Meeting Linda kakak

One of my favourite moments from 2026 was meeting Linda kakak.

After the miraculous way my siblings and I managed to reconnect with Linda Kakak (big sister) in 2019, for years I’ve prayed for an opportunity to meet this long-lost family member we hadn’t seen for over 20 years. Initially, the COVID pandemic and the uncertainties of travelling abroad quashed any serious hopes of a face-to-face meeting. Yet as my siblings and I began to plan the itinerary for a long-awaited reunion in Kuching (the city we were born in), 2026 seemed like the right time for us to move from finding Linda Kakak, to meeting Linda Kakak. But how on earth would we be able to do so?

Over the years since we re-established contact, I’d kept in touch with Linda sporadically, exchanging a few letters and messages. This time, thanks to relatives lending their Whatsapp accounts (Kakak still doesn’t have her own phone!), I got to have a couple of phone conversations prior to our trip. We promised to find a time to meet. (All of this required speaking and writing in Bahasa, a language I had barely used, but in which I suddenly found words and courage to speak with. After all, what’s a wrong word here or there, when you’re chatting with someone you once thought you’d never see again?)

Initially, we explored whether driving all the way to her village in Indonesia would make it possible to meet her. But that proved a border crossing too far for us to manage, especially once we discovered first-hand the difficulties of navigating broken and dusty roads in the region without accurate online maps. Instead, kakak graciously offered to cross the border herself to meet us in Kuching, and where Linda’s husband worked for most of the year to make ends meet for their family back in Indonesia.

So we arranged to meet on a Tuesday. Her older daughter Wendy would join her for the visit to Kuching. Her younger son Gonzalez would remain at their village as he’d already started school. We’d find them both at her nephew’s place.

Finally, after twenty years apart, on a hot and humid day in July, we met Kakak again.

It’s even more striking how much a person ages once you meet them in person. Kakak is now in her 50’s, raising two teenagers. Her life is completely different to ours. Susah (hard), she repeatedly described to us, as we sat in the shop apartment together. It was hard not to feel guilty at our divergent lives. Yet for a few precious hours, over a meal and a walk, we got to reunite, reconnect as family again, and reaffirm our love for each other.

My Taiwanese aunt-in-law (who joined me, Kim and Henry on this trip) got to say how grateful she was for kakak’s hospitality during her two previous visits to Kuching – especially during mum’s funeral and the chaotic days which followed. My brother got to pass on a game for Kakak’s kids, and see first-hand the result of his Facebook algorithm magic from 7 years ago. My sister got to sit with Kakak for the first time as an adult. Yet what I wanted to know most, and finally got to hear in person, was what had happened in the 20 years since we’d been in the same room together.

This is Linda’s story.

Jagoi Kinow (Kinaw), Bengkayang Regency, West Kalimantan

Lindawati Nosep was born in Jagoi Kindau, a small Bidayuh village just inside the border of West Kalimantan, Indonesia. We don’t know much about her childhood in the 70’s and 80’s. We know that by the time my sister Kimberley was born, Kakak had left her village to begin life as a live-in domestic helper in our family home in Kuching. While today this kind of vocation is more regulated, in the early 90’s, the life of a migrant worker in Southeast Asia was not so straightforward. Despite the many hardships, sending your unmarried daughter off to be a stranger’s live-in maid was a risk many rural Indonesians were willing to make in order to find extra income that could support the wider family. In exchange for board and a small monthly allowance, house helpers would follow the parents’ instructions and help with whatever chores or household duties were needed. Not only did kakak’s arrival relieve our mum from some of the demands of raising four children (including a newborn), it quietly signalled to friends and family some measure of middle-class status.

Kakak was 16.

Despite the cross-cultural shock of life in a new country and a big city (at least “the language was the same”, she quipped), Kakak began supporting our family with all kinds of jobs around the house: cooking, cleaning, tidying, folding, dusting, mopping. My early memories include potty training us on a round plastic “bucket”, changing the sheets for yet another wet bed, walking us home from school. I recall many a time seeing her stand imperiously over the stove, tossing the wok, chatting to us in her own creole of Bahasa, English, and eventually Mandarin as she grew to understand my mum’s instructions, ideas and laments. Once when cooking up one of her amazing dinners, she confidently told us: “One day I work in restoran, ya?”

During the 1990’s, most domestic helpers stayed at one house for a couple years before searching for better opportunities. Yet kakak stayed with us year after year, until it became hard to tell whether she was employed by our family, or simply another member of our family. We ate out at hawker stalls together, took long car rides together, spent beach holidays together, and more. Sure, she would still fold laundry, wash the dishes and so on – as part of her official employment. Unofficially, as kids we started to go to her for help, ask her to solve an argument, and listen to her share stories of her relatives back in the village she’d visit on her weekends off. Each tale was a window into a world completely different to ours. Kakak told us how our dad often had a temper, but generally treated her well through these first few years.

When we first immigrated to New Zealand in 1996/1997 as primary school children, one of the things we quickly learned was that the household chores were now up to us to handle. So as we learned to wash our own dishes (by hand, the way Kakak showed us) and mowed the lawns (good for character building!), we also got to appreciate her diligent service in a new light.

Living in different countries changed how often we saw Linda. Yet we did visit once or twice a year, and in doing so she got to watch us grow from awkward teenagers into young adults. In return, we got to see her take on more and more responsibilities around the home. Eventually, she had added nurse assistant (at my dad’s general practice) to the many different skills on her unwritten CV.

One of the last times we lived in the same house as Kakak was in 2006, when three brothers flew back to Kuching after the news that mum had died suddenly. As we bawled our eyes out during those sorrowful days, Linda — now in her 30’s — continued her quiet and faithful service: cooking and cleaning and caring for us and the many guests who streamed into our home to offer condolences. She was a calm voice of comfort when the darkness of mum’s death overwhelmed dad and others.

Our final all-in family photo together was on what would have been mum’s 50th birthday. At the airport, united by grief, we promised to keep in touch. “Strong ah”, she said before we parted ways. But after mum died, our family home gradually unravelled in ways we would only later discover. When Cheryl and I visited Kuching in 2010 to meet the relatives as newlyweds, Linda’s absence was a puzzling footnote to our time together.

We now know that Kakak was 36 when she left our home abruptly. We learned how there was a relationship breakdown; how she was falsely accused of stealing things that went “missing”. Faced with an impossible situation, unable to defend herself, she packed her bags and left without saying a word. For 20 years, she’d spent the prime years of her life serving our family dutifully. Once her life was a living sacrifice. Now she had to start over.

Freed from an unhappy home, but bereft of any security, Kakak tried working in a few places – a noodle stall at a hawker centre, then even a Hong Kong-style restaurant (fulfilling her long-held dream). However, without a passport, formal education or a permanent work solution, she eventually found her way back to Jagoi Kindau.

From Kakak’s description of her home town, the community sounded incredible. Yet life in a rural village has its own challenges. When she first arrived back “home” in the 2010’s, she told us she almost wanted to cry. “That place is not that good oh. Very suffer, I’m staying in the kampung. Stay at the kampung very suffer! Sometime we don’t have electricity, sometime we don’t have the water, very suffer. Yeah, sometime can ten time no electricity… on off on off on off. The water also. Very suffer… Very, very suffer.” Reintegrating with her community was hard too. Some saw kakak, an older single woman, as a misfit. “Too clever”. Eventually her mother encouraged her to consider marriage. “I don’t want to be married”, she replied. “But after I’m gone, who will look after you?” her mother asked. Reluctantly, she agreed for her mum to find someone among her Bidayuh community.

Kakak was 38 when she married Rusdi Lesam, a man from a neighbouring village she had never met before. Their greatest challenge came upon learning that their first child had trisomy 21 (Down syndrome), and a heart defect that required surgeries. The first few years of Wendy’s fragile life were filled with hospital visits, expensive bills, and tearful stories. Flying her beautiful daughter to Jakarta for specialised treatment was out of the question. Thankfully, Sarawak General Hospital agreed to enrol Wendy as a patient. So for several years, Kakak based herself back in Kuching. Life became a simple routine as she followed her via dolorosa to and from each hospital visit with her daughter in tow. Rusdi faithfully worked several jobs to cover the extra expenses. “This is our sports car”, he joked. Unlike other men in similar situations, Kakak’s husband supported her fully – a guardian-redeemer in more ways than one. A healthy baby brother, Gonzalez, was born two years later. Kakak was now in her 40’s.

As I heard Kakak’s full story for the first time, the Bible story of Ruth and Naomi also came to mind. A young woman who left home and crossed cultures in search of a better future, but who returned “empty handed” to find uncertain days ahead.
“That country is a very poor country. If you study there, doesn’t mean you have the good job if you finish university in Indonesia. A lot of Indonesia people come here (Kuching) to work, at kopitiam, if you have no permit also, if you get can. But I don’t have. I come here into the house (ours). Cannot go very far.” 

It was hard to know whether Kakak, like Naomi, similarly felt “bitter” at all the LORD had given her. Yet in our conversation that day, I also got to hear for the first time how Kakak’s faith shaped her deeply. In her trials, the Catholic church in Kuching became a refuge. “That time every day I go church, I go pray.” For years, Kakak and her church prayed for Wendy’s health and a future. How good to see our gracious Father answer her prayers so clearly! Her entire Bidayuh village are nominally Catholic — the fruit of decades of post-war missionary activity among the many tribal groups in Borneo. When we celebrated Wendy’s 14th birthday a few days ago, kakak asked if we could pray for her. “William tolong doakan Wendy agar dia sentiasa sehat gembira…” (William, help pray for Wendy to be healthy and happy every day.) It’s a privilege to pray in Jesus’s name for this and so much more for her. The God of this world can do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think (Eph 3:20).

Kakak’s story continues to challenge me. Here was a sister who helped raise our family first, and now raises her own children through hardships we’ve never known. The doctors said Wendy likely had her congenital issues because of Kakak’s older age. Thanks to the amazing care of doctors and nurses, Wendy is now in high school, where she spends her days speaking in her own special language. She works diligently at the level of a pre-schooler, yet is incredibly perceptive of the world around her. Her medical costs since she was born have amounted to five-figure sums. Kakak’s husband works two jobs in Kuching to make ends meet, and sends as much as possible back home. They reunite when they can, including at Christmas. Kakak stays with family members in Kindau who all surround them with love, especially Wendy. A cross-border agreement allows some freedom of travel, but without formal education or the right opportunity, many in her village experience a life totally different to ours.

Us Chong kids continue to wonder what it looks like to honour Kakak, our big sister; and to keep supporting her family from across the seas. Despite our busy lives, we would love to take up her invitation to one day meet her family in Jagoi Kindau. To meet Gonzalez and play a game of Dobble together. To see Wendy’s schoolwork and find more ways to connect as family. As Tim Urban has pointed out: “Despite not being at the end of your life, you may very well be nearing the end of your time with some of the most important people in your life…”

But for now, we’re grateful that we’ve not just found Kakak, but also met Kakak again. And we’re thankful to have learned Kakak’s bittersweet story of love that crosses cultures, languages and hearts. Now that we’re family again, we hope the story continues!

As my brother likes to say:

“Sila menjaga satu sama lain, dan sentiasa ingat orang-orang yang membantu anda ketika anda masih muda. (Keep looking after one another. And always remember those who raised you when you were young.)”Henry Chong, 2019

P.S.: If you remember Kakak’s love and kindness and would like to share a story, memory or gift for her family, we’d be happy to pass on your well wishes!

CSNTM Text & Manuscript Conference: “The Editio Critica Maior, Exegesis, and Translation”

Eight years ago, I read Dan Wallace’s Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics for the first time as a second-year seminary student. Much has changed since then, but in the Lord’s kindness, this past weekend I had the opportunity to present a paper virtually at the Text & Manuscript Conference, hosted by Dan Wallace and the team from the Centre for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts in Plano, Texas.

Previous Text & Manuscript conferences focused on the themes of “Pen, Print & Pixels” and “Intersection”. This year’s topic was The Editio Critica Maior: Exegesis & Translation, and included a stellar line-up of plenary and seminar speakers (plus a star-struck student from New Zealand!)

Staying home in Auckland admittedly meant some not-so-great schedules (including 2 am starts…). However, the inconvenience was more than repaid for with a veritable feast of scholarship, as well as hearing first-hand a number of discoveries and potential “revelations” that might change how, and even what we read in our Bibles in future.

For those interested in some of the latest research in New Testament text and manuscript studies, I’ve jotted down a range of notes and reflections of each session I got to listen in on (live and delayed), and included some potential implications for bible scholars and students in future. While I’m not sure yet if recordings will be published in future, some of these papers will likely end up in a future monograph on conference proceedings or published elsewhere. If you’re interested in my paper on some of the punctuation and paragraphing changes in ECM Revelation, you can read the outline here, while the rest of it will hopefully end up in my PhD dissertation as part of a comparative methodology chapter.

General reflections

There were two overall key “aha moments” (and one “uh-oh” one) for me personally:

  • Just because the Editio Critica Maior has published a textual decision (e.g. a new initial text, split guiding line, or segmentation in the case of Revelation), it doesn’t mean that scholars will agree with or adopt these decisions (see Greg Beale’s paper in particular), or that individual decisions won’t be revisited later on (which Matt Solomon highlighted regarding 2 Peter 2:18). It’s important to remember the initial text in the ECM isn’t presented as once-for-all infallible: it’s ultimately a Greek text based on decisions made by editors drawing from the knowledge, experience and resources they have at the time.
  • Scholars are keen to engage with the ECM if given the opportunity and time to do so. On this, INTF (the publishers of the ECM) have been very forthcoming with updates, including pre-releasing the text of ECM Matthew online (available here). In the Q&A / panel discussion, Greg Paulson (one of the ECM editors) confirmed that the next books to be completed and published will be: ECM Matthew (INTF), Luke (INTF), Pauline Epistles (IGNTP), and Hebrews (Wuppertal). I assume the last of the NT volumes will be John (also IGNTP).
  • Slightly controversial was when one presenter (see below) engaged with textual changes to ECM Galatians, which turned out to be based on unpublished details gleaned from a work-in-progress update at the SBL 2025 meeting. This meant none of us could actually look up “ECM Galatians”, nor comment further on some of the possible textual changes without the actual text in front of us. In an age where anything publicly shared becomes virtually impossible to redact or retract, I guess there needs to be some caution behind how much to release to the general public, and when.

Day 1 papers

In the first plenary, Greg Beale (RTS Dallas) read portions of his paper titled, “The Editio Critica Maior’s New Preferred Readings of the Solecisms in the Book of Revelation” (available here). It’s long been known that the Greek text of Revelation contains numerous instances of solecisms (i.e. where the grammar appears to be incorrect / inconsistent). Beale argued that the recently published ECM Revelation (searchable here) should not have removed some of these solecisms in favour of grammatically correct readings. His full paper cited textual changes in Rev 12:5 (NA28: ἄρσεν / ECM: άρρενα), Rev 4:7 (NA28: ἔχων / ECM: ἔχον) and Rev 5:6 (NA28: ἔχων / ECM: ἔχον) — he also touched on Revelation 12, although due to time constraints a lot of his paper was left unread. I appreciated the depth and detail in his paper, which was accompanied by a firm appeal for NT textual critics to retain the goal of determining the “original text” (an endpoint more recently phrased as “initial text”).

Next, Bruce Griffin (Keiser University, Nicaragua) provided an overview of how and why “the replacement of Erasmus’ textus receptus with Westcott-Hort seems to have had no substantial impact on theology in either Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant circles”. I learned that one of the reasons for this is because, for Roman Catholics, theology and dogma are derived from more than just the text. Griffin mentioned the identity of the woman in Rev 12 being a point of contention among Catholic authors that trundled along without reference to text-critical issues.

In the parallel seminar session, Liz Polczer Schrader (Villanova University) argued that the large number of split readings in ECM Mark (some with significant details included / excluded), supports considering Mark’s Gospel not as a singular entity, but as evidence of “narrative variants” and “pluriformity” at the origins of textual transmission. She expands on this argument in her book, An Abundant Bouquet (forthcoming 2026 with SBL Press). As I listened, I did wonder if by encouraging scholars to rethink the goal of textual criticism (searching for the original text / initial text) in this manner, we end up undermining confidence in one’s ability to study and refer to the “Gospel according to Mark” objectively. Then again, much of its contents were first orally narrated (and then translated and written down in Greek), so Mark and the earliest copyists / scribes may have had multiple accounts to contend with (certainly when it comes to the ending of Mark). It was a very stimulating paper, and I appreciated the opportunity to think deeper about what we mean when we say “Mark’s gospel”.

Next, delegates reconvened together to hear Jeff Cate (California Baptist University) detailed nine examples in the forthcoming ECM Matthew where intrinsic evidence may have been overlooked when determining the “Matthean muddles”. Cate pointed out overlooked intrinsic evidence that could help explain textual variants at Mt 27:17-18 (“Jesus Barabbas”), Mt 5:44 (“bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you”), Mt 16:2b-3 (regarding the weather and signs of the times), Mt 17:21 (“this kind does not come out except by prayer and fasting”), Mt 18:11 (“for the Son of Man came to save the lost”), Mt 19:20 (“from my youth”), Mt 23:14 (whole verse), and Mt 27:49 (spear piercing). I don’t think I managed to follow this paper as closely (could have been the 4.15am local time slump – but as my daughter commented, 9 examples equates to about 3-4 minutes on each one!). Thankfully, Cate has at least shared his slides (on the CSNTM website and his Academia profile) – though the eventual published version may help readers to make better sense of his arguments.

After “lunch”, Elizabeth Shively gave the second of four plenary sessions focusing on the impact of ECM’s textual changes on literary and theological readings in Mark’s gospel, focusing mainly on the prologue and ending(s) of Mark. Amidst her detailed engagement with some of the the textual changes (as part of a forthcoming commentary), she made two helpful points: “Textual criticism does not precede exegesis: it shapes it.” Also, “What matters is not how much MSS support there is, but also what it does regarding exegesis.” I found it encouraging to see both plenary speakers on Day 1 willing to engage with the textual changes in the ECM as they are preparing their commentaries. In far too many biblical commentaries, the text is just received as is with little to no discussion of text-critical issues.

Matt Solomon (who has previously studied the entire textual transmission history of Philemon) presented a paper titled: “ECM and the Text of 2 Peter: Observations and Explorations”. He honed in on 2 Peter 2:18 and the impact of the change between the editors preferring ὀλίγως in the 1st edition of ECM, and ὄντως in the 2nd edition for ECM (the impact of the textual change is that it’s not just new converts who are being deceived, but a more seasoned one). Again, I appreciated the exegetical value of thinking deeply about textual criticism.

Tyler Craft, Mikael Parsons/Spencer Danley and Matthew Whidden presented while I was making final preparations and presenting my paper, so I didn’t get to engage with these papers as much. Mikael Parsons and Spencer Danley engaged with ECM Acts by pointing out that many of the textual changes in there aren’t covered in Hugh Houghton’s latest textual commentary. Tyler Craft’s research focused on how κύριος without ὁ in the Synoptic gospels and Acts would be an argument in favour of viewing the use of κύριος as a title, akin to LORD in English (I’ll have to dig deeper, but he seemed to have a lot of data on his side). I’m also looking forward to digging deeper into Matt Whidden’s research into preparing an archetypal family 1 witness for ECM Matthew and Mark (which will eventually be added to the digital ECM directly).

Day 2 papers

Greg Paulson (Research Associate and Project Coordinator at the INTF) gave a thorough and helpful plenary that explained the Coherence-based Genealogical Method that sits behind the ECM textual decisions. He looked at eight sample passages in order to show the usefulness and limitations of the CBGM method in their work. It was helpful to hear him explain the working behind the ECM in an accessible way (which he has also done in this article: https://criticaltexts.com/the-one-with-the-cbgm/). He was also open about the limitations of the CBGM, citing in particular 2 Peter 3:10 where the method wasn’t able to help their decision-making at all. However, this made me wonder why the editors of ECM Catholic Epistles decided on printing a conjecture οὐχ εὑρεθήσεται “not be found / disappear”, if there was no helpful evidence from CBGM to back up a change to earlier NA editions (SBLGNT and THGNT omit the οὐχ). If applying intrinsic text-critical principles, εὑρεθήσεται could be the more difficult reading (and thus could have been kept as is)?

Another split session followed. In the main hall, Christopher Hutson (Abilene Christian University, Texas) presented a paper detailing some exegetical reflections on upcoming changes to the text of Galatians based on the CBGM. As per his abstract: “The ECM text of Galatians includes eleven changes from NA28. Six are inconsequential; two significant for understanding the structure of Paul’s argument; and three for thinking about Paul’s theology.” However, the fact that these changes haven’t actually been officially published yet (a point Greg Paulson brought up in the ensuing Q&A) means more qualification would have helped. Perhaps “Exegetical Reflections on Potential Changes to Galatians in the ECM” would have been a more appropriate title!

Under the realtime collation on the digital ECM at Galatians 2:20, the NA28 text is still what’s on display. (Source: https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/ecm, accessed 3 June 2026)

Nevertheless, the paper did spark some reflection on what would happen if ECM Galatians did commit to these textual changes (whether as the new initial text, a split guiding line, or something else). Of these, I personally think the most notable would be a decision in Galatians 2:20 between υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ (“son of God”, with most manuscripts and a B rating in UBS6) and θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ (“God and Christ”, with P46 and 03).

If the ECM editors end up picking the latter reading, not only could it impact debates around πίστις Χριστοῦ (faith in Christ / faithfulness of Christ), we would end up with a Greek edition (and subsequent Bible translations) with an unexpectedly direct declaration of the divinity of Christ from an undisputed Pauline letter: “And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the son of God and Christ, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (this isn’t unprecedented in the NT though: we have 1 Timothy 2:13 “God and Saviour Jesus Christ”, and a similar address also appears in James 1:1 “James, bondservant of God and Lord Jesus Christ”). Hugh Houghton’s latest textual commentary seems to maintain the status quo “in keeping with the immediate context and Pauline theology more generally” (Houghton TCGNT, 456), but if we applied the “harder reading to be preferred” principle, or followed more recent evidence from Stephen Carlson and Tommy Wasserman, then θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ could well become the new initial text in ECM (and subsequently in UBS7 or NA30 at the earliest). It’ll be interesting to follow the eventual decisions of the ECM on this and other textual changes to Galatians and the rest of the Pauline epistles in the coming years.

It was unfortunate how parallel scheduling prevented more people hearing Oleksandr Okhrimenko (University of Birmingham) present a wonderful paper on Apostolus Christinopolitanus, a 12th century manuscript that contains the oldest and most complete Cyrillic translation of Acts and Epistles. Amidst the backdrop of ongoing war in Ukraine, it was an honour to hear first-hand about this biblical manuscript, a cultural treasure produced in medieval Ukraine during a time of cultural flourishing. Featuring text and annotations interfacing Cyrillic, Greek, Latin and even some Glagolitic script (I had to look it up too!), the manuscript attests to exceptionally capable and cross-cultural transmission of the Word of God. Remarkable!

Martina Vercesi (part of the BICROSS team at Leuven University) presented another bombshell paper showing that, based on comparative study between the Greek and Latin texts in bilingual manuscripts (e.g. GA629 and 79), so-called “Western” unique readings in the Greek text of 05 and 06 are more likely influenced by the interlinear Latin text alongside it. If true, these Greek textual variations need to be reconsidered as having Latin textual ancestry (something NT text critical methods, including the CGBM, isn’t really able to account for). For those of us who read bilingually (e.g. English and Chinese) on a regular basis, this makes such intuitive sense, and it will be very interesting to see where this research leads and how it will affect the ECM text and its presentation in future (for example, if the IGNTP team already tag Gregory-Aland numbers with an additional “k” for catena manuscripts, perhaps bilinguals could be treated in a similar fashion).

After lunch, Travis Williams (Tusculum University) presented an excellent paper on the use of “our” / “you (pl.)”. You can read his paper in full here, but basically, he used a range of statistical methods to comb through every instance of similar-sounding 1st and 2nd-person plural pronouns (e.g. ἡμεῖς/ὑμεῖς) across the extensive witness data now preserved in the ECM text. Scholars such as Bart Ehrman have previously advanced arguments of intentional and theologically-motivated scribal changes (“the orthodox corruption of the New Testament”). Based on very detailed analysis of the ECM textual base and applied specifically to 1 Peter, Williams argued that rather than random changes, scribes tended to change from “you” to “we” (perhaps for communal inclusion), did so more frequently within the epistle text genre, and did so more frequently in passages of theological or soteriological importance. Based on this, he also offered good evidence for reconsidering some of the textual changes in ECM (e.g. he argues for 1 Peter 2:21 “Christ also suffered for you/us”, and 1 Pet 2:24 “He himself carried up our/your sins in his body on the tree”). I personally wondered if this research would have more of an impact in parts of the NT where the difference between “you” and “we” would be more exegetically significant. Nevertheless, this is groundbreaking work that’s possible with the availability of MS transcriptions (created by hundreds of volunteers over the years).

Nelson Hsieh (New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, and author of this helpful dummies guide to reading the NA28 apparatus!) closed out the presented papers with a considered analysis of how often the ECM and THGNT text has shifted closer to the Byzantine text, which has historically been disregarded or downplayed by earlier editors of the UBS and NA editions that we rely on today. It was a helpful summary on some of Hsieh’s dissertation work (memes and all!), and I look forward to reading the published monograph version (I think it’s forthcoming with Brill).

For any other readers who were also at the conference, what did you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

A momentary prayer for the occasion of severe heart failure

A prayer for the occasion of severe heart failure.* Based on Psalm 73, Col. 1:17, 2 Cor. 12:2, and other Scriptures. To the theme: “Present tense, future perfect”.

Truly God, you are good to those who are pure in heart.
So hear our prayers for _____ in Christ,
who holds all things together
even this faltering heart.

We thank you Lord for every heartbeat you have given ____.
That even with this physical frailty, this thorn in his flesh (and cardiac muscle),
You are still all-knowing and Most High.
You hold His right hand,
He is continually with you,
You guide Him with your counsel,
And afterwards You will receive him to glory.

As doctors work their wisdom,
and nurses care for his needs,
may _____ not envy the young and healthy,
but rather give him compassion for them.

Help him to tell of Your mercy to him from his youth,
and give him opportunities to say:
“I have made the Lord God my refuge;”
and to say:
“But for me, it is good to be near God.”

As the arsenal** of medicine fills within him,
Fill him again with Your Spirit’s peace.
Assure Him of Your nearness.
Comfort his family and loved ones who weep and laugh by his bedside.
Convict those who are unfaithful to you.
Counsel and strengthen all who meet him by Your Holy Spirit.

For: “Who have I in heaven but You?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides You.”

You are sweeter than healing,
sweeter than length of days,
sweeter than anything on earth.

So Lord, help _____ to remember and declare:
“My heart and flesh may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart
and my portion forever.”


(*Series Note: I’ve always found prayer hard. What has consistently helped me not to give up is to listen in and pray along with other brothers and sisters. Whether it’s the praises and laments of the psalmists, the Lord’s pattern and practice of Word-soaked prayer, the contemplative thoughts of the early catholic fathers, the lofty devotional thoughts of the Puritans distilled in works like Arthur Bennett’s “The Valley of Vision”, the time-tested Book of Common Prayer and other Reformation-era prayers, the prayer points from missions reports around the world, and the everyday life liturgies found in Douglas McKelvey’s “Every Moment Holy” prayers. In the same vein, I’m trying my best to write more of my prayers down. Even if we never pray them again, the process of writing slows us down to contemplate every moment as holy and worth turning back to God in worship. Names and some details might be changed at times. As with everything we write on here, feel free to borrow and adapt for your own personal use. Or even better, write and share your own momentary prayers and let us know!)

**____ is a fellow long-suffering fan of Arsenal FC. COYG!

Two kids spots from preaching Jonah

Over the summer, our church congregation (PCBC English) have been “on tour” – trialling a few different service times and formats to see what combination would serve our church’s mission in the future.

Amidst the changes, it’s been nice to go back to a favourite book during the preaching time across all our congregations. I’ve really enjoyed preaching Jonah over the years at different churches, including at PCBC English when we first started in 2020. However, this was the first time planning a sermon series alongside a children’s program. And because we knew we would be having several families with young children joining our English services (a refreshing change!), we decided try out a few extras in our gathered worship – including two kids spots.

I’m still very much a newbie at producing kids talks and resources (it’s much harder than writing a PhD!). Thankfully, Sandy Galea has some helpful centering advice for churches – in particular, she reminds us that the aim of kids talks in a main service is actually to communicate God’s Word to kids and to teach parents how to do the same. In her words, the primary aim of the in-service children’s spot is to “give [parents] the language with which to discuss the big idea of that section of scripture with their children.”

On the first Sunday, I played this throwback video we first made in 2020 of our kids reacting to Jonah’s story (filmed in the style of the “Kids React” Youtube series). We somehow managed to recap and react to the whole of Jonah in 4 minutes! Check it out here:

I’m still surprised and grateful how perceptive our eldest three children were even in their younger years. Sometimes just asking a few kid-friendly questions is all it takes to make a fun video together!

On the second Sunday, we tried out a live skit, written in the style of a nature documentary, in order to introduce the big idea of Jonah 3-4: “God has been so kind to give Jonah a second chance, so shouldn’t he show His kindness to others? Shouldn’t we in Jesus?” Here’s the part of the church service livestream where Tingting, Moriah and Eden performed it in front of the congregation (I thought Moriah gave a pretty good David Attenborough-like narration!).

Here’s the script with accompanying pictures below (feel free to use and adapt if you’d like!) What do you think? How would you tell the story of Jonah in a way that helps points kids and parents to Jesus?


“Safari in Nineveh” – Kids Spot @ PCBC English, 11.1.2026

Parts: Jonah/Joni (silent acting part); Narrator (spoken part); Voice (spoken part).
Someone to change the pictures on the Powerpoint screen.

Tech: 2 wireless microphones & clicker (or slides operator).

[Scene: Jonah, a wilderness explorer, lies on stage, fast asleep. The powerpoint screen is overhead. The audience is observing a “nature documentary”.]

[PICTURE: SUNRISE OVER AN AUCKLAND LANDSCAPE]

Narrator: Dawn breaks over the plains of Assyria.

[PICTURE: OF CITY AT SUNRISE]

Nineveh. The great city.

Home to all kinds of creatures.

[PICTURES: OF AUCKLAND ZOO ANIMALS]

V: [optional: make animal noises]

(CC) Taubinphoto / Flickr

A shelter for man and beast.

Bird and plant.

[PICTURE: CLOSE UP OF A PLANT WITH BIG LEAVES]

Such as this Assyrian creeping vine.

This specimen is in full bloom.

While its big leaves offer shade…

to an unexpected traveller at rest.

[JONAH, WEARING A SAFARI HAT, IS ASLEEP ON THE GROUND.]

Jonah is a reluctant explorer

who has shouted angry things at God the previous day.

[PICTURES: JONAH’S GREY PAST]

A close encounter with a fish has left him smelly.

Gustavo Doré, “Jonah Preaches to the Ninevites” (1866)

An unexpected response from the people of Nineveh has rattled him.

But for now, he sleeps.

[JONAH IS STILL ASLEEP.]

But as the day dawns,

[PICTURE: WORM ON A LEAF]

A worm emerges.

Chewing the vine,

[PICTURE: DRY EARTH, SCORCHING SUN]

it withers.

[JONAH WAKES UP FROM THE DISCOMFORT.]

V: [optional: make wind noises]

[JONAH ACTS ANGRY, SHAKES FIST TOWARDS THE SKY]

N: Prophets can’t roar like most big animals.

But they can get angry…

[JONAH HISSES AND GROWLS]

when their habitat is under threat.

But this time, something unusual happens.

[VOICE ON MIC, AS IF SPEAKING TO A FRIEND]

V: “Hey Jonah.”  [JONAH: LOOKS UP]             V: “How are you doing today?”

[JONAH SHAKES HIS HEAD FURIOUSLY, FOLDS ARMS.]

V: “Let me ask you again. Have you got a right to be angry?”

[JONAH: NODS, ARMS FOLDED, BUT STILL LISTENING.]

N: Like a loving dad, God shows kindness to Jonah. Kindness he doesn’t deserve.

[PICTURE: CITY AGAIN…]

But there are around 120,000 people in Nineveh.

Surrounded by animals too.

Will this prophet learn to share God’s kindness with every kind of person?

N: Prophets like Jonah have long been considered heroes.

But only now are we discovering…

they have complex messy lives.

[PICTURE: BLACK SCREEN]

[End – Jonah and voice parts stand and bow, Jonah exits stage]

[MC to summarise big idea]

“God has been so kind to us, shouldn’t we then show the same kindness to others? This is Jonah’s story, Jesus’s story, and may it be our story too.

Welcome again to PCBC English, I’m _____ and it’s so good to have you join us…”


Why you may not want to get Hugh Houghton’s Textual Commentary (yet)

In the next two weeks, some of the best and brightest New Testament scholars will be descending upon Boston, Massachusetts for the ETS and SBL Annual Meetings. For a certain group of Bible nerds, the highlight of the event will undoubtedly be the Monday 24 November all-day feast of sessions relating to New Testament textual criticism (NTTC). There’ll be an important update on ECM Matthew, and one of the TC sessions will be completely focused on discussing the contents and impact of one book – A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Hugh Houghton. Why?

Anyone who’s read a UBS Greek New Testament will have at some point come across the seemingly arcane collection of letters and symbols at the bottom of each page. For example:

Apparatus entry for Heb. 5:12 in UBS5

Hugh Houghton’s book patiently walks through over 1000 of these textual unit variations, and gives a reader-friendly summary of why the UBS text printed has been chosen, what are other possible options regarding the earliest text, and what issues to consider in order to discern the most appropriate translation of the NT text there.

The last Textual Commentary like this was written by Bruce Metzger (1st edition 1971, 2nd edition 1994), and is still the go-to resource for almost every serious student, pastor and scholar interested in the Greek New Testament. Indeed, Houghton has published a once-in-a-generation commentary full of helpful, up-to-date insights that will shape biblical studies in the decades to come.

But… I don’t think you should buy it just yet.

Not because it’s no good. It is excellent! From what I’ve read so far, it certainly is a worthy successor — and in many places, I dare say an improvement — over Metzger’s textual commentary. Even Houghton’s introduction alone (pp. 1*–36*) is worth the price of the book, and ought to be essential reading for anyone engaged in biblical studies. In less than 40 pages, he provides an excellent summary of everything related to establishing the New Testament text, in language that’s not overly technical, and abreast of the latest research and advances in textual criticism. In places, there are even some helpful correctives for much of the prevailing scholarship in support of a thoroughgoing alteration or “orthodox corruption” of the NT text in the earliest manuscripts (e.g. Bart Ehrman).

Unfortunately though, there’s a growing list of all kinds of errors scattered throughout the 1st edition (currently the only available edition worldwide). As of today, there’s already 30 different items on the list of corrigenda (things to be corrected). And on that basis, I would actually suggest Greek NT students and translators etc. wait until a corrected edition (in print or digital form) comes out before purchasing a copy. You can read more details and some examples in the following short note (also available on my Academia page) – and I’ll add a few screenshots below of corrections I’ve had to make to my personal copy.

What are your thoughts? What have you seen in Houghton’s new textual commentary that excites or concerns you? 

An important detail that needs adjustment in everyone’s reviews of Hugh Houghton’s Textual Commentary: the original count of 1008 variants reflected the number of entries in the Textual Commentary, but the actual number in UBS6 is 1017 (hence the correction).
This is a misprint that’s important to correct: no, the UBS6 has not reversed their opinion regarding the placement of the αἱ γυναῖκες… passage in 1 Cor 14:34-35. In fact, they have become more “confident” ({A} in UBS6, from {B} in UBS5) regarding the traditional placement of the passage, though unsurprisingly Houghton’s comments themselves have sparked a bit of debate online.
Correction on p. 340: “Add new entry for James 5:20. // 5:20   ἁμαρτιῶν. (of sins.) {A}” A bit ironic that it’s necessary to do some textual criticism on a textual commentary (though in case you’re wondering, the ink is clearly blue and not “apricot”… 😉)
On page 510, Houghton’s entry for the word τινα in Heb. 5:12 begins as follows: 5:12 τίνα (lit. which) {C}. He then provides an interesting text-critical discussion summarising why the UBS Committee has altered the accenting of the word, previously rendered as τινὰ (an indefinite pronoun connected with the previous διδάσκειν ὑμᾶς: ‘someone’ [to teach you]), in favour of the accentuation τίνα (an interrogative pronoun connected with the following τὰ στοιχεῖα: ‘which’ [are the basic elements]).