生活.牧養.煲湯

在新的一年，我思考怎樣的生活才是最適合自己，怎樣的工作事奉才是最好？

生活，我一直想愈簡單愈好，不論是生活的方式和節奏，或是生活的興趣和習慣，我希望愈簡單愈好。有時生活太多太複雜，容易失去自己，失去生活的素質。簡單是美，我相信是真的。有人說：「小等於多」(Less is more)，我是同意的。我認為簡單的生活有助人去思考和尋問如何生活的問題：我的人生目標是甚麼？在短暫的人生中，應如何投放我的時間和資源？上帝在我和我家的使命是甚麼？如何生活才不算是自私？如何才算是逹到生活的平衡（例如：生活，事奉，休閒，遊戲）？這些問題往往隱藏於複雜和密密麻麻的生活裏。簡單的生活比較容易讓人預留一此空間誠實面對生命，不逃避，不放縱，不讓大眾文化牵着鼻子走，嘗試發掘甚麼是自己的刻心價值，並盡力圍繞着這些價值生活，設定和安排，認識自己的愛惡，有所為，有所不為。

事奉，實事求是是我一直工作的原則。在教會「生存」了多年，聽了好多口號式的信仰。異象越偉大；內容越空洞無物。我一直認為教會真正的需要好簡單：真道和牧養。盡一己能力正確地解釋和宣講聖經，好像保羅對以弗所的長老說：「上帝的全部計劃（the whole counsel of God），我已經毫無保留地傳給你們了。」（徒 20：27，新譯本）「到地」的牧養，讓羊群知道牧羊人生命的喜好，價值和方向；同時，牧羊人認識羊群集體的需要和個別的人生處境。總之，牧養能建立這相互認識 （mutual knowledge）便可以。我過去是這樣做，將來，我相信會用類同的做法。類同，不是相同，因為今日的我不完全是昨日的我，明日的我將會是更好的我。所以，將來式的牧養質素只能跟過去的類同，不會是相同；但我深信，將來的類同將會是更好的牧養。

「將來的類同將會是更好的牧養」不是阿Q精神或正向思維，而是一種基督教末世論的神學視野。在《還看下一代》（香港：卓越，1996）一書裏，寫關於末世論的角度時，楊牧谷用煲湯的比喻來說明這種思維：「譬如說一鍋湯要燉五小時才算色香味美，主人在早上七時便開始燉了，正午十二時這鍋湯便燉好，那麼這鍋湯是不是愈接近正午十二時，它的香度愈濃，味道愈美？假如歷史就是這鍋湯，一切的預備與辛勞都會在正午十二時而大功告成，下一代是不是比上一代更接近正午十二時？他是不是比我們這一代更接近希望？」（頁97）

將來的牧養將會更好因為更接近正午。

在末世中，保羅同樣對帖撒羅尼迦教會說：「我們既然屬於白晝，就應當謹慎，披上信和愛的胸甲，戴上救恩作頭盔。」（帖前 5：8，新譯本）

My Farewell Letter 2010

I wrote this letter in the year of 2010. When I resigned from the church, I did not write a formal resignation letter to the church. I only wrote this “informal” letter to the congregation that I looked after from 2005 to 2010. I believe I had a good time. I am thankful for this congregation. I thank God for this pastoral ministry.

--

Farewell Letter

To the congregation,

I have decided to tender my resignation from GCAC effective December 31^st, 2010. I started to seriously think about resignation at the end of 2009. I formulated my mind around June, 2010. I waited until now because I promised to officiate the wedding. And I did not want to break the news before it. In August, 2010, there was no Governing Board meeting. Thus, I was not able to officially inform the Governing Board about my decision. After informing the Governing Board in September, 2010, I will send out this farewell letter to all of you.

Throughout the years, the thought of going back to school has oscillated in my mind. After pasturing the church for five years, I realize that I like to focus on three things in my pastorate: to make disciples, to teach, and to preach.  I always ask myself, “What is the most practical way to fulfill the Great Commission?” (Matt. 28:19-20) Discipleship, teaching, and preaching are the three main areas in my pastorate.

When I decided to go to seminary eight years ago, I said to myself, “I need to be equipped for ministry.” I spent about four to five years to be equipped. In the past five years, I do see that I’ve been able to serve God and His church in certain ways in which I could never imagine myself doing it without the opportunity having theological and biblical training in seminary.

I am forever thankful for the chance to serve in the English congregation in which my understanding of Christian faith has been shaped and reshaped, and my pastoral soul and identity have been enlarged and established, respectively. It is in this particular context of ministry that I grew old and up as a person, a pilgrim, and a pastor.

Eugene Peterson notes, “The congregation is the pastor’s place for developing vocational holiness. It goes without saying that it is the place of ministry: we preach the word and administer the sacraments, we give pastoral care and administer the community life, we teach and we give spiritual direction. But it is also the place in which we develop virtue, learn to love, advance in hope—become what we preach.”[1]   Thanks for being such a congregation so that I can become such a pastor.

In regard with teaching, I’ve started to ponder upon the possibility of pursuing further study. God willing, I’d like to be a pastor and a professor in the future. I do not know whether or not this is the best time for me to stop my pastorate and to start a new journey of faith. One night, I was meditating on and praying for this matter, Hebrews 11 came to my mind, particularly the life and the faith of Abraham. Then I turned to the Scriptures. In vv. 8-10, by faith Abraham obeyed God’s calling and went out to a place of inheritance. However, he did not know where he was going. In vv. 17-19, by faith Abraham offered Isaac with extraordinary obedience, for he considered that God would raise him up from the dead.

After reading these two passages, I asked myself, “What kind of faith did Abraham have?” I was thinking in my head, “The faith that Abraham had is that there would always be a new possibility before him, for he had the faith to believe the God of resurrection. Resurrection indicates new possibility. It foreshadows what is not yet to come. It points forward to the future hope.”

Paul said that the God whom Abraham believed was the one who “gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist” (Rom. 4:17). 

Jurgen Moltmann notes, “This God is present where we wait upon his promises in hope and transformation. When we have a God who calls into being the things that are not, then the things that are not yet, that are future, also become ‘thinkable’ because they can be hoped for.”[2]  In between the two passages about Abraham, the author of Hebrews said, “These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth” (11:13). There is no guarantee I will receive any promise. But I see it from a distance. I welcome it gladly with anticipation. And I accept the fact that I am a sojourner on earth. “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).

The God of new possibility led Abraham all the way through; Abraham acted upon the mystery of God with a leap of faith. The God whom Abraham followed is also my God who has rescued me and guided me through and through. A new possibility of pursuing further study, of teaching, and of ministering to another church ought to be out there, somewhere in the providential care and sovereignty of God. May the God of new possibility prepare me for another ministry.

Paul Tillich notes, “Theology, as a function of the Christian church, must serve the needs of the church. A theological system is supposed to satisfy two basic needs: the statement of the truth of the Christian message and the interpretation of this truth for every new generation. Theology moves back and forth between two poles, the eternal truth of its foundation and the temporal situation in which the eternal truth must be received.”[3]  This is my theological dictum: Apart from the church, my faith is no longer biblical and theologically sound. The needs of the church must be served through the gifts that God has given us in Christ through the Spirit. A people of God needs to be edified; the church of Christ, be built up; the temple of the Spirit, be taken care of.  

No matter where I am, I won’t practice my faith apart from His church, for biblical faith should always be communal, which is church-oriented, Christ-centered, and cross-focused.

I hope that you share this part of my communal faith in your faith journey.

Your friend

---

[1] Eugene H. Peterson, Under the Unpredictable Plant: An Exploration in Vocational Holiness (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), p. 21.

[2] Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), p. 30.

[3] Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973), volume 1, p. 3.

Stand Firm in the Gospel

In the time of turbulence, Paul exhorted a young church in Thessalonica to stand firm and hold on tight: “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold on to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.” (2 Thess. 2:15 ESV) Paul taught them in person; now he taught them through his letters. In 1 Thess. 2:17 ESV, Paul said, “But since we were torn away from you, brothers, for a short time, in person not in heart, we endeavored the more eagerly and with great desire to see you face to face.” He then sent Timothy to them (1 Thess. 3:1-5), and Timothy returned with the good news of their spiritual condition (1 Thess. 3:6-10). Paul and the Thessalonians were separated in distance, but not in spirit. Paul’s heart was attached to the Thessalonians. Paul ministered to them in person or through another person; he also ministered to them in his letters.

“The traditions that you were taught” refers to the fundamental teachings of Christian faith that are consisted of three things: the basic gospel message (His death and resurrection; see 1 Cor. 15:3-4); a balanced worshipping church, such as preaching the Word and performing sacraments (e.g. the Eucharist and baptism); and the basic rules of Christian behavior (e.g. love).[1] How important it is to get back to the fundamental teachings and lay a firm foundation on those teachings. “We do not move on from the Gospel. Instead, we move on in the Gospel, for its depths are unfathomable and its implications for life and teaching are innumerable.”[2] In other words, we can never grow out of the gospel; we can only grow with the gospel. If we are serious about the gospel, we must be serious about the gospel implications, such as theology, community, and ethics.

How often we witness people falling short and giving up their faith in the midst of doubt and difficulty. Ever since then, they have kept their lives away from the gospel. One of the reasons why some people give up their faith is that they are not firmly grounded and nurtured in the gospel in the initial stage of Christian journey. How common it is in today’s church. We turn away from the self and to the gospel; however, we are not biblically, theologically, and ethically grounded in the gospel. We end up being saturated with the self.

For the Thessalonians, Paul taught them to stand firm and hold on tight. Don’t be captivated by the cultural force or present circumstances. Rather, the church in Thessalonica must stand firm in the truth and model this truth in the world. “The church must remember two points in particular: first, that Christianity is about truth, and second, that those who say they are Christians must model this truth by their integrity.”[3]

---

[1] N. T. Wright, Paul for Everyone: Galatians and Thessalonians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), p. 150.

[2] Gary A. Parrett and S. Steve Kang, Teaching the Faith, Forming the Faithful: A Biblical Vision for Education in the Church (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2009), p. 99.

[3] David F. Wells, The Courage to be Protestant: Truth-Lovers, Marketers, and Emergents in the Postmodern World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), p. 92.

Peterson on Pastoral Theology

In The Pastor: A Memoir (New York: HarperOne, 2011), Eugene Peterson notes:

For several years, I had been on the lookout for writers who would give me direction and affirmation for who and what I had become and was becoming as a pastor. I wasn’t coming up with much. I asked around for the names of the leaders in the field of pastoral theology. One name, a professor at one of our leading Presbyterian seminaries, camp up frequently.

I learned that he was giving a seminar in a church in Philadelphia, a little over an hour away, and drove up to spend a morning in his company. He was absolutely brilliant. I was absolutely impressed. He appeared to know everything and fluently articulate everything. There were about twenty pastors in the seminar. As we spent the morning talking about the life and work of pastor, I was totally awed by the clarity and probing insights he brought to the subject. For the first hour or so I was under his spell. And then I began feeling that something might not be quite right. What I was doing, working in a congregation characterized by interruptions, false starts, and unfinished work, seemed like a far cry from anything he was presenting. A fog worked its way into the room, obscuring the clarity of his words. I asked how we might extend the conversation after we left the seminar. What would he recommend? He recommended his books: “Stay in conversation with me through my books…”

When I returned home, I bought all his books—there were eight of them—and began reading. If he was the person who knew the most about pastoral theology in America, I wanted to be informed. After the second book and starting on the third, something didn’t seem right. I looked in the index under the heading “prayer.”  Nothing. Not a single reference to prayer. I went through the indices of the other books. Still nothing. I still had a great deal to learn about the vocation of pastor, but I knew one thing for sure: the work of prayer was at the heart of everything. Personal conversation with God had to intersect with everything I thought or said, whether in the sanctuary or on the street corner. And here was a man who, I was told by many, was our leading pastoral theologian, writing eight of the most influential books on being a pastor in America in the twenty or so years preceding my becoming a pastor—and not a single reference to prayer.

I looked for references to congregation, the workplace of pastors. For church. For worship. For preaching. For scripture. These were subjects high on the interest level of the Company of Pastors. I remembered the reluctantly divulged item in Philadelphia of the famous professor’s meager one year of experience in pastoral work. And this was my generation’s leading authority on pastoral work? His brilliant works on pastoral theology obviously had little or no grounding in the pastor’s workplace, “this damned church.” I felt gypped.

I took the books to the landfill and dumped them. Pastoral theology without prayer and without congregation? Nobody in my neighborhood was going to read these books if I had any say in it. (pp. 149-151)

Pastoral Portrait

I purchased N. T. Wright’s New Testament set (18 volumes) recently. I am planning to finish reading them in January and February. (I just finished the volume on The Prison Letters.) It is a good habit to read the Bible along with useful commentaries. Each volume of this series is short and concise. N. T. Wright, a first-rated theologian and exegete, is always able to provide some pointers for readers to understand the text in the first century and apply it in the twenty-first century.

From time to time, we need to set different short-term goals to encounter the Word of God. For example, we can continuously read one particular book in the Bible in a month, like Exodus. We can read all Pauline epistles repeatedly in six months. Or we use a book like An Introduction to the Old Testament to read the entire Old Testament. I used to read five psalms per day. I finished reading the Book of Psalms in a month. I stopped doing it after a few months. (I think I got bored.) In spite of the fact that the Bible is the Word of God, it’s true that we get bored in reading the Bible here and there. That’s why we need creativity as well as new challenge to encounter the Word of God. A new challenge imposed on myself is to read the New Testament along with N. T. Wright’s commentaries. 

In commenting on Paul’s ministry in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 2:1-8), N. T. Wright notes:

In his dealings with the Thessalonians themselves, as a result, Paul could afford to be gentle, caring and loving. He wasn’t secretly out to gain anything from them; he simply and genuinely wanted the love of God to embrace them, and as he worked among them he found that his own love was drawn out to them as well. Those who have had the privilege of being ministered to by people with this motivation know how wonderful it is when pastors share with them not only the gospel but their own very selves. Those of us who have had good Christian friends, at school, college, work or in social life, will know the same thing.

And, in case anyone supposes…that Paul is praising himself too much, we should reflect that he could hardly have written all this—and the scribe taking Paul’s dictation could hardly have copied it down—if it wasn’t true. The Thessalonians would recognize this self-portrait when they heard the letter. The question for all Christian ministers is: if we were to describe ourselves like this, would anyone recognize who we were talking about?[1]

A self-portrait of a Christian minister ought to be recognized by a particular group of people in a local church. Pastoral ministry is like “a nursing mother taking care of her own children” (1 Thess. 2:7). This imagery vividly depicts Paul’s pastoral attitude and endurance. And the congregation in Thessalonica should recognize this “motherly” image in Paul and his ministry. No Christian minister ought to be fully defined by a congregation. We are mature enough to see that some churches turn ministers into mere workers. However, one’s pastoral depiction cannot bypass the congregation’s recognition either. Christian ministers are servants of the church for Jesus’ sake (2 Cor. 4:5). Not only are Christian ministers servants of Jesus Christ, but also the body of Christ—the church.

---

[1] N. T. Wright, Paul for Everyone: Galatians and Thessalonians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), p. 96.

Hindrance and Providence

“I want you to know, brothers, that I have often intended to come to you (but this far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles” (Rom. 1:13, ESV; cf. 15:22).

Paul attempted to visit the church in Rome. He was prevented to do so even though his purpose of his visit was to win some converts among the Christians in Rome and the Gentiles. In Rom. 15:23-24, 28, Paul then elaborated what he introduced in the beginning of this letter that the ultimate reason of his visit was to convince the Romans to participate in the mission of God by supporting his mission to Spain.[1]

Paul did finally arrive at Rome. But his journey to Rome was a captive one (see Acts 27:1-28:31). He did not arrive at Rome according to his own time; however, he was escorted there in God’s time. Whatever the reasons why Paul got hindered in the first place, he did not get what he prayed for in his time. Nevertheless, he always got what he prayed for only according to the divine pleasure and sovereign will. Paul’s mission was to “bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations (Rom. 1:5, ESV; also see 16:26). He planned to go to Rome with good will, but Paul was not exempted from being stopped.

In commenting on Rom. 1:13, John Calvin noted:

The Lord frequently upsets the purposes of his saints, in order to humble them, and by such humiliation to teach them to regard his Providence, that they may rely on it…The hindrances of the godly and of the unbelieving differ: the latter perceive only that they are hindered, when they are restrained by the strong hand of the Lord, so as not to be able to move; but the former are satisfied with an hindrance that arises from some approved reason; nor do they allow themselves to attempt anything beyond their duty, or contrary to edification.[2]

Paul was hindered; however, it did not stop him from pursuing God’s will in his life. He waited and submitted to God’s providence.

---

[1] Acts 1:8, ESV—“…And you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” In Paul’s mind, “Spain was regarded as the ‘end(s) of the earth.’” See Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), pp. 75-82.

[2] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans. Translated and edited by John Owen. 500^th Anniversary Edition (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2009), p. 59.

有誰讀過全本《聖經》？

(Taken from http://fishandhappiness.blogspot.com/2012/01/blog-post_05.html)

《新約》的歷史

正在看 The Great Courses 裏由 Bart Ehrman 講授的 The History of the Bible: The Making of the New Testament Canon，共十二講，每講三十分鐘，只兩張 DVD 便完全收錄了。我買時這套 DVD 是減價貨，記得只售約十美元，真是廉價質高的知識，問題是有沒有興趣學習而已。 Ehrman  說話快而清楚，聲線亦算有抑揚頓挫，內容講得有趣味，絕非是個「悶教授」；看著畫面，見他滔滔不絕，身體語言也豐富，真有點覺得是在上他的課。

Ehrman 在第一講的開場白便相當有趣。他說自己曾在課堂上問學生：「你們有誰相信《聖經》是神默示的？」，結果全班約四百人幾乎全都舉手表示相信（那是 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill，而 North Carolina 是在所謂 Bible Belt 內的）。然後他又問：「你們有誰看過 The Da Vinci Code 這本小說？」結果也是幾乎全班舉手。最後他問：「你們有誰讀過全本《聖經》？」這次只有零星的學生舉手。Ehrman 於是對學生說：「我真是不明白，Dan Brown 的小說固然引人入勝，但你們說相信《聖經》是神默示的，難道你們不想知道神在祂的書裏說了些甚麼嗎？」

Ehrman 以這幾個問題帶出一點：很多人（包括非教徒）都同意《聖經》是一本很重要的書，但他們卻大多對《聖經》的內容和歷史都不甚了了（包括教徒）。然而，我著眼的卻是：教徒和非教徒在這方面的情況殊不相同 --- 非教徒可以認為《聖經》是一本很重要的書，卻沒有興趣深入認識這本書，這沒有任何不妥，世上重要的書多的是，怎可能每本都深入認識？教徒則不同了，對他們來說（很多教徒都這麼相信），《聖經》不但是一本很重要的書，而且記載了神的話，不是其他重要的書可比擬，因此，他們是絕不應該未讀過全本《聖經》的。

Dialectical Tension

Matthew’s gospel concludes with the Great Commission of Jesus Christ. It is not new that the command of Jesus in the Great Commission is the hermeneutical key to interpret Matthew’s gospel. Jesus called the disciples in Galilee, and he gave them the Great Commission in Galilee. From Galilee to Galilee, how did Jesus call and make disciples in Matthew’s narrative? Matthew’s Gospel became the discipleship blueprint for Matthew’s community in the first century.

In discipleship, there is no fairy-tale or magic. The ups and downs of discipleship path are real and inevitable. We grow along the way with the guidance and power of the Spirit. I find it interesting to realize that some disciples still doubted when they saw the resurrected Jesus on the mountain in Galilee. “Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.” (Matt. 28:16-17, ESV) At the end of the gospel, after Jesus had done and proved everything he said through the cross and resurrection, they worshipped. However, some doubted.

In commenting on the Great Commission, David J. Bosch notes:

Clearly these references to the weakness of the disciples have an important meaning for Matthew’s readers. Being a disciple of Jesus does not signify that one has, as it were, arrived…The weaknesses of the disciples in Matthew’s gospel do not, however, have a dark side only. In Matthew 28:17 the disciples’ doubt is strangely juxtaposed to their worship: “They (all!) worshiped him; but some doubted”…[Matthew] wishes him community to know that mission never takes place in self-confidence but in the knowledge of our own weakness, at a point of crisis where danger and opportunity come together. Matthew’s Christians like the first disciples, stand in the dialectical tension between worship and doubt, between faith and fear.[1]

There is always a dialectical tension between trusting and following. Matthew’s gospel recognizes it in the path of discipleship. It seems to imply that there is a place for disciples to worship and doubt God at the same time even though Matthew does not promote it as a norm for the life of discipleship (see Matt. 8:23-27). We worship with doubt; we doubt in worship. How true it is in real life.

I wish I can say that we worship wholeheartedly and trust in His authority all the time. I wish I can teach something like that. But I am glad that Matthew put the weaknesses of the disciples toward the end. And Jesus did not rebuke them. Rather, Jesus gave them a mission and a promise: I will continue to be with you at the end of age as you continue to make disciples of all nations in the name of the triune God. The life of discipleship is grounded in the promise of God in Christ as we continue to fulfill His mission commissioned to us. In the midst of fulfilling this great task, we grapple with the dialectical tension with the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

---

[1] David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1991), p. 76.