pearlie Female. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

My 11-year-old son loves to eat, and not just eat but eat good food! When we were at the bookstore, we noticed this book and after reading in the introduction the author's delightful escapade with escargots, which happens to be one of my son's favourite, we bought the book.

He started reading it, liked it but soon he came back to me complaining about the book's language. Nevermind that the author went to Las Vegas because there was a lady there who cut of the husband's penis, he told the story in not one but a few expletives. My son has since abandoned the book.

Looks like I now have to read it to censor it, so he can get back to reading it.

This book was an excellent read: one of the most enjoyable books I have read in a long time. Buschart examines 8 main denominations: Lutheran, Anabaptist, Reformed, Anglican, Baptist, Wesleyan, Dispensational and Pentecostal.

I like his approach to the presentation of the various traditions. He begins each discussion by telling a story of the denomination, whether about a church he attended, a liturgical act he encountered or an experience he had with them. I find that very interesting as he draws us into his discussions. He introduces us into what the tradition is about.

Then he proceeds to give the context, approach and theology of each of the traditions.

The context is given in their historical and ecclesiastical background. It is very illuminating as he tells the story of how each of them began. It provides us with a footing to begin to understand the denominations, though I wished he had not only concluded on the American side of the history but provide a more a global view of them as well.

The approach is viewed from each of their theological and hermeneutical method. He closes each discussion with a general feel of their theology, particularly their characteristic beliefs. This is where we can identify what makes the traditions.

Albeit with only an average of 20 pages per denomination, he was able to provide excellent historical and theological summaries of them. I can now say that I am beginning to have a fair understanding of these traditions. While there are limitations, Buschart managed to highlight their main theological tenets that make them what they are.

As I read, I discovered much about each of the traditions.

Lutheran: A Gospel of Grace
I noticed from my reading that in comparison to the other denominations, the Lutherans are very much a confessional and creedal denomination. Buschart summarises them with the gospel of grace being the heart of their belief and practice of tradition. From faith to life, the Christian gospel is a message of grace.

Anabaptist: Faith for Radical Community
I was not familiar with this denomination until I read that the Brethren churches are offshoots of the Anabaptist. They did not accept baptism without a personal commitment and therefore most of them underwent a re-baptism even though they have been through baby baptism under the Catholic tradition. Anabaptist's hermeneutics were the hermeneutics of the church. The read the Bible together, interpreted it together and formulated comprehensive statements of faith. They paid particular attention to the Gospels and New Testament. They followed Christ in service to the world.

Reformed: To the Glory of God and God Alone
To the reformed, God is a sovereign God. God is great, God is good and theology is ultimately and finally about God. All men are to acknowledge and submit to him. He is the great I am. God is the subject of the verb.

Anglican: Spirit of a Via Media
My discovery of the Anglican tradition was what surprised me the most among all the others. I had not realise that I know almost nothing about this denomination. I attended a Anglican kindergarten when I was a kid but only one Anglican service more than 20 years ago. I assumed I knew enough about them. Wesley was a Anglican himself and it never occured to me that I should learn more about them. I discovered that the Anglican is a tradition of the via media, the "middle way". From the time it started until today, they have sought to articulate theological beliefs that strikes a middle way between Roman Catholicism and Protestanism, not by formulating some sort of theological synthesis or hybrid but by embracing ambiguity and inclusion. And their theology is more of a theology of liturgy.

Baptist: Freedom for Immediacy
Baptists are generally a non-creedal people but they cared about theology. The believer is free to interpret the bible apart from the binding prescriptions of a creed, church and state. They are guided by the Holy Spirit and the bible itself. The local congregation is free to oversee its own affairs.

Wesleyan: Grace-full Holiness and Holy Wholeness
Being a Methodist myself and after attending Methodism lectures some months back, I began to understand why I think the way I think. Buschart summarised it perfectly, "Wesleyan Christians go out into nothing less than the entire world, their 'parish', with nothing less than their practical divinity - a message of grace-full holiness. All people need to be saved, by God's grace all people can be saved, and this salvation can be wholly holy."

Dispensational: Rightly Divinding the Scriptures
This denomination is new to me - I had thought they were a cult, but not so. There are many renowned scholars from this group of people, like Dwight Pentecost, Craig A. Blaising and Darrell Bock. The Dispensationalists according to Herbert Bateman, "is a tradition driven by a desire to be scriptural and a recognition that infallibility is what the text - not its interpreters - possesses." Buschart summarised that "through reverent and methodical study of the Bible, Dispensationalists seek to discern God's plan for the ages as revealed in the Scriptures." The most distinctive characteristic of the denomination is their view on the characters and distinctions between the nation of Israel and the church.

Pentecostal: The Spirit of Continuity
I grew with the Pentecostals - in a sense where while I still attend Methodist services, I am surrounded by the Pentecostals during my school days , where the Holy Spirit must be experienced, evidenced by the speaking of tongues. They firmly believe that God is the same yesterday, today and forever and the experiences of the early church, as recorded in the book of Acts, provided patterns for us in all ages.

Buschart rightfully closes the discussion with a look into Christian Hospitality, that is we must come to position where we disagree, we disagree in love and in acceptance - to take on a "both/and" approach to unity and diversity within Christianity. It is ironic that most Christians agree that existentially and experientially, the church is diverse and divided, but will you not agree with me that in this age, the boundaries that separate the division may slowly be disintegrating. Not entirely for sure, there are still areas we could not reconcile, but the boundaries may be blurring in some. And where they are not, we are still one Church, with one Head, Jesus Christ, our Saviour, our King and our Lord.

I have not really read Elliot's books in full but when I did this one, I enjoyed it so much I finished it in one sitting. She sees life and lives life with life. There are tears and suffering but over and above it all, there is the love, hope and joy of the Lord. A delightful read, and truly an encouragement in this seemingly endless and tough highway of life.

If you need a book that can give you a thorough yet readable all-in-one discussion about the Millennial views, this is it. After introducing the topic with a thorough overview on the historical development of the millennium, he zeroed in on each of the views, beginning with a run up of what it entails, followed by its biblical basis and concluding each view with a critique. As such, you can hold on to any view and still read the book peacefully. Of all the materials I tried to get my hands on on the Millennium, this is by far the best of the lot.

I found this little book in the bookstore yesterday. This 128-page book argues that we need to interpret the Gospels from a Hebraic perspective.

The authors are scholars of Judaic-Christian studies. They maintain that the bible needs to read with knowledge of the Hebrew language. They contend that the Synoptic Gospels are originally conveyed in Hebrew and that it is with much Hebraic idioms that cannot be fully brought across by merely interpreting it into Greek or in our case English. For example, English idioms like “kill time”, “hit the ceiling” or “eat your heart out” cannot be understood from the conjoined meanings of its elements (p.2). So it is with Hebraic idioms.

According to them, the Gospels are in fact a Greek translation of Hebrew origins. Jesus spoke and taught in Hebrew.

They brought up a number of “mistranslations”, that is, in our perspective. I highlight two of them here:

Luke 10:9 (NASB)
… The kingdom of God has come near to you.
The Greek “engiken” or the English “near” mean “it is not yet here”, which give an futuristic implication being not here yet. But the Hebrew “karav” means the exact opposite – it is here! It has arrived! (p.62)

Matthew 5:42 (NASB)
Give to him who asks of you,
and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.
This saying is couched in Hebrew poetry – parallelism, i.e. expressing of the same thought twice, but each time in different words. In Matt 5:42, the repeated theme is carried through with the words “ask” and “borrow, each in parallel meaning of the other. In Hebrew, “ask” has three meanings: (1) ask a question, (2) make a request and (3) borrow. The authors tie this verse to Matt 5:39 calling it a further illustration of “Do not try to ‘get even’ (Hebraic interpretation of ‘turn the other cheek’) with a neighbour who wronged you”. Instead, when he comes asking to borrow something, sugar or salt or flour, give it to him. (p.73-4).

I was quite impressed with it at first but as I thought about it further, I am not sure if I am now. I also have loads of questions, the obvious one being: how do I know when is it a Hebraic idiom and when is it not?

It was also highlighted that “righteousness” and “judgement” in Hebrew could also mean “salvation”. If that is the case, then Matt 12:18b (quoted from Isaiah 42:1) which reads, “I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall proclaim justice to the Gentiles”, would mean that God has given salvation to the Gentiles. But what does that say about the usage of “righteousness” in Pauline’s epistles? Paul is very much a Jew himself, a Hebrew of Hebrews in fact. Should we also give the same treatment to the rest of the New Testament? Why do the authors only focus on the Synoptic Gospels?

Janet Ng quit her full-time job to devote her life to nurture her visually-impaired son, Colin. Harvest of Love is an inspiring real-life story of how Janet went against all odds to help Colin pursue tertiary education in music in Malaysia where there is hardly any music teacher of facility for visually-disabled students. Born with multiple disabilities in 1983, Colin was not expected to survive beyond one month. Through sheer grit and faith, Janet proved her doctors wrong and managed to raise a talented young man - the first visually impaired person to graduate in music from a Malaysian university-college.

It was a happenstance that we met them one Sunday and we made a videoclip of Colin on the piano - check it out here: http://pearliegates.blogspot.com/2008/03/sunday-spree.h…