The librarian looked at me funny. He didn't smile.
This is probably because I was checking out Holy Sh*t with a book that teaches children to write poem. I guess those two subjects don't mix.
B saw me reading Wajnryb. He looked at the cover and said, "Dad, really?!"
I am reading two books on swearing and that for several reasons. People I'm meeting often sprinkle their sentences with spices. The excuse is to say that I need to desensitize myself to it (as if I am still allergic to it...). From time to time, I think E has dropped F-bombs here and there. He has just started to speak and it is challenging to understand clearly what he is saying. This perhaps comes from YouTube Minecraft videos (Thanks to whoever you are who have polluted my kid's vocab....). M has some fascinations with Cantonese swear words and he has managed to learn a few. He learns that something completely harmless in English can be severely offensive in Cantonese. FCC requires media to bleep out swear words, but I often feel that those bleeps are invitations to search my mental dictionary for the right word to complete the sentence. I also feel that reading books on the topic isn't so different from reading heretical theological works. In the end, I want to read any grammatical and historical study on swearing and I found a number of them. For now, I only plan to read two.
One is written by Melissa Mohr, a PhD from Stanford, and another one by Ruth Wajnryb. Mohr's is written from a historical perspective and Wajnryb from a cultural and linguistic perspective. The two authors probably have two very different attitude about swearing.
Mohr was introduced on the flap of the book like this...
Melissa Mohr has recently been dividing her time between writing this book about swearing, and hiding it from her kids.
However, Wajnryb wrote about her childhood,
I swore profusely and indiscriminately. So out of kilter with my surroundings was I that I could have been dropped into the family home from another planet. (p.24)
Understandably, she wrote,
My daughter has been an accomplished swearer from her earliest toddlerdom. But even as she picked up the odd taboo word -- mostly through osmosis at home -- she also learned the rules. Restraint was needed in the company of grandmas, headmistresses, basically anyone old-looking. (p.180)
What I have learned are these so far by reading Wajnryb:
(1) Swearing and making oaths are related especially from a religious point of view
(2) Swear words are limited thus a single word can serve multiple grammatical functions: finite verb, gerund, infinitive, noun, adverb, exclamation, etc.
(3) Swear words do follow grammatical rules, i.e. people can actually think that you have committed grammatical error when you swear (as if they really care....)
(4) Swearing can be categorized: social, annoyance. There may be other ways to categorize it.
(5) Swear words can be replaced completely by other words especially religious words, e.g. "Jesus Christ" can be used to swear
(6) Swearing and theology are related, e.g. our attitude towards a certain swear words are shifting depending on our view of religion; Ch. 8 of Wajnryb is "In the Name of God" (this is an interesting chapter....); there are plenty of euphemisms in the Old Testament, etc.
(7) Swearing in one culture may sound totally benign in another, i.e. a literal translation may complete change its meaning
(8) Swear words can be incorporated into another word as prefix or infix
(9) Swearing behavior is different among men and among women. e.g. "High swearing goes with low crying."
No, I have no plan to do a presentation before my kids on these topics. M was only interested in reading a few lines I have shown him and has never asked me again.
Oh, darling, don't you ever grow up, don't you ever grow up Just stay this little Oh, darling, don't you ever grow up, don't you ever grow up It could stay this simple
Some people don't like Taylor Swift because she made a lot of money with her popular songs and they were inspired by her uninspiring love live. Never Grow Old has hints about that. However, one does not need to have her experiences to want to stay young. Dermatologist tells us our skin needs "regeneration." (probably more like a woman thing....) My colleague told me I live like a teenager (no one should believe him...). I have also told my 73-year old daughter that she is only 2-year old in Christ (since she is a PhD in Physics, she is a genius...).
Is staying young possible? Or, actually, it is something we should not give up.
Scriptures have these....
22The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases; his mercies never come to an end; 23they are new every morning; great is your faithfulness. (Lamentations 3:22-23)
This is part of a section (Lamentations 3:19-24) in Lamentations that is sandwiched between dark acrostic laments in the book. Focus is on our covenantal God. God's mercies for us never end. "Steadfast love" comes to us because God has established the covenant of covenant with all those belong to Him. Therefore, great is His covenantal faithfulness. Our love and our mercies, or at least our experience of these, will one day come to an end; however, His grace and mercies are forever new. We know this as we continue in our communion with Him.
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. (2 Corinthians 5:17)
The new has come refers to a new epoch in redemptive history. Anyone who is in Christ belongs to this new epoch that continues into eternity (thus the term "Eternal Life"). Paul has probably applied Jesus' teaching in John 3 about regeneration. This regeneration is not our work, but that of the Spirit. If it is from the Spirit, given by God, it cannot be taken away (Romans 8:38-39), not even we can ruin it.
13Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 3:13-14)
In this way, Paul talked about forgetting what lies behind, but I don't think he was talking about a memory wipe for elsewhere he has asked us to remember where we were (Ephesians 2:11-12). Rather, it is about one's focus in life. Memories stay with us in one way or another. Some will continue to impact us. What Paul talked about is a new definition and new identity we have in Christ. The prize of the upward call is an eternal communion with God. Our life now is only a preparation for what will come. This is I guess why Peter said,
Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 1:13)
We are to set our hope on the grace of Jesus Christ so that our all-consuming passion will be not be wasted on our biological reality but our spiritual renewal that is daily and ongoing: in our dying to sins and and also in our living to grace and promises of God in Christ (Ephesians 4:17-24).
Immigrants use many ways to get legal status here and to survive here. Some of them can be called half-married.
Type I Half-Marriage: Some couples will get married over a traditional banquet but they will not register (claiming they can't figure it out how) with the city government. Therefore, technically, in the community, they are married, but legally, they are not. They do this in order get welfare benefits (both cash and medical assistance) because a woman giving birth to a child looks entirely like a single parent and without income, she may qualify.
Type II Half-Marriage: Some couples will get a legitimate divorce in their country of origin. Then, either the husband or the wife will legally marry to a citizen in this country and obtain legal status here. This fake marriage will be dissolved a few years after all the immigration paperwork are finished. The children of the person who has come here first will then proceed to apply for the other parent to come here. However, the original couple will probably never get married lest the immigration office figures out the scheme.
Type III Half-Marriage: A single lady may find ways to come here, get married to a citizen and obtain legal status here. It leaves a lot of question whether such marriages are real or not. We have met one in her 20s who was abused before.
I would say I am often puzzled whether some of these people I have met are actually married or not. Immigrants are very creative when they need to survive here and many professionals (immigration lawyers) will make money along the way by helping them.
Since poetry often communicates what is private and mysterious and unknowable, comparison is a valuable tool. In fact, it is one of poetry's chief ways of communicating. --- Margaret Ryan, How to Read and Write Poems.
Look, I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see that the fields are white for harvest. (John 4:35b)
Either this verse is an encouragement or a curse. It can be an encouragement of it spurs you to find harvest; otherwise, it leaves you questioning why you still haven't seen the harvest.
However, the key really is to understand what Jesus has said.
It is unmistakable that Jesus is talking about the abundance and the readiness of the harvest. Some scholars (Lightfoot and Ridderbos) said Jesus was pointing to the Samaritans who were coming to Jesus in white robes. However, this is at most an informed speculation. Morgan commented on this verse about the disciples' reaction:
"If those disciples had been appointed a commission of enquiry as to the possibilities of Christian enterprise in Samaria I know exactly the resolution they would have passed. The resolution would have been: Samaria unquestionably needs our Master's message, but it is not ready for it. There must first be ploughing, then sowing, and then waiting. It is needy, but it is not ready." (quotes by Morris, p.279 n.85)
That last line is definitely the conclusion of many. We tend to see the needs but not the readiness for our experience with people are mostly negative. Jesus, however, points to the readiness of people to receive the Gospel and therefore, we must be diligent in reaping the harvest. Another implication of the white harvest term is that we should know that the harvest is not readied by our work, but it is made ready and we are simply there to reap the harvest. Last chapter (John 3) talks about the hidden work of the Holy Spirit in regenerating the sinners and this verse must read in that light.
It is meaningless to reap what is not already matured and ready for harvest. Jesus' statement points us to look at our environment and community from his perspective. There are always people who are ready to come to faith and to follow Christ and we just need to work very hard to find them and to bring them in. Predestination is at play here. This is our hope and our encouragement especially for those of us working in small churches.
29Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:29-30)
What is more burdensome? Christ's commands or our own guilt and bitterness?
A yoke harnesses two animals together to pull a cart or other equipment. Likewise, Jesus' yoke includes all the commands His disciples are expected to know and do. These are mostly written and stated instructions. Any unwritten rule or unspoken expectation puts in place in the church is secondary and relative. It is a form of the heresy of legalism when these secondary instructions become as authoritative as the written commands of Christ. Although drinking, smoking, dancing are never prohibited in the Scriptures (see the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:28-29), some elevated these onto the level of the Ten Commandments (which is written). This diminishes Christian liberty (Galatians 2:4). We need Christ's yoke instead.
Jesus said: "For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Many things we do and many decisions we make may actually bring us into many troubles. Logic of sin carries consequences that can last for generations. We need grace that last forever. Natural consequences of sin are quite difficult and heavy to bear. In contrast, walking in the way of the commands of Christ is therefore a lighter burden and easier. Lie is complicated. One lie that has left the house needs more to cover its track. An easier path is the truth and truth that can become a blessing to others is spoken in love and patience. Bitterness and guilt that we take up in life are not easy to shake. They come with a playback button. Forgive-and-forget may be possible but it is sometimes not at all practical; instead, forgive-and-love solves problems that grudges cannot solve because believers are fully forgiven and what God can do in grace. Injuries of life are real and they burden us, too; however, healing by the Word is more powerful, enables us to move on and looks beyond the prison cell we have built for ourselves. The Word brings us the hope and promises that we cannot give ourselves.
If we need something light and easy in this life, we need Jesus to shoulder the consequences of our sins while we also need Him to show us a clear path through this life in a complicated and uncontrollable world. We can find it in understanding and obeying the gospel of Christ because He is gentle and lowly in heart.
[I have visited this passage again and again for it continues to fascinate me. This is another reflection focusing on what the serpent and the woman (i.e. the man, too) have done with the command of God in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:16-17).]
2:16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."
3:1Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" 2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" 4But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. 5For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
6So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths. (Genesis 2:16-17, 3:1-7)
In Genesis 2:16-17, God’s original command for Adam has three parts:
Part I: V.16b The permission to eat from any tree – a wide scope of choices Part II: V.17a The prohibition to eat from one and only one tree – a narrow scope of prohibition Part III: V.17b The consequence of disobedience – certainty of death
In the interaction between the serpent and the woman in 3:1-5, all these three parts are denied. Although Adam has not been quoted in this conversation, he was always there with the woman according to Genesis 3:6. Adam was with the woman though he did not say anything. The Chinese translation CUV "又給她丈夫，她丈夫也吃了" left a few words out from the Hebrew text. A better Chinese translation is "又給那跟她在一起的丈夫，她丈夫也吃了." The craftiness of the serpent is manifested in how these parts are being denied. Its strategy is well-planned and executed.
A. The Serpent’s Bait -- In 3:1, the serpent raised a question that directly contradicts and denies what God has explicitly allowed. The response of the woman (she is not named Eve until after the Fall in 3:20) showed that she has followed the suggestion implied in the serpent’s question. The serpent questions the existence of even a tiny bit of God’s goodness and reasonableness. It has not directly contradicted God’s intention but it’s leading her in that direction. It was trying to hook her. This questions God’s abundant provision in Part I.
B. The Woman’s Bite -- She did not totally agree with the serpent and yet she has not tried to contradict it either. When the woman has failed to name the tree, the prohibition has lost its anchor (3:3). While God has specifically named a tree, the woman makes it just like any other tree that is “in the midst of the garden.” When the woman said, “…neither shall you touch it,” (3:3) she has added to God’s original prohibition (“you shall not eat,” 2:17) thus amplifying the prohibition and reducing God’s allowed freedom. It makes the woman sounds like the Pharisees who have added to the prohibitions of God in order to protect it, or so they thought. In the end, although God’s description of the consequence is definite (“you shall surely die,” 2:17), the woman framed it like a concession (“lest you die,” 2:17). The certainty of the consequence is reduced. This enlarges the scope of prohibition in Part II and undermines the certainty of death in Part III.
C. The Serpent Set the Hook with Justification -- The serpent now, seeing the woman was hooked, continued. In this last step, serpent moved onto an explicit and complete denial of God. It flatly denied what God has explicitly stated. It said, “You will not surely die,” (3:4) though God said, “…you shall surely died.” (2:17) This might be its original intent anyway. It is only now that it made it clear. In 3:5, the serpent tried to justify (“for”) its denial of God’s announced consequence of disobedience. It said, “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” The serpent’s justification is that they (apparent the serpent spoke to both Adam and the woman) will be like gods. It implied that they are currently blind (i.e. they are created to be blind) but their eyes will be opened by disobedience. They will also gain knowledge. On these two points, the first assertion is strange. They could obviously see the beauty of the fruit without eating the fruit (3:6-7). The narrative (God’s words) has also contradicted the serpent’s assertion. After they ate the fruit, the fact that would gain knowledge is also denied for they would know only one addition thing: the fact that they were naked. In fact, they did not need to eat the fruit in order to know good and evil. Comparing what God has commanded and what the serpent have said, they could immediately know what is good and what is evil. It denies the certainty of death in Part III.
We can see that in the conversation between the serpent and the woman, God’s command, including what is generously graciously allowed, what is narrowly prohibited, and even what entails from disobedience, is entirely subverted. Therefore, we can define sin in view of God’s command (Westminster Shorter Catechism #14, etc.). Sin is a subversion of what God has said either in minimizing His grace, in enlarging His prohibition, or in denying the consequences.
We need to be careful how to understand and handle the command of God. The term "satanic" can be defined according to how the Command of God is being handled. It is satanic when words are being taken from or added to what God has explicitly spoken and there are serious consequences associated with mishandling the Word of God.
Next logical reflections: Was Jesus’ temptation related to this? How does the Law of God develop from the OT to the NT?
This was the passage for a message preached at a recent retreat.
36Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.
37Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?" 38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself." 40And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation." 41So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.
42And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. 43And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. 44And all who believed were together and had all things in common. 45And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. 46And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, 47praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved. (Acts 2:36-47, ESV)
Christian faith is both spiritual and material, both individual and communal.
One key purpose of the coming of Jesus Christ is to deal with sin (Genesis 3:15, Matthew 1:21); however, with this salvation from sin, they are placed into a corporate body in order that they will be discipled and taken care of. Therefore, the Christian faith contradicts religions of the world in terms of the way of salvation and the consequences of salvation although all religions agree that the world is problematic. To face a problematic broken world, the Christian solution is not to deny it, but to transform it. Transformation of the world calls for a different kind of faith.
Immediately after Peter preached (Acts 2:14-36), 3,000 came to faith and were immediately baptized. His last statement (v.36) made it clear that they have sinned by crucifying Jesus on the cross though it is adequately clear that, politically, it was the Romans and the Jewish leadership who have done that. In answering their question ("Brothers, what shall we do?", v.37), Peter said they are to repent and be baptized. Then all will receive the Holy Spirit. No exception. Peter did not mention a lengthy time of discipleship before baptism just like Jesus has instructed them (Matthew 28:18-20). The giving of the Holy Spirit was a fulfillment of Old Testament promise (Ezekiel 39:29). These New Testament saints therefore surpassed all those from before in what they possessed. However, it needs to be clear that this faith is not only about spiritual blessings, but also material blessings because the needs in the community will be taken care of within the community. Christians do not share the Buddhist disdain of the material world.
Individually, each of them needed to repent and be baptized and yet communally, they lived together and had all things in common. It is clear the early church was not practicing communism. None of them were asked to give everything up for the "state" and they sold on what are necessary to meet immediate needs only. They had also done so voluntarily. They have done these so that needs were met. Their communal life also included not just Sunday worship but daily worship (v.46). Their communal life also poured out "into the street" so that everyone loved them. As we continue to read Acts, we know they were not without critics and many would persecute them. However, the highlight on these people is that they were "having favor with all the people" (v.47). However, in a way, Luke did not attribute their attractiveness to their continual growth and kindness. Instead, Luke wrote, "...the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved." Growth came from the Lord, not their appeal in the community. These early Christians found no necessity to play politics in order to protect their moral interests and distinctive way of life. Politics were never in their favor anyway. Therefore, they simply lived and people were attracted to them.
Certainly, we know our society and culture are very different today, but we need to be drawn back to think and rethink how the Apostles' teaching, communal life, sacraments, and prayers can be shared for all (v.42). I tend to think we may need to find way to teach or fellowship on a daily basis (just like the medieval daily mass) in view of the needs and irregular schedules of our community.
Nevertheless, to focus on faith as an individual matter undercuts and undermines the public appeal of the Christian faith. Faith is meant to be confessed personally and communally (e.g. Westminster Confession of Faith and various historic creeds of the Church). A Christian faith that is purely spiritual that disregards the material effects of faith is in fact heretical (e.g. Gnosticism and her various cultic siblings in the early church) and quite useless.
Sin isolates (Genesis 3:12, etc.). Christ's death and resurrection reverses that isolation through faith so that we are adopted into His Body. May the blessings of the Lord flow to us through our communal life, establish us, and transform us into the image of Christ.
14I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. 15So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. (Romans 1:14-15)
"I am under obligation" can be translated as "I am a debtor [opheleteis]..." Paul thinks he owes everyone much and so he is eager to preach the Gospel to them. What he owes, Paul does not think of repaying with money, instead, the way to repay is to preach the Gospel to everyone. Paul did not limit his message to those whom he thought would qualify or whom he thought would be easier to reach. His message is for everyone.
No one has asked him to write this letter. Paul's obligation is unilateral and does not require the other side to approve it. It is a call for understanding. However, he is especially eager to preach the Gospel to the believers. The Gospel is for those who are brothers and sisters.
His work would also necessarily be unfinished until the very end. If one views that as a form of sacrifice* (Paul's own words in Romans 12:1), injuries probably will continue until death (death of the sacrifice) and there is no need to be healed.
We do need to be healed (Isaiah 53:5). "Healed to be sacrificed" captures the irony of we are called to do.
* To be integrated is Jesus' call for us to carry the cross on a daily basis (Matthew 10:38).
Some believers have expressed such opinion after non-believers have used services of the church (e.g. meals, programs, seminars, evangelistic meeting, etc.) but have showed little interest in the Gospel. However, we have seen these phenomena in the Scripture:
(1) None of the Israel except two who are released from Egypt would enter Canaan (Joshua and Caleb, Numbers 32:11-12) and yet God had rescued them by Moses anyway.
(2) Jesus has healed ten lepers (Luke 17:11-19) but only one came back to give Him thanks. Nevertheless, Jesus healed all ten.
(3) Judas, who has eventually betrayed Jesus, has followed Jesus, sent to do ministry (Matthew 10:5), and was allowed to manage the group fund (John 12:6). If ministry is sacred, Judas was allowed to be part of it.
(4) God gives rain and sunshine to both the good and the evil (Matthew 5:45) from the beginning until the end. God did not execute Adam and Eve immediately and they are allowed to live in it.
Either we say Israel, the nine lepers, Judas and many sinners on earth has used God, or we say God is gracious enough to allow them to use the things He has created. If God's children are to be like their Father (Matthew 5:48) and they truly believe all their resources come from God (including time), they can allow their resources to be used by everyone. Outcomes of the Church's ministry do not entirely depend on her works; instead, it depends on the Lord who works through her. In her nearsightedness, she can consider her resources as wasted and exploited by the non-believers; instead, she should acknowledge her ignorance in the exact detailed plan, timetable and work schedule of God and be faithful in her ministry planning and execution.
Solomon was the wisest man on earth (1 Kings 4:30-31), but he had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). If the ladies had lived together, their biological clocks would synchronize. (nooooooooo.......) May be that's why he wrote Ecclesiastes 1:2.
On a Sunday morning when I was about 16, I was walking to church. I lived in a nice neighborhood (I knew this only later in my life...) and have never had any problem. That morning was different. As usual, the street was quiet. When I was very close to the church, I found myself surrounded by 7-8 boys. They were walking on the opposite side of the street and as I got closer to the church, they crossed over and had me surrounded. Some of them were of my height and some were shorter. I don't remember if they have said anything, but one of them stepped forward and punched my chest. He was a shorter one and it hurt. I was shocked. I don't remember they had any weapon and God must be gracious. Without even saying anything, I pushed through them, ran straight into the church and hid. They have run after me into the church's courtyard. However, there were a few people there and so they did not stay long and left.
That punch stays with me until now. I am amazed how this insignificant incident affects me. When people approach me these days without a clear intention, I will tense up. When I am at an ATM machine, I will keep looking over my shoulder. Once a man was asking me something from behind when I was at an ATM machine, I tensed up and I walked off abruptly. I took a course on self-defense in college. Even so, the punch stays with me. I have taken up this allergic reaction that is unnecessary but it may be necessary so that I can understand some other things.
I can (or may be I should not pretend I can) imagine what may happen to people when something more serious happened to them during their lifetime. Some of our experience will stay.
Things happen to us outside our control. This is the one thing ministry has consistently showed me. Can't we believe things happen to us only under God's providence and they are meant to strip away our self-reliance and pride? Christ said to Paul, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Corinthians 12:9) That may be what He wants to show me. Without weaknesses and knowing our sinfulness, how will look outside ourselves to seek the Lord?
Along this line, I have not seen anyone like Mr. W. He is in his 70s and a taxi driver from Hong Kong. He has several major surgeries because of cancer in the last 20 years. He has lost at least a part of the stomach, a kidney, 1/3 of his left lung, and a section of his right femur. He tells me recently that pain has developed in his right pelvic area. He came to Christ a few years back and has been faithful in church attendance. Each time he recovers, he will be back. I plainly tell him the Gospel does not promise that he will recover from every surgery and sufferings but that the Lord will be with him always. He accepts that. I am always amazed how he can accept that. He tells me he reads the Scriptures and prays every morning. He knows what the Lord has done for him. He has gone through much and he knows; when I complain, I don't. May be he is like this because he has been fighting traffic and other taxi drivers on the streets in Hong Kong, but may be God intents to show His grace through his frailties until the very end. It is a privilege for me to baptize him in early June.
He is faithful though we are not. May His grace moves us over to love Him.