures. Hence if something is bad about him, we will inevitably suffer the consequences, it is like the many parts one body example: when your hand is pain, the whole body feels it. The degree that we are affected will depend on two things. One of them will be the proximity of the relationship. It is like you having a abusive father has more lasting consequences then you having a lousy neighbor... etc. You get the meaning. The other factor would be the amount of power held by the bad person. Imagine you have a evil seven year-old brat that constantly tries to bombard your homework with water bombs and a dictator that is constantly trying to bombard your country with rogue airplanes. It can't get any clearer then this. Here's the bad new. God is always close to us (proximity) and God is Almighty (holds huge amounts of power). You can't escape, and due to His unlimited power, he can execute any form of torture on you. How neat.

Now then, let’s complicate things a bit.

What if God was not good?

Understand that this differs quite a bit from the above question. You need not be bad to be not good. You just need to be not good... enough. Humans are not good, but very few, in fact I believe hardly can be considered purely evil. Most are just good people that gone bad, followed the wrong ambition or beliefs leading to their bad or even atrocious deeds. They are deluded, not purely evil. In fact, they can most probably reason out their actions if given a chance, just that their brand of reason may not be approved by the general majority. When I was somewhere along my teenage years of 15 to 16, I was taught that complimenting someone to be good may be one of the worst insults you may give. Good is a general word with no particular meaning, covering a wide range of adjectives that are all favorable in nature. Thus to term someone as a good person is basically equivalent of saying "you are a nice chap although I do not know why". Hence I was taught to affirm characteristics specifically; you are persevering, you are faithful, you have integrity. I had sworn I would resurrect from my coffin to personally strangle the person who describe me as a good man in my eulogy (the testimony you give about someone who is deceased). Yet to depict God as good is the probably one of the only possible words we can use, as we attempt to adequately describe the one who is all of those favorable adjectives. Only recently have I got new understanding on the full meaning of good. Good is not used to describe nothing in particular; on the contrary, it should be used to describe everything in particular. When we say God is good, we mean he is faithful, loving, perseverance, joyful, peaceful etc... He is everything that is good. Think of it as a positive form of the "all of the above" option. It is the supreme complement, and one which can only be held by God Himself.

Hence back to the point. What if God was not good? What is defined as not good. Missing any one of the favorable adjectives would make him not good. To put this across more clearly, imagine that to be good, you need to have all the 9 parts of the fruit of the spirit. Miss out any of the parts and you will not be good. Just that instead of 9 adjectives that make up of the word good, in reality, the real good comprises an infinite number of adjectives which are favorable. If God is not good, and He misses out a part in the fruit of the spirit, it would make Him an absolute monster in any issues regarding that characteristic. If God is not good, and He missed out the characteristic of joy, He would be a sadist. If God is not good, and the characteristic He missed out was diligence, He would be a sloth. After all, we can be joyful and yet lazy at the same time can't we? Well, let's just imagine about this kind of a half past six type of being, in which has a combination of good and bad qualities. We didn’t just imagine about a god, we merely thought about a man. Even humans have a mixture of good and bad qualities.

So do you know exactly whom and what are you worshiping?






I worship a good God.

[The Return of the Demented Mind: The beginning]


You sure you want to read this? The truth be told, I don't even want to type this. I think I have like 5 short essays/long posts (whatever you people like to call it) to share. Its really tiring to think, and worse to repeat what you think by typing out cause you have to reevaluate the whole thing. If I pondered and got my answer, that would be enough headache. Then again, if I don't go though the trouble to type my answer out, I would have to reevaluate my question again. What a waste of time. (Oh my gosh Zach, you are even evaluating whether to reevaluate or not. *Gawks* What a retard!)

Well, I promised God to be a good steward of my thoughts that He gave me. He decides what to do with them, who shall read them, who shall use them. I am merely the steward carrying out His instructions. If they are of any use to anyone, failure to repeat my conclusions would be withholding blessings to them. Then again if they are merely intellectual rubbish disguised with a sleight of hand sort of showmanship skill, please skip at your own pleasure. In fact, I would very much rather that altogether, I would even seriously recommend that - escape while you can. I am perfectly fine with unread piece/s of post/s, after all, they are just the title suggest: a glimpse into a demented mind. As for the rest of the stubborn retards that refuse to heed advices, read on with me below today, and in the next few days to come.

Christmas sermon point one.
1) God is altogether good
And I thought it was a basic point. (You should have known better Zach...)
Did you realize that point was so basic, it was a premise that all future run-ins with God need to be based upon? This point is also always under siege from Christians as well as the non-Christians. If God is good, why is there suffering? If God is good why are there people going hell. If God is good, why was the death not prevented? If God is good, why ____________?

Interesting point to note: If let's say fine. You get your point. Fine. God is not good! God is evil. No one will ever says, since God is evil, why is there good? If God is evil, why do I get blessed? Humans have a natural inclination of placing the spotlight on the bad things and assume that the good things are suppose to happen. When they don't, they get all nasty and foul tempered about it. God always get blamed for the bad things and forgotten for the good things. Well done humans!

Back to the above point. We always question God again and again on that characteristic of His although it should have been long understood. God is good and is unable to do anything else except good. In a way, God is bounded by that "law". Just as how we are all bounded by gravity and fall when we are in free space, God is good and can only do good when left to His own. Notice the subject of the above question. The questions put the goodness of God under scrutiny "if God is good, why...” Basically, the primary question is "Is God good?" The secondary sentence is just evidence hoping to prove God bad. The primary question is important and must be answered. Without it, the other questions cannot be answered. However, as for those who have already found the primary answer may I encourage all of us to mature in our walk with God and in our question probing. Let us advance to the secondary question and make it the main question. Why is there suffering? Why is there death?

Already knowing and holding the assumption that God is good, it can only mean one thing. There is some good in the suffering. There is a good purpose behind the death. The real quest for us now is just to find out the reasons behind, not re-describe God with other adjectives. This approach may help us to adopt a more effective approach in facing troubles. Instead of examining God's goodness all over again and prove it eventually, why not immediately jump into finding the reason for the trouble? A good and sovereign God places these things in our life for a purpose, they are not random accidents. Let's not continually waddle in the milk of immaturity and keep re-doubting God's goodness every time something bad happens.





God is good. All the time. Get over it already!

Rain.

Is it the weather? Or is it me?

Someone tell me. Is it possible to hope for something yet not expect anything?

Expectation will always lead to disappoint. Naturally, no human would want to be disappointed just as no one would want to be burnt on their own accord. I found the secret.
Do not expect, and you will not be disappointed. Of course, the downside is that you would not ever be satisfied as well but that is besides the point... or is it?

However as humans, we thrive on hope. Without hope, we are nothing. The core essence of the human spirit is the ability to hope. The tenacity of the human spirit is revealed there. We hope in what we do not have. Without hope, there is nothing to left to live for.



Yet how do we not expect and yet still remain human. Am I paraphrasing impossibility?



It's like I'm paranoid lookin' over my back
It's like a whirlwind inside of my head
It's like I can't stop what I'm hearing within
It's like the face inside is right beneath my skin






I hope for the unexpected. Is this a word game? Deceive me then. Please.

Trust Chronicles

The first essay.
Finally out. Please feel free to give comments on the comment link below or you can also email your personal comments to me at zachary.thedreamist@gmail.com

I would really treasure valuable feedback. Thank you in advance.

Download it here.

For those whom the link is unable to work, you can cut and paste the address below:
http://www.geocities.com/thisismycry/trustchronicles1.doc

[The sole question]

Not so long ago, there was much hype about this particular question. Perhaps some of you may have heard it before, some of you may not. It evokes much thought for anyone whom even attempts to find an honest answer to it. The question is the one and only -

"What is close to your heart?"

Some may have answers to the question almost immediately, some may choose to go home to ponder and reflect. Eventually, those that persevere on and choose not to give up will come out with some sort of an answer. However, how accurate the answers are will depend on our personal understanding of ourselves. Also, humans have a way of dismissing something they do not want to be associated with. It may be explained away as a form of confirmatory biasness. Thus the answers we found, may only be the answers we wish to find.

Hence I observed a trend that may help in pinpointing what is truly close to our heart. Basically, this protocol is based on the human emotions. As we all know, human emotions tend to be a bit unfathomable at times, thus this is not advice from an expert, but some guidelines that hopefully may help us in the search for the question's answer.

Laughter.
What makes you laugh? What makes you so joyful you felt that time passed too fast for that moment? What was the moment that will paint a smile across your face when you reminisce about it? Was it the time your favourite soccer team fought back from ashes? Your first date? Your friends giving you a surprise? Your ace-d result slip? That is what's close to your heart.

Tears.
What makes you cry? What makes you sob so hard you could not recognize yourself with your teary face? What makes you so sad that you were on the brink of losing self control? What makes you stay awake all those sleepless nights? What makes you lose your sense of yourself? Was it your failures? Your broken relationships? The death of your beloved? That is what's close to your heart.

The incidents in which we display our extreme emotions of joy, sorrow and anger tend contain things that we hold dearest in our hearts. The truth is, none of us can hide what is close to our heart. It is always on display, just that whether anyone is around to notice the display is a different matter.
Just before I end off, I would like to leave you people with a passing thought.




What is closest to God's heart?

[For the cynics]

Ever wondered why are some people cynical/skeptical (they both seem like the same thing to me, forgive me for my poor command of English) towards people and God? I believe it boils down to two words.

Past experiences.

With this in hand, skeptics infer the rest of the facts regarding the rest of the world. Due to the fact a certain number of people have hurt and broken their trust, they assume the rest are out to do the same. I think the method is logically sound, but reasonably unsound.

It is logically sound because just like in statistics, one can predict the percentage of bad eggs in a carton if one takes a certain number of random samples in random cartons to open and test. If 30 out of 100 eggs are spoilt, we can make a statement that 30% of the eggs are spoilt, even though if those are the only 30 bad eggs in the entire shipment of the 1000 eggs.

However, although this method may be logical, it may not be reasonable when we are dealing with people instead of products. If 30 out of a 100 people were to hurt you, we cannot assume that 30% of the population is hurtful because every individual is unique and different. Although it may appears to be justifiable* to treat a person that has broken your trust with skepticism, how do we reason away the same treatment to person that has done you no harm? Due to past hurts, we tend to impose our skeptical treatment on everyone whom we met. This is totally unfair as it is equivalent to hanging everyone in America because 3 Americans were caught murdering. We cannot employ a one-size-fit-all way of handling people. Why must I be that the receiving end of your skepticism when it was the other person that hurt you?

However, that is not the worst possible thing that can happen. As a result of past hurts with people, some individuals may even impose this skepticism on God - Even when God didn't even hurt them in the first place. Let's not end up treating God like how we would treat a human. We must give him a fair chance to prove Himself trustworthy, instead of jumping to conclusions by inferring his character from His tainted creations.

Could you imagine how if He was to judge us the same way we do to others? We will be judged upon others mistakes. If supposedly because the majority of the human race is going hell, chances are we would go hell to, so He dumps you there not because of you taking responsibility of your individual actions but because of random probability. Now, that would truly be hell indeed.






*Although it may seem justifiable in the world's view, the bible does not indicate so - We are told to forgive.

[Zach’s self-talk]

Haha. Shirley newly coined word stuck. If all my self-talk conversations were broadcasted, I have no doubt I would ended up in the nearest asylum anyone could bring me to. (Then again, Singapore only has one right...... get what I mean by self-talk?)

ANYWAY.... one of the self-talk conservations I had recently was brought to light because of Michael's preaching.

"It is prideful to think our failures are more powerful then God."
-Michael, Youth service 9 Dec 06

Indeed... who are we to say that God is not powerful enough? We all know that impossible is nothing with God. But I guess that is all to it that we know. "Whatever we say we are, we will become." Right? How many of us truly speak as thought God is exalted more then our failures? Why are we readily admitting areas in our lives that cannot be changed, easily throwing in the towel when faced with overwhelming problems in our group? We may agree on the mental knowledge of impossible is nothing for God, but verbally we are agreeing with the rest of world that God is limited to our natural ways. By this I am not saying we verbally voiced out that God is weak, but in our cries of "I never passed this paper before and never will", "doubt that I can get healed by tomorrow" and "logically, I cannot think of a way out" we have admitted more then we would have like to implicitly. And I bet many of you heard off these type of people. Perhaps, many of you like me... heard myself.

More then often, we give God the glory He deserve in church but yet strip Him of that glory in our personal lives. Why is that so? I gave some thought to this matter. Could it be something with our perspective of God?

Allow me to question you. Who is God to you?

An immortal? Someone who is more powerful then us? These answers may seem to describe our God, but I think they fail to give Him the placing and description He truly deserves. Save them for Hercules instead. Immortal merely means not human, never dying. More powerful is correct, but wrong characteristic of God. You do not compare power with God. He is not God because He is more powerful then us. He is God because He is power. He defines what is power. He is the source. Omnipotent is the perfect word used to describe because it is the only word suitable. If God is unable, He is not God. He set very high standards for Himself when He described Himself in His own word. He is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscience, love, immutable. Just this five characteristic is a bite off more then we can chew. Allow me to explain why.

Do we truly understand the concept of immutable? He will not change but more importantly, He CANNOT change. For if He change, He is not longer God, and He is no longer worthy to be worshiped. Due to the fact He is immutable, He will be forever omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience (Lets call it the 3Os.... I am getting tired of typing.) Without being immutable, He can stop being the 3Os, yet still be called God. Imagine it as an ON/OFF switch that He can toggle between. "On" meaning He has the 3Os, and "Off" meaning He took a break and is no only the 3Os. Switching on and off a lamp does not make the lamp any less a lamp, thus if God did not claim to be immutable, He can be powerless at times without breaching the rule of not being God. However, God did not make things easier for Himself. He declared Himself the 4 characteristics together with his immutability. This means that anytime He is not loving, or powerful enough, He is not God. If He is not with you, He is not God. If He does not know something, He is not God.

This is the definition of the word God. Do not let household legends and myth dilute your understanding on the word that is ascribed to Him. He is G-O-D. The Almighty, the Alpha, the Omega. With such understanding, questions such as "who made God?" will be meaningless. For God cannot be surpassed and created by a higher being. If someone made god, then that someone will BE God.

Among the 3 Omni-s, the one that is held under scrutiny the most is obviously the omnipotent aspect. People ask if He is truly all mighty, why can’t He heal me, help me in this... etc. The issue is not He cannot. If He cannot, He is not God. The reason is He chose not to. So perhaps the better question is why He chose not to. Even then, He has already replied us.



[Isaiah 55:8-9]
"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

For people who had ever had the thought that free will came at too large a price, God had made a miscalculation in the creation of man or we would be happier without the possibility of sin.


C.S Lewis wrote,

Of course God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently He thought it worth the risk. Perhaps we feel inclined to disagree with Him. But there is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes: you could not be right and He wrong any more than a stream can rise higher than its own source. When you are arguing against Him you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all: it is like cutting off the branch you are sitting on. If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will -- that is, for making a live world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings -- then we may take it it is worth paying.






How do we reason with the person who gave us reason?

In Killers of the Dream, Lillian Smith wrote,


"We in America -- and men across the earth -- have trapped ourselves with that word equality, which is inapplicable to the genus man. I wish we would forget it. Stop its use in our country: Let the communist have it. It isn't fit for men who fling their dreams across the skies. It is fit only for a leveling down of mankind"


We certainly desire for all people to have equal access to opportunities and justice, but we know that everyone doesn't respond equally to his environment or advantages. And that's true for the people you will have the opportunity to develop. Some people are eager to be enlarged [mentored]. Others don't care about personal growth or won't grow under your care. It's your job to figure out which is which.





If you are intending to soar, don't let anyone shackle you down.

A dream is a photograph of heaven that God pasted
in your heart.
-from the perspective of a kid