Waterside DG

Waterside's Very First Lo Hei

2008-02-20T00:34:00.003+08:00

More Prosperous... errrr... Bible Study!! :D

Christian Friendship, Luke 10, and How To Love

2007-01-25T01:01:00.000+08:00

hello!
it's been a while.
We're now going through Luke 9 - 12 for bible study.

there's a nice blog post on Christian friendship here, which i thought was quite useful. Do read it if you have time.

Christ Among The Partisans

2006-04-13T13:32:00.000+08:00

NYT, Apr 9 2006

By GARRY WILLS
Chicago

THERE is no such thing as a "Christian politics." If it is a politics, it cannot be Christian. Jesus told Pilate: "My reign is not of this present order. If my reign were of this present order, my supporters would have fought against my being turned over to the Jews. But my reign is not here" (John 18:36). Jesus brought no political message or program.

This is a truth that needs emphasis at a time when some Democrats, fearing that the Republicans have advanced over them by the use of religion, want to respond with a claim that Jesus is really on their side. He is not. He avoided those who would trap him into taking sides for or against the Roman occupation of Judea. He paid his taxes to the occupying power but said only, "Let Caesar have what belongs to him, and God have what belongs to him" (Matthew 22:21). He was the original proponent of a separation of church and state.

Those who want the state to engage in public worship, or even to have prayer in schools, are defying his injunction: "When you pray, be not like the pretenders, who prefer to pray in the synagogues and in the public square, in the sight of others. In truth I tell you, that is all the profit they will have. But you, when you pray, go into your inner chamber and, locking the door, pray there in hiding to your Father, and your Father who sees you in hiding will reward you" (Matthew 6:5-6). He shocked people by his repeated violation of the external holiness code of his time, emphasizing that his religion was an internal matter of the heart.

But doesn't Jesus say to care for the poor? Repeatedly and insistently, but what he says goes far beyond politics and is of a different order. He declares that only one test will determine who will come into his reign: whether one has treated the poor, the hungry, the homeless and the imprisoned as one would Jesus himself. "Whenever you did these things to the lowliest of my brothers, you were doing it to me" (Matthew 25:40). No government can propose that as its program. Theocracy itself never went so far, nor could it.

The state cannot indulge in self-sacrifice. If it is to treat the poor well, it must do so on grounds of justice, appealing to arguments that will convince people who are not followers of Jesus or of any other religion. The norms of justice will fall short of the demands of love that Jesus imposes. A Christian may adopt just political measures from his or her own motive of love, but that is not the argument that will define justice for state purposes.

To claim that the state's burden of justice, which falls short of the supreme test Jesus imposes, is actually what he wills — that would be to substitute some lesser and false religion for what Jesus brought from the Father. Of course, Christians who do not meet the lower standard of state justice to the poor will, a fortiori, fail to pass the higher test.The Romans did not believe Jesus when he said he had no political ambitions. That is why the soldiers mocked him as a failed king, giving him a robe and scepter and bowing in fake obedience (John 19:1-3). Those who today say that they are creating or following a "Christian politics" continue the work of those soldiers, disregarding the words of Jesus that his reign is not of this order.

Some people want to display and honor the Ten Commandments as a political commitment enjoined by the religion of Jesus. That very act is a violation of the First and Second Commandments. By erecting a false religion — imposing a reign of Jesus in this order — they are worshiping a false god. They commit idolatry. They also take the Lord's name in vain.

Some may think that removing Jesus from politics would mean removing morality from politics. They think we would all be better off if we took up the slogan "What would Jesus do?"

That is not a question his disciples ask in the Gospels. They never knew what Jesus was going to do next. He could round on Peter and call him "Satan." He could refuse to receive his mother when she asked to see him. He might tell his followers that they are unworthy of him if they do not hate their mother and their father. He might kill pigs by the hundreds. He might whip people out of church precincts.

The Jesus of the Gospels is not a great ethical teacher like Socrates, our leading humanitarian. He is an apocalyptic figure who steps outside the boundaries of normal morality to signal that the Father's judgment is breaking into history. His miracles were not acts of charity but eschatological signs — accepting the unclean, promising heavenly rewards, making last things first.

He is more a higher Nietzsche, beyond good and evil, than a higher Socrates. No politician is going to tell the lustful that they must pluck out their right eye. We cannot do what Jesus would do because we are not divine.

It was blasphemous to say, as the deputy under secretary of defense, Lt. Gen. William Boykin, repeatedly did, that God made George Bush president in 2000, when a majority of Americans did not vote for him. It would not remove the blasphemy for Democrats to imply that God wants Bush not to be president. Jesus should not be recruited as a campaign aide. To trivialize the mystery of Jesus is not to serve the Gospels.

The Gospels are scary, dark and demanding. It is not surprising that people want to tame them, dilute them, make them into generic encouragements to be loving and peaceful and fair. If that is all they are, then we may as well make Socrates our redeemer.

It is true that the tamed Gospels can be put to humanitarian purposes, and religious institutions have long done this, in defiance of what Jesus said in the Gospels.

Jesus was the victim of every institutional authority in his life and death. He said: "Do not be called Rabbi, since you have only one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no one on earth your father, since you have only one Father, the one in heaven. And do not be called leaders, since you have only one leader, the Messiah" (Matthew 23:8-10).

If Democrats want to fight Republicans for the support of an institutional Jesus, they will have to give up the person who said those words. They will have to turn away from what Flannery O'Connor described as "the bleeding stinking mad shadow of Jesus" and "a wild ragged figure" who flits "from tree to tree in the back" of the mind. He was never that thing that all politicians wish to be esteemed — respectable. At various times in the Gospels, Jesus is called a devil, the devil's agent, irreligious, unclean, a mocker of Jewish law, a drunkard, a glutton, a promoter of immorality.

The institutional Jesus of the Republicans has no similarity to the Gospel figure. Neither will any institutional Jesus of the Democrats.

Garry Wills is professor emeritus of history at Northwestern University and the author, most recently, of "What Jesus Meant."

The OTHER dg

2006-01-08T20:28:00.000+08:00

Then Naomi said, 'Wait, my daughter, until you find
out what happens. For the man will not rest until the
matter is settled today.'

婆婆说：“女儿啊，你只管安坐等候，看这事怎样成就，因为那人
今日不办成这事必不休息。”

- Ruth 3:18

Today the cell group that I attend in Beijing studied Ruth 3 and 4, in Mandarin, English and the odd smattering of Cantonese (not from me of course, mm sek gong/teng). Seeing as Waterside studied Ruth over a year ago, I felt inspired to pen my thoughts on what the Christian life in Beijing has been like.

Let me start by saying that as masochistic as my decision to work in Beijing initially was, I did not set out to further flagellate myself by joining a bible study group made up primarily of Chinese speakers. No, that was not the intention. I had envisioned finding a group of ethnic Asian, English-speaking, cosmopolitan trendies who enjoyed fooling around and hanging out together - i.e. another Waterside.

But God, ahem, had other plans.

The first group I attended in this city was an English-speaking one, made up mainly of Singaporeans and Malaysians. But something did not feel right. It was a group of mostly married couples, some old enough to be my mum and dad. Others had little kids who had to be attended to during the bible study, and on some days, there were as many toddlers in the room as there were adults. I prayed about this and did my best to be servant-minded and not thinking only of how my own needs could be met, but it became apparent that I could not relate to the fears and anxieties shared during prayer sessions to be effective in ministering to other members.

After weeks of turning up an hour late for Friday night bible study, I decided to look for a group that met on weekends. In gung-ho spirit, I decided to join a Mandarin-speaking group of Hong Kongers, Taiwanese, Singaporeans and Malaysians, thinking that it might be an opportunity to invite one of my Mandarin-speaking Singaporean pals along - she didn't last though - or my Taiwanese friend (she's reluctant to commit). So it was just me. And I soon realised that attempting to bond with a new group of mainly non-Singaporeans more comfortable with Chinese than English, let alone studying the bible in your second language, is really quite an uphill task.

In the two months or so where I stayed away from any fellowship group out of a sense of alienation, I was forced to confront the fundamental issue of why Christians should meet, pray and study the bible in a small group. This time, there was none of the comfort zone of shared socio-cultural tics that you can sort of groove along to even if you are not actually learning that much or growing spiritually from week to week. All you can take hold of, in this case, is that the Christian life is not an island and that it is in God's plan for Christians to meet and teach the bible. And that there are some struggles in our walk that only other Christians will understand and give wise counsel to.

When I started dragging myself back to the meetings, I would be humbled each time, even as I sat there quietly unable to contribute much to the discussions. Humbled because I could see the commitment of most of the members -- it is actually quite a new group, an offshoot of a Hong Kong, Cantonese-speaking group that decided to start a Mandarin splinter so they could reach out to more people. Many of them are actually more comfortable in Cantonese, although they can speak competent and even eloquent Mandarin, albeit with a heavy Hong Kong drawl.

And once I got to grips with some of the phraseology of theological discourse in Mandarin (acquiring a Chinese bible myself to cross-refer alongside my English NIV helped), I found the discussion and sharing honest, stimulating and moving. The bilingualism of the group helps; while I can't throw around my big words like I used to do in Waterside, everyone speaks and understands English enough for myself and a few others (chiefly the Singaporeans and Malaysians) to pray in English and voice opinions in a mix of both languages.

And so, back to the book of Ruth. Today's study was interesting for me because, well, I guess I am a year older and so much has changed in that year. What I remember chiefly from when Waterside studied Ruth was the whole business of Ruth lying at Boaz's feet and Naomi/Mara's grudging faith in the Lord. It didn't seem like a particularly substantial book of the bible to me.

But several things stood out for me today in sharp relief as the group members unpacked the text and shared personal experiences. The book of Ruth opens with the family of Naomi nearly decimated through the deaths of all its males and no hope of the family line ever continuing. Naomi feels totally emptied of hope and a future, and Ruth doesn't look like she will ever have a husband again or bear children. But by the end God delivers everything they desire and more. The union of R and B spawns a lineage that leads eventually to the birth of Jesus.

Then there is the matter of submission. It sucks, as Naomi said. But Ruth's submission at every step of the way is the crucial ingredient here for the working of God's plan, whether it is submission to her mother-in-law or to Boaz's request for her to wait until the matter of the appropriate kinsman-redeemer (code word for husband) is sorted out.

A Malaysian guy in the group shared his experience over the past year. He became a Christian three years ago and since then, had struggled with some of the practices of the company he works for and which he helped to start six years ago. Stuff like corruption, the giving of a little bit on the side to the other party to cut a deal, which is endemic in China. And improper account-keeping.

He tried to rationalise that it was okay and that the opportunity cost of not doing was too great. But it got to a point where he felt he was at a spiritual crossroads and that God was prompting him to leave the company. His business partners were not happy though, and threatened to make things ugly for him. And then there was the matter of his wife, who had just left her job back home to join him in Beijing. Pushed to the point of complete and utter surrender to the will of God, he prayed, stood his ground, tendered his resignation and waited. Surprisingly, his partners accepted his resignation without a fight. Now he and his wife are unemployed though, and waiting prayerfully to see what God has in store for them next.

There are a lot of stories and testimonies like that coming out of this cell group, of people in a crossroads, waiting for God to reveal His hand as they continue along uncertainly as expatriates in the Middle Kingdom. A few have gone back and a few have stayed, each renewed in their faith and purpose.

The Economist now...

2006-01-05T09:32:00.000+08:00

two articles from the Economist, found via a blog (i no longer subscribe to the economist, maybe i should spend more lunches reading the copies at the magazine rack on my floor) - one on the corporatization of religion in the States, and another related title - Onward Christian Shoppers (Disney and Evangelical America!).

hello everyone. happy 2006. there should be another collage soon. the year has gone by fast eh?

catch ball

2005-11-15T14:01:00.000+08:00

catch ball
Originally uploaded by waterside.

fun in the sun, had by several DG's, last sunday afternoon. thank God for good weather, and for opportunities to get to know others (and for a chance to run and play).

PTTP, reprise

2005-10-18T12:16:00.000+08:00

i just remembered that PTTP stands for the post-thirty-tummy-pat. now we have the PTAT - post thirty acquisition therapy.

one word of reminder. DEBT.

crikey.

Singapore and Katrina

2005-09-16T08:47:00.000+08:00

September 14, 2005
Singapore and Katrina

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Singapore

There is something troublingly self-indulgent and slothful about America today - something that Katrina highlighted and that people who live in countries where the laws of gravity still apply really noticed. It has rattled them - like watching a parent melt down.

That is certainly the sense I got after observing the Katrina debacle from half a world away here in Singapore - a city-state that, if it believes in anything, believes in good governance. It may roll up the sidewalks pretty early here, and it may even fine you if you spit out your gum, but if you had to choose anywhere in Asia you would want to be caught in a typhoon, it would be Singapore. Trust me, the head of Civil Defense here is not simply someone's college roommate.

Indeed, Singapore believes so strongly that you have to get the best-qualified and least-corruptible people you can into senior positions in the government, judiciary and civil service that its pays its prime minister a salary of $1.1 million a year. It pays its cabinet ministers and Supreme Court justices just under $1 million a year, and pays judges and senior civil servants handsomely down the line.

From Singapore's early years, good governance mattered because the ruling party was in a struggle for the people's hearts and minds with the Communists, who were perceived to be both noncorrupt and caring - so the state had to be the same and more.

Even after the Communists faded, Singapore maintained a tradition of good governance because as a country of only four million people with no natural resources, it had to live by its wits. It needed to run its economy and schools in a way that would extract the maximum from each citizen, which is how four million people built reserves of $100 billion.

"In the areas that are critical to our survival, like Defense, Finance and the Ministry of Home Affairs, we look for the best talent," said Kishore Mahbubani, dean of the Lee Kwan Yew School of Public Policy. "You lose New Orleans, and you have 100 other cities just like it. But we're a city-state. We lose Singapore and there is nothing else. ... [So] the standards of discipline are very high. There is a very high degree of accountability in Singapore."

When a subway tunnel under construction collapsed here in April 2004 and four workers were killed, a government inquiry concluded that top executives of the contracting company should be either fined or jailed.

The discipline that the cold war imposed on America, by contrast, seems to have faded. Last year, we cut the National Science Foundation budget, while indulging absurd creationist theories in our schools and passing pork-laden energy and transportation bills in the middle of an energy crisis.

We let the families of the victims of 9/11 redesign our intelligence organizations, and our president and Congress held a midnight session about the health care of one woman, Terri Schiavo, while ignoring the health crisis of 40 million uninsured. Our economy seems to be fueled lately by either suing each other or selling each other houses. Our government launched a war in Iraq without any real plan for the morning after, and it cut taxes in the middle of that war, ensuring that future generations would get the bill.

Speaking of Katrina, Sumiko Tan, a columnist for the Sunday edition of The Straits Times in Singapore, wrote: "We were shocked at what we saw. Death and destruction from natural disaster is par for the course. But the pictures of dead people left uncollected on the streets, armed looters ransacking shops, survivors desperate to be rescued, racial divisions - these were truly out of sync with what we'd imagined the land of the free to be, even if we had encountered homelessness and violence on visits there. ... If America becomes so unglued when bad things happen in its own backyard, how can it fulfill its role as leader of the world?"

Janadas Devan, a Straits Times columnist, tried to explain to his Asian readers how the U.S. is changing. "Today's conservatives," he wrote, "differ in one crucial aspect from yesterday's conservatives: the latter believed in small government, but believed, too, that a country ought to pay for all the government that it needed.

"The former believe in no government, and therefore conclude that there is no need for a country to pay for even the government that it does have. ... [But] it is not only government that doesn't show up when government is starved of resources and leached of all its meaning. Community doesn't show up either, sacrifice doesn't show up, pulling together doesn't show up, 'we're all in this together' doesn't show up."

2005-08-01T20:11:00.000+08:00

Joanne is priceless

2005-08-01T20:05:00.000+08:00

Waterside at our coolest. Thanks Shiao

2005-08-01T20:03:00.000+08:00

Did anyone notice Elliot playing GRAB with Domo?

Harry Potter Satire (spoiler warning)

2005-07-30T02:28:00.000+08:00

Just to give you an idea of the kind of writing we have to put up with when you start on a Potter book. Published verbatim so that you will not miss any of the tortorous nuances she employs. Names have been changed to complete the satire.

In silence, Errol read 5 installments of the series. Then, halfway through the sixth book, he staggered and fell for-ward. His eyes were still closed, his breathing heavy.

"Errol Errol?" said Rowling, her voice strained. "Can you hear me?"

Errol did not answer. His face was twitching as though he was deeply asleep, but dreaming a horrible dream. His grip on the book was slackening. Rowling reached forward and grasped the heavy tome, holding it steady.

“Errol, can you hear me?" she repeated loudly, her voice echoing around the cavern.

Errol panted and then spoke "I don't want. . . Don't make me ..."

Rowling stared into the whitened face

". . . don't like . . . want to stop . . ." moaned Errol.

"You . . . you can't stop, Errol," said Rowling. "You've got to keep reading, remember? Here . . ."

Hating herself, repulsed by what she was doing, Rowling forced the book back toward Errol so that Errol read the remainder of the chapter.

"No ..." he groaned, as Rowling turned another page for him. "I don't want to. ... I don't want to. . . . Let me go. . . ."
"Its all right, Errol," said Rowling, her hand shaking. "Its all right, I'm here —"

"Make it stop, make it stop," moaned Errol.

"Yes.. . yes, this'll make it stop," lied Rowling. She flipped a page and Errol screamed; the noise echoed all around the vast chamber, across the dead black water.

"No, no, no, no, I can't, I can't, don't make me, I don't warn to. . . ."

"It's all right, Errol, it's all right!" said Rowling loudly, her hands shaking so badly she could hardly open the book. "Nothing's happening to you, you're safe, it isn't real, I swear it isn't real — take this, now, take this..." And obediently, Errol read, as though it was an anti-dote Rowling offered him, but upon finishing the paragraph, he sank to his knees, shaking uncontrollably.

"Its all my fault, all my fault," he sobbed. "Please make it stop, I know I did wrong, oh please make it stop and I'll never, never again ..."

"This will make it stop, Errol," Rowling said, her voice cracking as she forced yet another chapter on him.

Errol began to cower as though invisible torturers surrounded him; his flailing hand almost knocked the book from Rowling's trembling hands as he moaned, "Don't hurt them, don't hurt them, please, please, its my fault, hurt me instead ..."

"Here, read this, read this, you'll be all right," said Rowling desperately, and once again Errol obeyed her and now he fell forward, screaming again, hammering his fists upon the ground, while Rowling opened to another chapter.

"Please, please, please, no ... not that, not that, I'll do any-thing ..."

"Just read, Errol, just read . . ."

Errol read insanely, but when he had finished, he yelled again as though his insides were on fire. "No more, please, no more ..."

Rowling turned to the last chapter. "We're nearly there, Errol. Read this, read it. ..."

She supported Errol's shoulders and again, Errol read and began to scream in more anguish than ever, "I want to die! I want to die! Make it stop, make it stop, I want to die!"

"Read this, Errol. Read this. . . ."
Errol read, and no sooner had he finished than he yelled, "KILL ME!"

"This — this one will!" gasped Rowling. "Just read this .. . It'll be over ... all over!"

Errol stared at the book, read every last word, and then, with a great, rattling gasp, rolled over onto his face.

Holding him in her lap, she assured the barely breathing form "Don't worry, Errol, you'll be protected from long term damage by your ability to love, heave and forget"

New Blog Definitions

2005-07-29T17:31:00.000+08:00

With the proliferation of blogs in our DG (at least 5 known bloggers), please note the following Blogxicon. Special care to differentiate between a very long blog and a blog site with very many entries.

Blurker (BLUR-kur): noun

1. One who reads many blogs but leaves no evidence of themselves such as comments behind; a silent observer of blogs.

2. One who reads many blogs but has no blog of their own; a blog-watcher or blog voyeur.

3. Vicarious living individuals who no longer have to depend on tabloids and magazines to get their fix. And it has the whole "reality" thing to boot.

Blogopotamus: noun.

A very long blog article
Usage: "Paul Marks has done another Blogapotamus on Samizdata.net"

Blogorrhea: noun.

An unusually high volume output of articles on a blog.

Pre-Dictionary

2005-07-27T16:12:00.000+08:00

Predestination

Theology.

The doctrine that God has foreordained all things, especially that God has elected certain souls to eternal salvation.
The divine decree foreordaining all souls to either salvation or damnation.
The act of God foreordaining all things gone before and to come.

Taboo Word

A call to arms as everyone readies pat answers
Used to illicit tired groans and rolling eyes
Threatens to polarize congregations and sow discord
Has come to symbolize intellectual retreat and controversial avoidance of controversy.

DG glossary Adoptee vs Adultery vs Affiliates vs Associates

2005-07-18T21:15:00.000+08:00

In trying to clear up the terminology we use to describe certain folk who hang around us (those who are not of Waterside, but are Waterside)

DG Adoptee

One who, while maintaining links with his/her parent DG, has been accepted into fellowship and awarded full privileges and having to bear similar duties to the adopting DG

Glossary it is not.

2005-07-01T09:29:00.000+08:00

Need to exonerate myself from these touchy-feely attacks I've received.

If there is emotional openness without physical closeness, then it is NOT touchy feely. So in that regard, men can say all the emotional MGSR things they want. They may also include ick-neutralizing guttral grunts and fists pounding on chests. But all they need do is maintain a respectful distance from one another, it is NOT touchy-feely.

touch·y-feel·y
adj. Informal

Marked by or emphasizing physical closeness and emotional openness: became uncomfortable when the group therapy session got too touchy-feely.
Based on sentiment or intuition, especially to the exclusion of critical judgment: “a book that proves the existence of the Almighty... without recourse to spiritual mumbo jumbo or any of that touchy-feely faith stuff” (Adam Begley).

new glossary

2005-06-27T14:56:00.000+08:00

PTTP - post thirty tummy pat. applicable to males only.

Some thoughts on wisdom

2005-06-09T00:59:00.000+08:00

Hey, hey, is our DG blog turning into a barely disguised pitch for NYT or what? :)

I have time, I'm on holiday, so I decided to get away from the cut-and-paste for a while.

The upcoming church camp is on the book of Proverbs and a cursory read of the book will tell you it has a lot to do with the subject of "wisdom".

The first 9 books, in particular, keep trumping the benefits of "wisdom" as opposed to "folly", and parallels are drawn repeatedly between that and another pair of opposites, "adultery" vs. "discipline" (and yes, "discipline" is invoked instead of the more obvious "fidelity").

Wisdom is likened to a woman trying to make herself heard (1:20). Wisdom will save you from the adulteress (2:16).

Indeed Wisdom sounds like a great wife rather than the chor-lor Folly who "sits at the door of her house ... calling out to those who pass by" to simpletons and "those who lack judgement" (9:13-18).

Proverbs ends with an epilogue, "The Wife of Noble Character". Perhaps Proverbs is really God's thinly-disguised manual for men on How To Choose A Wife And To Stick With Her? Guys, take note :)

Of course, there are other aspects to godly wisdom we are to mark. Proverbs 6:16-19, for example, tells us "there are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him", among them, "haughty eyes" (don't be dao), "hands that shed innocent blood", "a heart that devises wicked schemes" and "a man who stirs up dissension among brothers".

I suppose, reflecting on what God is trying to tell us about wisdom, it really is a very dynamic, active and living thing. Wisdom is not just something cerebral, intellectual and all-in-our-heads, but is born out in lived experience and how we hold ourselves in relation to other people.

Wisdom is discipline. Wisdom is humility before God and accepting that He knows waay more. Wisdom is staying true to the woman you married. Wisdom is about, to paraphrase 4:20-27, guarding one's heart, putting away perversity from your mouth and keeping your eyes straight ahead.

All very specific yet simple instructions. Not rocket science. Manna for the soul of those who think themselves into knots and find themselves unable to move forward.

Other gems:

"Listen to your father, who gave you life, and do not despise your mother when she is old." (23:22) Ouch, just as I caught myself rolling my eyes at my mum wiping my mobile phone for germs...
"Finish your outdoor work and get your fields ready; after that build your house." (24:27) Do one thing at a time, finish it before going on to the next, get your harvest before building your nest.
And my favourite: "An honest answer is like a kiss on the lips." (24:26)

The past three months for me have been a time of feeling closer to God, mainly through praying with my prayer partner and best bud in Beijing and really seeing God working and coming through in our lives.

Am looking forward to church camp for a good dose of God's word in terms of systematic preaching and teaching, something that has been missing for a while.

Monkeynomics

2005-06-06T09:39:00.000+08:00

A most interesting article from the NYT. PETA members might be howling in protest, but I can almost hear Cheemoth sushing them as he tries to take in the ramifications behind stoogie altruism and selfishness.

How are the lessons applicable to us?

How about a handful of metaphorical excrement?

Be generous and show hospitality, especially to those of the household of God! There are plenty of opportunities to practice the the 'take home' from our Bible studies. And to those who have given of their time and resources - may you be spared from the tick bites of a thousand mangy camels.

I've pasted the 500 word article at the bottom because not everyone has an account with NYT.

June 5, 2005
Monkey Business
By STEPHEN J. DUBNER and STEVEN D. LEVITT

Keith Chen's Monkey Research

Adam Smith, the founder of classical economics, was certain that humankind's knack for monetary exchange belonged to humankind alone. ''Nobody ever saw a dog make a fair and deliberate exchange of one bone for another with another dog,'' he wrote. ''Nobody ever saw one animal by its gestures and natural cries signify to another, this is mine, that yours; I am willing to give this for that.'' But in a clean and spacious laboratory at Yale-New Haven Hospital, seven capuchin monkeys have been taught to use money, and a comparison of capuchin behavior and human behavior will either surprise you very much or not at all, depending on your view of humans.
The capuchin is a New World monkey, brown and cute, the size of a scrawny year-old human baby plus a long tail. ''The capuchin has a small brain, and it's pretty much focused on food and sex,'' says Keith Chen, a Yale economist who, along with Laurie Santos, a psychologist, is exploiting these natural desires -- well, the desire for food at least -- to teach the capuchins to buy grapes, apples and Jell-O. ''You should really think of a capuchin as a bottomless stomach of want,'' Chen says. ''You can feed them marshmallows all day, they'll throw up and then come back for more.''
When most people think of economics, they probably conjure images of inflation charts or currency rates rather than monkeys and marshmallows. But economics is increasingly being recognized as a science whose statistical tools can be put to work on nearly any aspect of modern life. That's because economics is in essence the study of incentives, and how people -- perhaps even monkeys -- respond to those incentives. A quick scan of the current literature reveals that top economists are studying subjects like prostitution, rock 'n' roll, baseball cards and media bias.
Chen proudly calls himself a behavioral economist, a member of a growing subtribe whose research crosses over into psychology, neuroscience and evolutionary biology. He began his monkey work as a Harvard graduate student, in concert with Marc Hauser, a psychologist. The Harvard monkeys were cotton-top tamarins, and the experiments with them concerned altruism. Two monkeys faced each other in adjoining cages, each equipped with a lever that would release a marshmallow into the other monkey's cage. The only way for one monkey to get a marshmallow was for the other monkey to pull its lever. So pulling the lever was to some degree an act of altruism, or at least of strategic cooperation.
The tamarins were fairly cooperative but still showed a healthy amount of self-interest: over repeated encounters with fellow monkeys, the typical tamarin pulled the lever about 40 percent of the time. Then Hauser and Chen heightened the drama. They conditioned one tamarin to always pull the lever (thus creating an altruistic stooge) and another to never pull the lever (thus creating a selfish jerk). The stooge and the jerk were then sent to play the game with the other tamarins. The stooge blithely pulled her lever over and over, never failing to dump a marshmallow into the other monkey's cage. Initially, the other monkeys responded in kind, pulling their own levers 50 percent of the time. But once they figured out that their partner was a pushover (like a parent who buys her kid a toy on every outing whether the kid is a saint or a devil), their rate of reciprocation dropped to 30 percent -- lower than the original average rate. The selfish jerk, meanwhile, was punished even worse. Once her reputation was established, whenever she was led into the experimenting chamber, the other tamarins ''would just go nuts,'' Chen recalls. ''They'd throw their feces at the wall, walk into the corner and sit on their hands, kind of sulk.''
Chen is a hyperverbal, sharp-dressing 29-year-old with spiky hair. The son of Chinese immigrants, he had an itinerant upbringing in the rural Midwest. As a Stanford undergraduate, he was a de facto Marxist before being seduced, quite accidentally, by economics. He may be the only economist conducting monkey experiments, which puts him at slight odds with his psychologist collaborators (who are more interested in behavior itself than in the incentives that produce the behavior) as well as with certain economist colleagues. ''I love interest rates, and I'm willing to talk about their kind of stuff all the time,'' he says, speaking of his fellow economists. ''But I can tell that they're biting their tongues when I tell them what I'm working on.''
It is sometimes unclear, even to Chen himself, exactly what he is working on. When he and Santos, his psychologist collaborator, began to teach the Yale capuchins to use money, he had no pressing research theme. The essential idea was to give a monkey a dollar and see what it did with it. The currency Chen settled on was a silver disc, one inch in diameter, with a hole in the middle -- ''kind of like Chinese money,'' he says. It took several months of rudimentary repetition to teach the monkeys that these tokens were valuable as a means of exchange for a treat and would be similarly valuable the next day. Having gained that understanding, a capuchin would then be presented with 12 tokens on a tray and have to decide how many to surrender for, say, Jell-O cubes versus grapes. This first step allowed each capuchin to reveal its preferences and to grasp the concept of budgeting.
Then Chen introduced price shocks and wealth shocks. If, for instance, the price of Jell-O fell (two cubes instead of one per token), would the capuchin buy more Jell-O and fewer grapes? The capuchins responded rationally to tests like this -- that is, they responded the way most readers of The Times would respond. In economist-speak, the capuchins adhered to the rules of utility maximization and price theory: when the price of something falls, people tend to buy more of it.
Chen next introduced a pair of gambling games and set out to determine which one the monkeys preferred. In the first game, the capuchin was given one grape and, dependent on a coin flip, either retained the original grape or won a bonus grape. In the second game, the capuchin started out owning the bonus grape and, once again dependent on a coin flip, either kept the two grapes or lost one. These two games are in fact the same gamble, with identical odds, but one is framed as a potential win and the other as a potential loss.
How did the capuchins react? They far preferred to take a gamble on the potential gain than the potential loss. This is not what an economics textbook would predict. The laws of economics state that these two gambles, because they represent such small stakes, should be treated equally.
So, does Chen's gambling experiment simply reveal the cognitive limitations of his small-brained subjects? Perhaps not. In similar experiments, it turns out that humans tend to make the same type of irrational decision at a nearly identical rate. Documenting this phenomenon, known as loss aversion, is what helped the psychologist Daniel Kahneman win a Nobel Prize in economics. The data generated by the capuchin monkeys, Chen says, ''make them statistically indistinguishable from most stock-market investors.''
ut do the capuchins actually understand money? Or is Chen simply exploiting their endless appetites to make them perform neat tricks?
Several facts suggest the former. During a recent capuchin experiment that used cucumbers as treats, a research assistant happened to slice the cucumber into discs instead of cubes, as was typical. One capuchin picked up a slice, started to eat it and then ran over to a researcher to see if he could ''buy'' something sweeter with it. To the capuchin, a round slice of cucumber bore enough resemblance to Chen's silver tokens to seem like another piece of currency.
Then there is the stealing. Santos has observed that the monkeys never deliberately save any money, but they do sometimes purloin a token or two during an experiment. All seven monkeys live in a communal main chamber of about 750 cubic feet. For experiments, one capuchin at a time is let into a smaller testing chamber next door. Once, a capuchin in the testing chamber picked up an entire tray of tokens, flung them into the main chamber and then scurried in after them -- a combination jailbreak and bank heist -- which led to a chaotic scene in which the human researchers had to rush into the main chamber and offer food bribes for the tokens, a reinforcement that in effect encouraged more stealing.
Something else happened during that chaotic scene, something that convinced Chen of the monkeys' true grasp of money. Perhaps the most distinguishing characteristic of money, after all, is its fungibility, the fact that it can be used to buy not just food but anything. During the chaos in the monkey cage, Chen saw something out of the corner of his eye that he would later try to play down but in his heart of hearts he knew to be true. What he witnessed was probably the first observed exchange of money for sex in the history of monkeykind. (Further proof that the monkeys truly understood money: the monkey who was paid for sex immediately traded the token in for a grape.)
This is a sensitive subject. The capuchin lab at Yale has been built and maintained to make the monkeys as comfortable as possible, and especially to allow them to carry on in a natural state. The introduction of money was tricky enough; it wouldn't reflect well on anyone involved if the money turned the lab into a brothel. To this end, Chen has taken steps to ensure that future monkey sex at Yale occurs as nature intended it.
But these facts remain: When taught to use money, a group of capuchin monkeys responded quite rationally to simple incentives; responded irrationally to risky gambles; failed to save; stole when they could; used money for food and, on occasion, sex. In other words, they behaved a good bit like the creature that most of Chen's more traditional colleagues study: Homo sapiens.
Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt are the authors of ''Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything.''

Popewatch 2005 CNN Reports

2005-05-30T14:36:00.000+08:00

CNN just reported that the new Pope hopes to end the schism between the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodoxies.

link here.

A little background.

The split between RC and GO (Greek Orthodox) happened in 1054 - almost a thousand years ago. For catholics, this split is even more severe than the Remformation of the 15th Century.

What caused the Split?

Doctrine - RC pronounced that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son and Father. GO declared it heretical.

Practices - To venerate or adore icons? Talk about drawing imaginary lines.

Power - RC insisted that Rome be the center of the Chrisitan world because St Peter was buried there. GO wanted Constantinople to be the center because it was the Capital of the Holy Roman Empire (or what was left of it).

Bicker, bicker and in 1054, they excommunicated each other. Rome and Constantinople. The Pope vs the Patriach

Simmer, Simmer and in 1204 the Roman Pope Innocent III launched the 4th Crusade against Constantinople and sacked the city. (bet the turks and arabs were having a good laugh)

So now we know where Eastern Orthodox came from and why the crusaders actually sacked a Christian city in 1204.

It will be interesting to see if this mending takes place during the lifetime of Benedict XVI

Bananaphilosophy

2005-05-28T22:59:00.000+08:00

This is an old post for those who might have missed it. Am writing this because I just ate two bananas.

The Banana: The Atheists Nightmare

Note the unique design of the banana:
Shaped for the human hand
Has a non-slip surface
Cover indicates status of contents
green -- too early
yellow -- just right
black -- too late
Easy-open tab for removal of wrapper
Perforated wrapper
Bio-degradable wrapper
Shaped for the human mouth
Has a point on top for easy entry
Is pleasing to the taste buds
Is curved towards the face to ease eating process

Essentially it is the "from design" argument for the existence of God formally laid down by Thomas Aquinas. Although he didn't exactly use a Banana in his example. What it does say is that something so well designed reflects intelligence and could not have occured by chance.

Problem with the "from design" argument is that it suits an evil capricious god just as well as a Good and Just one. Hence we have some rather serious minded scientists who genuinely believe that Earth was seeded by aliens. (The Macross Zero series hints very strongly at this theory - just what are kids learning from tv nowadays?)

It is fallacious to say that 'intelligent design' could not happen by chance simply because it seems improbable or beyond the grasp of human imagination.

You gotta love KungFu Hustle

2005-05-26T22:24:00.000+08:00

http://www.kungfucrazy.co.uk/?TTR2

good for five mins of distraction from your deskjob.

Midgets Vs Lions

2005-05-23T22:59:00.000+08:00

Dudes, check out this fake BBC report

Lion Mutilates 42 Midgets in Cambodian Ring-Fight

More NYT Goodness

2005-05-23T00:03:00.000+08:00

May 22, 2005

On a Christian Mission to the Top

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

For a while last winter, Tim Havens, a recent graduate of Brown University and now an evangelical missionary there, had to lead his morning prayer group in a stairwell of the campus chapel. That was because workers were clattering in to remake the lower floor for a display of American Indian art, and a Buddhist student group was chanting in the small sanctuary upstairs.

Like most of the Ivy League universities, Brown was founded by Protestant ministers as an expressly Christian college. But over the years it gradually shed its religious affiliation and became a secular institution, as did the other Ivies. In addition to Buddhists, the Brown chaplain's office now recognizes "heathen/pagan" as a "faith community."

But these days evangelical students like those in Mr. Havens's prayer group are becoming a conspicuous presence at Brown. Of a student body of 5,700, about 400 participate in one of three evangelical student groups - more than the number of active mainline Protestants, the campus chaplain says. And these students are in the vanguard of a larger social shift not just on campuses but also at golf resorts and in boardrooms; they are part of an expanding beachhead of evangelicals in the American elite.

The growing power and influence of evangelical Christians is manifest everywhere these days, from the best-seller lists to the White House, but in fact their share of the general population has not changed much in half a century. Most pollsters agree that people who identify themselves as white evangelical Christians make up about a quarter of the population, just as they have for decades.

What has changed is the class status of evangelicals. In 1929, the theologian H. Richard Niebuhr described born-again Christianity as the "religion of the disinherited." But over the last 40 years, evangelicals have pulled steadily closer in income and education to mainline Protestants in the historically affluent establishment denominations. In the process they have overturned the old social pecking order in which "Episcopalian," for example, was a code word for upper class, and "fundamentalist" or "evangelical" shorthand for lower.

Evangelical Christians are now increasingly likely to be college graduates and in the top income brackets. Evangelical C.E.O.'s pray together on monthly conference calls, evangelical investment bankers study the Bible over lunch on Wall Street and deep-pocketed evangelical donors gather at golf courses for conferences restricted to those who give more than $200,000 annually to Christian causes.

Their growing wealth and education help explain the new influence of evangelicals in American culture and politics. Their buying power fuels the booming market for Christian books, music and films. Their rising income has paid for construction of vast mega-churches in suburbs across the country. Their charitable contributions finance dozens of mission agencies, religious broadcasters and international service groups.

On The Chronicle of Philanthropy's latest list of the 400 top charities, Campus Crusade for Christ, an evangelical student group, raised more from private donors than the Boy Scouts of America, the Public Broadcasting Service and Easter Seals.

Now a few affluent evangelicals are directing their attention and money at some of the tallest citadels of the secular elite: Ivy League universities. Three years ago a group of evangelical Ivy League alumni formed the Christian Union, an organization intended to "reclaim the Ivy League for Christ," according to its fund-raising materials, and to "shape the hearts and minds of many thousands who graduate from these schools and who become the elites in other American cultural institutions."

The Christian Union has bought and maintains new evangelical student centers at Brown, Princeton and Cornell, and has plans to establish a center on every Ivy League campus. In April, 450 students, alumni and supporters met in Princeton for an "Ivy League Congress on Faith and Action." A keynote speaker was Charles W. Colson, the born-again Watergate felon turned evangelical thinker.

Matt Bennett, founder of the Christian Union, told the conference, "I love these universities - Princeton and all the others, my alma mater, Cornell - but it really grieves me and really hurts me to think of where they are now."

The Christian Union's immediate goal, he said, was to recruit campus missionaries. "What is happening now is good," Mr. Bennett said, "but it is like a finger in the dike of keeping back the flood of immorality."

And trends in the Ivy League today could shape the culture for decades to come, he said. "So many leaders come out of these campuses. Seven of the nine Supreme Court justices are Ivy League grads; four of the seven Massachusetts Supreme Court justices; Christian ministry leaders; so many presidents, as you know; leaders of business - they are everywhere."

He added, "If we are going to change the world, we have got, by God's power, to see these campuses radically changed."

An Outsider on Campus Mr. Havens, who graduated from Brown last year, is the kind of missionary the Christian Union hopes to enlist. An evangelical from what he calls a "solidly middle class" family in the Midwest, he would have been an anomaly at Brown a couple of generations ago. He applied there, he said, out of a sense of "nonconformity" and despite his mother's preference that he attend a Christian college.

"She just was nervous about, and rightfully so, what was going to happen to me freshman year," Mr. Havens recalled.

When he arrived at Brown, in Providence, R.I., Mr. Havens was astounded to find that the biggest campus social event of the fall was the annual SexPowerGod dance, sponsored by the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer Alliance and advertised with dining-hall displays depicting pairs of naked men or women. "Why do they have to put God in the name?" he said. "It seems kind of disrespectful."

Mr. Havens found himself a double outsider of sorts. In addition to being devoted to his faith, he was a scholarship student at a university where half the students can afford $45,000 in tuition and fees without recourse to financial aid and where, he said, many tend to "spend money like water."

But his modest means did not stand out as much as his efforts to guard his morals. He did not drink, and he almost never cursed. And he was determined to stay "pure" until marriage, though he did not lack for attention from female students. Just as his mother feared, Mr. Havens, a broad-shouldered former wrestler with tousled brown hair and a guileless smile, wavered some his freshman year and dated several classmates.

"I was just like, 'Oh, I can get this girl to like me,' " he recalled. " 'Oh, she likes me; she's cute.' And so it was a lot of fairly short and meaningless relationships. It was pretty destructive."

In his sophomore year, though, his evangelical a cappella singing group, a Christian twist on an old Ivy League tradition, interceded. With its support, he rededicated himself to serving God, and by his senior year he was running his own Bible-study group, hoping to inoculate first-year students against the temptations he had faced. They challenged one another, Mr. Havens said, "committing to remain sexually pure, both in a physical sense and in avoiding pornography and ogling women and like that."

Mr. Havens is now living in a house owned and supported by the Christian Union and is trying to reach not just other evangelicals but nonbelievers as well.

Prayers in the Boardrooms

The Christian Union is the brainchild of Matt Bennett, 40, who earned bachelor's and master's degrees at Cornell and later directed the Campus Crusade for Christ at Princeton. Mr. Bennett, tall and soft-spoken, with a Texas drawl that waxes and wanes depending on the company he is in, said he got the idea during a 40-day water-and-juice fast, when he heard God speaking to him one night in a dream.

"He was speaking to me very strongly that he wanted to see an increasing and dramatic spiritual revival in a place like Princeton," Mr. Bennett said.

While working for Campus Crusade, Mr. Bennett had discovered that it was hard to recruit evangelicals to minister to the elite colleges of the Northeast because the environment was alien to them and the campuses often far from their homes. He also found that the evangelical ministries were hobbled without adequate salaries to attract professional staff members and without centers of their own where students could gather, socialize and study the Bible. Jews had Hillel Houses, and Roman Catholics had Newman Centers.

He thought evangelicals should have their own houses, too, and began a furious round of fund-raising to buy or build some. An early benefactor was his twin brother, Monty, who had taken over the Dallas hotel empire their father built from a single Holiday Inn and who had donated a three-story Victorian in a neighborhood near Brown.

To raise more money, Matt Bennett has followed a grapevine of affluent evangelicals around the country, winding up even in places where evangelicals would have been a rarity just a few decades ago. In Manhattan, for example, he visited Wall Street boardrooms and met with the founder of Socrates in the City, a roundtable for religious intellectuals that gathers monthly at places like the Algonquin Hotel and the Metropolitan Club.

Those meetings introduced him to an even more promising pool of like-minded Christians, the New Canaan Group, a Friday morning prayer breakfast typically attended by more than a hundred investment bankers and other professionals. The breakfasts started in the Connecticut home of a partner in Goldman, Sachs but grew so large that they had to move to a local church. Like many other evangelicals, some members attend churches that adhere to evangelical doctrine but that remain affiliated with mainline denominations.

Other donors to the Christian Union are members of local elites across the Bible Belt. Not long ago, for example, Mr. Bennett paid a visit to Montgomery, Ala., for lunch with Julian L. McPhillips Jr., a wealthy Princeton alumnus and the managing partner of a local law firm. Mr. Bennett, wearing an orange Princeton tie, said he wanted to raise enough money for the Christian Union to hire someone to run a "healing ministry" for students with depression, eating disorders or drug or alcohol addiction.

Mr. McPhillips, who shares Mr. Bennett's belief in the potential of faith healing, remarked that he had once cured an employee's migraine headaches just by praying for him. "We joke in my office that we don't need health insurance," he told Mr. Bennett before writing a check for $1,000.

Mr. Bennett's database has so far grown to about 5,000 names gathered by word of mouth alone. They are mostly Ivy League graduates whose regular alumni contributions he hopes to channel into the Christian Union. And these Ivy League evangelicals, in turn, are just a small fraction of the large number of their affluent fellow believers.

Gaining on the Mainline

Their commitment to their faith is confounding a long-held assumption that, like earlier generations of Baptists or Pentecostals, prosperous evangelicals would abandon their religious ties or trade them for membership in establishment churches. Instead, they have kept their traditionalist beliefs, and their churches have even attracted new members from among the well-off.

Meanwhile, evangelical Protestants are pulling closer to their mainline counterparts in class and education. As late as 1965, for example, a white mainline Protestant was two and a half times as likely to have a college degree as a white evangelical, according to an analysis by Prof. Corwin E. Smidt, a political scientist at Calvin College, an evangelical institution in Grand Rapids, Mich. But by 2000, a mainline Protestant was only 65 percent more likely to have the same degree. And since 1985, the percentage of incoming freshmen at highly selective private universities who said they were born-again also rose by half, to 11 or 12 percent each year from 7.3 percent, according to the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.

To many evangelical Christians, the reason for their increasing worldly success and cultural influence is obvious: God's will at work. Some also credit leaders like the midcentury intellectual Carl F. H. Henry, who helped to found a large and influential seminary, a glossy evangelical Christian magazine and the National Association of Evangelicals, a powerful umbrella group that now includes 51 denominations. Dr. Henry and his followers implored believers to look beyond their churches and fight for a place in the American mainstream.

There were also demographic forces at work, beginning with the G.I. Bill, which sent a pioneering generation of evangelicals to college. Probably the greatest boost to the prosperity of evangelicals as a group came with the Sun Belt expansion of the 1970's and the Texas oil boom, which brought new wealth and businesses to the regions where evangelical churches had been most heavily concentrated.

The most striking example of change in how evangelicals see themselves and their place in the world may be the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination. It was founded in Hot Springs, Ark., in 1914 by rural and working-class Christians who believed that the Holy Spirit had moved them to speak in tongues. Shunned by established churches, they became a sect of outsiders, and their preachers condemned worldly temptations like dancing, movies, jewelry and swimming in public pools. But like the Southern Baptists and other conservative denominations, the Assemblies gradually dropped their separatist strictures as their membership prospered and spread.

As the denomination grew, Assemblies preachers began speaking not only of heavenly rewards but also of the material blessings God might provide in this world. The notion was controversial in some evangelical circles but became widespread nonetheless, and it made the Assemblies' faith more compatible with an upwardly mobile middle class.

By the 1970's, Assemblies churches were sprouting up in affluent suburbs across the country. Recent surveys by Margaret Poloma, a historian at the University of Akron in Ohio, found Assemblies members more educated and better off than the general public.

As they flourished, evangelical entrepreneurs and strivers built a distinctly evangelical business culture of prayer meetings, self-help books and business associations. In some cities outside the Northeast, evangelical business owners list their names in Christian yellow pages.

The rise of evangelicals has also coincided with the gradual shift of most of them from the Democratic Party to the Republican and their growing political activism. The conservative Christian political movement seldom developed in poor, rural Bible Belt towns. Instead, its wellsprings were places like the Rev. Ed Young's booming mega-church in suburban Houston or the Rev. Timothy LaHaye's in Orange County, Calif., where evangelical professionals and businessmen had the wherewithal to push back against the secular culture by organizing boycotts, electing school board members and lobbying for conservative judicial appointments.

'A Bunch of Heathens'

Mr. Havens, the Brown missionary, is part of the upsurge of well-educated born-again Christians. He grew up in one of the few white households in a poor black neighborhood of St. Louis, where his parents had moved to start a church, which failed to take off. Mr. Havens's father never graduated from college. After being laid off from his job at a marketing company two years ago, he now works in an insurance company's software and systems department. Tim Havens's mother home-schooled the family's six children for at least a few years each.

Mr. Havens got through Brown on scholarships and loans, and at graduation was $25,000 in debt. To return to campus for his missionary year and pay his expenses, he needed to raise an additional $36,000, and on the advice of Geoff Freeman, the head of the Brown branch of Campus Crusade, he did his fund-raising in St. Louis.

"It is easy to sell New England in the Midwest," as Mr. Freeman put it later. Midwesterners, he said, see New Englanders as "a bunch of heathens."

So Mr. Havens drove home each day from a summer job at a stone supply warehouse to work the phone from his cluttered childhood bedroom. He told potential donors that many of the American-born students at Brown had never even been to church, to say nothing of the students from Asia or the Middle East. "In a sense, it is pre-Christian," he explained.

Among his family's friends, however, encouragement was easier to come by than cash. As the summer came to a close, Mr. Havens was still $6,000 short. He decided to give himself a pay cut and go back to Brown with what he had raised, trusting God to take care of his needs just as he always had when money seemed scarce during college.

"God owns the cattle on a thousand hills," he often told himself. "God has plenty of money."

Thanks to the Christian Union, Mr. Haven's present quarters as a ministry intern at Brown are actually more upscale than his home in St. Louis. On Friday nights, he is a host for a Bible-study and dinner party for 70 or 80 Christian students, who serve themselves heaping plates of pasta before breaking into study groups. Afterward, they regroup in the living room for board games and goofy improvisation contests, all free of profanity and even double entendre.

Lately, though, Mr. Havens has been contemplating steps that would take him away from Brown and campus ministry. After a chaste romance - "I didn't kiss her until I asked her to marry me," he said - he recently became engaged to a missionary colleague, Liz Chalmers. He has been thinking about how to support the children they hope to have.

And he has been considering the example of his future father-in-law, Daniel Chalmers, a Baptist missionary to the Philippines who ended up building power plants there and making a small fortune. Mr. Chalmers has been a steady donor to Christian causes, and he bought a plot of land in Oregon, where he plans to build a retreat center.

"God has always used wealthy people to help the church," Mr. Havens said. He pointed out that in the Bible, rich believers helped support the apostles, just as donors to the Christian Union are investing strategically in the Ivy League today.

With those examples and his own father in mind, Mr. Havens chose medicine over campus ministry. He scored well on his medical school entrance exams and, after another year at Brown, he will head to St. Louis University School of Medicine. At the Christian Union conference in April, he was pleased to hear doctors talk about praying with their patients and traveling as medical missionaries.

He is looking forward to having the money a medical degree can bring, and especially to putting his children through college without the scholarships and part-time jobs he needed. But whether he becomes rich, he said, "will depend on how much I keep."

Like other evangelicals of his generation, he means to take his faith with him as he makes his way in the world. He said his roommates at Brown had always predicted that he would "sell out"- loosen up about his faith and adopt their taste for new cars, new clothes and the other trappings of the upper class.

He didn't at Brown and he thinks he never will.

"So far so good," he said. But he admitted, "I don't have any money yet."

Kungfu Hustle on Metacritic!

2005-05-18T16:01:00.000+08:00

Kungfu Hustle gets 77 points on Metacritic! That is a rating that is even higher than starwars!

Cheemoth, I am vindicated! 10000 lemmings can't be wrong. lol

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/kungfuhustle

And of course sideways rightly tops the charts.

A Haiku to Yu

2005-05-12T21:52:00.000+08:00

I've been trying my hand out at Haikus. Here is a Haiku riddle -

Pilgrims in the Dirt
Penitent Faces Covered
White Backs to the Sky

I welcome comments :)

hair raising and such

2005-05-10T11:48:00.000+08:00

i want to write this down before i forget. but apologies if anyone finds this slightly frivolous.

怒发冲冠 nu fa chong guan - accompanied by maniacal laugh and double hand action (hands at side of head, now move it upwards in rapid shooting motion). not exactly glossary, but to be used to describe someone who is literally, bristling with anger.

NYT Reports Christians Engaging Muslims via ROCK

2005-05-10T06:50:00.000+08:00

A Christian Rock concert in Muslim Morroco.

I'm only posting this story in relation to what happened recently in KL with Zach.

I'm afraid I still have not come to a satisfactory conviction on the issue of reaching to Muslims via "in your face" evangelism.

But here is a story worth reading:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/10/arts/music/10chri.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1115678271-KPcpV1q1U3H8PLcXYU8PCg

Not sure if you can access the story without a subscription.

NYT Strikes Again

2005-05-09T23:49:00.000+08:00

Another Great piece of writing from NYT. I never quite saw Movie Stars and Superheroes in this way. Refreshing!

Heroes vs. Stars: Revenge of the Nerds
By A. O. SCOTT

One of the few memorable moments in Chris Rock's bridge-burning turn as host of this year's Oscar broadcast was his observation that while Russell Crowe is a bona fide movie star, Tobey Maguire is "a boy in tights." This remark was taken, and was probably to some extent intended, as a cruel put-down of a fine young actor, but it nonetheless illustrated a basic axiom of popular culture that has nothing in particular to do with Mr. Maguire's masculinity or Mr. Crowe's clout. Simply put, a superhero is not a movie star, and vice versa. Indeed, one might go so far as to say that as a cultural figure, the superhero is the opposite - the nemesis, the secret alter ego, the evil twin, the Bizarro-world double - of the movie star. And in their battle for world domination, notwithstanding Mr. Rock's mockery (though implicitly reflected in it), the superheroes are winning.

Their ascendancy in Hollywood is a triumphal chapter in a 70-year epic during which comic books have moved from the disreputable, juvenile margins of pop culture to its center. And not only pop culture, but upper-middlebrow literature, too, as young middle-aged novelists like Michael Chabon and Jonathan Lethem have found in the realm of boyhood fandom a rich store of ready-made myths, mysteries and moods.

The cachet of comics - and I mean the old, cheap, pulpy kind, not "comix" or "graphic novels" - is all the more remarkable given that for most of their history, they could count on provoking the disdain of literary intellectuals, the panic of moralists and the condescension of mainstream show business, which saw them as fodder for cartoons and campy kid shows. The days when a film critic could wish that comic books would just go away - as Robert Warshow did in a brilliantly ambivalent 1954 essay on his young son's fandom - are long gone. The superheroes demand to be taken as seriously as they have always taken themselves.

For one thing, they command some very serious money. The ostensible point of Mr. Rock's riff was that only a handful of certified movie stars can guarantee box-office success, and that the studio executives should bear this in mind when casting their would-be blockbusters. But the numbers tell a somewhat different story, since the movies featuring Mr. Maguire in tights, "Spider-Man" and "Spider-Man 2," had two of the biggest opening weekends in movie history and have outgrossed Mr. Crowe's entire catalog so far. Credit for those huge numbers, needless to say, belongs more to Spidey than to the person in his costume, and it is the web-slinger and his ilk who currently dominate the box office.

While the number of movie stars is dwindling - are there 8 now, or still 10? Does Brad Pitt count? - the ranks of big-screen costumed crime fighters is growing. On June 15, Batman returns - I mean "Batman Begins" - since he already returned 13 years ago, in the second installment of the newly reset series - and the Fantastic Four step out to join their successful Marvel colleagues the X-Men. A new Superman and an updated Wonder Woman are on the horizon, and the conventional wisdom of the moment is that there is room for all of them and more. Even the B- and C-list do-gooders - the Hellboys and Punishers, the Blades and Elektras - get their chance and earn their money. The occasional failure - whether ambitious and flawed like "The Hulk" or extravagantly awful like "Catwoman" - only seems to sharpen the appetite of the public and the eagerness of the studio executives. Unlike movie stars, superheroes do not have agents, weight or drug problems, controversial political beliefs or outrageous salary demands, and their box-office power has yet to find its deadly kryptonite.

Further evidence of the rivalry between movie stars and superheroes can be found in the early pages of "Men of Tomorrow" (2004), Gerard Jones's fast-paced and informative retelling of the origins of modern comic-book culture. In an opening set-up, from which the rest of the book flashes back, Jerry Siegel, one of the Cleveland teenagers who dreamed up Superman back in the Great Depression, is reading an article in the trades about the impending movie based on his creation and contemplating another skirmish in his endless campaign for recognition and compensation. The anecdote, which takes place sometime in the mid-1970's, dramatizes both Siegel's bitter exile from the comic-book world he had helped to invent and also the multimedia juggernaut that comic books had become. Warner Brothers, having recently acquired National Periodical Publications, parent of DC Comics, was gearing up for an exercise in what a later era would call synergy, and it had big plans for "Superman." There was a 300-page script by Mario Puzo and candidates to play the Man of Steel reportedly included Clint Eastwood, Paul Newman and Dustin Hoffman.

Those names, appearing on the first page of Mr. Jones's prologue, are at best incidental to his tale, but they do catch the reader's eye, providing a passing glimpse of a strange alternative history of Hollywood. Needless to say, none of those stars got the part. And to picture any one of them in tights and a cape, leaping tall buildings in a single bound, requires superhuman powers of imagination and results in images of nearly monstrous absurdity. Could we really have had a squinting, sneering Superman ("Do you feel lucky? Well do you, Lex Luthor"), or a scowling, nervous, diminutive Clark Kent ("Ms. Lane, are you trying to seduce me?")? And what about Al Pacino, another hot movie star of the 70's whose name pops up later on?

The very idea - hoo-wah! - seems as much a violation of the laws of nature as X-ray vision, spider sense in humans or unassisted flight. There may have been specific reasons none of these actors wound up attached to the final project, but their collective nonparticipation established a rule that has rarely been flouted. By the time the first "Superman" picture was cast, the title role went to Christopher Reeve, who had the chiseled features, the height and the hint of mischievous self-spoofing that made him seem, at the time and in retrospect, perfect for it. What he did not have was a well-known name or a recognizable image, and that was also perfect. Reeve, an impeccably trained, reasonably talented actor, did interesting work in other pictures, but his stardom was delimited, even as it was enabled, by his most famous character. And like the artists, inkers and writers who brought Superman to life in his original, pulpy incarnation, Mr. Reeve did not own the character, but rather inhabited him, gracefully and with good humor, for as long as the franchise lasted.

Now the franchise is being revived, with an unknown Australian named Brandon Routh stepping into those red midcalf boots for "Superman Returns" next year. Meanwhile, elsewhere in the DC/Warner universe, the moribund "Batman," begun by Tim Burton and run into the ground by Joel Schumacher, has been made over, with Christopher Nolan at the helm of "Batman Begins" and Christian Bale as the young caped crusader. Mr. Bale, like Mr. Maguire - and like Eric Bana ( the Hulk) - is a relatively skinny, serious actor with enough charisma to embody the role but without the kind of excessive individuality that would overshadow it.

The earlier Batmen - Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney - are perhaps the exceptions that prove the rule. Each one had already made - or would subsequently advance - some claim on genuine movie stardom, but their one-shot impersonations of Batman did not do much to elevate their standing. And their intense, unpredictable screen personalities - the very idiosyncrasies that would have formed the basis of lasting stardom - seem to block our access to the fantasy of superheroism, which is based on psychological transparency. Movie stars are glamorous creatures we dream of meeting someday, while superheroes are the people we secretly believe we really are.

That dimension of secrecy is crucial. Comic books are the foundation of a fan culture once derided and now celebrated as the province of nerds, misfits and losers - young men, like their idols' alter egos, who could compensate for their social marginality by coming to the rescue of the society that had spurned and mocked them. Their origin stories are tales of shame, victimization and abandonment overcome by lonely discipline and endless self-sacrifice. (Batman, the orphaned heir to the Wayne fortune, and Spider-Man, a working-class orphan from Queens, share not only secret identities but also a penchant for solitude and melancholy.) Stars, on the other hand, are the society's most cherished winners, congratulated for being themselves, drawing attention in the way that the masked, disguised and anxious supermen never do.

Or so we're told. Within the confines of their narratives on page and screen, the superheroes will be perpetual underdogs - the paradox that has kept them going throughout their history. But as any comic book reader knows, their victory is never final, and the vanquished movie stars will never vanish altogether. They can always find work playing villains, as Jack Nicholson and Arnold Schwarzenegger did in the first and last installments of the earlier "Batman" series. So perhaps Mr. Maguire should take heart. When he outgrows his tights and is cast as a misfit with a diabolical plan to destroy the world, rather than as a misfit with a mission to save it, he will at last have proven Chris Rock wrong.

addendum

2005-05-07T17:21:00.000+08:00

more glossary.

HYH - a HY Hypothetical. (you know who you are. =))
hypotheticals posed at late night supper sessions in which puzzled frowns and furrowed brows are often the result. "would you rather be short and have a big nose, or be very thin and a big mouth?"

More Waterside Glossary!

2005-05-07T00:40:00.000+08:00

Here is yet more Waterside jargon, inspired by, amongst other things, camomile blossom tea.

The Man-Date - two heterosexual men socializing without the crutch of business or sports. It is two guys meeting for the kind of outing a straight man might reasonably arrange with a woman. (Note: This is not original, to be sure. But it is neccessary for what is to come.) [EDIT : further reference may be had here.]

The Man-age a Trois - a man date gone awry? A wrongheaded attempt to neutralize the potential awkwardness of a man date by asking a third man along (buffer?).

Prince of Wales

2005-05-03T00:03:00.000+08:00

there's this funky little pub known as the Prince of Wales. have been meaning to check it out for ages.
apparently it's a backpacker's place too! cute. we should go look it up one day!

http://www.pow.com.sg

Still on China...

2005-04-24T11:57:00.000+08:00

I've been meaning to ask if anyone is keen to make a week-long trip down to Nujiang, Yunnan at the end of the year.

I've a friend who's spending a year there providing counselling services to kids and foster parents, teaching English and life skills at the local schools and teaching mental health at a health science school. I met up with her early this year before she left and she mentioned something about the need for Christians to get out of their Christian ghettos and comfort zones.

It might be a good opportunity, not just to see first-hand what God is doing in China, but to participate by providing our time, services and companionship to the kids and my friend over there.

We could also stop by in Beijing to say hello to orangeclouds on the way back. It would be nice if we could make this a group thing. :)

China's Christians

2005-04-24T10:23:00.000+08:00

Apr 21st 2005 | BEIJING
From The Economist print edition

Christianity is becoming popular with China's urban elite

THE late pope, John Paul II, often said that one of his greatest dreams was to visit China. If his successor, Benedict XVI, achieves that goal, and with it an end to half a century of estrangement between China and the Vatican, he will find a country remarkably receptive to Christianity, in spite of the Communist government's deep suspicion of religion. But the Catholic church will have some catching up to do; it is Protestantism that in recent years has spread most rapidly in China, even among the usually sceptical urban elite.

Quantifying Christian belief in China is fraught with difficulty. The avowedly atheist authorities try to prevent surveys by foreign or Chinese researchers that might challenge the official view that Christianity is still a marginal phenomenon. Numbers presented by Christian activists, on the other hand, may reflect a degree of wishful thinking. Officially, there are 5m baptised Catholics and 15m Protestants. Vatican officials believe there are more than 10m Catholics. In its report last year on religious freedom, the American State Department quoted estimates for the Protestant community ranging from 30m to 90m. These unofficial tallies would mean that 2-7% of China's population is Christian.

The most rapid spread occurred in the 1980s after the lifting of China's Maoist-era ban on religious activity and the reopening of thousands of Christian churches. Believers were typically elderly, little-educated and poor. But, since then, the average age of believers has fallen and worship in places not sanctioned by the government has become more common than in officially-approved churches.

For the government, the recent proliferation of house churches—informal gatherings of Christians in private homes or other unauthorised locations (by law, organised worship must take place in sanctioned venues)—is especially alarming. It regards such activity among Catholics as open defiance of the Communist Party, which in 1951 ordered China's Catholics to break ties with the Vatican. The government's attitude towards Protestant house churches is less antagonistic, but it fears that some provide cover for dissidents. There are frequent reports of house-church leaders being arrested or harassed.

Most striking in recent years has been the spread of Christianity among urban intellectuals and businesspeople. A Chinese academic (and party member) at a government-affiliated institute says that in the past five years especially, Christianity has flourished on university campuses. Most universities, he says, have several clandestine Christian “fellowships”, comprising students, graduates and teachers, who meet regularly to read the Bible and discuss their faith. “You'd be astonished to see these meetings. They are completely different from the way we've viewed house churches in the past, as places that attract old women and the illiterate with little scientific understanding,” he says.

At Renmin University of China in Beijing, Li Qiuling says his lectures on western religious culture are not only fully attended by the 100 students registered on his course, but also by dozens of others who simply want to listen in. Mr Li says very few students attend church and most have little interest in organised religion. But they are interested, he says, in Christian values. David Aikman, the author of “Jesus in Beijing”, a book about the growth of Christianity in China, says there are probably dozens of Chinese universities teaching Christian culture.

Anecdotal evidence suggests a growing interest in Christianity among businesspeople. Some have embraced the faith during studies in the West. The academic cited above says companies in China are increasingly keen to sponsor academic symposia related to Christianity. He says the recent spread of Christianity among this educated elite marks “a very critical change” in the development of the religion in China.

Why all this interest? Although foreign Christian missionaries were active in China long before the Communist takeover in 1949, Christianity never had anything like the popularity it enjoyed in eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union before communism came to those parts. Since the relaxation of China's religious controls a quarter of a century ago, foreign missionaries have returned to China, often under the guise of teaching at Chinese universities. But the urban elite's yen for Christianity is little related to their efforts.

Some say it denotes a crisis of faith over the failings of communist ideology. China's conversion to capitalism has prompted a search for values that might help counter the negative side-effects of this transformation, such as corruption. But, if so, why not turn to faiths with a much longer history in China, such as Buddhism, Taoism or Confucianism?

These religions are also enjoying a revival. But Christianity appeals particularly to intellectuals because it is the faith most deeply rooted in the countries that well-educated Chinese most envy—principally America. “Some people have begun to think that the birth of capitalism and modern science in the West is not entirely unrelated to Christianity,” says Mr Li. Protestantism is especially attractive because it lacks the political baggage accrued in China's rows with the Vatican, including over relations with Taiwan.

None of this has gone unnoticed by China's leaders. Last year, they launched a campaign to promote atheism in schools. An internal party document recently railed against “illegal missionary activity”. New regulations on religious activity took effect in March. These insisted the government must maintain its grip on religions and places of worship. Yet this grip is clearly faltering.

The Perils of Cutting and Pasting

2005-04-22T13:24:00.000+08:00

Thanks to Cheemoth for spotting it early.

Earlier today I had posted a blog with a link to a very funny golfing incident. We all know who the real intended audience is, but it had me in stitches.

I cut the URL from my media player and pasted it in the blog.

I didn't know that the link would open up the browser at a webpage with rather questionable advertising. I had thought that it would open up the media player like mine.

I do apologise if anyone had the misfortune of accessing the link before I took it down again.

Thanks Mr MGSR.

Charles and Carmilla - RIOT!

2005-04-18T17:00:00.000+08:00

Cheemoth is not the only champion of overseas Press. I'm a big fan of Cagle's Slate.

And lest I earn the ire of Mr Shadowlands, better throw in a NSFW cautionary. The Inquisition is alive and well! Bwahahahahaha.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/NicholsonCharles/main.asp

now how do i stick pictures in this blog?

Waterside DG

2005-04-18T16:41:00.000+08:00

Waterside DG

For those of us who have not yet grasped the "Ladder Theory of relationships between Men and Women" please follow this link
http://www.intellectualwhores.com/masterladder.html

Are you an intellectualwhore? Hahahaha.

Kosher Viagra. Never thought I'd see those two words together

2005-04-15T01:00:00.000+08:00

Yes I may shamelessly love the NYT, but the BBC is fast-climbing the charts! I shall never forget our British roots (if I may call it that), and here's why.

I'm a WHAT?

2005-04-15T00:20:00.000+08:00

This is too funny! Neonangel's blog has this test linked. I took it, and 5 days into being a Presbyterian, I find that I'm actually an...

1: Eastern Orthodox (100%)
2: Congregational/United Church of Christ (97%)
3: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England (95%)
4: Presbyterian/Reformed (95%)
5: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene (90%)
6: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic) (73%)
7: Lutheran (73%)
8: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God (69%)
9: Roman Catholic (66%)
10: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.) (57%)
11: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist (50%)
12: Church of Christ/Campbellite (50%)
13: Seventh-Day Adventist (35%)

I can already hear spottiswoode going "tut tut... you are a flake.."

The Man-date

2005-04-13T11:47:00.000+08:00

Link is here.

Really good. So good, in fact, that I'm going to post the article in its entirety here. Apologies to NYT. You're the best (in case editor reading)!

April 10, 2005

The Man Date

By JENNIFER 8. LEE

THE delicate posturing began with the phone call.
The proposal was that two buddies back in New York City for a holiday break in December meet to visit the Museum of Modern Art after its major renovation.

"He explicitly said, 'I know this is kind of weird, but we should probably go,' " said Matthew Speiser, 25, recalling his conversation with John Putman, 28, a former classmate from Williams College.

The weirdness was apparent once they reached the museum, where they semi-avoided each other as they made their way through the galleries and eschewed any public displays of connoisseurship. "We definitely went out of our way to look at things separately," recalled Mr. Speiser, who has had art-history classes in his time.

"We shuffled. We probably both pretended to know less about the art than we did."

Eager to cut the tension following what they perceived to be a slightly unmanly excursion - two guys looking at art together - they headed directly to a bar. "We couldn't stop talking about the fact that it was ridiculous we had spent the whole day together one on one," said Mr. Speiser, who is straight, as is Mr. Putman. "We were purging ourselves of insecurity."

Anyone who finds a date with a potential romantic partner to be a minefield of unspoken rules should consider the man date, a rendezvous between two straight men that is even more socially perilous.

Simply defined a man date is two heterosexual men socializing without the crutch of business or sports. It is two guys meeting for the kind of outing a straight man might reasonably arrange with a woman. Dining together across a table without the aid of a television is a man date; eating at a bar is not. Taking a walk in the park together is a man date; going for a jog is not. Attending the movie "Friday Night Lights" is a man date, but going to see the Jets play is definitely not.

"Sideways," the Oscar-winning film about two buddies touring the central California wine country on the eve of the wedding of one of them, is one long and boozy man date.

Although "man date" is a coinage invented for this article, appearing nowhere in the literature of male bonding (or of homosexual panic), the 30 to 40 straight men interviewed, from their 20's to their 50's, living in cities across the country, instantly recognized the peculiar ritual even if they had not consciously examined its dos and don'ts. Depending on the activity and on the two men involved, an undercurrent of homoeroticism that may be present determines what feels comfortable or not on a man date, as Mr. Speiser and Mr. Putman discovered in their squeamishness at the Modern.

Jim O'Donnell, a professor of business and economics at Huntington University in Indiana, who said his life had been changed by a male friend, urges men to get over their discomfort in socializing one on one because they have much to gain from the emotional support of male friendships. (Women understand this instinctively, which is why there is no female equivalent to the awkward man date; straight women have long met for dinner or a movie without a second thought.)

"A lot of quality time is lost as we fritter around with minor stuff like the Final Four scores," said Mr. O'Donnell, who was on the verge of divorce in the mid-1980's before a series of conversations over meals and walks with a friend 20 years his senior changed his thinking. "He was instrumental in turning me around in the vulnerability that he showed," said Mr. O'Donnell, who wrote about the friendship in a book, "Walking With Arthur." "I can remember times when he wanted to know why I was going to leave my wife. No guy had ever done that before."

While some men explicitly seek man dates, and others flatly reject them as pointless, most seem to view them as an unavoidable form of socializing in an age when friends can often catch up only by planning in advance. The ritual comes particularly into play for many men after college, as they adjust to a more structured, less spontaneous social life. "You see kids in college talking to each other, bull sessions," said Peter Nardi, a sociology professor at Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif., who edited a book called "Men's Friendships." "But the opportunities to get close to another man, to share and talk about their feelings, are not available after a certain age."

The concern about being perceived as gay is one of the major complications of socializing one on one, many straight men acknowledge. That is what Mr. Speiser, now a graduate student at the University of Virginia, recalled about another man date he set up at a highly praised Italian restaurant in a strip mall in Charlottesville. It seemed a comfortable choice to meet his roommate, Thomas Kim, a lawyer, but no sooner had they walked in than they were confronted by cello music, amber lights, white tablecloths and a wine list.

The two exchanged a look. "It was funny," Mr. Speiser said. "We just knew we couldn't do it." Within minutes they were eating fried chicken at a "down and dirty" place down the road.

Mr. Kim, 28, who is now married, was flustered in part because he saw someone he knew at the Italian restaurant. "I was kind of worried that word might get out," he said. "This is weird, and now there is a witness maybe."

Dinner with a friend has not always been so fraught. Before women were considered men's equals, some gender historians say, men routinely confided in and sought advice from one another in ways they did not do with women, even their wives. Then, these scholars say, two things changed during the last century: an increased public awareness of homosexuality created a stigma around male intimacy, and at the same time women began encroaching on traditionally male spheres, causing men to become more defensive about notions of masculinity.

"If men become too close to other men, then they are always vulnerable to this accusation of, 'Oh, you must be gay,' " said Gregory Lehne, a medical psychologist at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine who has studied gender issues. At the same time, he added, "When you have women in the same world and seeking equality with men, then all of a sudden issues emerge in the need to maintain the male sex role."

And thus a simple meal turns into social Stratego. Some men avoid dinner altogether unless the friend is coming from out of town or has a specific problem that he wants advice about. Otherwise, grabbing beers at a bar will do just fine, thank you.

Other men say dinners may be all right, but never brunch, although a post-hangover meal taking place during brunch hours is O.K. "The company at that point is purely secondary," explained Steven Carlson, 29, a public relations executive in Chicago.

Almost all men agree that beer and hard alcohol are acceptable man date beverages, but wine is risky. And sharing a bottle is out of the question. "If a guy wants to get a glass of wine, that's O.K.," said Rob Discher, 24, who moved to Washington from Dallas and has dinner regularly with his male roommate. "But there is something kind of odd about splitting a bottle of wine with a guy."

Other restaurant red flags include coat checks, busboys who ask, "Still or sparkling?" and candles, unless there is a power failure. All of those are fine, however, at a steakhouse. "Your one go-to is if you go and get some kind of meat product," explained James Halow, 28, who works for a leveraged buyout firm in San Francisco.

Cooking for a friend at home violates the man date comfort zone for almost everyone, with a possible exemption for grilling or deep-frying. "The grilling thing would take away the majority of the stigma because there is a masculine overtone to the grill," Mr. Discher said.

And man dates should always be Dutch treat, men agree. Armen Meyer, 28, a lawyer in New York who is an unabashed man dater, remembers when he tried to pay for dinner for a friend. "I just plopped out the money and didn't even think about it," Mr. Meyer said. "He said, 'What are you doing?' And I'm like: 'I was going to pay. What's the big deal?' And he said something like, 'Guys don't pay for me,' or 'No one pays for me.' There was a certain slight power issue."

When attending a movie together - preferably with explosions or heavy special effects, never a romantic comedy - guys prefer to put a nice big seat between each other. (This only sounds like an episode of "Seinfeld.") "Going to the movie with one other guy is sort of weird, but you can balance it out by having a seat space between you," explained Ames McArdle, a financial analyst in Washington.

Men who avoid man dates altogether are often puzzled by the suggestion that they might like to spend time with male friends. "If you're buddies with another guy, there shouldn't be any work involved," Mr. Halow of San Francisco said. Which is why many men say that a successful man dates requires a guy to demonstrate concern for his friend without ever letting on. "The amount of preparation that the other guy is making is directly proportional to how awkward it is," Mr. McArdle of Washington said.

When man daters socialize with non-man daters, the activities always fall to the lowest common denominator. Mr. Meyer of New York remembers how he would ask his roommate Jonathan Freimann out for dinner by himself. But Mr. Freimann would instinctively pre-empt, by asking other guys along.

"If I had known he wanted to spend one-on-one time, I would have," Mr. Freimann explained, adding that group dinners had simply seemed "more fun." (The two had dinner in San Diego last week.)

Jeffrey Toohig, 27, is a more reliable bet for Mr. Meyer. They regularly have dinner together to discuss women, jobs and whatever else is on their minds, because, as Mr. Toohig put it, "the conversation is more in-depth than you can have at a bar." Mr. Toohig, who is looking for a job helping underdeveloped countries, divides his male friends into two groups: "good friends who I go out one on one with, and guys I go out with and we have beers and wings." And, he pointed out, dinner with Mr. Meyer has the advantage of not making his girlfriend jealous, the way dinners with his female friends do.

All men, however, agree that one rule of guy-meets-guy time is inviolable: if a woman enters the picture, a man can drop his buddies, last minute, no questions asked.

A romantic date always trumps a man date.

All these Schindlers

2005-04-12T09:20:00.000+08:00

Stumbled upon this article on the BBC's website and learned about these Oskar Schindlers from WWII whose heroic actions went unnoticed and have taken the last 60 years to bring to light. Lord knows how many there were. To name some I'm sure we've never heard of:

Karl Plagge
Raoul Wallenberg
Nicholas Winton
Albert Bedane

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4432075.stm

Am suddenly reminded the 60th anniversary of VE Day approaches (Victory in Europe, May 8th).

youth connect

2005-04-05T09:30:00.000+08:00

a very lovely watersider was featured in the ST yesterday for her good work in Youth Connect. big props to her!

religion as a badge of hipness

2005-03-30T11:28:00.000+08:00

more NYTimes goodness.

Wearing Their Beliefs on Their Chests

"The commodification of religious faith "is born of a consciousness that any religious movement, to stay viable, has to speak the idiom of the culture," said Randall Balmer, a professor of American religion at Barnard College in New York."

and from Michael Macko, the men's fashion director of Saks Fifth Avenue,

"...who viewed the Dsquared collection in Milan last winter, said he was somewhat taken aback. "Hmm, I thought, 'Religion as a fashion theme. That's a little different from corduroy or camel. How do we handle this?' " Undeterred, Saks bought the Dsquared line for its stores across the country. "We bought it as a fashion item, not as a moral statement," said Ronald Frasch, the chief merchant of Saks. "We sell crosses, and it's not a big step from crosses to sweaters."

article will be up for a week, follow cheemoth's instructions to save it.

A little foray..

2005-03-28T11:39:00.000+08:00

...elsewhere to see if our other contributors or readers would find this interesting.

http://www.bushin30seconds.org/

Something I've seen about a year ago.

And a plug for a magazine and book.

http://www.sojo.net/

Why I love the NYT Mag on a sunday.

2005-03-28T01:08:00.000+08:00

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/magazine/327MEGACHURCH.html

Because it has articles like these! Recommend recommend! Warning. In a week or so it'll be paid access so if you got no time can visit link, select printer friendly mode, and copy+paste into your computer for a future read. This is long. Or email me for a copy.

I love these social commentary pieces in the NYT Mag.

Mushy goodbye

2005-03-10T11:04:00.000+08:00

Nawt really la, am not thaaaat sentimental a person.

Actually I meant to post much earlier, seeing the dearth of entries on this blog, but somehow, I forgot both my user name and my password, and several attempts to get Blogger.com to email me the details failed (boo, Blogger!).

May I add that I lurrve the monicker Skinnypastor, or SkinnyP, as it has been abbreviated.

It seems like I spent a lot of my Christian life moaning about the dire shortage of good, like-minded Christian companionship. For years, it was like whine, whine, whine to God, when it was also the lack of trying on my part and the simple fact that double-minded me wanted to have my cake and eat it: church-going Sundays and playing and working hard miles away from Him the rest of the week. I needed my space, plus I was a liberal intellectual, dammit :)

I am starting to realise, in my very slow, 迟钝-fashion, that true freedom really is to be found in seeking a life in Christ. And that this freedom is neither "anything goes", nor is it complex like rocket science. It is based ultimately on trust, the basis of all great relationships anyway. In his dictums, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind" and, "Love your neighbour as yourself", Jesus set humanly impossible standards precisely because they could only be lived out with the help of his holy spirit: throwing ourselves at his feet and hanging on for dear life like so many of the broken men and women in the Bible.

And I glimpsed this, not just from listening to sermons or even pondering and dissecting His word, but through friendships in church, through ministry and seeing people put others first and most of all praying through my needs and warts and black holes with faithful women (awwww, hugs).

In this DG and with other DG-affiliates (haha, you know who you are) I found some kind of a resting place where I could also be me -- pig out, name-drop big words and strange bands, unleash our inner-American Idols in karaoke lounges, argue over movies and generally not pretend that we are perfect Christians.

So after all the whining, I guess God -- who has a magisterial sense of humour -- said See! Lookity! He led me to the water side, and then several months later packed me off on a plane to China.

Do keep me in your prayers because goodness knows I am fallible (especially where manga-jawed men are concerned) and do write because I will write back (I am quite a good writer, ahem). Better yet, come to town for jiaozi and smelly Chinese beer.

Will keep y'all in my prayers.

thoughts on a membership class day

2005-03-07T23:39:00.000+08:00

thank you mr moth for reviving the dead as a dodo blog. :)

i enjoyed the article on charles and cami, as well as the exposition on how to zao membership class. :P

membership class was super xiong and going into it with 3 hours sleep is SO not a good idea. But I really liked all the reminders SkinnyPastor (TM Moth) was laying down on us about what it means to be a member of ARPC and more importantly, the Body of Christ itself. I really like the direction ARPC is going in - its renewed focus on dependence on God through prayer, the constant call to humility and servanthood, and rememberance of God's sovereignity.

At one point SkinnyP drew a little tree diagram to summarise the brief history of the Church... I was struck by how every branch and off-shoot of the Church was matched with a name: Martin Luther for Protestanism, John Knox for Presbyterianism, Wesley brothers for Methodist movement etc. etc. Always one man, placed within a nexus of change, playing the role of catalyst. One man probably unaware of the bigness of things to come, unaware of the greatness of changes to be initiated. LIke a viral plague, Christianity moved from Rome, to England, to Scotland, to America, to Asia and Africa. When SkinnyP talked about a little boat of English believers travelling to Germany just to find out what this Luther guy was about, only to return to start the Anglican church.....wow, can you imagine the small conversation that started that?

"Hey, you free next weekend to go up to Germany? I heard this guy has good ideas to reform the church" "Yeah, why not. It;ll be a bit tough - must leave behind my farm unattended and gotta blow my new horsecart savings but yeah, what the heck...."

Boom. Next thing you know, the Church of England springs up and sends forth a thousand missionaries.

I wondered about Jesus' constant refrain for us to Ask and we shall be given, Seek and we shall find. The context of his comments always lay in the asking of things that were for the glory and realisation of the Kingdom of God I guess.

So much in the world convinces us that our individual lives are small, petty, insignificant, pitiful little things. Even we christians find it hard to believe or dream about big things for God's purposes. We play safe, we work within our zone of safe predictability and never venture out for fear of disappointment.

Somehow these ordinary guys - Luther, Knox, Wesley - saw God's work needed to be done and went ahead to do them. I cannot imagine them predicting the changes in human history God set in place through them. How amazing to look back in your life and realise you were a part of God's plan in such a powerful manner.

I read a wise little comment today: "Don't ask God to bless what you are doing. Ask God what He is doing and go do it. For that already is blessed."

If we ask the things that are after God's heart, he will provide...he already has provided and is waiting for us to align our lives and decisions around his. It's so simple that it almost seems banal : Life perhaps is all about learning to Ask and Seek for the things of God. Then we will see a real outpouring of blessing beyond our expectation.

How amazing. How gracious. How divine :)

Charles and Camilla in the NYT

2005-03-07T13:12:00.000+08:00

An unlikely place to find a love story, and an unlikely couple. But here's a love story rooted in realism, full of imperfections and warts (incl the literal kind). The gist of the article is that there's so much that's real in this relationship, that the contrast between this and the fairy- tale- wedding-turned-rubbish debacle very striking.

It's really quite related to our many supper and coffeetime discussions about attraction: perceptions of beauty, "seh", other less clear forms of attraction; otherwise intelligent men who when it comes to women, think with the other head first; shallowness; rejection. Can't find the words, but it set my mind thinking about a lot of things. I think I was very struck because there are things there about values very hard for us to learn (and unlearn).

Recommended. Need to register.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/06/magazine/06WWLN.html

Wah memmer liao leh..

2005-03-07T11:44:00.000+08:00

Wah lau

8 hours of skinnypastor is quite lethal. But we survived it without too much semi-comatose drooling. Tip for future: the optimal way to attend membership class is to come at 9am, mark attendance, and then go off to do your shopping etc. Come back at around 3-4pm during coffee break (this one you need friend on the inside to SMS you) and be in time at the end to fill out the application form. I only wished I discovered this trick sooner. Nerhmine. There will be another church to change membership to :-)

kaylah, got semi-pseudo-insight one. Church growth is like the parable of the mustard seed. Imagine your sparsely traded microcap. Like Microsoft in 1985. Then 20 years later it's an 800lb gorilla of a company. So it is with ARPC. (oh switch off your heresy-dars this is a joke!) Skinnypastor recalled the early days 20 years ago when ARPC was a dozen people, and any abscences on Sunday would be acutely felt. Now it's so different. The numbers growth is indeed something to marvel at, but we don't seem to laud it too much. Skinnypastor even mentioned wanting to reduce church size (in jest, of course). In context of membership class (50+ this round) it's rather sobering.

knock knock

2005-02-23T14:27:00.000+08:00

dg interloper asks - is anything going on in here? =)

the secret is out! waterside's first baby! :)))))

2005-01-04T23:16:00.000+08:00

yay, the big secret is out on our yahoo mailing list! Mae and Andy are having a baaaaaaaaby. WHOOHOO!

To quote Perfect Strangers' Balki Batokamos (all you 80s kids you know who i am talking about), "Oh Cousin Larry, we so happy now, we do the Dance of Joy!

shoutout to the Man in the USA and thoughts on tsunami thing

2005-01-03T12:22:00.000+08:00

Big wave over the ether to Chunseng!

heya! we cant wait to have you back here as well! we went karaoke on new years day and we have found the ultimate MGSR song that will surely send you clawing the walls in agony. Even the more MGSR tolerant among us had shivers hearing it.

was just thinking and blogging as i read papers about tsuanmi crisis updates.....the need for a sustained year of contribution to these places is so necessary! While the vast outpouring of donations has been really heartening, experts think that the real cruncher will be in the next few months of rebuilding and logistical efforts.

while i am pretty sure habitat for humanity and operation mobilisation will get some projects going, i was wondering if we the local church community can make some sustained effort at giving.

was contemplating various initiatives to raise money over the year for rebuilding efforts...anyone have ideas? These could act as a form of ministry as well, one where we could invite non-christian but big hearted people as well. Unleash the inner christian social activist in you, especially for those of you who have mentioned casually/seriously your desire to see the church more proactive in these areas.

one of my new year wishes for our DG is that we start to look beyond just our personal or even our DG needs. The larger church and society itself are laid out before us to serve after all. ;)

food for thought?

New Year in Big Country

2005-01-02T23:36:00.000+08:00

SO...surprises for 2005 on Jan 2nd...

1. Meet the Fockers wasn't an SQ22 inflight movie selection after all, after much trepidation and angst...

2. I find myself typing an entry into a blog representing my new life in Singapore, from Philadelphia my old life, as a guest in the house that was my home for five years. Talk about MGSR juxtaposition opposites: of old and new, big country and small, this and that.. yadda yadda...

3. I already find myself counting the days till I get on the plane back home. What a homeboy I've become.

Hmm.. semi-spiritual point to all this meandering, oblique drivel: that God intervenes in a big way re: major transitions in life. In situations and in us. But mostly in us. And very serendipitously too (ooh minor MGSR tremor there..) I'm glad that the last year was good. I know it won't always be, but it doesn't mean God works less. I've learnt the better lessons are found in the harder learning. (aahh, goose pimple breakout..!!)

take warm showers to neutralize the raised-hairs. That's what I'm going to do now.

DG Wishes for 2005!

2005-01-01T05:02:00.000+08:00

That all the working boys and girls will finish work punctually on Tuesdays so we can start at 8pm sharp.
That mutually encouraging and sharpening relationships will form.
That we will not tire from the journey.
That if we do tire from the journey, wish #2 would already be in place to keep us going.
That those who embark on new endeavours in foreign lands will continue to abide in the Vine and get rooted in a community of faith.
That we will grow deeper in our knowledge of God, and share more sincerely His love.
That we will be found ready when Kingdom comes.

Blessed 2005 folks! :)

more picture madness

2004-12-28T11:10:00.000+08:00

reindeer
Originally uploaded by neonangel.

mob
Originally uploaded by neonangel.

hey thanks for sending the pics, alto! have done redux versions because i am a slacker who cant get out of holiday mood and go back to regular work. have put them in my personal blog already. :) will post one here too.

on more serious note, thanks for posting the where to help info regarding recent tsunami crisis. Was looking for info about that.... damn sad stuff man. My parents got back at 1am after our mad hatter party and the first thing they did was turn on telly. My mother kept saying "It's the end of the world. Si liao ah!" and proceeded to eat our leftovers, telling my dad to eat too before the tidal wave hits SIngapore. It would be kind of funny if it was not so poignant man.

Tidal Wave Disaster Appeal

2004-12-28T09:36:00.000+08:00

if you can help in any way

1) Singapore Red Cross

2) Sri Lankan Airlines

"Request for Emergency Aid

The first of a series of tsunami waves hit Sri Lanka in the early morning of 26 December 2004.

Thousands have already been killed, and hundreds of thousands more have lost their homes. Whole families have been washed away into the sea in this catastrophe.

President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga has declared a State of National Disaster, and has already sent out an appeal for international aid.

We at SriLankan Airlines also wish to proactively help where we can, to do what little we can to ease the suffering of the people. To that end, we are appealing to you, our business associates, to open your hearts and contribute the following items to be airlifted to Sri Lanka.

1. Tents
2. Food (Pre-cooked or ready-to-eat meal packs)
3. Water Purification Tablets
4. Wheat Flour, rice, other staples
5. Drugs: Paracetamol, anti-biotics, wound dressing, suture material, disposable syringes, vitamins, and vaccinations for diarrhea, cholera and malaria.
6. Intravenous infusions (saline and dextrose)
7. Portable generators
8. Clothes and blankets

For small parcels/items, we would appreciate you sending your donations down to our office at 133 Cecil Street, Keck Seng Tower, #13-02, Singapore 069535.

For medium-sized and large donations, let us know at sin_sales@srilankan.aero and we will make arrangements to collect items from your office either with our personal vehicles or with a logistics operator.

Our grateful thanks,

Johann Wijesinghe
Manager Singapore and Indonesia
SriLankan Airlines"

christmas dinner madness

2004-12-28T01:42:00.000+08:00

christmas dinner madness
Originally uploaded by waterside.

thanks neonangel for hosting dinner!

New Year QnA to do if you bored

2004-12-27T22:53:00.000+08:00

maiden post! shout-out to redbeanfish and alto who set up my account for me.
came across one of these silly little QnAs that are actually quite fun to do and pass around like a slam book concept. I remember we circulated one way back in 2002 in IP DG and we got some interesting cryptic answers.... :) will post this on yahoo email list and see if we can get similar vibe going, kekekeke. (TM Popeye laugh)

1. What did you do in 2004 that you'd never done before?
2. Did you keep your New Year's resolutions, and will you make more for next year?
3. Did anyone close to you give birth?
4. Did anyone close to you die?
5. What countries did you visit?
6. What would you like to have in 2005 that you lacked in 2004?
7. What dates from 2004 will remain etched upon your memory, and why?
8. What was your biggest achievement of the year?
9. What was your biggest failure?
10. Did you suffer illness or injury?
11. What was the best thing you bought?
12. Whose behavior merited celebration?
13. Whose behavior made you appalled and depressed?
14. Where did most of your money go?
15. What did you get really, really, really excited about?
16. What song will always remind you of 2004?
17. Compared to this time last year, are you:
18. What do you wish you'd done more of?
19. What do you wish you'd done less of?
20. How will you be spending Christmas?
22. Did you fall in love in 2004?
24. What was your favorite TV program?
25. Do you hate anyone now that you didn't hate this time last year?
26. What was the best book you read?
27. What was your greatest musical discovery?
28. What did you want and get?
29. What did you want and not get?
30. What was your favorite film of this year?
31. What did you do on your birthday, and how old were you?
32. What one thing would have made your year immeasurably more satisfying?
33. How would you describe your personal fashion concept in 2004?
34. What kept you sane?
35. Which celebrity/public figure did you fancy the most?
36. What political issue stirred you the most?
37. Who did you miss?
38. Who was the best new person you met?
39. Tell us a valuable life lesson you learned in 2004:

Waterside Glossary - Tres

2004-12-20T17:19:00.000+08:00

i've been tasked with this entry. and no, i am not committing DG Adultery! (though am i flirting with it? hmm.)

Three-Chord Rock : referring to bands like Green Day who produce quintessential college/punk/emo rock that involve the use of three chords, sometimes two. all new bands learnt by DG members will be cross-referenced against this yardstick. For example, Third Eye Blind has four chord songs, so they rawk. per cheemoth.

Glossary deux

2004-12-20T13:55:00.000+08:00

OK this isn't canonized DG lingo. It's language that has arisen from recent water-side discussions. Might see wide usage one day.

Committing DG adultery: the act of being unfaithful to your DG and trying another one on the side. Especially if your initial ardor for your DG has worn off and other DGs appear so much more attractive to you.

Girlfriend/Boyfriend fast: self explanatory: a fast from dating so as to commit yourself to God, prayer and to general emotional overhaul: i.e. finding out what the heck is wrong with you, why previous relationships failed, what you need, why you can't commit, why are you such a jerk to girls (not me ahh) yadda yadda... Recommended duration : 6 or 12 months or as needed. But not too long or else you become susceptible to temptation.

Waterside Glossary

2004-12-13T10:46:00.000+08:00

Alright some terminology might need explaining. Perhaps this post will eventually become an entry in the Waterside-DG FAQ post but for now, some essential definitions:

MGSR - Mao Gu Song Ran (Chinese, clearly). It roughly translates to "hair-raising" and "spine-chilling", but there is no better learning of this phrase than by scratching with all your 5 fingernails on a blackboard. Music from Debbie Gibson and Timmy Thomas have been known to give such effects.

ZNJJ - Zuan Niu Jiao Jian. Literally, trying to bore a hole in the pointy end of a bull's horns. It means being a stickler, being nitpicky, pontificating.

VD Alert - Not what you think it means! It is used in Bible Study to silence a boisterous member currently in the throes of a verbal diarrhoea attack, who's often ZNJJ-ing on a pointless topic.

Tough one: Gwyneth Paltrow or Renee Zellweger

2004-12-13T00:07:00.000+08:00

How hard: Thursday's hypothetical requires one to choose between two American actresses (see the post Weekly Supper Fix) with flawed though competent fake British accents and who probably had the same accent teacher too; 2 women in sort of doormat-ty longsuffering roles, currently attached to useless guys. Both movies had rather memorable soundtracks, Sliding Doors featured a pre-fame Dido and still obscure Abra Moore and eternal favourite Jamiroquai, thus more stylish. Yet JM has that killer Bob Dylan closing song (appended below) which reaches me, as it should all men, deeply. Incidentally both played fat woman roles too (subtly moralistic tone here), although one wore a fat suit while the other actually binged up for it. TWICE it would seem!

I'm not sure I see the difference between the options. But my instinct draws me to a Renee type. And I'd say it's the kid and the song (again, see below). The single mother, who as Cuba Gooding Jr succinctly puts, has "been to the puppet show and seen the strings". The 26 year-old woman who finds herself trying to raise a man, while other women her age are still trying to snag one. The irony when a man and a woman are caught in a "who's saving whom" scenario. Alright the living room scene was quite hair-raising. Yes the show has more than it's fair share of cheese for the lactose intolerant, and with low MGSR thresholds. But enuf said. Read the lyrics.

Shelter From the Storm
Bob Dylan

It was in another lifetime, one of toil and blood
When blackness was a virtue and the road was full of mud
I came in from the wilderness, a creature void of form.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

And if I pass this way again, you can rest assured
I'll always do my best for her, on that I give my word
In a world of steel-eyed death, and men who are fighting to be warm.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Not a word was spoke between us, there was little risk involved
Everything up to that point had been left unresolved.
Try imagining a place where it's always safe and warm.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

I was burned out from exhaustion, buried in the hail,
Poisoned in the bushes an' blown out on the trail,
Hunted like a crocodile, ravaged in the corn.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Suddenly I turned around and she was standin' there
With silver bracelets on her wrists and flowers in her hair.
She walked up to me so gracefully and took my crown of thorns.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Now the bounds are broken and they can't be retired
A one more journey to the woods, the hole were spirit tired
It's a never ending battle, for a peace that's always torn
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Well, the deputy walks on hard nails and the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much, it's doom alone that counts
And the one-eyed undertaker, he blows a futile horn.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

I've heard newborn babies wailin' like a mournin' dove
And old men with broken teeth stranded without love.
Do I understand your question, man, is it hopeless and forlorn?
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Now there's a wall between us, somethin' there's been lost
I took too much for granted, got my signals crossed.
Just to think that it all began on a long-forgotten morn.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

In a little hilltop village, they gambled for my clothes
I bargained for salvation an' they gave me a lethal dose.
I offered up my innocence and got repaid with scorn.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

Well, I'm livin' in a foreign country but I'm bound to cross the line
Beauty walks a razor's edge, someday I'll make it mine.
If I could only turn back the clock to when God and her were born.
"Come in," she said,
"I'll give you shelter from the storm."

A retreat at a Balinese villa...

2004-12-12T21:05:00.000+08:00

Ok, not.

One of our church's elders very kindly offered us the use of his place for our DG's annual retreat. A gorgeous Balinese-style bungalow so artfully surrounded by foliage as to conceal its location right in the heart of Singapore.

The retreat was great. (Even though a few of us did doze off post-lunch while pondering over a list of tough questions taking stock of our spiritual journey thus far.)

The questions included:

+Am I Ensuring That I Am Disciplining Myself In The Things That Are Important To God (a difficult two-parter if there ever was one, cos you gotta first establish what's important to God)?

+Am I Reaching Out To People Even When It Is Difficult?

+One Word/Phrase To Describe Where I Am Now.

They will probably be fuel for more reflection, prayer and discussion in the days ahead, hopefully.

Today's sharing session, however, was pretty honest, illuminating and bittersweet. As one of the Watersiders put it so succinctly in his soul-baring remarks, the relationship between faith and application really all boils down to the question: Do I live this life to please myself, or to please God?

All in all, it was a good time to take stock of the past year *assorted moans and cheers*. Now we can say to 2005: Bring it on.

Weekly supper fix

2004-12-09T17:20:00.000+08:00

Visitors to this site may wonder: Who or what is Waterside DG? What do Watersiders do?

Well, a group of us meet once a week for Bible study.

Robust discussion (at a mysterious place called Waterside) is usually followed by supper where some of the theological/life-application threads may be continued.

More often than not, though, supper conversation is usually "a free flow of crap", as Errol so succinctly puts it.

With all ARPC discipleship groups taking a break in the month of December, a few of us got together after work last night, quite by chance, for a rehash of our weekly supper fix.

Here was last night's brain-numbing poser, inspired by the movies.

For guys: Who would you rather be married to - Gwyneth Paltrow in Sliding Doors or Renee Zellweger in Jerry Maguire?

The gals have a choice between: Richard Gere in Pretty Woman or Johnny Depp in Pirates Of The Caribbean (ok, think a less fey version).

Chew on it. The answer is less simple than it appears, and reveals more about you than you care to admit.

Who is John Stott?

2004-12-06T15:49:00.000+08:00

A surprising but timely article in the NY Times!

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/30/opinion/30brooks.html?oref=login

---------------------------
Who Is John Stott?

By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 30, 2004

Tim Russert is a great journalist, but he made a mistake last weekend. He included Jerry Falwell and Al Sharpton in a discussion on religion and public life.

Inviting these two bozos onto "Meet the Press" to discuss that issue is like inviting Britney Spears and Larry Flynt to discuss D. H. Lawrence. Naturally, they got into a demeaning food fight that would have lowered the intellectual discourse of your average nursery school.
This is why so many people are so misinformed about evangelical Christians. There is a world of difference between real-life people of faith and the made-for-TV, Elmer Gantry-style blowhards who are selected to represent them. Falwell and Pat Robertson are held up as spokesmen for evangelicals, which is ridiculous. Meanwhile people like John Stott, who are actually important, get ignored.

It could be that you have never heard of John Stott. I don't blame you. As far as I can tell, Stott has never appeared on an important American news program. A computer search suggests that Stott's name hasn't appeared in this newspaper since April 10, 1956, and it's never appeared in many other important publications.

Yet, as Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Center notes, if evangelicals could elect a pope, Stott is the person they would likely choose. He was the framer of the Lausanne Covenant, a crucial organizing document for modern evangelicalism. He is the author of more than 40 books, which have been translated into over 72 languages and have sold in the millions. Now rector emeritus at All Souls, Langham Place, in London, he has traveled the world preaching and teaching.

When you read Stott, you encounter first a tone of voice. Tom Wolfe once noticed that at a certain moment all airline pilots came to speak like Chuck Yeager. The parallel is inexact, but over the years I've heard hundreds of evangelicals who sound like Stott.
It is a voice that is friendly, courteous and natural. It is humble and self-critical, but also confident, joyful and optimistic. Stott's mission is to pierce through all the encrustations and share direct contact with Jesus. Stott says that the central message of the gospel is not the teachings of Jesus, but Jesus himself, the human/divine figure. He is always bringing people back to the concrete reality of Jesus' life and sacrifice.

There's been a lot of twaddle written recently about the supposed opposition between faith and reason. To read Stott is to see someone practicing "thoughtful allegiance" to scripture. For him, Christianity means probing the mysteries of Christ. He is always exploring paradoxes. Jesus teaches humility, so why does he talk about himself so much? What does it mean to gain power through weakness, or freedom through obedience? In many cases the truth is not found in the middle of apparent opposites, but on both extremes simultaneously.

Stott is so embracing it's always a bit of a shock - especially if you're a Jew like me - when you come across something on which he will not compromise. It's like being in "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood," except he has a backbone of steel. He does not accept homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle, and of course he believes in evangelizing among nonbelievers. He is pro-life and pro-death penalty, even though he is not a political conservative on most issues.
Most important, he does not believe truth is plural. He does not believe in relativizing good and evil or that all faiths are independently valid, or that truth is something humans are working toward. Instead, Truth has been revealed. As he writes:
"It is not because we are ultra-conservative, or obscurantist, or reactionary or the other horrid things which we are sometimes said to be. It is rather because we love Jesus Christ, and because we are determined, God helping us, to bear witness to his unique glory and absolute sufficiency. In Christ and in the biblical witness to Christ God's revelation is complete; to add any words of our own to his finished work is derogatory to Christ."

Politicians, especially Democrats, are now trying harder to appeal to people of faith. But people of faith are not just another interest group, like gun owners. You have to begin by understanding the faith. And you can't understand this rising global movement if you don't meet its authentic representatives.

Not Falwell, but Stott.

lomo

2004-12-06T15:27:00.000+08:00

lomo1
Originally uploaded by waterside.

lomo shot of the water polo match!

test

2004-11-17T14:24:00.000+08:00

test test tallyho