Songs We Need to Start Singing

Friday, February 27, 2009

I stumbled upon this wonderful song by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend. I thought that it was just so theologically sound and what Christians need today. Many of us are only receiving breadcrumbs in our worship, and in our music. We need bread and meat! These are the kinds of songs that minister to unbelievers and break their heart to repent and put their faith in God. These are the kinds of songs that minister to the believer to continue and persevere in the faith. Please, I implore you music ministers, evaluate your line-ups. Do not settle for songs that are theologically lacking and that are powerless. Worship should not just prepare us for the preaching of the Word. The songs in themselves should be preaching to the congregation about God's message. Let us evaluate the songs we are singing.

Do they have the same impact without the music?
Are they based on Scripture?
Do they minister the meat of the Word or breadcrumbs?
Do they point to the Gospel and exalt God's redemptive works?

Read the story of this song HERE



and this is the message we need to start hearing!

The Price of the Filipino Sacrifice

Monday, February 23, 2009

60 years have passed since the government of the United States reneged on its promise to give full veterans rights to the Filipinos who volunteered to fight during World War 2. Now, approximately only 15000 of the troops are alive and they are finally receiving some compensation for their service to the US. Many of them fought in the battles that decided the fate of the war in the Pacific. We remember the many Filipinos who sacrificed their blood for the freedom of their country which was then a US Commonwealth.

So, after 6o years, what is the price of their sacrifice? $ 15000 for US citizens and $ 9000 for non-US citizens. A special thanks to Pareng Barack (Pres. Obama) for including this retributive compensation within the stimulus package for the Filipino veterans.

But, I think that the amount of pride that we as Filipinos have for these veterans cannot compare with any amount that any government is willing to give. They fought for democracy and freedom with their own lives. Their story gives me one more reason to be proud to be Pinoy.
Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!

Please read the whole story here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/23/forgotten.veterans/index.html

Want to know how the Reformation began?

I found this amazing video. I think it's called the Reformation Rap. A little history lesson with a dash of "fun." Although, I don't really appreciate rap hehehe.

JILBC Single's Summit Liveblogging

Saturday, February 21, 2009

I'm liveblogging the events at the JILBC Single's Summit happening right now...check it out at the JILBC blogspot

Bahay Kubo translation

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

For those of you wondering what is the translation of some Philippine vegetables here are a few.

Filipino Version
Bahay Kubo
Bahay Kubo kahit munti
Ang Halaman doon ay sari sari.
Singkamas at talong,
Sigarilyas at mane,
Sitaw bataw patani,
Kundol patola, upo’t kalabasa,
At saka may’ron pang labasnos, mustasa.
Sibuyas, kamatis, bawang at luya.
Sa paligidligid nito’y panay na linga.
English Version
Nipa hut
My nipa hut, although it’s small
The plants are diverse
Turnips and eggplants,
Winged beans and peanuts,
String beans, edible pots, lima beans,
White melon, gourd, white pumpkin and squash,
And still there are more, radish, mustard,
Onions, tomatoes, garlic and ginger,
All around are lush sesame plants.

I got this from this blog.

"Abstinence for teens not realistic"

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Refer to the link: Bristol Palin, Sarah Palin's daughter

I do not want to make this an issue about Bristol Palin. She has gone through enough scrutiny from the media during the election. I simply want to raise the issue of abstinence which is obviously "the best option." It is highly unfortunate that this society has come to the realization that the "best option" is not longer "realistic?"

Allow me to paint the picture here. The probability of contracting serious health risks by engaging in sexual activity is far greater than the probability of contracting serious health risks by not engaging in said activity. Even the "safest" methods of contraception are only effective 90-98 % of the time. That means that the danger even with the safest methods still exist 2-10 % of the time.

With abstinence, the risk of STD's, HIV, and other risks are 0 % provided of course that there are no other risk-related activities in which one would be engaged. Now I ask the question, is not 0 % safer, if not much safer than 2-10 %? The fact is abstinence is the best option and the only safe sex is no sex until marriage.

13 yr old father?!

Monday, February 16, 2009

What do you think about this?

Read more about it here.

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=CCB4641EB815B6BE

here is a playlist on youtube about the movie Expelled by Ben Stein. Is Evolution true? Does Darwinian Evolution answer the basic questions of life? Where did life begin? Where did the information for life come from?

Very good video!

Bro Eddie Running for Presidency?

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

This post is a response to The Professional Heckler's post here. The site won the Best Blog entertainment award from The Philippine's Blog Award.

So, I felt the need to answer some of TPH's questions. I do not of course speak for Bro Eddie, the Bangon Pilipinas Movement nor the JIL Church. I am simply a concerned citizen (of Canada) but I am nonetheless a Filipino by blood and by heart.

TPH quoted:

"In fact, Bro. Eddie has reportedly come up with a possible campaign slogan. It goes… “Todo na ito: Villanueva at Panlilio! Ang hindi bumoto… diretso sa impiyerno!” (Afraid!)"

Now, I would like TPH to give evidence as to the likeability of this happening. This is nothing more than sheer conjecturing from the imagination of our dear author. This slogan is wrong on so many different levels that I cannot imagine how someone who is obviously smart for having won the Best Entertainment Award would even stoop to this level of defamation.

TPH also wanted to ask Bro Eddie 5 important questions.

Top 5 Political Questions to Ask Bro. Eddie Villanueva

5: To date, how much pork barrel has been enjoyed by your son Joel as a party-list representative?

You can check for yourself: http://www.cibac.org/

4: If you and Bro. Mike Velarde would go head to head in the 2010 presidential polls, who do you think the Lord would choose - if He could vote?

Obviously, our author missed the mark on the motives of a Bro Eddie presidential bid. I do not support Bro Eddie simply because he is the spiritual director of my local church. Rather, I support Bro Eddie because I've seen the passion in his heart for the Philippines. I have heard him personally speak and was convinced that he has a viable plan for renewal in all aspects of Philippine society. Politically speaking, Bro Eddie would be the best candidate even before making the spiritual argument.

3: You? Really now?

Please do not put words in someone else's mouth.

2: In 2004, you claimed that the Jesus is Lord Movement had five million loyal members. Do you remember how many of them actually rejected your presidential bid?

The people's choice were the people's choice. Bro Eddie made his case, it was still up to the people whether they would listen and do the right thing. I listened, I will do the right thing this year. That is why I want to get my dual citizenship in the hopes that I will be able to vote in the next election. My suggestion to all Filipinos would be to just listen to what Bro Eddie has to say and then make your decision.

And the No. 1 political question to ask Bro. Eddie Villanueva…

1: If you were elected president in 2010… what the hell were the voters thinking?

I'll tell you what I would be thinking-that I am exercising my right as a Filipino to choose righteous governance over the lesser evil candidate, that I am investing in the lives of future generations, that I am voicing out my concerns over the lack of moral integrity in the government and that I am wanting change, renewal and a new kind of politics to be in place. That is what I would be thinking.

HOW WOULD YOU ANSWER TPH's QUESTIONS?

Driven Out

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Mark 1:12 "And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness."

As we read about the life of Jesus Christ within the context of Mark's Gospel, we have to add on to the layers that we have already learned. For example, We already know from verse 1 up to now that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the LORD, baptizer in the Holy Spirit, a Nazarene, and the Beloved of the Father. From here on out, the ministry of Jesus will begin and we must undertake to learn more about Him and His nature.

Also, we have already learned that the very first action that we see Jesus doing was getting baptized to fulfill all righteousness for us. So, I would like to assume that as Mark's Gospel continues, the actions of Jesus are His way of telling us how to behave and how to act.

Here in verse 12, we can see how Jesus submitted to the unction of the Holy Spirit. Jesus here was showing us how to live our lives according to the leading of the Spirit. Notice how Jesus completely trusted in the Spirit of God and was not hesitant to follow. In the same way, Jesus is showing us how to be obedient and to carefully follow and to diligently keep in step with the Spirit.

Whom I Love

Does God Exist? Debate @ SFU

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Last night, despite my incredibly busy schedule, with a paper due in the morning that I have not started, I managed to attend the "Does God Exist?" debate at Simon Fraser University. The debaters were Dr. Michael Horner (theist) and Dr. Dale Beyerstein (atheist).

Beyerstein was the first to present his case. He went through the 8 principles of reason: (I paraphrase)

1. Onus of proof on profounder and not on denier.
2. Merely asserting something does not count as proof.
3. Repeating something does not make it proof.
4. Merely asserting something somebody else had said does not make it true.
5. Fervent belief in something does not make it true.
6. Just because something might be nice if it was true does not make it true.
7. Occam's Razor; the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
8. No special pleading; all principles apply to religious claims.

After this Beyerstein continued presenting his case stating that theology is independent and stands out of the rest of the empirical sciences. He also claimed that the Bible's authenticity is suspicious because of the lack of independent evidence to back it up. Also, one of his main concerns was that Christians do not provide the explanation of "HOW" God created the universe.

On the affirmative side, Horner presented his case in a three-pronged approach. Horner argued:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. The universe has a cause.

Furthermore, he mentioned the improbability of life in the universe and how its fine-tuning suggests the existence of a Designer. And lastly, he also argued:

1. If God does not exist, then objective morality does not exist.
2. Objective morality exists.
3. Therefore God exists.

Horner also challenged Beyerstein to provide the evidence of the truth of atheism. He argued that since atheism is claiming to "know there is no God" atheists should provide proof of how they know.

After their own presentations they both went through their rebuttals and afterwards there was question period. There was of course no declared winner for the debate but I would like to mention that the atheist never did provide any reason for why he held the views of atheism. On the way to the bus stop I heard someone say that Horner did a good job presenting his argument and Beyerstein did a poor job because he did not defend his own beliefs. I think however that Beyerstein did not have an answer for Horner's question.

How can one explain knowing that there is no God? Has anybody examined all the evidence in the universe to be absolutely sure that God does not exist? At best, the claim of not knowing whether God exists or not is a much more logical position than claiming to know there is no God.

At the end of the debate, I saw the person in front of me fill out the survey. I mischievously eavesdropped and found that she was less skeptical about God's existence although she wrote a lengthy note which I could not decipher. I think that the debate was beneficial for the students and for myself. And, at the end of it all, I am still waiting for an atheist to defend the claim "I know God does not exist."

God Loves Himself

Mark 1:11b "with you I am well pleased."

The Father was pleased with the Son for many reasons but I will focus on one today. First and foremost, when the Father beheld the Son, He saw his own exact representation, the radiance of His own glory, his own image. It was as if He was looking into a mirror. And, the reality is that God loves Himself. Here's what John Piper said:

The love of God is not God's making much of us, but God's saving us from self-centeredness so that we can enjoy making much of him forever. Visit his site here.

At this point, God may look like a narcissist. However, that is not the argument of Piper. When God exalts God, He is exalting the only One in the universe worthy of exaltation. And, when He exalts Himself then we are able to behold Him for who He really is. This is actually more beneficial for us than for Him because He is the final source of our joy. If He did not exalt Himself and declare His glory in the heavens we would be void of our greatest joy.

This is why the Father was pleased with the Son. Why is it then that we try and find joy in ourselves or in other things when the Son of God, the Messiah is the only One that can fill all the emptiness of our lives.

Update:
I am very pleased with how HP managed my laptop crisis. I have my laptop back now and none of my files have been erased! Woot!!! So, this is the first post I have from my fixed laptop. I better take better care of it from now on.

You are my Son

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Mark 1:11a "And a voice came from heaven: You are my Son..."

Yesterday, we witnessed Jesus who was being vindicated by the Spirit. Today, in this verse, Jesus was vindicated by the voice in heaven. The question is: who spoke? From the first part of the verse we can understand a couple of things about the speaker. First, the speaker came from heaven but that does not tell us who the speaker was. Secondly, this heavenly speaker calls Jesus his "Son." Now, if the speaker calls Jesus, "Son," then it is probable that Jesus calls the speaker, "Father." And indeed, the speaker who vindicated Jesus is none other than the Father who is in heaven.

For me, the words "You are my son.." are the sweetest words that a person could receive from God. I remember during the CYN Camp '04 in Red Deer, Alberta; it was my first youth camp in JIL. At one point during the camp, there was a time of prayer and there the Lord spoke to my heart one word. He called me "son." When I heard those words, I began to cry in thanksgiving. At another time, during the Encounter Retreat '06 at Heritage Valley in Abbotsford, BC, during the prayer time of the very first session the Lord spoke to me again. That time He said only one word; that word was "Anak." "Anak" is the tagalog word for "child." When I heard that word, I began to cry and weep before the Lord in repentance for not honoring Him as a Father.

Today, God is speaking yet again this time towards you. He is calling you out from darkness and sin to become his precious, redeemed and called-out child. He is calling out to you: "Son! Daughter! Child!" Why not call out to Him: "FATHER!"?

What if God was one of us?

Monday, February 2, 2009

Mark 1:10 "As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove."

The importance of this passage is multi-faceted. First, this passage shows the distinction between the Spirit and the Son. As opposed to the Modalists or Monarchianists (Onenes) who would teach that the Son and the Spirit are one in Person, this passage clearly indicates the different roles played by them. It was the Spirit, like a dove who was descending and it was the Son, "coming up out of the water," upon whom the Spirit descended. To reiterate, Jesus did not descend upon Jesus. Secondly, this passage marks the beginning of the ministry of Jesus Christ. At that moment, the Spirit vindicated the Messiahood of Jesus of Nazareth. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah the prophet who prophesied that the Spirit of the Lord would be "upon" the Messiah (literally and symbolically). After approximately 30 years after His birth, it was revealed that He was the Messiah and the Lamb of God.

In addition to the "fulfilling all righteousness" argument concerning the baptism of Jesus yesterday, it is also believed that Jesus was baptized in order to identify Himself with the human beings He came to save. Here is an illustration:

I am reminded of the story of a young man in a school who was diagnosed with Cancer and who as a result of his treatment for Cancer had his hair fall out. A picture was taken of him in his class at school and it was not possible to tell which the boy was because all of his classmates had chosen to shave their heads, so that they stood alongside him in his condition. This was true solidarity. There is a sense here, of Jesus doing the same thing when he gets into the water. http://www.thisischurch.com/sermon/baptism_of_Jesus2003.htm

Update: I recieved my UPS box from HP Customer Service today. I placed my laptop and all my stored files along with it into the box, went to the UPS branch nearest me and waved goodbye to all my previous works. When it returns (hopefully ASAP), it will be in factory conditions.

Why Lord?

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Mark 1:9"At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan."

I had trouble with this verse. I could not understand why Jesus needed to be baptized. I'm sure John the Baptist thought the same. I mean, baptism was supposed to be a sign of repentance, but Jesus was sinless who did not need to repent or confess anything. So, why did he need to be baptized since He did not need to be reconciled to God? Jesus' answer in another Gospel account was that "all righteousness needs to be fulfilled." What does that mean? I did not know. So, I got a little help from John MacArthur (one of my favourites). Here's what he had to say:

Well, what does he mean by that? Some people say, "Well, He wanted to identify with the people who were getting ready for Him." That’s possible. Others have said that, "He wanted to set the example for believers in the future." I think that’s very possible—that’s getting close. But, let me just kind of cap it off. What He wanted to do was fulfill all righteousness and for us, all righteousness would include what? Baptism. If you’re going to fulfill all the righteousness that God asks of you, you’re going to be baptized. I think Jesus…you know His life was imputed to us, our sins were imputed to Him, His righteous life imputed to us…and He fulfilled all righteousness…all righteousness. http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/BAPTISMAC.HTM

Make sense?

Action: Get Baptized!