One thing I just noticed is that 鱼生 is supposed to be a play on words for 余升. Ok well, that's not that interesting. What I actually just noticed is that my Chinese name is 余宗升. Ok well, I did know my Chinese name before this. Originally, the 升 was a different character consisting of a 生 with a 王 radical. But that's a pretty uncommon character that most people don't use anymore. So my grandfather, who named me, later told me that I could probably just use 昇, which in simplified form is 升.

Point of my noticing is that if you remove the 宗 from my name, then you get 余升

Anyway, this was my first Chinese New Year in Singapore. So it was the first time ever that I've been able to spend it with my extended family.

This is my mom's side of the family. I don't have a photo of me visiting my dad's side of the family... But I did do the same thing at my dad's sister's place too.

新年快乐！

I was sitting on the ground today during volleyball practice and realized that I had finally managed to catch a glimpse of "the other me."

That is, the me that exists in the world where my parents did not emigrate to Canada, rather, staying in Singapore. I would have been born and raised in Singapore. I would probably know a somewhat useful amount of Malay, Mandarin and possibly Hokkien (at least, in a nearly infinitely greater capacity than I currently do). I would not carry a Canadian accent. I would have no affinity for snow. I would not be studying at the University of Waterloo. I would only be in first or second year university due to NS. I would only know how to drive on the left side of the road, or perhaps I wouldn't even have my drivers license yet.

I would likely be sitting somewhere in Singapore, much like I was doing tonight. Somewhere on campus. Doing something. It's a bit strange when I think about it. How in the dimensions of space and time, if a parallel world were to exist where I was raised as a Singaporean, I would probably now be within 1 km of myself.

Whether or not I would have picked up volleyball is a whole other question, entirely dependent on life choices on my part, and those who I would have grown up with in Singapore.

So I can't say for sure that I would have been sitting on a volleyball court the same way I was earlier this night.

But still, it's funny to think about it.

It seems that who you are is not entirely due to your own personal choices (though in many cases, perhaps it is). On the contrary, it seems to me that who you are can be largely due to the choices and actions of those around you.

It seems that even here in Singapore, I can't "escape" the aspect of denominational differences between charismatic and non-charismatic churches (if the distinction between denominations could ever be described in such a binary sense).

I went to City Harvest Church today with my friend and another exchange student. After an hour-long MRT ride from Buono Vista to Expo, we alighted and walked over to the exhibition centre hall where the service was being held. We weren't quite sure where to go, but the mass crowd of Chinese young-adults and youth assured us that we were probably headed in the right direction.

Soon enough, signs with City Harvest on them gave further confidence that we had in fact made it.

Entering the conference hall, an usher greeted us and motioned to us to follow his colleague, who led us to three vacant seats. Following the usher, I looked around in the relative darkness and couldn't help but feel transported back to the One Thing conferences I had gone to in Kansas City, MO. The place was sizable and the bleachers were packed with people. Lights and smoke machines created an almost concert-like atmosphere, and large projected and LED displays ensured that all attendees could see what was happening on stage.

Worship was already underway, so we continued standing and joined in.

Worship style was not unlike what one might be used to hearing on most recent Hillsong albums.

Following the service, the speaker performed an altar call for people who either had not yet been baptized in the Holy Spirit or who have never spoken in tongues. Of course, these two events are synonymous in some circles, but I personally prefer to maintain this distinction.

This is the kind of thing that even I myself can find differences in opinion among those closest to me. The pastor gave the typical run down of how to speak in tongues (not unlike how it has been described to me both in and outside of my home church). Following this, (what seemed like) a good chunk of the congregation and those on stage broke out in tongues.

Herein lies a bit of difficulty for some people. I am very familiar with the Corinthians passage about how tongues should require interpretation, etc. This is where agreement diverges quite quickly sometimes. Is it or is it not correct for a church to allow such a mass exercising of tongues?

I'm not sure I have an answer. What I believe you perhaps should not do is speak in tongues to the body of Christ without an interpretation. But to speak in tongues as a prayer language, that is a different story. Paul notes that the gift of tongues edifies the believer who exercises it. So I encourage people to speak in tongues if they can. Moreover, the whole school of thought that speaking in heavenly languages allows one's spirit to pray in moans and groans that cannot be expressed in words is no doubt quite powerful in the spiritual realm.

But what of praying and worshiping as a group in tongues? Paul's writings suggest that only two or three should speak in tongues with an interpreter. If no interpreter is present, then none should speak (1 Cor 14:26 ff).

I can understand why then many people do not agree with the style of worship and prayer that some charismatic churches exhibit (entire congregations speaking in tongues simultaneously). But then shall we take all of 1 Corinthians 14 literally? If so, then women should not speak in churches (1 Cor 14:34). If that's the case, then not just the charismatic churches are at fault, but perhaps almost all evangelical, baptist, and many other denominations?

So then what does that mean? As most people would agree, context is of utmost importance when reading and interpreting scripture... I myself, unfortunately, am not well versed in the thorough history and state of Corinth during the time that Paul wrote the letter of 1 Corinthians. However, what I can relate from previous sermons I have heard, the church of Corinth was apparently a bit of a mess, and was perhaps overly "charismatic." And thus, Paul wrote some guidelines for the church of Corinth for them to perhaps regain some order within their services.

Paul even notes himself to "not forbid speaking in tongues." Rather, "everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way."

So then what of tongues during worship? Is it disrupting the natural order of worship? If it is not, then my current best is that it is permissible. For practical example, if the worship leader proceeds into a musical interlude and enters a section of spontaneous worship, then the congregation worshiping spontaneously in either an earthly or heavenly language would not disrupt the service. This, I feel, is permissible. But if the worship leader proceeds into a quiet meditative passage giving people a chance to be still and know God is God and a member or two break out into tongues without an interpretation, then I believe that is disrupting the order of service. Or, if the speaker has already began speaking, members of the congregation should not break out into tongues or spontaneous worship thereby disrupting the service. If the member does have a word for the body, then I feel they should then follow Paul's guidelines in 1 Corinthians 14.

In reading some of a book by Pawson on the Holy Spirit, one of the things that I find interesting to note is his point that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is not typically mentioned or described in any of the epistles. This occurrence is only described in Acts. His take on this is that in the epistles, the Holy Spirit is already assumed. Paul is writing to churches that already understand that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is necessary and already happening. Thus, no explanation is needed.

To me, this can be taken to indicate that the church in Corinth probably wasn't the only church speaking in tongues. But only that they were exercising tongues and other gifts to the point that their regular order of service was being disrupted to the point that Paul had to correct them.

On the topic of being orderly, do not mistake me for saying that spontaneity and free-flow worship are disallowed. Because in actuality, I do not feel that these disrupt the order of service if used properly. Again, problems could occur if a musician suddenly stood up during the sermon and started banging on the snare drum because they felt led to by the Spirit. That could be an example of disruption, in which that kind of spontaneity is not so good in my eyes. If he truly has a word for the church, then he should follow Paul's guidelines.

But breaking into spontaneous chorus during worship, I do not believe that is disruptive in most contexts.

Of course, there is an aspect of sensitivity that needs to be exercised depending on what your audience is as a worship leader. But that is a whole other topic.

At any rate, those are my current best thoughts regarding what I encountered today.

I never like it when people walk out of a church and start spewing out lists of things they didn't agree with. "Oh this was wrong, and this was wrong." And then they're companions will continue, "Yes yes! And this and this was wrong too!"

Yes, we are called to discern. But discern does not mean that I should carry a list of thoughts according to my beliefs and then grade a person or church according to that list.

Rather, if there is something done differently or something new happening, it might be better to commit it to the Lord in prayer and then do some research in the Word, along with trying to determine where exactly your topic of debate is coming from - i.e. perhaps voice your concerns and discuss?

Of course, certain disagreements might be more obvious than others. For example, if a church told you that downloading movies illegally online was ok, then that's a bit of a no brainer. But if you are looking at an issue that is less obvious within the body of Christ, then I believe it warrants some discussion rather than an immediate write off.

This is the kind of thing that I know Dave, Gabe and I talked a lot about while I was living in Sunview last term.

If you disagree with me or see any mistakes, please please do comment to let me know.

For those wondering how things look through my eyes in Singapore, you'll be please to note that I've been slowly uploading photos to the gallery section of my site.

I'm not taking nearly as many photos as Yushi is. Not sure why. I think perhaps it's a combination of the fact I've been to Singapore before, and also that I don't want to draw too much attention to myself by pointing a camera at everything/one I see.

I haven't taken the time to add descriptions to each of the photos. I'll see if I can't describe things next time around. But if you have comments, whether technical or just social, don't hesitate to write. Either are appreciated.

You'll always see the three most recent photos at the top of my blog. Clicking one of those thumbnails will bring you to that image's gallery page.

The photo to the left was taken at one of the NUS shuttle bus stops at night. During the exposure, a small bus passed by, which left a light trail, along with a bit of blue blur where the body of the bus had passed. The photo was shot in shutter priority mode.

The residence hall I am in here at NUS is pretty neat.

The organization of things lends itself much better for friendly interaction between other block mates, when compared to UW residences.

In UW, each floor, block or house is assigned a don. The don is a student, but I believe might also be paid for this position. This person alone is typically responsible for organizing any events within the block they oversee.

At KEVII, there is no one "don" per se. Rather, there is a committee of about 15+ people, who themselves are regular students and regular residents of the residence hall. Together, this team is responsible for planning events.

It seems to me that this setup lends itself better for integrating people, because a whole group is taking ownership of the task, rather than just one person. That one person is a hit and miss - at least from my experience comparing the two different dons I had during two different terms in residence in UW.

Anyway, reason I brought all this up was because tonight my block held their first event, a dessert night for people to just come out, eat some desserts and chill with each other.

For me, as a new student and moreover, new resident of the residence hall, such a night was invaluable for connecting with other residents.

Pretty cool. I also found out a little bit more about the inter-hall sports competitions that are going on, and signed on to check out our residence hall's volleyball team.

We'll see if I can't transfer my ToT skills over or not.