In many traditional treatments of Christian theological anthropology (the Christian understanding of human beings), the focus has been on the rational faculties or spiritual capacities that distinguish humans from the rest of the animals.

Traditional conceptions of what constitutes the image of God in man (imago Dei) have been based mainly on these significant qualities.

While these qualities are important and deserve the attention they have been given, other uniquely human qualities are somewhat neglected.

For example, an aspect of our humanity that still awaits fuller exploration by theologians is our ability to see the lighter side of ourselves, others and life itself. I am referring to humour, which is associated only with Homo sapiens and which is absent in the other animals.

In this short article, I want to reflect on two behaviours that many regard as distinctively human but are not taken seriously enough (no pun intended) by theologians: the smile and laughter.

Let us begin with the smile.

Anthropologists tell us that only the human being is capable of smiling because this act is a personal and rational response to others and to events. Animals, they maintain, do not smile and what may sometimes appear quite close to a smile are in fact merely grimaces.

In making this observation, these anthropologists merely confirm what John Milton knew centuries before. In his delightful depiction of the love that Adam and Eve shared in Paradise Lost, Milton writes: ‘smiles from reason flow, / To brute denied, and are of love the food.’

The smile, according to Milton, is a rational act. Thus, it follows that only rational creatures are capable of this behaviour.

In addition, the involuntary smile, as a genuine response to the other, can be said to be an act of self- transcendence. Or, as Roger Scruton has brilliantly put it, the smile is ‘the blessing that one soul confers upon one another, when shining with the whole self in a moment of self-giving’.

Smiling is a way in which we signal our presence – not just our physical presence, but more importantly our personal presence as well – that we are truly ‘here’. Similarly, reciprocated glances and smiles are subtle acknowledgements of one another’s presence, a sign of human sociality.

What about laughter?

Again laughter can be arguably said to be a distinctively human behaviour. Animal laughter like those observed in chimpanzees, bonobos and even rats are not really laughter. They are in fact only vocalisations that sound like laughter, often in response to some physical stimuli.

Although laughter may be analysed in various ways, we must at the outset recognise the fact that, like the smile, it is always a rational response to something. Put differently, we may say that laughter is a form of judgement.

That is why philosophers Like Roger Scruton have postulated – rightly, in my opinion – that only rational beings laugh.

Thus, although bonobos may make screeching sounds that resemble human laughter when tickled, it should not be mistaken as laughter. This is because human laughter, although involuntary and visceral, is never simply a subjective response.

That laughter is a rational response and a form of judgement can be demonstrated in the way in which we respond to some jokes. Although some jokes are funny, we do not laugh at them because they are offensive and in bad taste. This means that we do not laugh at everything that is amusing, only those we judge are worthy of laughter.

Furthermore, laughter is in many senses a social phenomenon. It is an expression of delight or amusement that is other-directed. Scruton again explains this well when he writes that ‘Laughter is an expression of amusement, and amusement is an outward directed, socially pregnant state of mind’.

If smiling and laughing are distinctively human behaviours, can we say that they in some sense mirror our Creator, since human beings are created in the image of God?

Do we have accounts of God smiling or laughing in the Bible?

In the great Aaronic blessing, we have this remarkable statement: ‘the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you his peace’ (Numbers 6: 24-26). Although the expression has been variously interpreted, it could mean that God looks upon his people with a pleasant and cheerful countenance because he is pleased with them.

This has led some commentators to extrapolate that God smiles in delight as he looks upon his people.

The Bible does speak about divine laughter. But in most cases, the laughter of God is derisive – he laughs at human folly, idolators and those who set themselves up as mighty.

But the Bible also tells us that God delights in his children. For example, in Psalm 149, we read: ‘For the Lord takes pleasure in his people; he adorns the humble with salvation’ (v. 4).

And his delight and blessings bring joy and laughter to his people. Rejoicing in the restoration of Zion, the Psalmist could say: ‘Then our mouth was filled with laughter, and our tongue with shouts of joy … The Lord has done great things for us; we are glad’ (126: 2-3). This has led some theologians to suggest that God laughs with us as we rejoice in our salvation.

To suggest that God smiles and laughs do not in any way distort the biblical portrayal of God in his personal dealings with his people, which are often depicted in anthropomorphic terms.

slot online cempakaslot

Laughter and the smile are therefore indices of self-transcendence. As rational and uniquely human behaviour, they may in some sense be said to be an aspect of the image of God that we all bear.

Emmanuel escaped from a life of crime in a witchcraft gang to a relationship with Jesus thanks to the Good Samaritan programme.

Holding a venomous snake, chanting strange prayers while the gang cuts his arms to make him strong – this was Emmanuel’s initiation into a witchcraft gang.

Aged just nine years old, his mother sent him to live in an orphanage after she became too sick from AIDS to look after him.

Vulnerable and alone, Emmanuel looked for a place to belong. He was lured into a witchcraft gang with the promise of magic powers and super strength through mantras and spells.

Soon after his initiation learning these mantras turned into learning to pickpocket and steal from street stalls. He began drinking and fighting – he’d beat up anyone if they had a disagreement.

But then our team arrived at the orphanage to run our Good Samaritan programme. The programme teaches young people social values and how to be a loving caring citizen through a series of interactive workshops all based on the Biblical parable.  

Sceptical and wary, Emmanuel sat at the back listening but not participating in the activities. Gradually, as the weeks went by, he heard more about Jesus and slowly started joining in until his life was profoundly changed.

Living differently

slot gacor 2026

“Now my life is very different,” says 16-year-old Emmanuel.

“I went to a pastor and talked to him about the things I had been doing. I started praying and reading my Bible.”

Emmanuel is no longer violent and he cut his ties with the gang, choosing instead to pray for them.

He’s the first to help out with chores around the orphanage and is now studying hard at his school work so he can become an accountant.

He even spends time with the young people in the orphanage, teaching them football skills and mentoring them.

“I want to tell young people like me to avoid bad things and to accept Jesus Christ. I have done bad things. I have stolen from people and hurt people. But now I respect people because of Jesus.”

Having celebrated Reformation Sunday some weeks back, I find it appropriate to write on one of the chief slogans that encapsulates the essence of what the Reformation was about—Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). I offer the following theses for our consideration (the reader should be glad to know it is 5 and not 95 theses!)

1. Sola Scriptura is first and foremost a theological claim: Scripture is the divine discourse of the self-communicative God to his people

A proper grasp of Sola Scriptura, I believe, begins with an assertion of the following theological claim: Scripture is the divine discourse of the self-communicative God to his people.

In turn, this theological claim involves two other key doctrines, that is, our doctrine of God and our doctrine of Scripture.[1] God is seen as the God who desires to communicate, to speak with His people. And Scripture is seen as the text used by God to be the viva vox Dei (living voice of God) to address the people and generate faith and obedience.[2]

This, I submit, is the basic theological claim underlying Sola Scriptura that imbues the slogan with its sense of authority in the first place.

2. Sola Scriptura is recognizing what God is intending with Scripture within the divine economy of salvation: as a covenant document to draw the church into covenantal relationship with God.

The above notion is verified in three ways.[3]

In terms of its content, Scripture depicts the history of God’s covenantal relations to humankind, including all the divine communicative acts (promises, warnings, commands, consolations etc.) that witness to what God was doing in Christ. In terms of its form, Scripture sets forth the terms and conditions of this very covenantal relationship itself. And in terms of its effect, to encounter the words of Scripture is to encounter God himself in action, supremely in his making of a covenantal promise to us.[4]

Sola Scriptura reminds us that Scripture alone is sufficient to bring about this covenantal intention of God. Hence, Scripture should rightly be conceived as a divine covenant document before an ecclesial constitution.[5]

3. Sola Scriptura, more than a principle, is a canonical practice of the church

At its core, Sola Scriptura is best regarded as a practice, specifically, a Spirit-enabled church practice in reading, understanding and using Scripture in the church in a certain way.[6]

In line with a dramatic or theatrical analogy, there are two ways that the church can ‘perform’ the ‘script’ (Scripture). The first, an ecclesial performance interpretation, is where the interpretative community (the church) authors and directs. The second, a divine authorial-centered performance interpretation, is where the interpretative community receives, responds and enacts. Of the two, the latter corresponds to the practice of Sola Scriptura.[7]

In saying this, however, I am not presuming that the church can have an immediate and unmediated access to God’s Word removed from the interpretive context or interpretive tradition she finds herself in. Stated differently, in the language of the famous philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer, the church’s performance—in this case her reception and response to the canonical script—always occurs out of a tradition or ‘historically-effected horizon’. It is pure naivety to say that one can approach a text ‘a-horizontally’.[8]

Rather, in practicing Sola Scriptura, I mean this: the church’s interpretation and performance is always subject to potential correction from the canon. Practicing Sola Scriptura means not collapsing the text (of Scripture) into the tradition of its interpretation and performance.[9]

In Gadamerian language again: Sola Scriptura refers to the radical alterity of the scriptural texts that confront us as the Word of God.[10] It means respecting the otherness of this other horizon in the dialogue and allowing it to do its work of critique rather than quickly neutralising it through dissolution within the fusion of horizons.[11]

4. Sola Scriptura is a spirited-canonical practice of Jesus Christ before that of the church

Granted the above that Sola Scriptura affirms Scripture as canon, then canon itself is ideally first viewed as a performance (by God) before it is viewed as a script designed for further performance (by the church).

This means that it is precisely because Scripture as canon is first and foremost a performance of what God was saying and doing in Jesus Christ that it serves as a normative specification of how the church is to carry on saying and doing in Jesus Christ.[12] In other words, Sola Scriptura is firstly viewing the canonical discourse in itself as an instance of the triune God’s ‘performance’, and then correspondingly as a script that calls for an appropriate and corresponding ecclesial response.[13]

In fact, a deeper examination reveals Jesus Christ himself as the preeminent canonical ‘performer’. Jesus comes and shows to us how the Scriptures should be read: he reads the parts in light of the covenantal whole and the whole in light of the Christological centre that he is (Luke 24:44, John 5:39–40).[14]

In this way, Jesus establishes the preeminent canonical practice to be ‘of him’ in the sense that the practice is about him and it is his own practice. Jesus Christ is thus both the material and the formal principle of the canon, its substance and its hermeneutic respectively: ‘substance’ in that the Word inscripturated is about the Word incarnate, and ‘hermeneutic’ in the sense that the Word incarnate teaches us how to read the Word inscripturated.[15]

The final step in the equation is to recognise that in inaugurating this key canonical practice, Jesus also commissions this practice in that the apostles and the church are to interpret Jesus after the way He himself did.[16] The sending of the Spirit is to ensure the efficacy of this specific hermeneutical and canonical practice of Jesus in the church and in her tradition. Tradition, seen in this light, is hence the church faithfully passing on and continuing these canonical acts effected by the Spirit, rather than ‘inventing’ new acts under the name of the Spirit.[17]

5. Sola Scriptura is finally a declaration of the clarity of Scripture as recognised within the community of faith

To summarise: Sola Scriptura does not negate tradition, but it does allot tradition a secondary role by designating it with a ministerial rather than a magisterial authority. As Kevin Vanhoozer aptly states it: “Tradition plays the role of moon to Scripture’s sun.”[18]

slot online cempakaslot

Sola Scriptura proclaims there is a gauge or criterion to measure the faithfulness of tradition, and extending further, even the work of the Spirit in tradition. For Sola Scriptura is ultimately a confession and declaration of the perspicuity or clarity of Scripture within the community of faith.

This is a clarity effectuated by the preeminent hermeneutical practice of Jesus himself and continued by the Spirit within the church’s tradition. Concurrently, it is this clarity that enables Scripture to serve as an incessant and simultaneous criterion and check on tradition.

The clarity of Scripture is rightly not independent of tradition or the work of the Spirit, but the clarity of scripture does affirm the otherness of the text in critiquing our interpretation and in shaping tradition such that it is best defined as “loving deference towards the words of Holy Scripture,”[19] and as a “holy attentiveness.”[20]

Ultimately, Scripture, with her clarity, forms, checks and directs the church’s interpretation, and performance. And that, I believe, is what it fundamentally means to uphold Sola Scriptura today.

---

Rev Edmund Fong is currently an Associate Minister in Adam Road Presbyterian Church. He is currently pursuing a PhD in Systematic Theology on the theology of the great German theologian Karl Barth.

---

Notes

^{[1] Kevin Vanhoozer suggests that what he calls our ‘first theology’, that is, our first principles in doing theology, derives from a correlation of these two doctrines. See his “First Theology: Meditations in a Postmodern Toolshed,” in First Theology: God, Scripture & Hermeneutics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 15–41.}

^{[2] David S. Yeago, “The Bible,” in Knowing The Triune God: The Work of the Spirit in the Practices of the Church, ed. James J. Buckley and David S. Yeago (Grand Rapids; Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2001), 49–93, in particular p. 66, states it memorably: “It is this discourse, what is said in these writings, textually fixed in just this fashion, which the church knows as the ‘divine discourse’ of the Holy Spirit” (emphasis his).}

^{[3] This basic idea forms the main argument of chapter 4 of Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 115–150.}

^{[4] Timothy Ward, Words of Life: Scripture as the Living and Active Word of God (Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press, 2009).}

^{[5] Vanhoozer, Drama, 133.}

^{[6] Ibid., 32, 153.}

^{[7] Ibid., 165–185.}

^{[8] Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall, Second, Revised Reprinted Edition (London; New York: Continuum, 2006).}

^{[9] Vanhoozer, Drama, 152.}

^{[10] Amos Yong, Spirit-Word-Community: Theological Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective (Aldershot; Burlington: Ashgate, 2002), 313–314.}

^{[11] Mark L.Y. Chan, Christology From Within And Ahead: Hermeneutics, Contingency and the Quest for Transcontextual Criteria in Christology (Leiden; Boston; Koln: Brill, 2000), 145.}

^{[12] Vanhoozer, Drama, 152.}

^{[13] Ibid., 184.}

^{[14] Ibid., 220–224.}

^{[15] Ibid., 195.}

^[16] Ibid.

^{[17] As Vanhoozer highlights in Ibid., 194, this should not be taken to mean that the Spirit is subordinated in the midst of this. Instead, there is rightly reciprocity in the Son-Spirit relationship. Jesus enables the Spirit’s coming, but from a Spirit-Christology perspective, the Spirit also empowered Jesus to be who He was and to do what He did. The impetus rather, is to recognise the order and pattern set forth in Scripture, that “the one ministered to by the Spirit during his earthly ministry becomes, in his exalted state, the one whom the Spirit ministers” (emphasis his).}

^{[18] Vanhoozer, Drama, 210.}

^{[19] Yeago, “The Bible,” 69.}

^{[20] John B. Webster, “Biblical Theology and the Clarity of Scripture,” in Out of Egypt: Biblical Theology and Biblical Interpretation, ed. Craig G. Bartholomew et al., 1st ed., vol. 4, Scripture and Hermeneutics Series (Milton Keynes; Grand Rapids: Paternoster; Zondervan, 2004), 374.}

Speaker: Dr Andrew Loke
Venue: Bible House Level 4 Seminar Room
Time: 7.30pm – 9.00pm (two evenings)

cempakaslot resmi

2017 marks the 180th year that the Bible Society has been faithfully making God’s Word available and known in Singapore and among many other nations. Encouraged by faithful men such as Rev Dr Robert Morrison, the first Protestant missionary to China, and Sir Stamford Raffles, the founder of modern Singapore, it was instituted by the British and Foreign Bible Society in 1837. Since then, God has graciously preserved the Society through various challenges, and expanded its scope and impact to what it is today. In commemoration of our 180th anniversary, here are some of the most significant milestones in the Society’s history. 

1800: 15-year-old Mary Jones trekked 42km barefooted to buy a Bible after saving up for six years. 

7 Mar 1804: Inspired by Mary Jones’ story, the British and Foreign Bible Society (BFBS) was formed. 

1819: Morrison and his colleague, Rev William Milne, completed the translation of the whole Bible into Chinese; the same year Raffles founded modern Singapore. 

1823: The Bible Mission in Singapore commenced with Morrison’s distribution of 1,000 Chinese New Testaments to Chinese settlers there. 

1825: Morrison and Raffles urged the BFBS to send an Agent to Singapore to promote the Bible Mission in Eastern Asia. 

4 Jul 1837: The Singapore Auxiliary Bible Society was formally registered. 

1853: With support from the BFBS, Rev Benjamin P Keasberry published the New Testament in Romanised Malay. 

1882: John Haffenden arrived in Singapore as the Society’s first formally-appointed Agent. 

15 Nov 1907: The land at 7 Armenian Street was acquired. The Bible House, the Society’s permanent home, was completed two years later. 

1912: Commissioned by the BFBS, William G Shellabear completed a revised translation of the Malay Bible after 11 years of work. 

1913: Shellabear published the first Peranakan Bible in Baba Malay. 

1928: Ernest Tipson became the new Agent. His ministry among fellow prisoners during the Japanese Occupation (1942-1945) sowed the seeds for Trinity Theological College (TTC). 

cempakaslot login

1946: United Bible Societies was formed. Malaya was administered as a Joint Agency under the National Bible Society of Scotland (NBSS) and the BFBS. 

1948: Ian Morrison of the NBSS succeeded Tipson as Representative over the work in Malaya. 

1965: Rev Peter P K Hsieh succeeded Morrison, becoming the first local General Secretary of the Agency. 

1966: Following Singapore’s independence, the Agency’s name was changed to The Bible Societies of Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei. 

1967: Rev Khoo Siaw Hua was the first local to be appointed Chairman of the Society’s Advisory Council. 

12 Jun 1970: The Bible Society of Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei (BSSMB) was formally registered, with Rev Khoo as its first President. 

4 Apr 1974: The Bible House was rebuilt and reopened. It later underwent a second rebuilding in 2011. 

1978: A nation-wide Billy Graham Crusade in Singapore was held with the BSSMB’s support. 

1983: The first Joint Consultation on Chinese Scriptures was held in Singapore between church leaders from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore. 

1986: With Malaysia forming their own Bible Society, the BSSMB’s name was changed to The Bible Society of Singapore and Brunei (BSSB). 

1992: The BSSB’s name was changed to and officially registered as The Bible Society of Singapore. 

2002: Project S.E.E.D was launched. Scriptures were collected from all over Singapore and redistributed to the needy in Singapore and many other countries. 

2006: Commissioned by the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS), the Society published its first annual devotional for Lent. 

2014: In a joint partnership between the Society, NCCS and TTC, the ETHOS Institute for Public Christianity was formed. Sower Institute for Biblical Discipleship was also established. 

2015: In conjunction with Singapore’s 50th Anniversary and the Jubilee Day of Prayer, the SG50 Limited Edition Jubilee Bible was published. 

2016: International Bible Experiences Pte Ltd was officially registered. 

“For the LORD is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.” —Psalm 100:5 (ESV)

When the determined 15-year-old Mary Jones trekked 42km barefooted to buy a Bible, little did she realise that her love for God’s Word would inspire a movement which included William Wilberforce and Rev Thomas Charles to set up the British and Foreign Bible Society (BFBS) in London on 7 March 1804 to encourage the wider circulation and use of the Scriptures. This movement would in due course open the doors for the formation of The Bible Society of Singapore several years down the road.   

Cherishing the Past 

The Bible Society’s history is intertwined with the early pioneering work in the region—most notably that of Sir Stamford Raffles, the founder of modern Singapore, and Rev Dr Robert Morrison, the first Protestant missionary to China. They were among the first to realise Singapore’s potential as a strategic location for missions work in Asia, and it was due to their heart for the Bible Mission, which at the time meant the translation, printing and distribution of Scripture, that The Bible Society of Singapore exists today. 

Raffles came into contact with the work of the BFBS when they wrote to him on 22 November 1813 with reference to an appeal for Bibles by Dutch and English soldiers: 

“His Excellency will have the goodness to give directions that they be placed in the hands of proper persons to distribute the same…”

The BFBS sent 500 Dutch Bibles, 1,000 Dutch Testaments, 300 English Bibles and 500 English Testaments to be placed in the care of Raffles, British Java’s then Lieutenant-Governor, with the above letter. Raffles then eagerly carried out its instructions, moving also in the circles of those who started the Bible movement in 1804, as attested by Rev Peter Hsieh, the first Singaporean Secretary General of the Society (1965-1980). 

Raffles’ support for the Bible Mission grew, leading him to become the President of the Java Auxiliary Bible Society in 1814, and the President of the Sumatra Auxiliary Bible Society in 1818. His interest in supporting the Bible work increased when he returned to England in 1817. Letters from our Society’s archive showed that Raffles strongly supported Malay translation work and personally leaned towards a preference for the translation to the commonly-used Malay language. Old BFBS reports mention 200 reams of paper being granted to Rev Benjamin Peach Keasberry in Singapore later in 1848 to actualise the printing of a revised edition of the Malay New Testament. 

When Raffles established Singapore in 1819, the Bible Society naturally rooted in the new island settlement. The Bible movement there truly began in 1823, when the BFBS distributed 1,000 Chinese New Testaments to early settlers at the new Chinese settlement called “Sincapore” [sic] through Rev Dr Robert Morrison. On 4 July 1837, the Singapore Auxiliary Bible Society was formally established with the aim of serving the needs of the region.

In its first year, the Singapore Auxiliary was able to raise funds and take possession of 2,852 Bibles in 23 different languages into its depository. It also issued 956 Bibles, Testaments and Portions. As a strategic hub even in those days, Singapore also set up a Bible depository to store the Bibles and tracts. It was first held in the Singapore Institution (which later became Raffles Institution) located at today’s Raffles City. There were early attempts to distribute Bibles through colportage, but it met with strong opposition from the Chinese well into the 1880s. However, the persistent Sophia Cooke, who worked among Chinese girls, persevered in her outreach efforts. Chinese and Tamil colporteurs were eventually engaged to distribute the Bibles and tracts in 1883.

By 1884, Scriptures in 27 languages were circulated in Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei. After moving several times, the early Bible depot also found its permanent home in 1907 at Armenian Street. Today, the Bible cause has extended from Singapore even farther afield through the printing of Bibles in China, to supporting India through the William Carey Centre and to other Bible Societies—serving to impact the lives of Singaporeans and all who receive and read God’s Word. (Read the Bible Society’s Milestones on page 14 to understand how the Society has journeyed for the past 180 years in the Bible Movement.)

Celebrating the Present

Scottish novelist Robert Louis Stevenson said: “Don’t judge each day by the harvest you reap but by the seeds that you plant.” When God’s Word is sowed in the hearts of people who need its life-changing power, there is a great harvest. Every time a Bible is made available to a person, the potential for a renewed life is created (2 Cor 5:17).

The Bible Society has indeed also gone through several phases of transformation, not only in its physical location and structures, but also in its outreach. What has not changed is the emphasis on our mission of making God’s Word known to all nations (Mt 28:19). 

The Bible Mission is now a global effort carried out in over 200 countries and territories, through 147 Bible Societies that come under the banner of the United Bible Societies. The Bible Mission has grown from translation, publishing and distribution to include literacy, engagement and advocacy—putting the Bible in people’s hearts, gradually positioning ourselves as a mission agency for Southeast Asia and the wider world, and continuing to impact and transform lives with the Living Word.

Impacting the Nation through Engaging the Word 

The Bible Society’s Sower Institute for Biblical Discipleship (SIBD) provides biblical training for the Christian community in discipleship, leadership, and missions. This is done through a wide range of programmes that help people explore the Word of God deeply, as well as apply it into their lives. We also conduct literacy programmes in the region, teaching people to read and write so that they can read God’s Word for themselves.  Many of these programmes are collaborative efforts with established partners aimed at developing and providing holistic discipleship training to build up the Church.

SIBD also works with the Bible Society’s Sower Publishing Centre (SPC) and Bible Resource Centre (BRC) to make resources and training materials available not just locally, but also outside Singapore. These materials are translated and adapted for overseas audiences, particularly countries in the United Bible Societies’ Southeast Asia cluster of nations, hence furthering the Bible Mission in these places. 

One such example is WISE (Word Intake for Spiritual Edification). This 40-day Scripture-based programme is made available in different languages and dialects, in various formats such as devotional booklets, study guides and audio formats via iSower—a solar-powered audio Bible. This programme serves as a good complementary and follow-up programme after the transformational literacy curriculum. (Visit bible.org.sg/wise for more information on WISE.) 

Our discipleship and engagement efforts are not limited to only the present generation. Through our children, family and NextGen ministries such as the D6 Conference and FAM101, we aim to connect the Church with the home to accomplish God’s design of generational discipleship. (Visit bible.org.sg/events for more information.)

Engagement through Holistic Mission

The Bible Society has, over the years, expanded its role to embrace a more holistic approach towards the Bible Mission. We help people engage with God’s Word not only through learning and study, but also through real-life experience, living it out by providing God’s Word as well as humanitarian aids for those in need. These include people in the region who are heavily affected by poverty, persecution and oppression, and natural disasters. (Mt 5:1-12) The Bible Society’s travel mission ministry, International Bible Experiences (IBEx), organises Bible Mission Trips to provide Scriptures and basic necessities to victims in developing countries, especially the disaster and poverty-stricken areas.

The Bible Society also raised funds to support victims affected by the floods in Myanmar, the earthquakes in Nepal, Typhoon Haiyan in Tacloban , Philippines and the refugees in the Middle East. Through active contributions by generous donors, up to S$1,000,000, both in cash and kind, has been raised for the last three years.

bonus slot cempakaslot

IBEx also organises Bible Land Tours to help people experience and engage with the Word in the lands where Bible stories took place, meet the local missionaries, understand their struggles and needs, and catch God’s heart for missions.

Furthermore, Singapore has been designated as one of four Bible Mission Hubs of the UBS. Its strategic geographical location enables it to function as a centre for advancing the Bible Mission in the Asia Pacific and effectively addressing the needs of its countries.

Impacting the Nation through Advocacy

The Bible Society aims to make the Bible credible to individuals and communities in our ever-changing world through our advocacy work. Hence, we spearhead various initiatives to break down barriers towards the Bible and to communicate the relevance of the Word in various sectors of society in fresh and approachable ways.

ETHOS Institute for Public Christianity, a public think tank, was established in 2014. It is a tripartite collaboration of the National Council of Churches of Singapore, Trinity Theological College and The Bible Society of Singapore. It conducts public lectures, seminars and conferences to engage the wider public in societal issues, informing and equipping Christians and non-Christians on addressing these issues from a biblical perspective.

In addition, we also plan events such as Colours of the Bible, which is organised in collaboration with the Embassy of Israel, to interact with the Word through art. Such events promote the use of creative mediums, such as art and culture, to invite people to engage with and experience the Word.

Charting the Future

Foundations for the Bible Mission were laid by many faithful men and women who have gone before us. As we move into the next lap, the Bible Society strives to localise the global Bible Mission and internalise global best practices. Our efforts do not just further the Bible Mission in Singapore, but also work actively to increase our involvement overseas, bringing God’s Word to places and people that need it most. 

As the Bible Society celebrates 180 years of Bible Mission work of making God’s Word a living hope to all nations in 2017, let us be reminded of how God has graciously preserved the Society through various challenges, watching and guiding us through each charted course, carefully using the Society as a vessel to impact and transform lives. (Turn to page 17 to read about our Calendar of Events for 2017.) It is our sincere prayer that the Bible House and The Bible Society of Singapore will continue to be God’s instrument for generations to come (2 Tim 2:21) in making God’s Word available to all nations, inwardly centred on the Bible and outwardly expressed in service to people. We invite you to partner us in this meaningful mission.

Be Part of the Bible Mission

Your support is crucial to the Bible Mission! There are many ways you can do your part:

• Donate to financially support local and international Bible Mission efforts

• Pray that God will further the Bible Mission, bringing more people to Him through His Word

• Participate in our programmes to learn more about the Bible

• Volunteer with the Bible Society, contributing your time and effort to God’s work

                  

Every Christmas Christians celebrate the Incarnation, the metaphysical union between true divinity and true humanity in the one person of Jesus Christ. But is such a union possible?

Throughout the centuries many skeptics have raised doubts by pointing out that being divine entails being omniscient and omnipotent, but the New Testament portrays Jesus as having human properties such as being apparently limited in knowledge (Mark 13:32) and power (John 4:3-6).

Many Christians have responded by saying that the Incarnation is a mystery.

This is true, nevertheless, the inadequacy with simply replying ‘mystery’ is that, since the Christian wants to make meaningful statements by affirming, for example, that the divine nature includes omniscience and that Jesus was apparently limited in knowledge as stated by the Scriptures, he/she must demonstrate what is meant (or what could possibly be meant) by these statements; it is not enough to claim that it is a ‘mystery’ and leave it as that.

Moreover, the Christian must ensure that the explications of these statements do not result in contradictions. The problem with asserting that one can make contradictory statements about Jesus (e.g. ‘Jesus has complete awareness of everything and complete unawareness of everything simultaneously’) is that the person who makes such contradictory statements is not affirming anything about Jesus.

Affirming ‘complete awareness of everything’ and ‘complete unawareness of everything’ simply cancel each other out; it is like writing something and then immediately erasing it, such that one ends up with nothing that is affirmed of Jesus.

Therefore, in order to make meaningful statements about Jesus in accordance with the Scriptures and to rebut the charge of incoherence, it would be helpful if the Christian can suggest a possible model to show how concepts like omniscience and apparent limitation in knowledge can be affirmed of Jesus such that no contradiction results.

One such model is the Divine Preconscious Model (DPM), which is a form of ‘Kryptic model’. The New Testament portrays Christ as having divine powers including the knowledge of all things (e.g. John 16:30, 21:17), but not utilizing them in all situations. His divine powers were largely ‘hidden’ (‘Krypsis’ in Greek) during the Incarnation, and only utilised on certain occasions to reveal his glory (e.g. John 2:1–11).

This is what DPM postulates.

The key insight is that a divine person can refrain from utilising his omnipotence when he carries out certain activities, such as walking to a town in Samaria. One can therefore suggest that the Son of God did this by the finite strength of his human body instead of utilising his divine powers, hence he could experience fatigue as portrayed in John 4:3-6.

Likewise knowledge can be understood as a kind of power which one can refrain from utilising. For example, a person might have knowledge of calculus, even though he might not be consciously thinking about calculus all the time.

This knowledge of calculus can be said to be in his preconscious: when he chooses to utilise this knowledge by directing his attention to it, that is, when he chooses to consciously think about calculus, he can become aware of calculus.

Since having knowledge of a certain thing such as calculus does not require a constant conscious awareness of that thing, the knowledge of all things by a divine Person does not require a constant conscious awareness of all things by him. Thus, it could be the case that a divine Person chose to let his knowledge of all things reside in his divine preconscious at the Incarnation, and he freely chose not to utilize all of the knowledge in his preconscious, so as to consciously experience our human limitations.

Concerning Mark 13:32, it should be noted that the Greek word οἶδεν which is translated as ‘know’ means ‘to have realised, perceived, to know’; this word is often used in the New Testament in a general way, e.g. to know a person, to be able to understand/apprehend/recognise.

Therefore, in view of its semantic range, in this passage oiden (οἶδεν) can be legitimately rendered as ‘aware’. Thus, Mark 13:32 can be read as ‘But of that day or hour no one is aware, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.’

slot jp

This reading fits the context perfectly: the disciples would be hoping that the Son would reveal to them the day of his coming, but no one can reveal what he/she is not aware.

For our purposes here, it is important to note that such an unawareness of the Son can co-exist with omniscience in the same person because, as noted previously, omniscience does not require a conscious awareness of all the things known. A divine person can use his omnipotence to restrict the scope of his conscious awareness as well as the utilisation of his omniscience, and in this state of self-restraint the Son was genuinely unaware of that day; it was not a sham.

Because of his love for us, the Son of God restricted himself, came into the world, suffered for us and gave himself up for us (Galatians 2:20). This Christmas, let us be thankful that ‘The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth’ (John 1:14).

---

Dr. Andrew Loke (PhD, Kings College) is Research Assistant Professor at The University of Hong Kong. A former medical doctor, he is the author of ‘A Kryptic Model of the Incarnation’ (Ashgate, 2014) and ‘Debating the Christian Faith’ (Tien-Dao, 2014). He has published articles in leading academic journals such as Religious Studies. He is also the author of the ETHOS Institute Engagement Series booklet, ‘Science and the Christian Faith‘.

One of the most important contributions of the sixteenth century Protestant Reformation is its clear reminder to the Church concerning the primary authority of Scripture. Sola Scriptura – Scripture alone – was the battle cry of the great Reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin in the wake of a Church that is so laden with human traditions that the essence of the Gospel was so severely obfuscated that it was no longer in view.

Modern evangelism has in the main sought to be true to the emphasis of the Reformers by stressing the authority of Scripture as the infallible Word of God. However, in doing so some evangelical Christians and churches have consequently adopted a pejorative and dismissive view of tradition, a view which the Reformers neither held nor encouraged.

slot online cempakaslot

In his book, The Fabric of Theology Richard Lints argues that in adopting this approach – enunciated in slogans such as ‘No creed but the Bible’ – evangelical Christians have deprived themselves of the rich theological and spiritual heritage and wisdom of the Church. As a result, their understanding of Christian existence is impoverished and, without the tutelage of the Church the Bible is often read, interpreted and applied in subjective and idiosyncratic ways.

This in turn has led to the proliferation of interpretations of the faith, some of which are in conflict with others. When tradition is not taken seriously, writes D.N. Williams, ‘the “centre” that the Reformers were hoping to restore splintered into a multitude of conflicting versions of the faith’.

Evangelical Christians therefore need to rediscover the wisdom of the Reformers.

In stressing the primary authority of the Holy Scriptures, the Reformers were not urging the Church to ignore – much less dismiss – the secondary authority of tradition. If Scripture is the authoritative text for the Church, tradition must serve as its authoritative interpreter.

In his Large Catechism, Martin Luther writes thus about the Apostles Creed: ‘Here you find the whole essence of God, his will and his work beautifully portrayed in a few but comprehensive words’. In the same work, Luther asserts that ‘… the Creed brings us full mercy, sanctified us and make us acceptable to God’.

In similar vein, while John Calvin was highly critical of the teachings and practices of the Roman Catholic Church of his day he acknowledged the authority and value of tradition as the interpreter of Scripture. Thus, he could say that the ancient traditions of the Church seek to expound ‘the real meaning of Scripture’ and he acknowledged that the ecumenical creeds contain ‘the pure and genuine exposition of Scripture’.

The Roman Catholic theologian of the last century, Yves Congar, maintains that the nature of the Christian faith itself makes tradition important. The Christian faith, Congar argues, ‘is an inheritance that is both transmitted and received’. As authoritative interpretation, tradition enables the Christian properly understand the authoritative text, the Bible.

To say that the universal Church, whose life and ministry are shaped by Scripture as its authoritative interpreter is to acknowledge that she alone is able to discern the counsel of God it contains, by the help of the Holy Spirit.

The Church is the place where true Christian teaching and true faith can be found. And as Tertullian puts it in his treatise against the Gnostics, ‘only where the true Christian teaching and faith are evident, will be the true Scriptures, the true interpretations, and all the true Christian traditions be found’.

Perhaps one of the reasons why some evangelicals have difficulties with recognising the role of tradition in Christian theology is because the relationship between the Holy Spirit, the Church and Scripture is not explored in sufficient depth.

The theological significance of the fact that the Spirit who inspires the authors and the texts of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16) is the same Spirit who will guide the Church into all truth (John 16:13) must be carefully teased out if we are to have a robust understanding of the nature and role of tradition.

It was J. I. Packer, one of evangelicalism most important theologians, who made this point in his book, Fundamentalism and the Word of God. ‘The Spirit’, writes Packer, ‘has been active in the Church from the first, doing the work he was sent to do –guiding God’s people into an understanding of revealed truth’. ‘The history of the Church’s labour to understand the Bible’, he continues, ‘forms a commentary on the Bible which we cannot despise or ignore without dishonouring the Holy Spirit’.

The Church of today ministers in a world where great cultural upheavals are evident. Described by some enigmatically as the postmodern condition, our society witnesses an ever-deepening suspicion of received social conventions and traditions.

As the Belgian theologian Lieven Boeve observes, in the culture we call postmodern ‘emancipation from bonds that were once taken for granted and left unquestioned has resulted in a situation in which every human being is given the structurally-subjective task of constructing his or her own personal identity’.

In this postmodern world, the church that takes no interest in being shaped by her rich theological and spiritual traditions will be vulnerable to the seductive lure of the new and the novel. And in preferring discontinuities instead of continuities, such a Church runs the great risk of losing her identity, her uniqueness as God’s people and become indistinguishable from the rest of society.

A reflection from Darryl Teo, a participant of the Bible Land Tour to Israel from 5 – 16 November 2016.

Spiritual Directors: Brendon and Cathie Clancy

cempakaslot slot gacor

READ MORE
https://www.bible.org.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Worship-Through-the-Holy-Land_Word@Work.jpg