Category: Ramblings

When it was announced that the covid 19 mRNA vaccines were ready in early 2021,  we were convinced by the authorities that the efficacy of these mRNA vaccines was 95%.  The clinical trials of Pfizer were conducted this way.  2 groups of 20,000 volunteers participated with one group vaccinated while the other did not.  8 and 162 persons were infected from the vaccinated group and the non vaccinated group respectively.

Efficacy of the vaccine   =    1 – 8/162 x 100   =  95%

Out of caution,  I hesitated to take the vaccination till 50% of the nation’s population was fully vaccinated as announced by the authorities in their official website.  The cumulative figures of infection in that week were :

Fully vaccinated (2 jabs)       :   412   out of 2.5 million

Partially vaccinated (1 jab)   :  283   out of 0.5 million

Non vaccinated                      :  253    out of 2.0 million

Looking squarely at the above statistical data,  it was very strange that the partially vaccinated had the highest percentage of infection among the three groups.  If we leave out the partially vaccinated figures,  using the above formula in calculating the efficacy of the vaccine,

Efficacy   =  1 – 412 /253 x 100   = – 63% 

That was a red flag for me.  Instead of even getting zero efficacy,  the actual efficacy was negative 63% implying that the vaccinated was more likely to spread the disease.  Later, the authorities changed their narrative that the vaccine did not prevent transmission but protect against hospitalization and death.  It would be too far-fetched or bizzare for me to believe that the vaccine, which could not prevent the first line of defense against transmission, but could prevent the second or third line of defense of hospitalization and death.  Since the population was over 90% vaccinated, there was no control group for comparison to make such assumption.

Later, the authorities informed that the killed virus vaccine such as the China made vaccines were inferior to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.  That defied common sense again.  How could the killed virus vaccine, which presented the whole real virus but killed as not to cause disease, be inferior to the mRNA vaccine, which was only producing one spike protein of the virus ? Won’t a person’s immune system trained by the killed real virus vaccine recognize the same real virus better when he is exposed to the real virus than trained by the simulated single spike protein vaccine bearing no semblance to the real virus ?   The authorities also informed that natural immunity was inferior.  That was also bizzare for me.   It is like someone who has actually won a real fight against the enemy, and will he not better trained in future fights against the same enemy than just learning to fight in a simulated situation ? Some 9000, who suffered severe side effects from the first mRNA vaccine jab since rollout, were told by the authorities to complete. their vaccination regimen by taking the Sinovac killed virus vaccine. Was it not telling us that the killed virus vaccine was safer ?

Fast forward to 19 Feb 2025 when the Straits Times newspaper reported that 100,000 people in Thailand were infected with flu since the start of 2025 and there was 9 fatalities which all 9 fatalities were vaccinated.  

Due to the kiasu nature of the Singapore population,  32% were vaccinated upon learning of the death of a very famous Taiwanese actress Barbie Hsu due to pneumonia. I could safely assume that the Thailand population had lower vaccination rates below 20%.   Common sense interpreting the above data should tell us that the flu vaccine was not only not effective but might possibly weaken the immune system where all the deaths came from the very small vaccinated percentage. (Does not this statistics cast doubt on the earlier premise that mRNA vaccine does not prevent transmission but does prevent death ?)

Open theism is a theological view that emphasizes God’s dynamic relationship with creation, particularly regarding human free will and the nature of the future.  It asserts that :

1. God is Omniscient but the Future is Partially Open.   

Open theists believe that God knows everything that can be known, but because the future includes free choices that have not yet been made, it is not fully determined and therefore, not fully knowable.

2. Genuine Free Will.

Human beings have real freedom to make choices, which means their decisions are not pre-determined by God.  This view contrasts with classical theism, which holds that God’s foreknowledge includes all future events.

3. God Can Change His Plans.

Since the future is not entirely fixed, God can interact with humanity in real time, responding, adapting and even changing His course of action based on human choices and prayers.

4. God’s Sovereignty includes Risk.

Unlike traditional views that depict God as meticulously controlling everything, open theism suggests that God, in His sovereignty, allows for uncertainty and risk, valuing genuine relationships with His creatures.

Open theism is often contrasted with classical theism (which holds that God knows the future exhaustively) and is debated among theologians, with critics arguing that it undermines God’s omniscience and sovereignty. However, supporters believe it better aligns with biblical depictions of God’s relational nature and human responsibility. 

(See Table 1 for the comparison of Open Theism with Classical Theism, Arminianism and Calvinism.)

Let’s see how the various views interpret the following verses.

1.  God’s Knowledge of the Future.  

Isaiah 46:9-10.  “I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done.”

Classical Theism And Calvinism.   Strongly supports God’s exhaustive foreknowledge and sovereignty over all history.

Arminianism.  Affirms that God knows the future, but human free will is still intact.

Open Theism.  Open theists interpret this as God declaring His ultimate plan, not every single human choice.

1 Samuel 15:11.  “I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me.”

Classical Theism & Calvinism.  View this as anthropomorphic language – God is expressing disappointment but knew this would happen.

Arminianism.  Acknowledges that God foresaw Saul’s rebellion but still allowed him free will.

Open Theism.  Suggests that God’s plans can change based on human actions, meaning the future is not entirely pre-determined.

2. Human Free Will.

Deut 30:19.   “I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse.  Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live.”

Classical Theism & Calvinism.  Accepts human choices but interprets them as working within God’s ultimate plan.

Open Theism & Arminianism.  Strongly supports libertarian free will – humans can genuinely choose their destiny.

Acts 2:23.  “This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.”

Calvinism.  Shows that God’s sovereignty includes determining major events like Jesus’ crucifixion.

Classical Theism & Arminianism.  Supports foreknowledge but does not necessarily mean predestination of all things.

Open Theism.  Might argue that God’s plan involved sending Jesus,  but human choices (e.g. Judas’ betrayal) were not fully determined.

3. God’s Sovereignty vs Human Responsibility.

Proverbs 16:9.  “The heart of man plans his way,  but the Lord establishes his steps.”

Calvinism & Classical Theism.  Strongly supports God’s control over human decisions.

Arminianism.  Suggests God allows human plans but still guides history.

Open Theism.  Could interpret this as God influencing but not dictating outcomes.

Jonah 3:10.  “When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it.”

Classical Theism & Calvinism.  Argue that this is God revealing His unchanging character rather than literally “changing His mind”.

Arminianism.  Agrees that God takes human repentance into account but still knows the final outcome.

Open Theism.  Strongly supports the idea that God responds dynamically to human actions.  

4. Prayer And Divine Change.

Exodus 32:14.  “And the Lord relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.”

Classical Theism & Calvinism.  God’s “relenting” is seen as part of His eternal plan rather than a true change in decision.

Arminianism.  Prayer is significant, but God already knows the outcome.

Open Theism.  Prayer genuinely influences God’s actions, showing an open future.

James 5:16.  “The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.”

Classical Theism & Calvinism.  Agrees but believes God already knew the prayers and included them in His plan.

Arminianism.  Accepts that prayer is powerful but within God’s foreknown will.

Open Theism.  Supports the view that prayer makes a real difference.

(See Table 2 for the comparison.)

The early Christians were persecuted throughout the first three centuries under the Roman Empire for refusing to worship the Roman gods and the Emperor.   The worst period of persecution was under Emperor Diocletian from 303 to 311 AD.  It ended when the next emperor Constantine signed the Edict of Milan in 313 AD.  He convened the first of seven ecumenical councils in Nicaea in 325 AD.

Christianity was made the state religion in 335 AD, and the first Christmas celebration was celebrated by the early Christians thereafter in 336 AD.  There was about a few hundred churches scattered across the whole Roman Empire then and there was no central authority. The fourth ecumenical council of Chalcedon was held at a later date in 381 AD implying that there was still no central papal authority then.  Our formal doctrines were derived from these ecumenical councils especially that of Nicaea and Chalcedon.

The bishop of Rome gained prominence over other bishops primarily because it was the capital of the Roman empire then before it moved to Byzantium which was renamed Constantinople.  The church of Rome was the first to celebrate the Christmas before the few hundred churches also celebrated over time.   How did the individual church bishops arrive at such a decision to celebrate the Lord’s birthday based on theological or liturgical reasons was still debatable because it was not determined at any of the seven ecumenical councils. Papal authority was only formalized in 440 AD under Pope Leo I which was more than 100 years after the first celebration.  

It is clear that neither the state nor the later papal authority started the first Christmas celebration but rather the early Christians in Rome.  

To me, the Christmas celebration is a matter of conscience just like whether we should eat food offered to idols.  Scripture did give us clear instruction on such matter of conscience.  The small budding church in Ephesus faced such dilemma on whether to eat food offered to idols which was sold in marketplaces or being invited to feast by pagan friends.  In my opinion, one will be making a wrong turn to contend against each other on such matter of conscience.  After the Reformation,  the Lutheran church continued to celebrate Christmas proving that the matter of conscience of Christmas celebration was not in conflict with the matter of truth detailed in the five solas.  

Rom 1:26-27

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Any violation of the natural function is an abomination to our Lord God. An affront to His wisdom of His created order. The churches can argue that times have changed and the unnatural relationships can have committed faithfulness to each other is immaterial.

Likewise God has mandated that man is the head of the family. We can argue that women today are well educated and can just be as capable. (God has created men and women to be equal and all will be like angels in the coming glory. Gal 3:26-29. But for the time being, that is what God had decreed for the family relationship in this life.). It is also a clear scriptural command that women are not allow to teach and have spiritual authority over men. 1 Tim 2:12-13. The reason given was that Adam was formed first, then Eve – telling us that God’s sovereign will in His created order settled the issue.

Likewise the medical drugs invented so far either enhance or inhibit the NATURAL FUNCTION of the human organs or cells. Should one day the drugs interfere with the natural function of our cells (especially to alter to bad function), that is also a violation of God’s created order in my opinion.

Luke 15:11-32

11 Jesus continued: “There was a man who had two sons. 12 The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them.13 “Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealthin wild living. 14 After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need.15 So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs. 16 He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything.17 “When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! 18 I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired servants.’ 20 So he got up and went to his father. “But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.21 “The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate.25 “Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. 27 ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’28 “The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. 29 But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. 30 But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’ 31 “‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’”

We are created to have dominion of God’s creation and yet our first ancestors sinned by wanting to go their own way with their lives and their inheritance.  God simply gave them up to their sinful desires.  All unrighteousness will end in misery, and so the younger son discovered after all the years of wild living.  

I have heard numerous sermons on this parable but none stressed another crux of the parable is the spiritual bankruptcy of the younger son when he came to his senses.  He said to himself, “How many of my father’s hired servants have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired servants.”    The younger son acknowledged he had sinned against heaven and against the Father.  And he was no longer worthy to be a son and he was willing to submit himself as a hired servant.  That is a very clear penitent confession of his spiritual bankruptcy. Did he come back and demand that he be treated as a son again ?  No.   Did he come back unrepentant with past brutish behaviour and start asserting his authority as a son again ?  No.  

The false hyper grace pastor had twisted this wonderful message of repentance and grace by suggesting firstly that when the younger son said those words to himself, he was schizophrenic. By coming to his senses as stated in Scripture, it was obvious that the younger son was remorseful and decided to make that journey back to seek the father’s forgiveness.  The second twisted suggestion was that the father did not even bother to hear the son’s confession of sins before he welcomed him and so, there is no need to feel godly sorrow for sin or contrition, or to confess one’s sins and repent. We know God the Father is omniscient.  Surely He know our hearts when we are repentant and ready to return to Him. Any sensible person will not conclude that the younger son returned without any hint of repentance and be an ingrate all over again. Won’t he be so thankful forever to be received again as a son of the Father ?  Won’t he be a filial and responsible son from then on ?

1 John 5:16

¹⁶ If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that. 

Heb 6:1-6

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, ^[fsince they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

Heb 10:26-29

For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has ignored the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. ²How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?

Heb 12:16-17

¹⁶ that there be no sexually immoral or godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal. ¹⁷ For you know that even afterward, when he wanted to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears.

There are many explanation of this verse 1 John 5:16 regarding the sin leading to death.  Some interpreted that it is referring to specific sin that causes physical death such as death of some after partaking of the Lord’s supper without judging themselves or the death of Ananias and Sapphira in lying to the Holy Spirit. Or the unpardonable sin of attributing the works of the Holy Spirit as the works of the devil mentioned by our Lord. Others believed it is referring to sin of murder and we should not feel the necessity of praying that he or she should escape the physical death penalty.

Looking at the whole counsel of 1 John which was addressing the gnostics, John could be referring to the sin of apostasy.  The apostate had professed faith and even tasted the good things of the faith and yet could sin wilfully, or repudiate our Lord by denying His deity, incarnation and the sufficiency of His atonement.  Heb 6:1-8; Heb 10:26-29; and Heb 12:16-17 tells us that for such a person, there is no more place for repentance.  It is not a momentary weakness leading to sin but a continual hardening of heart in sinning. So there is a difference in the degree of sin.  The example given of Esau in Heb 12:16-17 describes him as a godless and immoral person. Esau could exchange his birth-right for a meal which clearly revealed his apostate state of belittling and trampling hard on God’s promises and blessings. That was not a momentary weakness. That was complete hardness. For though Esau wanted the blessings back with tears, he was rejected for he found no place for repentance.

In the present woke society in the western capitalism states, many so-called believers are sinning wilfully and may harden their hearts to a point of no return. In the coming persecution, these believers may willingly renounce Christ in order to escape reproach, suffering or martyrdom. There may be remorse but they cannot be renewed to repentance.

In Matt 24/25, our Lord’s disciples asked Him what would be the sign of His coming and of the end of age.  He gave 4 consecutive parables in the parable of the faithful servant, the parable of the talents, the parable of the wise and foolish virgins and the parable of the sheep and goats.  The parables gave instruction and responsibility to His disciples as stewards to care for His Kingdom.  The main instruction of the first and the last parable was to care for His people, especially the least of the brothers.  All four parables expect faithfulness from the stewards. 

In the parable of the talents, our Lord expected the disciples to understand both the spirit and the letter of His instruction to invest in His Kingdom while He would be away for a considerable period of time.  The first and second servant understood perfectly and invested with the resources given as faithful stewards.  These two servants fully knew their Master well that He expected them to be faithful in fulfilling His instruction. The third servant failed to know the character of His Master well and avoided any risk AT ALL COSTS. Thus he was not faithful in fulfilling the instruction of His Master.  

If our Lord expects us to bear fruit in every good work (Col 1:10), how often will we avoid sharing with the least of the brothers by hoarding our wealth – choosing to believe that giving is loss and not gain ?  If our Lord expects us to bear fruit as in sharing the gospel with all, how often will we avoid all risks to our jobs and career as not to share the gospel so that we do not step on toes in a woke and all inclusive society today ? Besides, how often are we rich towards ourselves first without being rich to God when we are given material blessings ?   The landowner in the parable of the rich fool was not greedy.  He had an unexpected abundant harvest that his present barns could not hold.  His first thought was to build bigger barns instead of caring for God’s people with the excess abundance. How often do we think of upgrading our standard of living FIRST when we receive a promotion, salary raise, big bonuses or unexpected abundant business profits ? If we are not obeying His 3 demands of discipleship in the first place (Luke 14:26,27,33), how can we be faithful servants till the end ?

As our Lord’s disciples, we have no excuse if we do not invest in His Kingdom of the highest priority and we should be content with just food and lodging.  1 Tim 6:6-10. But sadly the majority of Christendom in the western capitalism states tend to live with indifference to our Lord’s warning and instruction in these end times as goats rather than sheep.  And not being faithful to investing in His Kingdom at all.

Luke 12:13-21

¹³ Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.”¹⁴ Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?” ¹⁵ Then he said to them, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; life does not consist in an abundance of possessions.” 

¹⁶ And he told them this parable: “The ground of a certain rich man yielded an abundant harvest. ¹⁷ He thought to himself, ‘What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.’¹⁸ “Then he said, ‘This is what I’ll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain.¹⁹ And I’ll say to myself, “You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.”’ ²⁰ “But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’ ²¹ “This is how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is not rich toward God.”

Since I believed and was baptized in 1976,  I have heard numerous sermons on this parable.  The sermons would emphasize that having wealth is not a sin but only the love of it.  It is such a relief to many believers who live in such an affluent society as mine thinking that as long as we are not greedy to gain more, we are fine.  Is the parable that warns against all kinds of greed really says so ?

Our Lord already stated that life does not consist in an abundance of possessions.  In another word,  having an abundance or being rich is already a red flag.  Is the rich man in the parable greedy ?   It was his own land that yielded an unexpected abundant harvest.  It was unexpected because his present barns could not hold all.  This situation is no different from what we will face when we have an unexpected salary increase, promotion or a good business year.   There is no greed to gain more in such a situation.  Yet God was displeased with his mind being rich towards himself and not towards God.  The rich man’s first thought was how to place the abundance and to store up enough for him to take life easy from then. He could very well used this extra abundance to bless others –  to satisfy both spiritual and physical hunger – and thus laying up treasure for himself in heaven.  Ambrose once said,”The bosoms of the poor, the houses of widows, the mouths of children are the barns which last forever.”   Actually our Lord Jesus said a lot about the danger of riches, sometimes calling riches unrighteous or deceitful.  God even called this rich man a FOOL.   Yet how many affluent believers really feel the serious danger in the warning ?

If Christ comes today,  how are we going to answer what we do with our possessions ?  

Gen 1:14

And God said,”Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years…”

The Hebrew word for signs is “avah” which means to mark.  Scripture has frequent mention of the star constellations and from the above verse, they can be used to mark the seasons and years.  Thus when Scripture mentions certain events by marking the position of the constellations, stars and planets, we can know the date of the events by studying astronomy.  We must not confuse astronomy with astrology which is forbidden by God.   Astrology is the occultic belief that interprets the influence of the stars and planets on the lives of people.  Scripture mentions that Magi from the east came to look for Jesus our Lord, the King of the Jews, when they saw His star.  Matt 2:1-2.  This substantiated that certain unique astronomical signs in the heavens could reveal certain significant events.

In Gen 59:9-10, Jacob on his deathbed prophesized “Judah is a lion’s cub, from the prey, my son, you have gone up.  He stooped down; he crouched as a lion and as a lioness; who dares arouse him ?  The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples…”  The Hebrew word for foot is “regal” and this is significant for it may refer to the star Regulus, the brightest star in the Leo constellation, known as the King Star since ancient times. The sign for Leo is the lion.  We know from other scripture references that Jesus our Lord is often referred to as the Lion of Judah and the King of Jews. Jupiter (the largest planet in our solar system) in Hebrew means “righteousness” and Venus, the second planet from the sun, is known for its brightness in the dawn sky.  Our Lord Jesus is called “the bright and morning star”.  Rev 22:16.  Jupiter was often referred as the King planet by ancient astronomers.  Jupiter came into conjunction with Venus in Leo at 5 am, 12 August, 3 BC.  On 14 September, 3 BC,  Jupiter came into conjunction with the Star Regulus.  Could the Magi see these particular events or other similar conjunction of Jupiter with other celestial bodies around the time of the birth of our Lord Jesus and started planning to set off to visit and worship our Lord ?

Then between the dates of the above two astronomical events, a “great wonder” event happened that fitted the description in Rev 12:1-5.

Rev 12:1-5

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. ² She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. ³ Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. ⁴ Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. ⁵ She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 

The description of the great sign started by saying a woman was clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet. The woman referred to the Virgo constellation. And there was only one day – 11 September – that the moon was at her feet and the sun was at the upper torso. This configuration could be seen in Palestine between sunset at 6.18 pm and moonset at 7.39 pm on Wednesday 11 September, 3 BC. The Hebrew calendar month begins on the evening that the new moon appears, so the evening of 11 September was the first day of a new lunar month – the seventh month of Tishri. Tishri 1, Rosh Hashanah, is the New Year’s Day of modern Judaism.

There are other conclusive evidences in the gospels that point to the birth of our Lord in the month of September. Listen to David Pawson’s explanation on how he arrived at the conclusion that Jesus our Lord was born in September. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx50Pbf842E)

Postscript:

(I took the liberty to write a short summary of the information from the following articles and the book by Anthony Ray.

https://www.askelm.com/star/star004.htm

https://goodnessofgodministries.international/2011/12/22/when-was-jesus-christ-born-the-bible-says-september-11-3bc-the-day-of-the-feast-of-trumpets/

I was given the vision of 911 a few days before the actual attack and I was actually staying next to the World Trade Center then. And I was born on 11 September thus increasing the incredible odds of this string of events exponentially. I have been praying to know why the given Rev 18:17-19 central message has not happened yet and this recent knowledge that our Lord Jesus might be born on this same day may well be the Lord’s way of encouraging me to persist in preparing and waiting for it. Hab 2:3)

1 Cor 14

“If you speak to people in words they don’t understand, how will they know what you are saying? You might as well be talking into empty space. There are many different languages in the world, and every language has meaning. But if I don’t understand a language, I will be a foreigner to someone who speaks it, and the one who speaks it will be a foreigner to me.And the same is true for you. Since you are so eager to have the special abilities the Spirit gives, seek those that will strengthen the whole church. So anyone who speaks in tongues should pray also for the ability to interpret what has been said…If unbelievers or people who don’t understand these things come into your church meeting and hear everyone speaking in an unknown language, they will think you are crazy.

Well, my brothers and sisters, let’s summarize. When you meet together, one will sing, another will teach, another will tell some special revelation God has given, one will speak in tongues, and another will interpret what is said. But everything that is done must strengthen all of you…No more than two or three should speak in tongues. They must speak one at a time, and someone must interpret what they say. ²⁸ But if no one is present who can interpret, they must be silent in your church meeting and speak in tongues to God privately…Or do you think God’s word originated with you Corinthians? Are you the only ones to whom it was given?If you claim to be a prophet or think you are spiritual, you should recognize that what I am saying is a command from the Lord himself. But if you do not recognize this, you yourself will not be recognized.^[So, my dear brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and don’t forbid speaking in tongues. But be sure that everything is done properly and in order.”

The context of the whole passage of 1 Cor 14 is about orderly worship.  It clearly stated that at most 3 can speak in tongues and with interpretation, otherwise none should speak.  It does not edify anyone who may not understand, much less the unbelievers who turn up and may think everyone has gone crazy. 

It is clear from 1 Cor 14:37 that orderly worship is a command from the Lord.  Yet we see the blatant disobedience in some charismatic worship services when many just blabbered away in unintelligible tongues and laugh uncontrollably. 

Cain offered an unacceptable sacrifice as compared to Abel. Heb 11:4. That is the way of Cain who worship God to his own whim and fancy.