沒有經過流淚的雙目，永遠看不到人間疾苦

Jacob's unhappy biography

2012-02-01T23:20:00.001Z

reading Nahum M. Sarna's Genesis: the traditional Hebrew text with new JPS translation
Excursus 21 -Jacob the moral issue on Gen. 27:1-28:5

...what we read from Jacob's life is a unhappy biography.... um, a warning truly to every one of us.
every single decisions in our life could affect the future of ours and others!

How to Lead an Unbeliever's Funeral

2012-02-01T13:22:00.000Z

How to Lead an Unbeliever's Funeral by Jared C. Wilson

Reflections on the Church in Great Britain

2012-02-01T13:21:00.000Z

Reflections on the Church in Great Britain by D. A. Carson

how wonderful is the word of God

2012-01-27T09:14:00.000Z

Here are the words of the Lord to me through the beautiful translation of REB:
Psa 119:42 ... because I trust in your word.
Psa 119:43 Do not rob me of my power to speak the truth fro I put my hope in your decrees.

Psa 119:54 Your statues are the theme of my song throughout my earthly life.

Psa 119:64 Lord, the earth is filled with your unfailing love; teach me your statues.

"Son of God" offensive to muslims?

2012-01-23T11:08:00.002Z

why do they (professionals) do this?

Wycliffe, SIL Issue Guidelines on Translating 'Son of God' Among Muslims

The term 'Son of God' should be retained, but not at the expense of comprehension, translating groups say.

Collin Hansen | posted 10/13/2011 10:01AM

Christianity Today, October (Web-only), 2011

港籠屋生活成國際新聞

2012-01-19T13:36:00.000Z

what a shame!

港籠屋生活成國際新聞

2012-01-12

香港在反映貧富懸殊程度的堅尼系數上，是全球已發展地區最高，○六年升至零點五三三。港大社會工作及社會行政學系講座教授周永新表示，政府三月後公布最新堅尼系數，他估計堅尼系數仍高，即使窮人收入因應最低工資改善，但大部分收入作交租，生活質素更差。社聯業務總監蔡海偉指，過去一年基層市民在板間房、堃房、棺材房租金不斷升，收入上升是假象，政府應盡快加建公屋。

Christmas exegesis on Luk 2:7

2011-12-24T09:11:00.012Z

^ESVLuke 2:7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

^BGTLuke 2:7 καὶ ἔτεκεν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον, καὶ ἐσπαργάνωσεν αὐτὸν καὶ ἀνέκλινεν αὐτὸν ἐν φάτνῃ, διότι οὐκ ἦν αὐτοῖς τόπος ἐν τῷ καταλύματι.

but a more basic question: is the inn really an inn as nowadays? is the manger so portrayed as in the paintings? this could change his direction of interpretation/ application completely! (check the lexicons and the cultural background at the very least...)
for those who attended my class on Bible architecture and exegesis, I opined that κατάλυμα (inn) should properly be a guest room of a typical ancient Palestinian household! The manger (φάτνη) is actually a stall inside the household! (If so, the shepherds can find the baby anyway! The high class inn vs. poor shepherd dichotomy no longer works then.)
Jesus, though travelling in the world as a stranger, was nevertheless born in a warm family, possibly bringing much joy to his relatives, esp. when they heard of the experience of Mary and Joseph... (well, the joy motif here is more noteworthy)

source

postlude after sharing with a friend not in the class:

For a typical/ poor family, the manger is a part of the family inside the small house (Sidetracking: for poor families, animals live with the family and are almost a family member. that's the power of Nathan's parable in 2Sam 12). This actually facilitates the houshold's help, who should be a relative of Joseph, for Mary's delivery. According to Kenneth Bailey, guest rooms are separate rooms but still part of the structure of a typical house. With one familiar to ancient household setting, this reading would yield an implied situation that Jesus was born in a warm poor/average family like an average ancient person. The real tension at play in the text is NOT the mean/ rich host family vs. Jesus' family (with despised shepherds on their side...) then. The real undercurrent is the king of a poor and warm family (with Jesus' relatives and shepherds; and the heavenly host in 2:13) vs. Augustus in the cold and glorious (claimed) background of the secular history (2:1). Luke was writing in a manner of historiography with respect to salvation history.

ERE GOD HAD BUILT THE MOUNTAINS

2011-12-17T09:25:00.000Z

這幾天突然想起初信是認識的這首William Cowper的詩歌, 已找不到當時唱的譜/音, 但the wonderful I am... 令我想起初信返荃灣福音堂的情景:

ERE GOD HAD BUILT THE MOUNTAINS

Print Version /

Ere God had built the mountains,
Or raised the fruitful hills;
Before He filled the fountains
That feed the running rills;
In me from everlasting,
The wonderful I Am,
Found pleasures never wasting,
And Wisdom is my name.

When, like a tent to dwell in,
He spread the skies abroad,
And swathed about the swelling
Of Ocean’s mighty flood;
He wrought by weight and measure,
And I was with Him then:
Myself the Father’s pleasure,
And mine, the sons of men.

Thus Wisdom’s words discover
Thy glory and Thy grace,
Thou everlasting Lover
Of our unworthy race!
Thy gracious eye surveyed us
Ere stars were seen above;
In wisdom Thou hast made us,
And died for us in love.

And couldst Thou be delighted
With creatures such as we,
Who, when we saw Thee, slighted,
And nailed Thee to a tree?
Unfathomable wonder,
And mystery divine!
The voice that speaks in thunder,
Says, “Sinner, I am thine!”

Higgs boson: the particle of faith

2011-12-16T14:41:00.000Z

In this article, McGrath nicely pointed out that even science is not something about proofs but explanatory power. This aspect is similar to Christian faith which people often despised (and yet so "believed" in their own ..."scientific" claims however naturalistic, evolutionary... they are). I have an occasion to talk to a guy from quantum physics and he lamented that so many people/ scientists believe in such myth without knowing that they are living in this myth...

source

Higgs boson: the particle of faith

There are parallels between the search for the ‘God particle’ and the search for God Himself, writes Alister McGrath.

A graphic showing traces of two high-energy photons measured at Cern Photo: GETTY

By Alister McGrath

9:00AM GMT 15 Dec 2011

203 Comments

In 1994, Nobel Laureate Leon Lederman came up with a nickname for the Higgs boson – the mysterious particle proposed by physicist Peter Higgs back in the 1960s to explain the origin of mass. Journalists loved the name – "the God particle" – which probably explains the huge media interest recently in the work of the Large Hadron Collider. Most scientists hated it, considering it misleading and simplistic. Maybe so. But it certainly got people talking about physics.

And maybe it’s not such a bad nickname after all. Lederman invented the name the "God particle” because it was “so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive.” Nobody had seen it back in 1994. And they’re still not sure whether they’ve really seen it today. Yet this isn’t seen as a massive problem. The idea seemed to make so much sense of things that the existence of the “God particle” has come to be taken for granted. It has become, I would say, a “particle of faith”. The observations themselves didn’t prove the existence of the Higgs boson. Rather, the idea of the Higgs boson explained observations so well that those in the know came to believe it really existed. One day, technology might be good enough to allow it to be actually observed. But we don’t need to wait until then before we start believing in it.

Some tell us that science is about what can be proved. The wise tell us it is really about offering the best explanations of what we see, realising that these explanations often cannot be proved, and may sometimes lie beyond proof. Science often proposes the existence of invisible (and often undetectable) entities – such as dark matter – to explain what can be seen. The reason why the Higgs boson is taken so seriously in science is not because its existence has been proved, but because it makes so much sense of observations that its existence seems assured. In other words, its power to explain is seen as an indicator of its truth.

There’s an obvious and important parallel with the way religious believers think about God. While some demand proof that God exists, most see this as unrealistic. Believers argue that the existence of God gives the best framework for making sense of the world. God is like a lens, which brings things into clearer focus. As the Harvard psychologist William James pointed out years ago, religious faith is about inferring “the existence of an unseen order” in which the “riddles of the natural order” can be explained.

There’s more to God than making sense of things. But for religious believers, it’s a great start.

Alister McGrath is Professor of Theology at King’s College London, and President of the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. He is currently writing a new biography of the Oxford apologist and writer C. S. Lewis, to be published in March 2013.

good read for Christians and ministers

2011-12-08T16:20:00.000Z

source

若有一天這個城市死亡，死因會是沉默和冷漠╱文﹕蔡子強

明報 – 18小時前

【明報專訊】「他們最先走來捉共產黨，因為我不是共產黨，所以我無出聲；

他們稍後走來捉猶太人，因為我不是猶太人，所以我也無出聲；

他們接着走來捉工會分子，因為我不是工會分子，所以我還是無出聲；

到了他們來捉天主教徒，因為我是新教徒，所以我仍舊無出聲；

最後，他們走來捉我，環顧四周，已經沒有人留下來，可以為我出聲了。」

以上一段「唔關我事，所以我唔出聲，而到了最後，終於無人為我出聲」的故事，來自德國人馬田尼姆拉（Martin Niemoeller），他是一個德國傳教士，雖然也曾被希特勒逮捕而鋃鐺下獄，但戰後他一直沒有以受害者自居，反而深切反省。
馬田尼姆拉的歉疚
他認為納粹所犯下的滔天暴行，不應只推諉給少數幾個人，大家便認為可輕易「甩身」，反而認為應該由整個民族一起承擔，因為面對不公義，如果袖手旁觀坐視不理，本身便是一種不可饒恕的罪行。
他說﹕「我們常常選擇保持沉默，事實證明，我們並不能因此而逃避責任。我曾經不斷反覆地追問自己，如果在1933及1934年間，德國全國境內1.4萬名傳教士都嘗試挺身而出捍衛真理，甚至不惜為此賠上性命的話，歷史是否因此可以改寫呢？我愈來愈傾向相信，300至400萬條無辜犧牲的生命其實是可以挽回的。現在我們必須為此付出代價。」
1月起，吳志森將被香港電台奪去其烽煙節目主持的崗位。港台搬出一大套冠冕堂皇的理由，美其名是要多讓聽眾發表意見。港台上下，由領導層到工會代表，今次在這個問題上立場頗為一致。
香港電台讓我感到陌生
但眾所周知，吳志森一直被左派中人視為眼中釘，傾力圍剿。正如他近日在報章撰文說﹕
「去年12月至今，愛國左報指名道姓批判我的文章，多達70篇。打手們都仔細監聽我的節目，反覆閱讀我的文章，再斷章取義，進行批判。多了這批讀者和聽眾，未嘗不是一件好事，但他們希望的事發生了，目的達到了，今後會清閒多了。」
所以，港台今番舉動，很難不讓人不產生相關的政治聯想。我只能說，對於港台的朋友，我從未試過像今天般感覺陌生。
但我想，吳志森有一點是錯了，就是前述這些人不會變得清閒，因為他們很快便會找來新的目標，例如科大社會科學部副教授成名。
吳志森之後，矛頭轉向成名？
粗略一查，在過去短短10日，愛國報章便有4篇點名針對成名的文章，最新一篇是周一劉夢熊所發表的〈成名是科大副教授還是極端職業政客？〉。
就讓我節錄這篇文章的部分內容，讓讀者一開眼界﹕
「科大校董會應研究成名的所作所為，是否褻瀆師德和影響學校形象，是否應容忍這樣的所謂教授繼續誤人子弟？」
「有評論批評他『言論之激進、政治立場之極端，恐怕連激進反對派政客也自嘆不如，綜觀成名多年來的言論，他根本就是戴着學者頭銜的長毛，只不過是利用學者的身分去鼓吹激進路線』，這批評完全符合事實。」
「成名是『法輪功』的兩大媒體《大紀元時報》和『新唐人電視』的常客，令人搞不清他是科大副教授還是『法輪功』成員。」
「成名扮演極端職業政客的出位言行罄竹難書，令人質疑他是科大副教授還是極端職業政客？」
這類指控，稍為有常識的人，都會知道其橫蠻無理，不用我多廢唇舌。
不錯，劉夢熊確是在趙連海等問題上說過幾句「人話」，而讓他甚至受到吹捧，但到了一些關鍵位，他便很快「歸隊」。這些殺氣騰騰、叫人收聲的文章，展現出他與知識分子的真正差距。
袖手旁觀是一種罪行
我跟吳志森和成名在諸如公投、政改等問題上，都有頗為不同的政見，但我認為這些都不重要，因為這是一個開放、多元社會的必然現象。我相信，自己即使與他們政見不同，也一樣要捍衛他們說出這些政見的權利，這是應有之義。
很多人選擇在香港這塊土地安身立命，並不是因為那些高樓大廈，又或者昔日傳說中的「遍地黃金」，而是它尚算寬鬆自由、開放多元的環境。
我記得港大8•18事件後曾舉辦過一個公開論壇，不錯，就是徐立之有份出席的那一次。當時有一位來自國內的女同學激動的發言，她說內地是不可以因為抗議而集會的，集會只能為了慶祝，如果她們真的有所不滿，宣示的方法只有透過「散步」。她更說，有4個字，是20多年內自己也不敢喊出的，剛剛看到港大同學喊，她也終於按捺不住，忘情的大聲喊了出來，那就是「平反六四」。
如果有一天，吳志森、成名……，一個又一個都被迫收聲的話，我相信其餘的香港人也都不能獨善其身。如果大家目睹這些打壓和不公義，都選擇冷眼旁觀、明哲保身的話，這個城市將有一天會死亡，死因會是大家的沉默和冷漠。
但丁（Dante Alighieri）在《神曲》中說過﹕「地獄裏最熾熱之處，是留給那些在出現重大道德危機時，仍要保持中立的人。」（The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality.）
我相信，馬田尼姆拉心裏也會說﹕「監牢裏的一角，是留給那些在目睹打壓和不公義時，選擇無動於中、視若無睹的人。」
梁振英的公道
周二，梁振英高調反擊，批評有傳媒集團天天針對他，並以失實報道抹黑他，更指報道是有動機的，讓他感到困擾，大量虛耗他的精神和時間。
先不說梁拒絕說清楚哪些地方報道失實，聽到梁這番憤慨和控訴，再想起前述吳志森等，以及國內備受宣傳機器打壓的異見人士的遭遇，真的讓人有點哭笑不得。
在房屋、最低工資、民生問題上，梁振英總能滔滔不絕，侃侃而談，但到了諸如六四、大陸異見人士等人權課題上，梁總是選擇緘默，說沒有補充。梁從政了近30 年，曾當過特區籌備委員會副主任、行政會議召集人、全國政協常委等，位高權重，與那些備受打壓人士可謂天壤雲泥。試問過往他又有沒有為遭受打壓的異見人士以及人權公義等課題仗義執言過半句？他又有沒有為吳志森等的遭遇伸張過正義呢？今天，到他反過來要為自己討回公道，試問，他又認為自己會能夠得到多少人同情呢？
香港的傳媒當然不是納粹，但梁振英在慨嘆不公時，卻宜多一點馬田尼姆拉式的自省。
蔡子強
中文大學政治與行政學系高級導師

ברא in Gen 1:1

2011-12-08T13:29:00.002Z

who say that ברא is ONLY used with God as subject? See those non-Qal uses in Jos 17:15, 18; 1Sam 2:29, Eze 21:19 [2x], Eze 23:47!
this is the power of a basis research technique, using BW!
kingship and lordship, though related, are two discrete ideas. I cannot see in the text the former. sometimes exegetes tend to err by overstating and lumping up ideas... this can be avoided by critical self assessment...

source

◎陳文紀博士（本會譯經專員）

方舟與考古的回應與反思...

2011-12-03T11:40:00.002Z

翻看母院院長寫於半年前的回應, 文章雖短, 但覺得對今日的爭論仍然十分適切:
1. 對任何考古發現皆要持嚴謹與開放的態度;
2. 考古是有用的助證, 決不能如坊間一些人的主張, 把聖經單純看作一文本, 聖經的史實性不容忽視;
3. 基督教的真理超越了考古的領域, 神透過史實向人類發出啟示, 但啟示的內涵本身已超出史實本身所能承載. (原文的頁3)

一. 其實, 質疑人家的誠信, 是道德的問題(造假, 失實...), 當然不共戴天, 需要回應. 但與其互相攻擊, 扣帽子(有說人抺黑, 有說人不是因信稱義...), 繼而失見證, 雙方是否可以平心靜氣, 放下針鋒相對的坐低一起談談?

二. 同時, 信仰與科學也許是不少信徒不感興趣的話題, 是否藉這機會需要重新反思? 坊間的說法盡都可信嗎? 今天我們應如何向人傳講真理? 是否一切跟考古/科學的東西都應避而不談? 有沒有在自己的範疇(科學/理科, 文科等)努力卓越的基督徒能見證信仰的真實? 自問都見過一些在屬世範疇很聰明的叻人(基督徒), 但有時真的驚訝他們對聖經的了解(認識神方面)何其膚淺!!!

也許還有三, 四, 五,... 你能化困難為祝福, 一起更新你的信仰嗎?

hebrew for today

2011-12-01T16:02:00.003Z

וַיִּתְהַלֵּ֙ךְ חֲנ֜וֹךְ אֶת־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים (Gen 5:22a WTT)

NET notes: In Gen 5:22 the phrase suggests that Enoch and God "got along." This may imply that Enoch lived in close fellowship with God, leading a life of devotion and piety. An early Jewish tradition, preserved in 1 En. 1:9 and alluded to in Jude 14, says that Enoch preached about the coming judgment. See F. S. Parnham, "Walking with God," EvQ 46 (1974): 117-18.

וַיּ֥וֹלֶד בָּנִ֖ים וּבָנֽוֹת (Gen 5:22b WTT)

the waw-consec imperfect in 22b (//22a) suggests a continual action, part of the development or progression of the plot (foreground events).

Conclusion: walking with God and be-getting children are two comparable events; neither one is more in the background nor one is more in the foreground. Why do we often dichotomize the two?

other info:

JOÜON-MURAOKA, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, §155c

To start with, Hebrew has only one lexeme w to express et. In order to render the various distinctions only two methods can be used: either a modification of Waw or of the verbal form. Now these two methods are applied only in part. Simple et is always expressed by a weak w (i.e. without the necessity of doubling)(³); but energic w is not always expressed by a strong w (i.e. which requires doubling). Moreover strong w is in fact only found in the case of the form of succession wayyiqtol "and he killed." In the same form, when the phonetic laws allow it, vocalisation and stress are equally discriminating. In w-qatal the difference in value of et can sometimes be expressed by the position of the stress, e.g. w-qatálti(⁴) "and I killed" (et of pure juxtaposition) as against w-qataltí "and then I shall kill" (form of succession). In all the other cases, namely in the cohortative, jussive, and imperative the difference between the et of juxtaposition and the et of purpose-consecution does not appear in the form. The only way to see whether the w in that case is juxtaposing or final-consecutive is to use the context, syntax and also a comparison with Arabic(⁵).

Does an Unbelieving Child Disqualify an Elder?

2011-12-01T14:14:00.000Z

very reasonable response

source

Nov02 2011

Justin Taylor|5:30 AM CT

You Asked: Does an Unbelieving Child Disqualify an Elder?

Editors' Note: Send your theological, biblical, and practical ministry questions to ask@thegospelcoalition.org along with your full name, city, and state. We'll pass them along to The Gospel Coalition's Council members and other friends for an answer we can share.
Anonymous from Austin, Texas, asks:

Does the New Testament teach that an unbelieving child disqualifies an elder?

We asked for a response from Justin Taylor, father of three, elder at New Covenant Bible Church in St. Charles, Illinois, and vice president of book publishing at Crossway.

**********

There can be few things in life more painful than an unbelieving child. And when the child is the son or daughter of an elder, the questions take on a public dimension in the life of the church. Doesn't the apostle Paul say something about elders needing to have children who are believers?
The verses under consideration are 1 Timothy 3:4-5 and Titus 1:6. We'll look at them in more detail below, but at this point it's helpful to look at the two different conclusions that faithful interpreters have reached.
Douglas Wilson holds to the first option: "[I]f a man's children fall away from the faith (either doctrinally or morally), he is at that point disqualified from formal ministry in the church" (Douglas Wilson, "The Pastor's Kid" in Credenda/Agenda, vol. 2, no. 3).
Alexander Strauch holds to the second view: "The contrast is made not between believing and unbelieving children, but between obedient, respectful children and lawless, uncontrolled children." In other words, Paul is talking about "the children's behavior, not their eternal state" (Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Leadership, 229).
Which one is right? To answer that, we have to take a careful look at the key texts.

Faithful Leadership in the Church and Home

In 1 Timothy 3:4, Paul says that an elder "must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive." In the next verse he explains why: "for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church?" The obvious answer to the rhetorical question is that he can't. In other words, if you can't manage your household at home, you won't be able to care for the household of God. If you regular lose control of your kids, why should you be trusted to lead and protect a flock? John Stott gets the biblical logic right: "The married pastor is called to leadership in two families, his and God's, and the former is to be the training ground of the latter" (John Stott, Guard the Truth: The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus, 98).
None of this is particularly controversial. It's when we get to Titus 1:6 that the harder question arises.

Must an Elder's Children Be Believers?

Paul says that an elder's "children [must be] believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination." On first glance, the answer looks obvious. Paul says that an elder's kids must be believers. But note the footnote in the ESV: believers can also be translated faithful. (It's important to pay attention to footnotes in the translations of biblical texts, as they alert us when there are other equally valid translation options.) The Greek word here is pistas, which can mean either "believing" or "faithful" in the pastoral epistles. (For example, see "believing masters" in 1 Timothy 6:2 and "faithful men" in 2 Timothy 2:2). Word studies alone can't solve this---it depends on the context. But let's be clear on the two big options: Paul either meant that (1) an elder's children have to be believers, or (2) an elder's children must at least be faithful, submissive, and obedient.
How do we decide? The Reformers rightly insisted that we allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. Here we have one author (Paul) writing separately to two young church planters (Timothy and Titus) talking about the same subject (elder qualifications). How do the two passages about family life compare?
When we look at the Greek, we see how similar the language is between 1 Timothy 3:4 and Titus 1:6. You can see the similarities even if you don't know Greek:

The most natural assumption is that Paul is saying the same thing in slightly different ways. (As Andreas Köstenberger points out, it would be unusual if Paul gave Timothy a more lenient standard about elder's children and Titus a more stringent one.) If they mean the same thing, then to have children who are pista means to have children who are hypotagē. And what does it mean to have children who are hypotagē? Paul explains it in the next clause: "not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination" (see note below*).

Four More Reasons

With that in mind, here are four further reasons that incline me to believe that Paul is referring to the submission and obedience of an elder's children, and not to their salvation.
1) The grounding question of 1 Timothy 3:5 explicitly connects the elder's qualifications with his managerial skills in verse 4.
There is something sanctifying about being the child of a believing parent (1 Cor. 7:14). It does not guarantee salvation, but this relational reality sets the child apart in some way. A godly home with the gospel at the center does not automatically produce a believing child, but God has designed things such that this is often the case. In God's providence the modeling of belief and the aroma of the gospel in the home are often the means of producing salvation by grace.
None of this means, however, that there is a one-to-one correspondence between saving faith and good spiritual housekeeping. We see from both Scripture and experience that good and godly leadership does not always prevent children---whether spiritual or natural---from falling away.
So it's puzzling when John Stott says, "An extension of the same principle may be that presbyter-bishops can hardly be expected to win strangers to Christ if they have failed to win those who are most exposed to their influence, their own children" (John Stott, Guard the Truth: The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus, 176). This sounds right at first, but we know it's not true---effective evangelists can have children who leave the faith---and at the end of the day we must remember that salvation belongs to the Lord, who has mercy on whomever he has mercy. If we "expect" someone to be won to faith, we are likely forgetting the inscrutability of grace.
2) Even the best pastoral managers have unbelievers within their church or under their sphere of influence (cf. Galatians 1:6!).
It's possible for a pastor to manage the church (household of God) well, even though not everyone in it is a believer. If this is so, then it seems that one can manage his family (the smaller household) well, even though not all within it genuinely believe.

3) Insisting that having believing children is a prerequisite to eldership leads to some uncomfortable questions.
What do we make of an elder who has a number of believing children, walking faithfully with the Lord---but one who is not? If most of his children are believers, is he not a good manager of his household? Or does the one unbelieving child call into question his overall managerial ability? If it does, then why did any of his children turn out to be believers?

4) All of the requirements for eldership listed in this passage (being a one-woman man, being temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, a good teacher, not a drunkard, not a lover of money, and not a recent convert) are actions of personal responsibility. We would expect the requirement regarding his children to be in the same category.
Requiring that his children have genuine saving faith is to require personal responsibility for the salvation of another, something I don't see taught in Scripture.

Profound Effect

1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 are referring to the general submission and behavior of the elder's children. God has so designed the universe that the parental role of disciplinarian, model, authority, and servant-leader generally has a profound effect upon the behavior of the children. Paul does not spell out what this looks like in every case, nor does he spell out all of the specifics of what will disqualify an elder. The general case, however, is clear:

What must not characterize the children of an elder is immorality and undisciplined rebelliousness, if the children are still at home and under his authority. Paul is not asking any more of the elder and his children than is expected of every Christian father and his children. However, only if a man exercises such proper control over his children may he be an elder. (George W. Knight III, Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, p. 190. See p. 161 for his argument that Paul is referring to tekna ("children") who are under authority and not yet of age.)

May God give the pastors and elders of our churches grace and wisdom in faithfully leading both their churches and their homes.**
_____________________
*In personal correspondence (10/13/11, quoted with permission) Doug Wilson writes: "I am happy to translate the word as faithful, and to say that it means that the children should be 'under good management.' But I don't know why a child would be considered obedient if they were obedient when it comes to making their bed and staying away from cocaine, but disobedient to the central command to love God through Jesus Christ." The problem with this is that we need to let Paul himself explain what he means by faithfulness and obedience, and he explains it negatively in terms of public behavior ("not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination") rather than spiritual faithfulness to the gospel per se.
**I wish to thank Ray Van Neste, Tom Schreiner, and Andreas Köstenberger for offering helpful feedback on an earlier draft of this response.

Categories: Commentary, Featured, Opinion

尋找"雪花"驚世啟示?

2011-12-01T10:40:00.004Z

不是電視機上的！記得以前神學院院長許道良牧師經常說：All truth is God's truth。Bentley以卓越和嚴謹的精神，花了五十年的歲月，見證了神奇妙的創造! 今天我們何等需要基督徒在各個範疇見證上帝的大能和真實!

結語的這段令我印象深刻：

"The indifference and ridicule of some people doesn’t hurt—very much. He feels that he is serving the Great Designer; capturing the evanescent loveliness which, but for him, would be unappreciated—even unseen. And with that role he is content."

...
各位好友，不要輕言放棄。你也能在你的生命中尋找上帝的"驚世啟示"呢。

http://www.icr.org/article/6439/

Snowflake Bentley: Man of Science, Man of God

www.icr.org

Wilson (Willie) Bentley (1865-1931) was born on a farm in Jericho, Vermont. Jericho was an ideal place to study snow because it was in the heart of the snowbelt, producing an average annual snowfall of over 120 inches.1 Willie was homeschooled until age 14, then he attended public school for seve...

64 位教牧領袖聯署呼籲考慮應否支持影音使團

2011-11-29T14:07:00.003Z

一件起初為很值得欣賞的事... 事到如今, 的確有點可惜.
牽涉錢銀, 的確需要高透明度及可以受監察...

source

64 位教牧領袖聯署呼籲
考慮應否支持影音使團
（11月29日消息）

時代論壇

....
有關聯署全文如下：

親愛的主內同道：
我們懷著沉重的心情，要跟各位主裡兄姊談一談影音使團這幾年對外高調宣稱發現挪亞方舟一事。
我們欣賞該使團過去在福音事工上的貢獻，但留意到2004年起，他們事工的重心便漸漸偏移去考古發掘方舟。從2004年起，該使團便不斷以「發現方舟」作噱頭來舉行佈道會和拍攝電影，但我們憂心在未經確切核實之前便以此為號召，會有扭曲事實和取巧之嫌，對教會的誠信和慕道者造成傷害。事實上，他們已在三處不同地點聲稱發現過方舟遺骸，卻不肯公開據稱是方舟遺址的地點，以致其他考古學者根本無法核實他們的宣稱。該使團至今未有按考古學的嚴謹治學態度處事。最近一次發現七個空間的木結構後，即以新聞發佈會方式公佈他們的發現有99.9%可能是方舟，但隨後又改稱90%，甚為兒戲。
2010 年相繼有香港和北美的華人教牧和領袖，甚至基督徒科學家和地質學者，先後質疑該使團的考古聲稱，可惜該使團未有提出令普遍教會群體和公眾信服的證據來回應考古疑點，只不斷強調批評者未曾到訪過報稱的方舟遺址，或辯稱他們已將證據陳列在電影中，着質疑者先看過電影才作批評。面對教內愈來愈多的批評，該使團最近在十一月七日出版《號外》，點名指摘教內的質疑者造謠抹黑他們。
影音使團在方舟事工上，每年自各地信徒籌得大量捐款，但考古支出方面，卻未能向普遍教會群體和公眾交待令人滿意的財務報告。姑勿論木結構是否挪亞方舟，影音使團在未經學術界公開核實前便到處張揚，不斷向信徒募捐，並以發現方舟為名舉辦各類活動，手法並不恰當。
我們敦請大家採取審慎的態度，不必急於對木結構作出最終判斷，在影音使團公開所有證據、公開方舟遺址地點讓考古學界進行鑑別、以及尊重理性對話之前，鄭重考慮應否繼續支持該使團方舟相關的活動和籌款，和應否協助在堂會內發放其刊物和宣傳相關消息？
我們既然蒙召為教會守望，建立聖潔的國度，以真理和誠實傳揚福音，這審慎態度就是我們應有的負責任態度。
祝　事主得力！主恩常偕！
日期：二零一一年十一月廿九日
聯署人：

...

2011-11-26T23:17:00.003Z

really what to know more about the four points...

source

中國福音大會首場早上信息
王峙軍：中國教會需四種意識
（11月25日消息）

黎嘉晉

王峙軍牧師於早堂信息訓勉

【時代論壇訊】在 2011中國福音大會第一場解經信息上，美國新澤西洲「若歌教會」主任牧師黃子嘉勉勵信徒要走十字架的道路，一生遵行上帝的旨意，不要如法利賽人般假冒為善。而其後的早堂信息上，生命出版社社長王峙軍牧師指出，中國教會需要培養四種意識，就是整體、團契、危機及宣教意識。王峙軍解釋，中國教會是一個整體，要在真道上合一，而教會彼此間需加強橫向連結，不致一盤散沙，資源分散。至於危機意識，王峙軍表示，中國信徒不要在復興假象下發白日夢，要為主的道站穩，不要隨外在環境的改變而像西方世界走向敗壞，如從歐洲教會已經衰落、美國的教會極度世俗化情況。他強調，信徒要回到聖經，以真實地了解教會的景況。
在宣教意識方面，王峙軍表示，不要如個別信徒總是期待在北京天安門廣場開福音會，相反每位信徒都是宣教士，就如大會的五千名參加者若每人領一人歸主，便有五千人加入，成為主的信徒。
王峙軍在其後解經時提到，得悉有弟兄姊妹在出席是次福音大會上，面對攔阻，但最後仍然如希伯來書十章中所指的，坦然無懼地來到會場中間參加會議。

黃子嘉牧師勉勵信徒要走十字架的道路

Accuracy in Oral Tradition

2011-11-25T18:06:00.002Z

short interview but insightful enough to stir up your thoughts!
the role of Jesus as teacher and his disciples as passing on his tradition in a controlled manner ("nested transmission") via memory needs to be revisited!

Accuracy in Oral Tradition

Simon Smart, Craig Keener
October 5, 2011
Topic: Biblical, The Historical Jesus, Christianity

Dr. Craig S. Keener is a professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary. He is especially known for his work on the New Testament in its early Jewish and Greco-Roman settings. Craig has authored 15 books, with his popular-level Bible Background Commentary: New Testament selling over half a million copies.

「方舟」是教會的三稜鏡

2011-11-23T13:59:00.005Z

a well written article on the hotly debated issue of Noah's Ark.
on top of further rigorous research, there are points that badly need clarifications...

source

「方舟」是教會的三稜鏡

鄒賢程

自從影音使團開始了尋找挪亞方舟考古的事工，教內外發出不同的回響。有傳道、學者在Facebook 建立群組，參與討論的網友超過二千人。在《時代論壇》正反意見的發表也非常踴躍，閱覽人數亦常踞榜首。最近連非基督徒的蕭若元先生也回應此事。姑勿論誰是誰非，討論本身已經展示了這事工的爭議性。筆者以此為教會的三稜鏡－－把一道真光分化成為不同的顏色，也讓人看出同一議題的不同回應，這是基督教的多元性嗎？或是基督教的分裂的開始？請讀者往下閱讀，各自判斷。
對於「尋找方舟考古事工」，筆者歸納以下各種的回應：
一、贊成，這事工有助證明聖經的真實，對傳揚福音有重大幫助。（這是一些支持的學者和教會的看法）
二、贊成，無論能否證明聖經的真實，只要引起話題，就能產生福音契機。（這曾經是影音的總幹事袁文輝提出的立場）
三、贊成，不過考古的工作必須合乎科學的原則，否則變成誤導人的謊話，違反基督教的精神。
四、反對，認為基督教的根基在於聖經和耶穌基督，並非建立在考古工作，也無法因此證明聖經的真實和救恩的真確。
五、反對，雖然考古對聖經有輔助的作用，但過程艱巨和費用高昂，並非教會和機構能負擔，教會應該落實於更實際的福音和扶貧的工作上。
六、反對，認為影音的手段不真實，有誤導信徒之嫌。例如：考古的數據有爭議等。
七、沉默，認為基督教不應自我攻擊，各自為自己的召命而努力。總之各有各做，各自交賬。
八、沉默，認為無論怎樣「福音都被傳開」，只要有多一個人信主，就多一個人得救。信了主之後，教會再加以教導。
九、反對「沉默者」，認為基督教應該「是就說是，不是就說不是」，基督教應該有「更正」的傳統，沉默就等於認同。
十、反對「反對者」，認為「和諧」比一切都重要。攻擊（或評論）教內的肢體就是不合一的表現。提出「反對」就是破壞「和諧」的行為，都應該摒棄。

可以還有更多不同的聲音，筆者按觀察暫時以此為比較多的情況。如果一個事工引起不同聲音，而且涉及的範圍如此廣泛，筆者認為解鈴還需繫鈴人－－影音使團做出澄清，或與各方（不同立場）的學者、教會、神學院等代表作出公開對話（不是自說自話），或以攻擊還攻擊。畢竟，真理應該是愈辯愈明，讓更多人明白自己的立場，更有助事工的推廣，減低可能的分裂和「不和諧」情況，那不是一件更美的事？筆者，大膽把一些問題提出，希望影音的代表能理性接納和解答，讓信徒息疑。

一、弄清事工的本質：是引起話題，或是以考古證明聖經的真確？如果是前者，相信已經達到目的了。如果是後者，影音是否需要有更堅固的神學基礎來支持這理論。否則難以平衡反對者認為，這樣只會引起無窮無盡的考古工作。（參真証傳播：《考古、聖經與信仰》http://www.gnci.org.hk/tvpluz/component/seyret/video/212.html 當中有四位有份量的神學工作者的分析）
二、澄清考古、與佈道的邏輯關係：如果影音是希望利用考古來幫助佈道工作，當中的邏輯關係在哪裡？一塊木化石如何可以證明是木結構、木結構如何可以證明是一艘船、一艘船如何證明是挪亞方舟（可以是其它的船嗎？）、是挪亞方舟又如何能證明基督教的聖經的真實（可以是其它宗教的洪水故事嗎？）、挪亞方舟的真實與耶穌基督是復活有何關係（有沒有其他考古的證明需要呢？）。
三、有沒有選擇性披露資料：影音提出的其中一個碳十四的測試結果，與其他的三個樣本在不同的化驗室結果有明顯的差異。（三個樣本證明是現代年份，只有一個結果為四千八百年前但列明可能誤差正負率相當高）作為提出機構，如何解讀這些資料？是否有一個能證實就等於可以證實？
四、誇張宣傳手法：一個令很多人質疑的原因，是有關影音的宣傳手法。從開始的九十九點九發現方舟到九十或很有可能發現了方舟、到國家地理雜誌「十大考古發現」（後來證實為中文網頁翻譯出錯：實為十大瀏覽率最高的考古訊息，但影音沒有為此更正，將錯就錯）、「中美電影節中獲獎」變成「獲得中美電影界所肯定」等等。難免被人詬病。
五、財務透明度：影音多次呼籲信徒奉獻，但從未提出考古、化驗、宣傳及電影等種種工作的支出。信徒靠著信心的奉獻，無疑是基督教奉獻的一部分。正如胡志偉牧師在最近一篇有關的文章指出：「捐獻者有知情權，當更多捐獻者要求機構提升透明度與問責性，方作捐獻；這類教育有助提升與改善現今存在若干機構之內的陋習。機構要面向教會與公眾，否則我們當中將不斷出現醜聞，所有基督教機構同樣在眾目睽睽之下，成為世人的笑柄！」（參胡志偉牧師：「方舟神話」解構下的教會生態（下）http://christiantimes.org.hk/Common/Reader/News/ShowNews.jsp?Nid=69588&Pid=6&Version=0&Cid=150&Charset=big5_hkscs ）
六、回應手段有概念轉移之嫌：影音發出宣傳和特刊邀請信徒為他們祈禱，當中有為基督教「抹黑文化」、「語言暴力」等現象代求。這手法似乎有把反對聲音標籤為「抹黑」和「暴力」，但理性的討論是否就等同抹黑？提出討論的學者，大多接受高等神學訓練，甚至是教授級人士，他們在「抹黑」嗎？基督教是否存在「抹黑文化」？還是影音以「抹黑」手法杜絕反對聲音？基督教的真理容不下理性討論嗎？

以上種種疑問，有在坊間攝取的，有是筆者本身的提問。但最重要的是，我們的信仰應該是可以談論的信仰，有不同意見的可以討論。希望當事人能站出來，理性客觀地與不同意見者對話。為響應影音的代禱呼籲，筆者就以以下禱文，求上主垂聽：
創造天地萬物的上主，求你憐憫世人的愚昧無知，無法簡單明白你的旨意。求你幫助我們有明亮的眼目，能分辨是非，按著正意遵行你的使命。又能善用你所賜予的供應，奉獻在合宜的事工上，完成你的聖工。又願信徒、教會有智慧的心，提出善意的規勸，防止惡者的攻擊和試探。祈禱奉教會的根基和磐石－－主耶穌基督的名求，阿門！

（http://www.christiantimes.org.hk，時代論壇時代講場，2011.11.21）

2011-11-22T09:46:00.000Z

雖然王迴避了處理49年後的地下教會的問題, 但整體亦不惜為不錯的分析.

source

王艾明：台灣「多中歸一」信仰和諧　可成大陸基督教界美好見證

2011/11/22 上午 09:00:00　記者吳佳玲/綜合報導

RSS訂閱

｜

轉寄

｜

列印

｜

點閱(94)

字級設定：

南京金陵協和神學院副院長王艾明教授，日前接受台灣浸信會神學院邀請，第三度來台以「加爾文與浸會精神」為主旨進行8場系列演講，並應邀於中原大學和政治大學宗教研究所做專題演講。在結束為期9天的交流參訪行程後，於本報專訪中暢談目前大陸教會與神學教育發展的現況與挑戰。

大陸基督教三大現實

南京金陵協和神學院副院長王艾明教授。 (攝影/記者黃莉雯)

王艾明教授表示，近20年來，大陸基督徒發展已從原本的社會底層晉升至社會各領域，甚至進入精英與主導階層，這是第一大發展現實。

其次，因著國家政策法規保障人民的宗教信仰自由，大陸開始接受並承認基督教是充滿善良與愛心的信仰，政府高層不再把基督徒視為社會底層的群眾。

由於上述兩項現實發展，大陸基督徒人數快速增長，許多高端精英基督徒將各自的專業優勢與觀察帶進教會，教牧人員卻無法給予牧養，教會沒有足夠力量因應他們的需要與思考，導致部分基督徒獨自成立團契和聚會組織於基督教兩會教會的體制之外，這是第三大現實。

即便有上述三大現實現象的出現，目前大陸教會主日聚會場場爆滿，甚至必須多場次、多時段服事以為因應。體制內的教會牧師傳道卻面臨資源不足、人力缺乏的狀況，某些地區甚至是一位牧師需牧養5千會眾，在沒有多餘時間人力下，很難分身解決教會之外的三大現實。

對大陸基督教發展深具負擔的王艾明教授，此行觀察到台灣眾教會的發展經驗，可作為大陸基督教未來發展的參考，並為上述三大現實帶來的問題尋找合理的解釋。

大陸基督教五大關係

為了幫助海外牧者、學者解讀大陸的基督教和教會現狀，他提出以下五大關係模式，以便理解現實及所存在的問題：

1.體制教會vs.非體制教會

「主耶穌說：『因為無論在哪裡，有兩三個人奉我的名聚會，那裡就有我在他們中間。』」。王艾明教授認為，從系統神學分析，教會是被神所召選，信奉耶穌的信徒團契，主要在傳達神的愛與真理、為神做見證，不等於行政團體或一般世俗機構；在此前提下，大陸現存許多弟兄姊妹自組的團契，雖不屬基督教兩會教會，卻是按照《聖經》教訓與神的旨意而存在的實在的教會。

是否體制教會就是唯一合法教會，非體制教會就是非法？王艾明認為，這樣的二元分類，往往形成人為的對立面。「是不是體制教會有神的恩典？非體制教會則無？」，又或者「體制教會因著和國家政府合作，就是悖逆神的恩典？」這種思維對於體制和非體制教會來說都太過以偏概全，也顯示出雙方神學思考不夠深入。

應該思考4世紀羅馬帝國政權確立基督教為國教之後，卻引發體制教會和非體制教會之間的嚴重衝突中汲取教訓，進一步從神學和政治學層面建立合理、法的關係。

2.城市教會vs.鄉村教會

大陸教會主日禮拜，場場爆滿。 (攝影/記者吳佳玲)

大陸城市與鄉村教會存在截然不同的問題。城市裡多數的獨立教會，多為海歸、專業人士或大學生團契，他們認為這些政府確認的宗教團體的負責人，無法傳達正確福音與純粹教義，因而不願與之聯繫和通過他們申請政府的登記。

鄉村教會的會眾並不講求神學，只要聽到得救的福音與平安的資訊。事實上，很多鄉村教會渴望被登記，卻面臨登記的難題，一方面是教會牧師和傳道人少，另一方面是不少地方行政人員執法能力不彰，或對宗教瞭解有限，以致登記過程充滿變數與困難。

3.意識形態教會vs.民粹型教會

前者以意識形態為主導，忽略十字架的救贖，因而產生兩種極端：其一是聽政府業務主管官員的話，就是合法，不聽就屬非法；另一種是與政府合作的一律不是教會，一概不參加、不承認。民粹主義型教會則強調唯靠《聖經》，不靠外國人，藉此表示愛國，否認教會的普世性。

4.宣教型教會vs.差傳型教會

宣教型教會強調「宣教的中國」，一味進行短宣，缺乏跟進建造，以及教規與教義的約束；差傳型教會甚麼都看韓國、香港、台灣等海外差派機構的意思，非但沒有紮根大陸本土，是否能妥善處理當地政教關係，也是一大問題。因此，不論是宣教或差傳型教會對大陸本土福音教會都是衝擊。

5.大教會vs.小宗派

根據德國宗教社會學家Ernst Troeltsch的理論模式，在人類歷史上基督教的任何一個階段，都同時存在三種信仰型態：大教會、小宗派和神秘主義者。

大教會遵守三大信經，嚴格依法建立教會與國家之間的合理關係，共同承擔世俗世界的責任和義務，如信義宗、聖公宗、長老宗等；小教派則持守獨特信仰告白，以聖潔團契為主導，回避與國家的任何關聯，更多地顯示出嚴格的自律組織，如宗教改革時期、獨立教會和福音差傳團體等；神秘主義者則存在於上述兩類信仰團體之內和之外，構成獨特的思想者和信仰持守者的角色，如同舊約時期孤獨的先知、修道者和近代哲學、思想家等。

這樣的分析視野，有助於認識大陸既存的各種基督教信仰團體、類型和相互關係，避免非黑即白的互相否認或傷害。

大陸現階段神學教育挑戰：加強學術理論基礎

(攝影/記者黃莉雯)

面對當前大陸教會發展上的挑戰，扮演火車頭角色的神學教育，是否能有效帶領教會開創新局？王艾明教授明指現階段神學教育面臨的考驗，就是缺乏學術研究根基，以致無法發揮引領教會發展的作用；現行許多神學院課程師資多屬教牧分享和培訓班水準，相較之下，學術型神學院明顯不足。

神學院校領導階層和各科師資的平均學術水準和知識水準遠低於大學的一般標準和社會的智力現狀，若缺乏學術跟進，將無法吸引社會精英或高階份子成為兩會教會的成員。

他認為，對神的話語與啟示，需要深入信仰核心進行理論的研究，教會發展才不會偏離；當神學的基礎研究太少，教會負責人容易模糊異象，失去應有的責任和意志。

台灣教會發展美好見證　成為對岸祝福

台灣教會的自律、守法、合一，是神國裡美好的見證。 (攝影/記者吳佳玲)

最後，王艾明教授對於未來兩岸基督教交流，認為大陸可以從以下三個方面從台灣基督教界獲得啟發：

1.台灣建立在法治基礎上的政教關係，有別於大陸現行模式，不同教會宗派與基督教團體卻能自律、守法。因此，台灣各大宗派聯合組團訪問大陸基督教兩會及各地教會時，可以見證出法治社會中主內「多（宗派）中有一（合一）、一中有多」的特性，彼此尊重，承擔社會的公民責任，更充分表現出基督教神學中的「宗派」是高度自律守法的教會團體，而非互相攻擊、山頭主義、逃避公民責任及義務的「宗派主義」。

2.台灣教會的多元風貌，儘管不同宗派存在各自的特點，卻能在教會事務和政教關係等方面進行有效處理，透過平等協商、權力監督和依法辦教等民主機制傳承美好傳統。

3.「基督徒是好公民」在台灣存在著許多見證。十字架的真理就是「宣道」與「服事」並重，兩者不能偏廢，那種誤以為信仰越純正的基督徒，反而越遠離世界、漠不關心社會正義，單單將自己分別為聖等消極避世的教會觀，在台灣基督教界非常罕見。

他認為，台灣基督教界各宗派之間早已形成敬神、守法、盡責的理性格局，這是值得大陸基督教界重視和學習的見證。

two Chinese scholars remembering John Stott

2011-11-19T11:01:00.004Z

關啟文, 李思敬

happy is Psa 84:12

2011-11-18T15:19:00.005Z

my source of happiness that I need to learn from time to time in my life.

Psa 84:12 [MT 13]

יְהוָ֥ה צְבָא֑וֹת אַֽשְׁרֵ֥י אָ֜דָ֗ם בֹּטֵ֥חַ בָּֽךְ׃

LXX: κύριε τῶν δυνάμεων μακάριος ἄνθρωπος ὁ ἐλπίζων ἐπὶ σέ

אַשְׁרֵי particle interjection

Hol881 אַשְׁרֵי

אַשְׁרֵי: pl. cs. of *אֶשֶׁר fortune; sf. אַשְׁרָיו, אַשְׁרֵיךְ Ec 10₁₇; introduction to word of blessing; fortunate, blessed is (he who), are (they who): — 1. followed by noun, 1K 10₈; — 2. followed by suffix, Dt 33₂₉; — 3. °ašrê še Ps 137_8f146₅; — 4. followed by relative clause w/o relative particle Pr 8₃₂. (pg 31)

בטח verb qal participle masculine singular absolute homonym 1

Hol1031 בָּטַח

I בָּטַח: qal: pf. בּ׳, בָּטַחְתִּי, בָּטָֽחְתִּי, בָּֽטְחוּ, בָּטָֽחְנוּ; impf. יִבְטַח, יִבְטָֽח, אֶבְטַח, תִּבְטְחִי, תִּבְטְחוּ, תִּבְטָֽחוּ; impv. בְּטַח, בִּטְחוּ; inf. sf. בִּטְחֵךְ, abs. בָּטוֹחַ; pt. טֵחַ(וֹ)בֹּ, בֹּטְחָה, בֹּטְחִים, pass. « בָּטוּחַ: — feel safe, trust: — 1. w. b® Dt 28₅₂; w. ±al 2K 18₂₀; — 2. abs. be full of confidence Is 12₂; — 3. bœ‰¢µ careless, unsuspecting Ju 18₁₀.

when the famous pastors/ profs are arguing against "bad" or false archaeology

2011-11-17T07:44:00.001Z

when the famous pastors/ profs are arguing against "bad" or false archaeology, querying the right to take the assumption of Biblical details to interpret archaeological finds, look at this!
every science has its own presuppositions, why can't we take the Bible as trustworthy as a starting point?

Christianity Today, November, 2011

Archaeology's Rebel: Bible in One Hand, Spade in the Other

Eilat Mazar is unafraid to claim archaeological finds of biblical proportions.

Gordon Govier | posted 11/11/2011 12:18PM

on John 3:16

2011-11-09T09:49:00.000Z

there's something wrong from the graphic of this nice article, How to Meet the World's Greatest Need: Answer 3 Questions.
can you spot it out and tell the reason?

How Different Christian Denominations See Each Other

2011-11-08T22:24:00.001Z

this is fun.

source

two videos on gospel reliability

2011-11-07T17:53:00.001Z

New Evidences the Gospels were Based on Eyewitness Accounts - Peter Williams

Misquoting Jesus: Bart Ehrman vs Peter Williams

The Lord sees

2011-11-05T11:45:00.004Z

יְהוָ֣ה׀ יִרְאֶ֑ה (Gen 22:14 WTT)

The Lord sees! PTL for his provision.
Why Jehovah-Jirah is always translated as The Lord will provide? 耶和華以勒 is so deeply implanted to many Chinese believers. But hold on, see LXX
καὶ ἐκάλεσεν Αβρααμ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ τόπου ἐκείνου κύριος εἶδεν ἵνα εἴπωσιν σήμερον ἐν τῷ ὄρει κύριος ὤφθη (Gen 22:14 BGT)

The sense is a bit different in eastern mindset. He sees so he provides!
This contrasts Gen 22:8 that the Lord will see for himself the lamb for burnt offering.
Compare Gen 21:17 that God heard the boy Ishmael crying and let Hagar sees a well of water... he sees and he hears. He's fair though only Isaac is the chosen one.

盧龍光：因信稱義不是教義

2011-11-04T00:09:00.004Z

有教義的產生是沒有處境的嗎? 是處境的產物就不是教義?

source

華聯會培靈奮興大會
盧龍光：因信稱義不是教義
（11月3日消息）

潘樂敏

【時代論壇訊】由香港華人基督教聯會主辦第十七屆培靈奮興大會已於昨日起一連七日於尖沙咀浸信會舉行，今屆講題為「福音是上帝的大能」，邀得崇基學院神學院院長盧龍光牧師主講。首場講題為「不以福音為恥」，約有六百二十人出席。
盧龍光指出「因信稱義」不是教義，而是處境的產物。保羅在羅一16-17提出的觀點，其實是回應羅馬教會就當時猶太人和外邦人的爭執衝突，提出以「信心」作為信仰的共同基礎，而非以割禮或舊約要求的生活規範分別誰是真正信徒。盧龍光認為現時信徒以「因信稱義」作為基督教、羅馬書的核心乃受馬丁路德改教影響，但應留意馬丁路德以此作為宗教改革基礎也有其處境，因此信徒宜在讀經時返回成書處境，並加入想像力理解經文，再思其當代意義。
直接從聖經認識保羅
盧龍光首先指出羅馬書在教會歷史的重要性，指此書是福音書和使徒行傳後首卷福音書，亦曾影響奧古斯汀悔改、馬丁路德改教。當時馬丁路德以「因信稱義」作神學立場，當代亦有學者麥格夫整理因信稱義的發展，認為因信稱義是「現時教義的基礎，一旦動搖，基督教就會倒下來。」約翰衛斯理、神學家巴特亦受羅馬書影響甚深，「巴特的神學回應當時以人為中心的神學，雖是矯枉過正，但保羅確實為此帶來衝擊，『上帝』一字在羅馬書出現最多亦反映出其以上帝為中心，上帝的大能與人相遇亦是巴特的神學基礎，因此試圖在其處境中恢復以上帝為中心的信息。」
盧龍光認為，雖然普遍信徒都相信「因信稱義」是羅馬書的中心信息，但實則是「書中很多信息被簡化為只得因信稱義，並以系統神學角度理解。」直到二十世紀七十年代，新約學者開始發現羅馬書有不少處境性的內容，馬丁路德選擇以「因信稱義」更新信仰，但這不是保羅想要表達的信息，所以信徒應直接從聖經認識保羅。
猶太、外邦信徒均需上帝拯救
馬丁路德當時十分關注「如何從上帝的審判中得釋放」的問題，「有時認罪後，還是發現自己會重犯」，因此從羅一16-17中發現「義人必因信得生」而非因任何行為，「從頭到尾都是信」。加上當時的天主教會賣贖罪劵圖利，而不以告解、善行表達悔改決心，配合其經歷就得出「行為沒有用」的結論，並提出唯獨信心、唯獨恩典、唯獨聖經。
盧龍光明言，第十七節提及的「信心」固然重要，但開首的「因為」表現了十六節其實是整句的結論。十六節中提及「不以福音為恥」，是因為當時的信徒都以福音為恥，外邦人難以無故歸信死囚，而猶太人普遍關心的是復國問題，自然會認為耶穌的死十分羞辱。況且，當時羅馬教會的猶太人和外邦人多有衝突爭執，猶太人視外邦人為不被上帝揀選的次等人，外邦人則視猶太人為亡國奴。可是保羅在此處境中，正要提出「兩方都需要上帝的拯救，這就是福音的大能。」因此，保羅在第一章中心句一開首就說「不以福音為恥」，上帝的義要藉福音顯明，而猶太信徒和外邦信徒的共同基礎就是信心──「因信稱義」乃用作支持這最重要的信息。
華聯會培靈奮興大會一連七場各場分題為「不以福音為恥」、「上帝憤怒的顯明」、「上帝審判人的行為」、「上帝不偏待人」、「上帝的義加給一切信的人」、「亞伯拉罕因信稱義的榜樣」、「藉耶穌基督與上帝和好」。詳情可參該會網頁：http://dev.livingtab.com/hkcccu_cms/news1.php?id=3。

（http://christiantimes.org.hk，2011.11.03）

Near-death experiences not glimpse of the afterlife

2011-11-03T16:02:00.002Z

time for revising some out-dated apologetic arguments? at least be cautious when using it...
still something for further research. even though we can explain "the visions of tunnels and bright lights," what about those common experiences like seeing a man and hearing some words or seeing some actions from him? How is that formulated by our brain? If that's really common for people from different parts of the world, from different religions etc, could that be something engendered in the human being? a code left by the Creator?
if noradrenaline is identified as the main cause, can we extract them and repeat these experiences for a normal person?
thus to me, the relationship of these near-death experiences to the possible reality of afterlife is still to be studied. but this should be a welcoming first step if we hold a "faith seeking understanding" approach.

source

Why near-death events are tricks of mind

Near-death experiences are not paranormal but triggered by a change in normal brain function, according to researchers.

Psychologists who reviewed a range of phenomena such as out-of-body experiences, visions of tunnels of light or encounters with dead relatives, say they are tricks of the mind rather than a glimpse of the afterlife.

Reactions in the brain

Researchers at the Universities of Edinburgh and Cambridge say that most of the experiences can be explained by a reaction in the brain prompted by a traumatic and sometimes harmless event.
The researchers say that many common near-death experiences could be caused by the brain’s attempt to make sense of unusual sensations and perceptions occurring during a traumatic event.

Multi-sensory processes

Out-of-body experiences, for example, may happen when there is a breakdown in the brain’s multi-sensory processes, and visions of tunnels and bright lights could stem from a breakdown in the brain’s visual system caused by oxygen deprivation.
The new study also points to the effects of noradrenaline, a hormone released by the mid-brain which, when triggered, may evoke positive emotions, hallucinations and other features of the near-death experience.

Biological links

Approximately three per cent of the US population say they have had a near-death experience, according to a Gallup poll. Near-death experiences are reported across cultures and can be found in literature dating back to ancient Greece.

Some of the studies we examined show that many of the people experiencing a near-death experience were not actually in danger of dying, although most thought they were. The scientific evidence suggests that all aspects of the near-death experience have a biological basis.
Caroline Watt
School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences

The research is published in the Journal Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
Home page photo by Piku under a Royalty Free licence with attribution credit.

How Are the Synoptics “Without Error”

2011-11-03T08:00:00.001Z

old ones are not necessarily bad ones...
other posts by Piper on the same issue

source

How Are the Synoptics “Without Error”?

October 7, 1976 | by John Piper | Topic: Inspiration and Inerrancy of the Bible

Article One of Bethel's “Affirmation of Faith” reads: “The Bible is. . . without error in the original manuscripts.” There is a wide diversity of opinions about the meaning of “error” in such an affirmation. This is especially the case when the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) are being considered.
I will suggest two definitions of “error,” the first of which I consider proper for judging the reliability of any literature including the Synoptics, and the second of which I consider improper. According to the first I believe the synoptics are “without error.”

A writer is in error when the basic intention in his statements and admonitions, properly understood in their nearer and wider context, is not true. (In reference to the indicative statements, “true” means that obedience of these admonitions is in harmony with reality, i.e., it accords with the will of God.)
A writer is in error if any of his individual statements is not literally true.

The difference between these two definitions and my own understanding of the truth of the synoptic gospels may be clarified by several illustrations from the texts.

First Illustration

Jesus says in Mark 4:31 that the Kingdom of God “is like a grain of mustard seed which when sown upon the ground is the smallest of all the seeds of the earth. . .”
According to definition #2 above, Jesus erred here because the mustard seed is not the smallest seed on earth. But according to the first definition, he did not err because his basic intention was not in the least botanical. The point is the great contrast between the smallness of the seed and the largeness of the full-grown shrub. Jesus capitalized on the proverbial smallness of the mustard seed to make a perfect, inerrant point about the Kingdom of God.

Second Illustration

If we used definition #2 above, the Gospel writers would have to be accused of error in their chronology of the events of Jesus' life. Just one illustration: The story of the healing of the paralytic (Matthew 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26), the call of Levi (Matthew 9:9-13; Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32), and the question about fasting (Matthew 9:14-17; Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39) follow back to back in all three synoptics and so refer to the same events. Again, the stilling of the storm (Matthew 8:23-27; Mark 4:35-41; Luke 8:22-25) and the Gesarene demoniac (Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-39) follow back to back in all three synoptics so that with the verbal parallels one can see that the same sequence of events is being referred to in each Gospel. But Matthew has these last two events before the three cited above, while Mark and Luke have them after these three events. It cannot be both ways.
But the synoptics are not in error here according to the first definition above, because it was not their basic intention to give a rigid chronology of Jesus' ministry (which Papias said already in the second century, cf. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, III, 39,14ff). Their intention was rather to give a faithful representation of the essential features of Jesus' teaching and deeds. In this particular instance, Matthew probably felt he could best do this by including the storm stilling and Gesarene demoniac scenes in his composition of chapters 8 and 9, where he has gathered ten miracle stories. This presentation of Jesus' miracle working is then bracketed together with the Sermon of the Mount with the identical summary statements in 4:23 and 9:35. Thus we have a literary unit which beautifully and inerrantly sets forth the essential features of our Lord's ministry.

The Long-Proved Tradition

These two illustrations could be multiplied and other kinds of problems could be discussed (like changes in Jesus' words from one synoptic to another). But these may suffice at least for an introduction to my understanding of how the synoptics are “without error”.
I thus gladly align myself with the long-proved tradition: perfectio respectu finis (perfection with respect to purpose). I know no better statement of my own position on this matter than that of the Second Baptist Confession of 1677: “The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience. . .”
But I think just as important as agreeing with Affirmation 1 in detail is my deep commitment to the spirit of it. From history and from my own experience, I can say that it is almost impossible to exaggerate the importance of the Bible. We humans are incapable of finding out what we need so much to know: how to overcome sin, to escape the wrath of God, to become new creatures, to walk pleasing to the Lord. God must reveal this to us or we perish. This he has done and continues to do by means of a written Word, the Bible. When a man has understood the Bible he has understood the revelation of God infallibly, inerrantly and verbally.

Cut and Sharpen: Sabbath and ministers

2011-11-02T15:42:00.000Z

wonderful and in-depth sharing

source

Cut and Sharpen

One of God's underused gifts is time to sharpen.

Gordon MacDonald | posted 10/31/2011

Once, when my wife, Gail, and I were hiking the high meadows of the Swiss Alps, we saw two farmers cutting the high-standing mountain grasses with scythes, a hand-mowing tool that has been around since ancient times. Their broad-sweeping movements seemed like the synchronous movements of dancers.

Drawing closer, we noticed that both paused periodically and produced from their pockets something resembling a flat stone. Then in the same graceful manner, they now drew the stones back and forth across the scythes' blades. The purpose? To restore sharpness.

The sharpening done, each returned to the cutting.

Gail and I observed them repeat this process—cut and sharpen, cut and sharpen—several times: ten minutes (give or take) of cutting followed by five minutes of sharpening.

A dumb question: why waste five minutes sharpening the blades? We're talking here about 20 minutes of unproductive time each hour. Why not keep cutting, get the job finished, and head home at an earlier hour?

Answer: because with every swing of the scythe, the blade becomes duller. And with the increasing dullness, the work becomes harder and less productive. Result: you actually head home much later.

Lesson learned: cutting and sharpening are both part of a farmer's work.

Lesson applied: In my earliest pastoral years, I didn't appreciate this cutting/sharpening principle. I'm embarrassed to admit that I usually gave attention to the sharpening (or the spiritual) dimension of my life only when I needed something beyond my natural reach or when I found myself knee-deep in trouble.

The cumulative results of a life lived like this became alarming. It led to dullness of the soul.

While talking a lot about God, I had very little practice in listening to him.

My work fell prey to mission-creep. I tended to become bogged down in matters of secondary importance, neglecting truly important things.

I often complained of fatigue: not only physical fatigue, but spiritual and emotional emptiness.

Sometimes I became flooded with temptations to envy, impatience, ambition, discontent, wandering thoughts.

I was too sensitive, easily rattled by criticism, disagreement, and the slights of people who seemed not to be on my side.

I often did not feel I was doing my best. I seemed to give God and the people a B- effort.

My prayers were shallow, not reflective of a man who was supposed to "walk with God."

While most people complimented me as a good preacher and pastor, the fact was that I was not influencing many people toward a deeper commitment to Jesus Christ.

As time passed and I hit one too many "walls," I began an earnest search for what was missing at the center of my life. If I could not identify it, I feared that I was not going to last. It was then I discovered a most important biblical law: Sabbath—holy time when the soul is sharpened.

Somehow the Sabbath idea had not come alive to me before. Sabbath was perceived as a wild Sunday of spell-binding preaching, growing crowds, and successful programming. I never imagined a Sabbath experience of majestic worship, joyful quiet (instead of noise), interior "conversation" and a reordering of the pieces of my life. No wonder I felt so messy. I knew none of these.

All this is the result of a wide-spread reluctance to take God seriously when he says there are times when work in the world must stop (really, really stop!) and be replaced by work in the soul.

Imagine what a Sabbath pause might look like. There would be 24 hours of relative quiet in which to escape the unrelenting busy-ness in order to listen to God; 24 hours of intimacy with those one loves the most; 24 hours to appraise the recent days and count one's blessings and resolve one's regrets; 24 hours to look forward and re-order one's priorities and sense of direction; 24 hours to reaffirm true belief and obedience to God the Creator; 24 hours to rest, laugh, study, and play.

Simply imagining it causes me to breathe deeply and ask: What keeps me from this?

I was in my early thirties when this Sabbath-sharpening idea began to make sense. And it started not with Protestant or Catholic sources but by acquainting myself with Jewish thinkers.

Author and playwright Herman Wouk, an observant Jew, describes in his book This Is My God his life of faith and makes it clear that the Sabbath was at the core of his way of life.

Strength, Refreshment, and Cheer

"I can now tell (the reader)," Wouk wrote, "that (the Sabbath) day is the fulcrum of a practicing Jew's existence and generally a source of strength, refreshment, and cheer." That line certainly caught my attention.

"The great difference between the Puritan Sabbath and the even more restrictive Jewish Shabbat is an impalpable but overwhelming one of spirit. Our Sabbath opens with blessings over light and wine. Light and wine are the keys to the day. Our observance has its solemnities, but the main effect is release, peace, gaiety, and lifted spirits." (italics mine)

Reread Wouk's last four descriptors. When was the last time you ended a Protestant Sabbath (Sunday) and described yourself in such a fashion?

Wouk went on to describe a typical Sabbath in his Jewish family. Each week he arrived home—a New York City apartment—by sundown on Friday night.

"Leaving the gloomy theater (where Wouk worked), the littered coffee cups, the jumbled scarred-up scripts, the haggard actors, the shouting stagehands, the bedeviled director, the knuckle-gnawing producer, the clattering typewriter, and the dense tobacco smoke and the backstage dust, I have come home. It has been a startling change, very much like a brief return from the wars."

Notice the description of the theater and its echo of the larger world in which he (and we) live. And then notice the ordered world found in his home.

His wife and his boys awaited his arrival. Soon after the family sat down to a splendid dinner "at a table graced with flowers and the Sabbath symbols." Then—and I love this—Wouk touches each of his sons and blesses them. All of this is followed by eating, singing, conversation, and prepared questions. "For me," Wouk says, "(Sabbath) is a retreat into restorative magic."

Restorative magic: what a term.

Saturday, Wouk adds, is passed in much the same manner. There is a synagogue gathering and the embrace of the worshipping community. There is play in the park. There is togetherness. "On the Sabbath, he says, "(our boys know) that we are always there. They know too that I am not working, and that my wife is at her ease. It is their day."

"It is my day too," Wouk writes. "The telephone (think Blackberry here) is silent. I can think, read, study, walk, or do nothing. It is an oasis of quiet."

When Wouk returns to the theater on Saturday night after Sabbath has ended, someone says to him, "I don't envy you your religion, but I envy you your Sabbath."

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in his book Faith in the Future, writes not dissimilarly about his Sabbath: "Imagine the experience of coming home on Friday afternoon. The week has flown by in a rush of activity. You are exhausted. And there, in all its simplicity and splendor is the Sabbath table: candles radiating the light that symbolizes shalom bayit, peace at home; wine, representing blessing and joy; and two loaves of bread, recalling the double portion of manna that fell for the Israelites in the wilderness so that they would not have to gather food on the seventh day."

Then, get this.

"Seeing that table you know that until tomorrow evening you will step into another world, one where there are no pressures to work or compete or distractions or interruptions, just time to be together with family and friends."

Come to think of it, no one that I remember ever envied my Sabbath. Maybe it was because I had no consistent or well-ordered personal sharpening experience for anyone to envy.

An elder in one of my congregations once said to me at the end of a long, very busy Sunday morning: "I'm sure glad that God only insisted on one Sabbath each week. If he'd required two, I'd have a nervous breakdown."

By contrast, Senator Joseph Lieberman, an observant Jew, writes in his book The Gift of Rest, "For me, Sabbath observance is a gift because it is one of the deepest, purest pleasures in my life. It is a day of peace, rest, and sensual pleasure."

Explaining that last word, Lieberman writes: "When I said the Sabbath is sensual, I meant that it engages the senses—sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch—with beautiful settings, soaring melodies, wonderful food and wine, and lots of love. It is a time to reconnect with family and friends … with God, the Creator of everything we have time to 'sense' on the Sabbath. Sabbath observance is a gift that has anchored, shaped, and inspired my life."

Is there anything about the way most of us Protestants and Catholics "do church" these days that can be likened to what Wouk, Sacks, and Lieberman have said?

In my younger days of inner disorganization, the nagging question became: if God intends there to be experiences of release, peace, gaiety, a lifted spirit—then how can I experience them?

I wish I could answer this question by telling you that I regularly take full 24-hour Sabbaths. That would be untruthful. But I have learned to insert genuine Sabbath "sharpenings" into my life even if they have usually been briefer than 24 hours.

The Personal Side of Sabbath

There are two sides to Sabbath: the personal side and the communal or public side where one engages with friends and congregation. Here I can only reflect on the first of the two.

In our home over the past many years, the starting point for each day has been a Sabbath-silence. We have learned the value of time in a private place. No noise, no interruptions, no distractions. In the past when there were children in our home, we simply arranged to find this time in morning's earliest hours before they awakened. This, of course, meant going to bed earlier). And it actually worked for us.

Over the years I have come to guard those quiet moments as among my most precious treasures. Each morning the time is spent differently. But the goal is always the same. Again to quote Herman Wouk: "to find release, peace, gaiety and a lifted spirit." The larger purpose? To prepare to walk through the coming day obedient to Jesus, useful to people, embedded (not insulated) fully in the larger world.

Thomas a Kempis said of reflective moments: "Be faithful to your secret place, and it will become your closest friend and bring you much comfort. In silence and stillness a devout person grows spiritually and learns the hidden things of the Bible. Tears shed there bring cleansing. God draws near to the one who withdraws for a while. It is better for you to look after yourself this way in private than to perform wonders in public while neglecting your soul."

In these private Sabbaths, I have found a number of activities that are essential to my own day-to-day sharpening. They are my spiritual version of the sharpening of the farmer's scythe.

• Vigorous repentance. I must start here because repentance is life-saving and heaven-opening.

I once thought that repentance simply meant that when you do something bad, you mention it, say that you're sorry, and move on. But a revisiting of the Bible on this subject has moved me to understand that repentance is, first and foremost, an acknowledgement of that deeper pool of evil that lies resident in every one of us and which is ready to explode at any moment.

What a noisy life I live. How many unfinished thoughts fly away, never to be remembered again.

A deeper repentance means that I must examine my heart for such potential waywardness and renounce the tendency to compare myself with others, to explain away my failures, and to stop whining if someone isn't merciful to me.

Repentance means that I have to present myself to God and speak the equivalent of Isaiah's words, "Woe is me; I am a broken man." This has required a painful humility, a regular readjustment. There remain many moments when a rebellious part of me still tries to avoid owning and assessing my own messiness (active and potential). The Sabbath experience—the sharpening of the blade—means this cannot be avoided.

• Immersion in the Bible. Each day I push myself to read it not as a preacher preparing talks for others, but as one hungry (sometimes desperate) for God's kind and searching words.

I confess an unbridled love of the Bible's stories, especially those of Jesus and his disciples.

And there are life-long favorite places such as the oft-read Psalm 23. I often sit quietly and repeat this Psalm over and over again.

With each repetition, I pause and brood over individual words: cool waters … darkened valleys … rods, staffs … banqueting tables … the qualities of goodness and mercy (what powerful words to a sinner like me). I love to imagine the great shepherd, Jesus himself, going before me: urging calmness in those green pastures, assuring me of his presence amid danger, swabbing my wounds with oil, serving me a healthy dinner while my "enemies" look on powerless to do anything.

• Reading the great spiritual masters. I'd never had time for those strange folk when I was young. But now I read them with great appreciation: Augustine, Lawrence, Fenelon, Fox, Thomas a Kempis. They speak to my soul. Quakers, Catholics, Puritans, monks, mystics. Each brings a fresh perspective and builds into me a balance of understandings of this immense God who will not be fully captured by any one tradition or theological perspective.

• Reflection. What a noisy life I have lived. How many unfinished thoughts have flown through my mind never to be remembered again. How many experiences have gone unevaluated in the past? How many times did I fail to take inventory of the day and squeeze events and conversations that might morph into wisdom? How often have I forgotten to express thanks? Reflection is the act of gathering these things and squeezing meaning and message out of them.

• Journaling. Among the most important daily exercises I ever undertook was the day (December 17, 1968) when I began describing myself on the pages of a notebook. Over the years these journals have included records of each day's experiences where I heard (or missed) God's voice, what was delightful or regrettable. My journals include prayers, quotes, Bible references, and comments made to me by "angels" in the course of the day. Just as Israel built memorials to God's great acts and revelations, so my journals have been a memorial to God's grace in my life.

• Worship. In Sabbath one must kneel before the Lord, assume that prayerful posture and reaffirm once again the words: "Worship the Lord with gladness; come before him with joyful songs. Know that the Lord is God. It is He who made us, and we are His; we are His people, the sheep of His pasture."

In the act of worship—exalting God's character, his mighty acts, and reliable promises—we are appropriately upsized or downsized, depending on who we think we are at the moment. More than once I have been painfully reduced to true size by a God who will not tolerate my self-centeredness. Then there have been times when I have been so low and this wonderfully gracious God has lifted me out of "that slimy pit" and filled me with a new song.

• Sabbath imagining. It's often unappreciated, but the heavenly Father has provided us an imagination (an inner theatrical stage, if you please) where we can visualize scenarios of possible futures for ourselves. The long future (what sort of man might I be in ten years?) and the short one (for what must I prepare today?).

During my Sabbath moments, I quietly dream through the conversations I am scheduled to have. I often think about the tasks that populate my to-do list. As I imagine, I ask questions: How could I be useful in that situation? What might I say if he or she … Can I be a better listener? What word from God might come through me? It is in these imagining moments that God's Holy Spirit paints possibilities on our minds.

And so it is with my Sabbaths. The inner blade is sharpened, and one re-enters the larger world with greater focus and spiritual energy.

I love the words of Rufus Jones, a biographer of George Fox, founder of the Quaker movement: "In all his planning and arrange-ments he exalted the place of hush and silence, and he taught his followers to prize the times of quiet meditation in their gatherings for worship, so that he left behind him a fellowship of persons who knew how to cultivate the interior deeps within themselves and who had discovered how to make their own approach to God without external helps."

Along with Gail and me, George Fox would have loved those Swiss farmers.

Gordon MacDonald is editor at large of Leadership Journal and chancellor of Denver Seminary.

Copyright © 2011 by the author or Christianity Today International/Leadership Journal.
Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.

Titus 2:14-15

2011-11-01T17:16:00.001Z

Titus 2:14-15

14 ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν,

ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀνομίας

καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἑαυτῷ λαὸν περιούσιον, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων.

15 Ταῦτα λάλει καὶ παρακάλει καὶ ἔλεγχε μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς·

μηδείς σου περιφρονείτω.

a self conception of a minister

another manuscript of the Gospel of John?

2011-10-31T11:51:00.000Z

interesting but wait and see

Among other things, an extremely ancient portion of the Gospel of John, perhaps dating from the second century and which contains wording missing in the conventional biblical text.

source

New NASA technology reveals ancient texts

By Harold Raley

Correspondent

Published October 30, 2011

Because paper and parchment were scarce in biblical and classical times, scribes often wrote newer messages over older documents.

Called palimpsests, from a Greek word meaning “rubbed again,” these might have a surface writing in, say, Medieval Latin and underneath it much older messages in Greek, Syriac (a form of Aramaic), Arabic and other languages.

The library of the St. Catherine Monastery at Mount Sinai in Egypt contains several thousand documents, many of which are palimpsests. Until now, because of their brittleness, many of these documents could be read only in part and others not at all.

Enter NASA technology. Led by Michael White, director of the Institute for the Study of Antiquities and Christian Origins at the University of Texas, scholars from several universities are beginning to decipher these ancient writings.

The NASA super cameras, developed originally for military surveillance and scientific surveys and adapted for work at the St. Catherine library, now can reveal in amazing detail not only smudged or damaged surface portions but also the earliest and most intriguing strata of the palimpsests. Incredibly, these cameras even make it possible to read documents wholly or partly destroyed by fire.

And what has the Texas-led team discovered so far? Among other things, an extremely ancient portion of the Gospel of John, perhaps dating from the second century and which contains wording missing in the conventional biblical text. With similar NASA technology, White’s team of students and scholars has uncovered with surgical precision walls, rooms and artifacts from the oldest synagogue in Europe at Ostia, the ancient port city near Rome.

Still in its infancy, this combination of linguistics, archaeology and NASA technology promises to expand our knowledge of the biblical world. Exciting stuff indeed.

Harold Raley is a linguist, professor and writer who lives in Friendswood. He can be reached at haroldraley(at)sbcglobal.net.

an example for me to avoid...

2011-10-29T11:18:00.000+01:00

learning but not learned -also concerns the knowing vocabulary!

2 Timothy 3:7 πάντοτε μανθάνοντα καὶ μηδέποτε εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν δυνάμενα.

Does the Multiverse Really Exist?

2011-10-26T13:39:00.000+01:00

the ambiguous line between science and religion! thanks for a friend's info.

source

Scientific American (August 2011), 305, 38-43
Published online: 19 July 2011 | doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0811-38

Does the Multiverse Really Exist?

George F. R. Ellis

Proof of parallel universes radically different from our own may still lie beyond the domain of science

CREDIT: Levi Brown

Top

In Brief

The notion of parallel universes leapt out of the pages of fiction into scientific journals in the 1990s. Many scientists claim that mega-millions of other universes, each with its own laws of physics, lie out there, beyond our visual horizon. They are collectively known as the multiverse.
The trouble is that no possible astronomical observations can ever see those other universes. The arguments are indirect at best. And even if the multiverse exists, it leaves the deep mysteries of nature unexplained.

Additional images and illustrations

- [THE PERILS OF EXTRAPOLATION] What Lies Beyond?
- [DARK ENERGY AND THE MULTIVERSE] Does the Glove Fit?

IN THE PAST DECADE AN EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM HAS CAPTIVATED COSMOLOGISTS: THAT THE EXPANDING universe we see around us is not the only one; that billions of other universes are out there, too. There is not one universe—there is a multiverse. In Scientific American articles and books such as Brian Greene's latest, The Hidden Reality, leading scientists have spoken of a super-Copernican revolution. In this view, not only is our planet one among many, but even our entire universe is insignificant on the cosmic scale of things. It is just one of countless universes, each doing its own thing.

The word “multiverse” has different meanings. Astronomers are able to see out to a distance of about 42 billion light-years, our cosmic visual horizon. We have no reason to suspect the universe stops there. Beyond it could be many—even infinitely many—domains much like the one we see. Each has a different initial distribution of matter, but the same laws of physics operate in all. Nearly all cosmologists today (including me) accept this type of multiverse, which Max Tegmark calls “level 1.” Yet some go further. They suggest completely different kinds of universes, with different physics, different histories, maybe different numbers of spatial dimensions. Most will be sterile, although some will be teeming with life. A chief proponent of this “level 2” multiverse is Alexander Vilenkin, who paints a dramatic picture of an infinite set of universes with an infinite number of galaxies, an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of people with your name who are reading this article.

Similar claims have been made since antiquity by many cultures. What is new is the assertion that the multiverse is a scientific theory, with all that implies about being mathematically rigorous and experimentally testable. I am skeptical about this claim. I do not believe the existence of those other universes has been proved—or ever could be. Proponents of the multiverse, as well as greatly enlarging our conception of physical reality, are implicitly redefining what is meant by “science.”

Top

Over the Horizon

THOSE WHO SUBSCRIBE to a broad conception of the multiverse have various proposals as to how such a proliferation of universes might arise and where they would all reside. They might be sitting in regions of space far beyond our own, as envisaged by the chaotic inflation model of Alan H. Guth, Andrei Linde and others [see “The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe,” by Andrei Linde; Scientific American, November 1994]. They might exist at different epochs of time, as proposed in the cyclic universe model of Paul J. Steinhardt and Neil Turok [see “The Myth of the Beginning of Time,” by Gabriele Veneziano; Scientific American, May 2004]. They might exist in the same space we do but in a different branch of the quantum wave function, as advocated by David Deutsch [see “The Quantum Physics of Time Travel,” by David Deutsch and Michael Lockwood; Scientific American, March 1994]. They might not have a location, being completely disconnected from our spacetime, as suggested by Tegmark and Dennis Sciama [see “Parallel Universes,” by Max Tegmark; Scientific American, May 2003].

Of these options, the most widely accepted is that of chaotic inflation, and I will concentrate on it; however, most of my remarks apply to all the other proposals as well. The idea is that space at large is an eternally expanding void, within which quantum effects continually spawn new universes like a child blowing bubbles. The concept of inflation goes back to the 1980s, and physicists have elaborated on it based on their most comprehensive theory of nature: string theory. String theory allows bubbles to look very different from one another. In effect, each begins life not only with a random distribution of matter but also with random types of matter. Our universe contains particles such as electrons and quarks interacting through forces such as electromagnetism; other universes may have very different types of particles and forces—which is to say, different local laws of physics. The full set of allowed local laws is known as the landscape. In some interpretations of string theory, the landscape is immense, ensuring a tremendous diversity of universes.

Many physicists who talk about the multiverse, especially advocates of the string landscape, do not care much about parallel universes per se. For them, objections to the multiverse as a concept are unimportant. Their theories live or die based on internal consistency and, one hopes, eventual laboratory testing. They assume a multiverse context for their theories without worrying about how it comes to be—which is what concerns cosmologists.

For a cosmologist, the basic problem with all multiverse proposals is the presence of a cosmic visual horizon. The horizon is the limit to how far away we can see, because signals traveling toward us at the speed of light (which is finite) have not had time since the beginning of the universe to reach us from farther out. All the parallel universes lie outside our horizon and remain beyond our capacity to see, now or ever, no matter how technology evolves. In fact, they are too far away to have had any influence on our universe whatsoever. That is why none of the claims made by multiverse enthusiasts can be directly substantiated.

The proponents are telling us we can state in broad terms what happens 1,000 times as far as our cosmic horizon, 10¹⁰⁰ times, 10^1,000,000 times, an infinity—all from data we obtain within the horizon. It is an extrapolation of an extraordinary kind. Maybe the universe closes up on a very large scale, and there is no infinity out there. Maybe all the matter in the universe ends somewhere, and there is empty space forever after. Maybe space and time come to an end at a singularity that bounds the universe. We just do not know what actually happens, for we have no information about these regions and never will.

Top

Seven Questionable Arguments

MOST MULTIVERSE PROPONENTS are careful scientists who are quite aware of this problem but think we can still make educated guesses about what is going on out there. Their arguments fall into seven broad types, each of which runs into trouble.

Space has no end. Few dispute that space extends beyond our cosmic horizon and that many other domains lie beyond what we see. If this limited type of multiverse exists, we can extrapolate what we see to domains beyond the horizon, with more and more uncertainty as regards the farther-out regions. It is then easy to imagine more elaborate types of variation, including alternative physics occurring out where we cannot see. But the trouble with this type of extrapolation, from the known to the unknown, is that no one can prove you wrong. How can scientists decide whether their picture of an unobservable region of spacetime is a reasonable or an unreasonable extrapolation of what we see? Might other universes have different initial distributions of matter, or might they also have different values of fundamental physical constants, such as those that set the strength of nuclear forces? You could get either, depending on what you assume.

Known physics predicts other domains. Proposed unified theories predict entities such as scalar fields, a hypothesized relative of other space-filling fields such as the magnetic field. Such fields should drive cosmic inflation and create universes ad infinitum. These theories are well grounded theoretically, but the nature of the hypothesized fields is unknown, and experimentalists have yet to demonstrate their existence, let alone measure their supposed properties. Crucially, physicists have not substantiated that the dynamics of these fields would cause different laws of physics to operate in different bubble universes.

The theory that predicts an infinity of universes passes a key observational test. The cosmic microwave background radiation reveals what the universe looked like at the end of its hot early expansion era. Patterns in it suggest that our universe really did undergo a period of inflation. But not all types of inflation go on forever and create an infinite number of bubble universes. Observations do not single out the required type of inflation from other types. Some cosmologists such as Steinhardt even argue that eternal inflation would have led to different patterns in the background radiation than we see [see “The Inflation Debate,” by Paul J. Steinhardt; SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, April]. Linde and others disagree. Who is right? It all depends on what you assume about the physics of the inflationary field.

Fundamental constants are finely tuned for life. A remarkable fact about our universe is that physical constants have just the right values needed to allow for complex structures, including living things. Steven Weinberg, Martin Rees, Leonard Susskind and others contend that an exotic multiverse provides a tidy explanation for this apparent coincidence: if all possible values occur in a large enough collection of universes, then viable ones for life will surely be found somewhere. This reasoning has been applied, in particular, to explaining the density of the dark energy that is speeding up the expansion of the universe today. I agree that the multiverse is a possible valid explanation for the value of this density; arguably, it is the only scientifically based option we have right now. But we have no hope of testing it observationally. Additionally, most analyses of the issue assume the basic equations of physics are the same everywhere, with only the constants differing—but if one takes the multiverse seriously, this need not be so [see “Looking for Life in the Multiverse,” by Alejandro Jenkins and Gilad Perez; Scientific American, January 2010].

Fundamental constants match multiverse predictions. This argument refines the previous one by suggesting that the universe is no more finely tuned for life than it strictly needs to be. Proponents have assessed the probabilities of various values of the dark energy density. The higher the value is, the more probable it is, but the more hostile the universe would be to life. The value we observe should be just on the borderline of uninhabitability, and it does appear to be so [see illustration at right]. Where the argument stumbles is that we cannot apply a probability argument if there is no multiverse to apply the concept of probability to. This argument thus assumes the desired outcome before it starts; it simply is not applicable if there is only one physically existing universe. Probability is a probe of the consistency of the multiverse proposal, not a proof of its existence.

String theory predicts a diversity of universes. String theory has moved from being a theory that explains everything to a theory where almost anything is possible. In its current form, it predicts that many essential properties of our universe are pure happenstance. If the universe is one of a kind, those properties seem inexplicable. How can we understand, for example, the fact that physics has precisely those highly constrained properties that allow life to exist? If the universe is one of many, those properties make perfect sense. Nothing singled them out; they are simply the ones that arose in our region of space. Had we lived elsewhere, we would have observed different properties, if we could indeed exist there (life would be impossible in most places). But string theory is not a tried-and-tested theory; it is not even a complete theory. If we had proof that string theory is correct, its theoretical predictions could be a legitimate, experimentally based argument for a multiverse. We do not have such proof.

All that can happen, happens. In seeking to explain why nature obeys certain laws and not others, some physicists and philosophers have speculated that nature never made any such choice: all conceivable laws apply somewhere. The idea is inspired in part by quantum mechanics, which, as Murray Gell-Mann memorably put it, holds that everything not forbidden is compulsory. A particle takes all the paths it can, and what we see is the weighted average of all those possibilities. Perhaps the same is true of the entire universe, implying a multiverse. But astronomers have not the slightest chance of observing this multiplicity of possibilities. Indeed, we cannot even know what the possibilities are. We can only make sense of this proposal in the face of some unverifiable organizing principle or framework that decides what is allowed and what is not—for example, that all possible mathematical structures must be realized in some physical domain (as proposed by Tegmark). But we have no idea what kinds of existence this principle entails, apart from the fact that it must, of necessity, include the world we see around us. And we have no way whatsoever to verify the existence or nature of any such organizing principle. It is in some ways an attractive proposition, but its proposed application to reality is pure speculation.

Top

Absence of Evidence

ALTHOUGH THE THEORETICAL ARGUMENTS fall short, cosmologists have also suggested various empirical tests for parallel universes. The cosmic microwave background radiation might bear some traces of other bubble universes if, for example, our universe has ever collided with another bubble of the kind implied by the chaotic inflation scenario. The background radiation might also contain remnants of universes that existed before the big bang in an endless cycle of universes. These are indeed ways one might get real evidence of other universes. Some cosmologists have even claimed to see such remnants. The observational claims are strongly disputed, however, and many of the hypothetically possible multiverses would not lead to such evidence. So observers can test only some specific classes of multiverse models in this way.

A second observational test is to look for variations in one or more fundamental constants, which would corroborate the premise that the laws of physics are not so immutable after all. Some astronomers claim to have found such variations [see “Inconstant Constants,” by John D. Barrow and John K. Webb; Scientific American, June 2005]. Most, though, consider the evidence dubious.

A third test is to measure the shape of the observable universe: Is it spherical (positively curved), hyperbolic (negatively curved) or “flat” (uncurved)? Multiverse scenarios generally predict that the universe is not spherical, because a sphere closes up on itself, allowing for only a finite volume. Unfortunately, this test is not a clean one. The universe beyond our horizon could have a different shape from that in the observed part; what is more, not all multiverse theories rule out a spherical geometry.

A better test is the topology of the universe: Does it wrap around like a doughnut or pretzel? If so, it would be finite in size, which would definitely disprove most versions of inflation and, in particular, multiverse scenarios based on chaotic inflation. Such a shape would produce recurring patterns in the sky, such as giant circles in the cosmic microwave background radiation [see “Is Space Finite?” by Jean-Pierre Luminet, Glenn D. Starkman and Jeffrey R. Weeks; Scientific American, April 1999]. Observers have looked for and failed to find any such patterns. But this null result cannot be taken as a point in favor of the multiverse.

Finally, physicists might hope to prove or disprove some of the theories that predict a multiverse. They might find observational evidence against chaotic versions of inflation or discover a mathematical or empirical inconsistency that forces them to abandon the landscape of string theory. That scenario would undermine much of the motivation for supporting the multiverse idea, although it would not rule the concept out altogether.

Top

Too Much Wiggle Room

ALL IN ALL, the case for the multiverse is inconclusive. The basic reason is the extreme flexibility of the proposal: it is more a concept than a well-defined theory. Most proposals involve a patchwork of different ideas rather than a coherent whole. The basic mechanism for eternal inflation does not itself cause physics to be different in each domain in a multiverse; for that, it needs to be coupled to another speculative theory. Although they can be fitted together, there is nothing inevitable about it.

The key step in justifying a multiverse is extrapolation from the known to the unknown, from the testable to the untestable. You get different answers depending on what you choose to extrapolate. Because theories involving a multiverse can explain almost anything whatsoever, any observation can be accommodated by some multiverse variant. The various “proofs,” in effect, propose that we should accept a theoretical explanation instead of insisting on observational testing. But such testing has, up until now, been the central requirement of the scientific endeavor, and we abandon it at our peril. If we weaken the requirement of solid data, we weaken the core reason for the success of science over the past centuries.

Now, it is true that a satisfactory unifying explanation of some range of phenomena carries greater weight than a hodgepodge of separate arguments for the same phenomena. If the unifying explanation assumes the existence of unobservable entities such as parallel universes, we might well feel compelled to accept those entities. But a key issue here is how many unverifiable entities are needed. Specifically, are we hypothesizing more or fewer entities than the number of phenomena to be explained? In the case of the multiverse, we are supposing the existence of a huge number—perhaps even an infinity—of unobservable entities to explain just one existing universe. It hardly fits 14th-century English philosopher William of Ockham's stricture that “entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity.”

Proponents of the multiverse make one final argument: that there are no good alternatives. As distasteful as scientists might find the proliferation of parallel worlds, if it is the best explanation, we would be driven to accept it; conversely, if we are to give up the multiverse, we need a viable alternative. This exploration of alternatives depends on what kind of explanation we are prepared to accept. Physicists' hope has always been that the laws of nature are inevitable—that things are the way they are because there is no other way they might have been—but we have been unable to show this is true. Other options exist, too. The universe might be pure happenstance—it just turned out that way. Or things might in some sense be meant to be the way they are—purpose or intent somehow underlies existence. Science cannot determine which is the case, because these are metaphysical issues.

Scientists proposed the multiverse as a way of resolving deep issues about the nature of existence, but the proposal leaves the ultimate issues unresolved. All the same issues that arise in relation to the universe arise again in relation to the multiverse. If the multiverse exists, did it come into existence through necessity, chance or purpose? That is a metaphysical question that no physical theory can answer for either the universe or the multiverse.

To make progress, we need to keep to the idea that empirical testing is the core of science. We need some kind of causal contact with whatever entities we propose; otherwise, there are no limits. The link can be a bit indirect. If an entity is unobservable but absolutely essential for properties of other entities that are indeed verified, it can be taken as verified. But then the onus of proving it is absolutely essential to the web of explanation. The challenge I pose to multiverse proponents is: Can you prove that unseeable parallel universes are vital to explain the world we do see? And is the link essential and inescapable?

As skeptical as I am, I think the contemplation of the multiverse is an excellent opportunity to reflect on the nature of science and on the ultimate nature of existence: why we are here. It leads to new and interesting insights and so is a productive research program. In looking at this concept, we need an open mind, though not too open. It is a delicate path to tread. Parallel universes may or may not exist; the case is unproved. We are going to have to live with that uncertainty. Nothing is wrong with scientifically based philosophical speculation, which is what multiverse proposals are. But we should name it for what it is.

Top

THE AUTHOR

CREDIT: Nick Higgins

George F. R. Ellis

George F. R. Ellis is a cosmologist and emeritus mathematics professor at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. He is one of the world's leading experts on Einstein's general theory of relativity and co-author, with Stephen Hawking, of the seminal book The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (Cambridge University Press, 1975).

Top

MORE TO EXPLORE

Issues in the Philosophy of Cosmology. George F. R. Ellis in Philosophy of Physics. Edited by Jeremy Butterfield and John Earman. Elsevier, 2006. http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0602280

Universe or Multiverse? Edited by Bernard Carr. Cambridge University Press, 2009.

The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos. Brian Greene. Knopf, 2011.

Higher Speculations: Grand Theories and Failed Revolutions in Physics and Cosmology. Helge Kragh. Oxford University Press, 2011.

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN ONLINE
Multiverse: Yay or nay? Read the debate and cast your vote at ScientificAmerican.com/aug2011/multiverse

The HTML version of this article may not contain all of the images contained in the PDF version of this article, due to copyright issues.

Justification: Five Views

2011-10-23T23:47:00.000+01:00

Justification: Five Views

On 10.10.11 | In Justification | by mattbarrett

Justification: Five Views. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011.
Edited by James K. Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy. With contributions by Michael S. Horton, Michael F. Bird, James D. G. Dunn, Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Gerald O’Collins S.J. and Oliver P. Rafferty.
Reviewed by Thomas R. Schreiner

I like this review...

John Piper quoting Owen on decays of grace prevailing in us

2011-10-22T02:15:00.000+01:00

source

John Owen:

Do any of us find decays of grace prevailing in us; deadness, coldness, lukewarmness, a kind of spiritual stupidity and senselessness coming upon us? Do we find an unreadiness unto the exercise of grace in its proper season and the vigorous acting of it in duties of communion with God? And would we have our souls recovered from these dangerous diseases?
Let us assure ourselves there is no better way for our healing and deliverance, yea no other way but this alone, namely, the obtaining a fresh view of the glory of Christ by faith, and a steady abiding therein. Constant contemplation of Christ and his glory putting forth its transforming power unto revival of all grace, is the only relief in this case.

The Gospel Defended, The Works of John Owen, ed. William H. Goold, 1850-1853, (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1967), XII, 501-502, paragraphing mine.

moral bankruptcy in China

2011-10-20T15:37:00.003+01:00

I can never imagine how this can happen in a country which once called a country of long history and profound philosophical thought, the place where Confucius was born... this is unthinkable and terrible...

This made me think of the state before our conversion:
"separated from Christ... having no hope and without God in the world." (Eph. 2:12)

Oh, Lord, save our country!

source

小悅悅的七分鐘

2011-10-19 21世紀經濟報道

10月18日下午七時，小悅悅靜靜躺在廣州軍區廣州總醫院ICU(重症監護室)病房內，尚無知覺。病房外，十幾位從各處趕來的市民正試圖安慰小悅悅的父母王持昌夫婦。

王持昌從市民手里接過捐款捐物，每回都深深鞠躬。截止到18日下午五時，他們已經收到各界好心人捐款共計270100.45元。

為免別人非議捐款，他個人已在律師監督下在銀行開立專門戶頭，專款專用，並每日更新金額，供社會監督。

當日廣州軍區廣州總醫院ICU主任蘇磊、副主任文強及神經外科主任王偉民向媒體介紹了小悅悅的最新病情。

文強介紹說，小悅悅自14日下午轉至該院後，經過2天半的救治，目前病情有穩定的傾向。他同時表示，小悅悅“病情仍十分危重，隨時有生命危險”。

而對于小悅悅重新恢複知覺、睜開眼睛，王持昌是很樂觀的，“我孩子從出世到現在身體都很棒，感冒都很少得，意志也很頑強，2歲之前給她打針都不哭，拔了針頭後自己還用手抹抹傷口”。

他和大家的心願都一樣，相信孩子會挺過這一劫。

1個2歲的幼童，2輛肇事車輛，18個默然的旁觀者，1位拾荒老人：一段7分鐘的視頻，灼烤著中國人的神經。

小悅悅的七分鐘

10月13日，下午5時許，天色漸暗。

廣東省佛山南海黃岐廣佛五金城里，身著黑色長袖衫、紅色褲子的2歲女童小悅悅，晃悠悠走在自家門口的那條巷子里。

當天王持昌和老婆像往常一樣看著自己的五金鋪。6歲的兒子出門到其他商鋪找小朋友玩，往常他一般沿著南邊馬路走；由于當天下雨，他改道走靠北邊的馬路，因為這里沿途有頂棚能遮雨。兒子走出去不久，小女兒悅悅也追出去。

這條小路，平時主要是進出五金城的人或貨車經過，但人流和車流並不多。小女孩很熟悉，經常跟哥哥一起做游戲。

也許是看到什麼好玩的，小女孩邊走邊回頭，當她晃到路中央時，一輛白色面包車突然加速，將小女孩卷到車輪下。車停了下，又重新開足馬力，再軋過去，然後揚長而去。被軋的女童，在路中央翻滾著。

不過一分鐘不到的光景，有一名穿白衣灰色褲子的年輕男子從女童身邊走過，左右看看，卻無視地下躺著呻吟著的小女童，默然離去。

緊接著，是一個開摩托車的男子，從小悅悅身邊過，扭頭看了一眼，然後開著摩托車繞過，像在躲避一堆垃圾。隨後，又有一輛小型貨櫃車從女孩的身體上碾軋過去。

陸續有十余個人，從癱倒在地上的女童身邊路過，其間沒有一個人伸出手去幫幫她，甚至連低下頭去看看的時間也不曾有。

5：33，距離小悅悅被碾軋7分鐘後，終于有人看到了這個躺在血泊中被碾軋得不成樣子的女童。

一位身材消瘦的阿姨，嘗試著從地上抱起小悅悅，孩子一下子就癱倒在地上方。老人只能連拖帶抱，將她弄到路邊，然後對著巷子口大喊。

悅悅的媽媽聽到後，從自家店里跑出來，看著傷重昏迷的女兒，一把抱起來，就往醫院跑去。

由于臨街店鋪安裝著視頻監控設施，小悅悅在這7分鐘里的遭遇，一點一滴都被清晰的記錄下來：1個2歲的幼童，2輛肇事車輛，18個漠然的旁觀者，1位拾荒老人，在這條小巷里，上演了一幕人間悲喜劇。

後來才得知，這位沒有絲毫猶豫向女童伸出援手的，是當地一位靠拾垃圾為生的老人，她的名字叫陳賢妹，今年58歲。

王持昌並沒有刻意去了解。他介紹，平時經過這條馬路的以五金城的商戶居多，但這18人中，和自己熟悉的商戶沒有在這里面。

他不明白關鍵時刻這18個人為何這麼冷漠，“只能說，可能最冷漠的人剛好都湊在一塊了”。

“我當時的感覺就是火大，無奈，有種想打人的衝動。醫生告訴我，孩子可能造成的腦死亡，就是和被碾後休克太久直接相關。如果能再早一些，大腦會保住。”王持昌說。

一直克制住激動情緒的王持昌至今都不敢看孩子被碾過的視頻，但當別人問起他當時的情況，他終于失控，“來回兩三次啊，他怎麼能碾得過去啊！”

後來他通過各種途徑找車牌找凶手時，一度網上還幫助他人肉搜索司機。

據其介紹，到目前肇事司機已經歸案，案件正在調查，王持昌之前已配合警方做了詳細筆錄。

誰之責？

監控錄像被媒體披露之後，似深水炸彈，整個中國為之嘩然。迄今為止，在新浪微博上，短短的5天時間里，就有708631條微博是有關小悅悅事件的，很多人都對這18個無動于衷“路人甲”們表達了不可遏制的憤怒與鄙視。

不過，這些“路人甲”們卻有不同的解釋。事發後，曾有當地媒體找到了視頻上的幾位路人，但大多表示自己當時並沒有看到躺倒在血泊中的小悅悅，並表示“如果我看到地面上有血跡，一定會下車救人的”。

僅有一位女士坦承，自己是因為看到“出血太多感到害怕”而不敢去救，如果當時旁邊有人一起救，“我一定會救”。這位有著5歲女兒的年輕母親在接受採訪時這樣說。

廣州軍區廣州總醫院ICU(重症監護室)病房外擠滿了探視的市民。很多人並不能夠接受上述理由。

從中山市趕來的曲女士全程戴著墨鏡，擋住正在流淚的眼。她想不通當時在場者緣何那麼冷漠，“即便不去施救，但最起碼撥個120可以做到吧？！這些人見死不救，回家能睡得著覺？”

和她有類似想法的還包括從深圳開車專門趕來的蘇州籍金先生等人。

肇事司機會受到法律的制裁，已無疑問。而對于18個只能從道德上譴責的旁觀者，探視者一直沒有停止，並試圖找出當中的深層根源。

曲女士以自己的經歷試圖証明，冷漠的種子埋藏在生活中的點滴。

“舉個最簡單的例子，比如在這里的公眾場所，大多數人是不會去幫別人開門或扶門的。看見別人上電梯，趕緊關。”曲說，有時候見別人拿了很多東西，就主動幫別人扶門，但別人一個謝謝都沒有，很心寒。

曲老家在沈陽，來到廣東經商辦廠已11年。她在廣東每待兩個月就飛回沈陽三天看親戚，而那三天在公眾場所感覺到的氣氛和客居的廣東明顯不同，“在老家陌生人都會摁著電梯一直等我，我心里會被感動半天”。

當曲女士發表該觀點時，現場來自白雲區的王女士和來自佛山的汪女士對把原因歸結到地域表示不滿，“哪里都有好人，也有壞人，類似的事情也在其他地方出現過”。

和其他探視者不同的是，曲女士還對小悅悅的父母不能理解，父母作為監護人，應該負至少80%的責任，“孩子才兩歲，為什麼不能好好看著呢？”

當天曲女士並沒有見到小悅悅父母，臨走時她甩下一句話：“如果我見到他們，一定罵死他們。自己的孩子幹嘛不看住啊！”曲女士仿佛自己2歲的孩子出事一樣難受。

也有論者認為整體逐利的氛圍和生活的快節奏，難辭其咎。

廣東本地土生土長的張先生就

指出，“隨著市場經濟的推進，追逐金錢和速度、趨利避害的個人觀點盛行，這種快節奏下，個體真的很容易淪為追逐物質和金錢的工具，而把良知和美德拋至腦後，社會也因此逐漸原子化”。

“責任擴散”？

不過，有研究社會心理的學者表示這樣的舉動，可以用“責任擴散”這樣一個社會心理學的概念來解釋。

“‘責任擴散’是指在陌生人在場時，相關的個人責任會發生擴散，大家都在等待別人去承擔責任，就是這個意思。” 中國社會科學院社會學研究所研究員、社會心理學研究室主任楊宜音表示。

楊宜音舉個很簡單的例子：有10個人同在一間屋子里，突然其中有1個人摔倒了，剩下的9個人可能會想，其他8個人會伸出援手去救助，他自己就會猶豫。其實，如果屋子里面就他一個人，一般而言會著急上前去幫忙的，因為這個責任是特別清晰的。

在小悅悅被汽車碾軋之後，18個路人陸續經過受傷的孩子，卻沒有一個伸出援手，與這種“責任擴散”的社會心理是有一定關系的。

而在一個陌生人社會中，這樣的情況會更加明顯。

還是上面那個例子為例，楊宜音表示，如果9個人中有3個人是摔倒者的親屬，這3個人很可能會表現出自己去救這個人，但是如果都是陌生人的話，當事人很可能就沒有這樣一個心理壓力，因為不是處于一個被別人評價的環境之中，走了也就走了。

“所以，他人在場，這個他人是誰，對中國人而言是很重要的。如果他人都是熟人的話，很可能會有這樣一個情況，這個人為了表現自己的勇敢一個箭步就衝上去了。”楊宜音稱。

事故發生的地方，是廣州知名的五金產品批發市場。這里占地將近40萬平方米，商鋪2000多家，匯集了來自全國各地的五金工具、機械設備等批發商，五方雜處，各色人等聚集在此“討生活”。小悅悅父親王持昌，也是山東聊城人。

義務為王持昌提供訴訟支持的廣州律師羅先生也推測，“在五金城及沿海地區很多典型區域，流動人口多，大家陌生度高，大家都忙著打工經商賺錢求生存，有時候也許未及旁顧他人。說不定18個路人中有人急著送貨，做生意呢。但這絕對不是借口”。

王持昌自2003年來到廣東打拼，後在五金城經營商鋪，生活圈基本都在五金城，他說，五金城的商戶們多來自外地，河南、江西、山東、河北很多地方都有。

而當記者問及五金城周圍人關系怎樣時，王持昌拒絕回答，“你去(實地)看看就知道了”。在這樣一個外來人口聚集地區，普適的社會規範並不清晰，生意人們更多的是把這里當作“討生活”的戰場。“我也看到那個新聞了，五金城的人員來自天南海北，不是熟人社會，這個應該跟無人施救有一定的關系。”楊宜音稱。

不過，有專家也表示，如何解讀這18個路人的“袖手旁觀”，可能更要與社會的現狀連接起來審視。因為助人行為屬于“親社會行為”，其實質是人與人之間的合作，但是如果這種合作背後的機制被破壞的話，就會影響到這種行為的出現。

如果現在還處于雷鋒那個時代，人們恨不得找一件好事來做，好向別人炫耀。但現在的社會形態下，物質主義已成為主流，整個輿論也不再獎勵這種助人為樂的舉動。

社會中的每個個體在嘗試助人為樂的時候，首先想到的是自己會不會因為這樣的行為而受到傷害。“南京彭宇案的判決對人的影響是非常大的，社會導向都變了。”上述專家頗為無奈的說。

中國人民大學哲學系社會心理學專家沙連香教授亦表示：集體冷漠與旁觀者心態，現在已很難說清楚“哪個是因，哪個是果”。

不過，幸好還有這位拾荒者陳賢妹的存在，她向小悅悅伸出的那雙手，令很多人感到這個社會尚存一絲暖色。“這就是一件平常事，不知道為什麼會鬧成這麼大。”陳賢妹說。

廣東的一家媒體在頭版打出通欄黑體大標題“我們不做中國的路人”，呼籲國人在遇到類似的情況時，能夠“彎下腰、伸出手、張開愛心”。

因為這樣的舉動，“不僅僅是救她，而且是救我們自己”羅律師說，自己站出來幫助當事人，也是希望喚醒社會，“不要總是把希望寄托在別人身上，以為跟自己無關，總抱著不惹事的心態。對陌生人還是多一些善意和熱情更好”。

(內容由新浪北京提供。未經授權，不得轉載。)

How bible reading changes one's life

2011-10-20T07:50:00.001+01:00

good read. it seems I'm prone to be liberal...

source

Home > 2011 > October

Christianity Today, October, 2011 | |

Research

Survey: Frequent Bible Reading Can Turn You Liberal

What a surprising survey says about how reading the Bible frequently can turn you liberal (in some ways).

Aaron B. Franzen | posted 10/12/2011 10:20AM

A recent poll from LifeWay Research found that 89 percent of American households still own a Bible, with the average home having 4.1 Bibles. But owning a Bible is different from reading it—and pollsters might be surprised by what happens when many Americans do.

Most polls, surveys, and studies that have examined the Bible's influence have looked at views of its inspiration and methods of interpretation. Gallup, for example, has for four decades asked Americans how literally the Bible should be taken. Comparatively very little research has looked into what happens when one actually reads the Bible, especially when one reads it independently outside the church.

Perhaps we've assumed that such questions would be redundant, merely one more measure of religiosity, along with how often one attends church, how literally one views the Bible, and how much one prays. When researchers look at these indicators, they usually find a correlation with both political and moral conservativism. It's not always the case, but it is a trend. Reading the Bible on one's own makes a difference, too. The interesting part, however, is the unexpected difference it makes.

Frequent Bible reading has some predictable effects on the reader. It increases opposition to abortion as well as homosexual marriage and unions. It boosts a belief that science helps reveal God's glory. It diminishes hopes that science will eventually solve humanity's problems. But unlike some other religious practices, reading the Bible more often has some liberalizing effects—or at least makes the reader more prone to agree with liberals on certain issues. This is true even when accounting for factors such as political beliefs, education level, income level, gender, race, and religious measures (like which religious tradition one affiliates with, and one's views of biblical literalism).

Terrorism, Justice, and Science

In 2007, the Baylor Religion Survey asked Americans how often they read the Bible on their own. (It was a five-point scale in this study, ranging from "never" to "several times a week.") It also asked whether the federal government should expand its authority to fight terrorism—a reference to the Patriot Act. For each increased level of Bible-reading frequency, support for the Patriot Act decreased by about 13 percent.

Frequent Bible reading also influences views on criminal justice. As might be expected, respondents who were more politically liberal were prone to disagree with the statement, "The government should punish criminals more harshly." Unexpectedly (at least given the conservative stereotype), the more frequently people read the Bible, the more they too are prone to disagree with the statement. This is not an anomalous finding: Support for abolishing the death penalty increased by about 45 percent for each increase on the five-point scale measuring Bible-reading frequency.

Reading the Bible affects attitudes toward science as well. If you just ask people about biblical literalism, you don't find statistically significant differences in views of whether science and religion are compatible. But the more someone reads the Bible, the more likely he or she is to believe science and religion are compatible. (For each increase on the five-point scale, the odds that they see religion and science as incompatible decrease by 22 percent.)

Justice and Consumption

Some of the most interesting findings relate to moral attitudes. "How important is it," the survey asked, "to actively seek social and economic justice in order to be a good person?" Again, as would be expected, those with more liberal political leanings were more likely to say it's very or somewhat important. And those who read the Bible more often were more likely to agree. Indeed, they were almost 35 percent more likely to agree at each point on Baylor's five-point scale. That may be bad news for Glenn Beck, who last year told believers to leave their churches if they hear "social justice" language being used. Likewise, contrary to liberal media stereotypes, those who are most engaged in their faith (by directly and frequently reading its source material) are those who are most supportive of social and economic justice. A reading, politically conservative literalist is only slightly less supportive than a non-reading, politically liberal non-literalist.

Likewise, the survey asked whether one must consume or use fewer goods in order to be a good person. Political liberals and frequent Bible readers are more likely to say yes. A conservative Bible reader might not be as prone to say yes as a liberal non-reader, but think of it this way: Ask an evangelical who is politically conservative, has some college education, has an average level of income, is a biblical literalist, and does not read the Bible, and you'll have only a 22 percent chance he or she will say reducing consumption is part of ethical living. Ask the same person, only now they read the Bible, and you'll have a 44 percent chance they'll say so. It's still not a majority, but the swing is dramatic.

Why The Bible Pushes You Leftward

The discussion becomes even more interesting when we consider who is most likely to read the Bible frequently. It's evangelicals and biblical literalists, those who tend to be more conservative on these topics. In other words, those who read the Bible most often are more conservative, but the more they read the Bible, the more likely it is that their views will change, at least on these topics.

Why does this happen? One possible explanation is that readers tend to have expectations of a text prior to reading it. Given the Bible's prominence in our society, it's little wonder that many people think they know what's in it before they open it up. But once they start reading it on their own, they are bound to be surprised by something, and this surprising new content is then integrated and grafted on to the familiar. Beliefs do change with the addition of new information.

But it doesn't have to be unfamiliar content to surprise the reader. It just has to be personally relevant. Frequent Bible readers may have different views of biblical authority, but they tend to read it devotionally, looking for ways in which Scripture is speaking directly to them. They will read until struck by something that sticks out in the text. Even if the reader thinks the Bible has some error or needs a lot of interpretation, this thunderbolt moment can take on tremendous personal significance.

But frequent Bible readers don't just see the Bible as personal. They also see it as authoritative, written by an author who had a specific context and intent, and they want to conform to its message. After all, why read the Bible with no desire to embrace what it teaches?

In short, sometimes reading the Bible can change views and attitudes because readers are surprised by what's in it. Other times, it's just a matter of discipleship.

Aaron B. Franzen is a graduate student in the sociology department at Baylor University. This research is undergoing peer review.

what an awesome (and massive) book!

2011-10-14T14:06:00.000+01:00

source

Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts

Craig S. Keener

Price:	$59.99
ISBN:	978-0-8010-3952-2
ISBN-10:	0-8010-3952-5
Dimensions:	6 x 9
Number of pages:	1248
Carton Quantity:	16
Publication Date:	Nov. 11
Formats:	Hardcover

email page

printer friendly page

request exam copy

"This book is a rarity in the scholarly world in that it is both rigorous in its scholarship and speaks with knowledge and passion about an exciting subject that demands our attention. We have here perhaps the best book ever written on miracles in this or any age. Highly recommended."--Ben Witherington III, Asbury Theological Seminary

Most modern prejudice against biblical miracle reports depends on David Hume's argument that uniform human experience precludes miracles. Yet current research shows that human experience is far from uniform. In fact, hundreds of millions of people today claim to have experienced miracles. Respected New Testament scholar Craig Keener argues that it is time to rethink Hume's argument in light of the contemporary evidence available to us. This wide-ranging and meticulously researched two-volume study presents the most thorough current defense of the credibility of the miracle reports in the Gospels and Acts. Drawing on claims from a range of global cultures and taking a multidisciplinary approach to the topic, Keener suggests that many miracle accounts throughout history and from contemporary times are best explained as genuine divine acts, lending credence to the biblical miracle reports.

Contents

Introduction

Part 1: The Ancient Evidence

1. Opening Questions about Early Christian Miracle Claims

2. Ancient Miracle Claims outside Christianity

3. Comparison of Early Christian and Other Ancient Miracle Accounts

Part 2: Are Miracles Possible?

4. Antisupernaturalism as an Authenticity Criterion?

5. Hume and the Philosophic Questions

6. Developing Hume's Skepticism toward Miracles

Part 3: Miracle Accounts beyond Antiquity

7. Majority World Perspectives

8. Examples from Asia

9. Examples from Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean

10. Supernaturalism in Earlier Christian History

11. Supernatural Claims in the Recent West

12. Blindness, Inability to Walk, Death, and Nature: Some Dramatic Reports

Part 4: Proposed Explanations

13. Nonsupernatural Causes

14. Biased Standards?

15. More Extranormal Cases

Conclusion

Concluding Unscientific Postscript

Appendixes

Indexes

ES new website

2011-10-14T10:47:00.000+01:00

having been waiting for almost 2 years, so excited that this newly designed website is out now (before our 79th anniversary)! I like the new design and contents very much, esp. "院長的話" (under "認識播神")! You got to listen to/read it!

http://evangelseminary.edu.hk/

那雙看不見的手

2011-10-13T16:26:00.000+01:00

a thrilling song, especially after chatting with a friend of quantum physics who is closed to faith in Jesus Christ

那雙看不見的手
雖不見祢　觸不到祢
但是我知　祢正在對我低語
哦～主耶穌　哦～主耶穌
我深知道　祢一直就在這裏

是祢的手　釘痕的手
重新撫慰　我那破碎的心田
是祢聲音　溫柔話語
再度填滿　我心靈中的飢渴

六龜育幼院唱

梁文音唱

a good read for Bultmann

2011-10-12T13:15:00.001+01:00

The Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Modern Western Theology -

Bultmann, Rudolf

and the book: John Webster, Rudolf Bultmann: An Introductory Interpretation (Leicester: Theological Students Fellowship, 1976).

the "religious" science and Christian faith

2011-10-12T13:14:00.004+01:00

there's a old notion that Christian faith should not be and is not a religion. I still believe in this. I'm still reluctant to call one or treat myself as a "教徒". After reading this news, I'm more convinced now.
Especially impressed by Shechtman's words, 「在科學的最前線，宗教與科學似乎沒有太大不同。人們擁有信念，當他們宗教般地信仰某事物時，就會發生這樣的問題。」
People (are) used to dichotomize religion and science, thinking that one can only choose one and never both. Now, even the most scientific people admit that there's a sort of "religion" even in the most "scientific" part of the field called science -resembling to what the Roman Catholic did centuries before!
Thus, from my perspective, I think it is the stubbornness or an inward hardness of the heart, i.e. a closed mind-set, that hurts their own selves and others. That's the crux, or what the term religion/religious applies here. Isn't it what true Christian faith should oppose to? Isn't this closed mindset what Jesus decries essentially (ummm, esp. the Jesus in the Gospel of John!)? What the Creator calls for, is a man of sincerity and truth (John 4:23)
so for me, a true scientist is not far away from being a true Christian.
Look at the Pharisees of our own days, in the field of religion, and of science, and of the government...

source

科學要革命先過同行這一關

更新日期:2011/10/12 00:27 李威撰

【編譯李威撰整理報導】現代科學家雖不用像伽利略那樣，擔憂自己會遭到西班牙宗教裁判所的迫害，但《路透》報導指出，科學家仍可能被自己的同儕指控為異端，並受到他人奚落，對走在學術最前端的科學家來說尤是如此。
以色列科學家謝茲曼（Daniel Shechtman）因發現準晶（quasicrystal）而獲得諾貝爾化學獎，但他在前幾年卻被同樣研究領域的同儕批評為「半調子科學家」。甫獲得物理獎及醫學獎桂冠的得主們也表示，凡提出革命性發現或為人所忽略的新觀點時，走得太快的研究者似乎總是要擔憂這些類似的批評。
謝茲曼在今年稍早曾表示：「在科學的最前線，宗教與科學似乎沒有太大不同。人們擁有信念，當他們宗教般地信仰某事物時，就會發生這樣的問題。」
17世紀伽利略曾前往羅馬宗教裁判所接受審判，他因提倡哥白尼的觀點，認為地球繞太陽運動而被教廷指控為異端。
今天，科學家不眠不休進行研究，改寫長期為人所接受的自然規律時（譬如，天文學家發現宇宙正在加快膨脹速度而非放慢速度），他們不再受到輿論的撻伐及攻訐。

先驅如孤鳥古今皆然
甫獲得2011年的諾貝爾物理學獎的美裔澳洲學者施密特（Brian Schmidt）表示：「這看起來太瘋狂了，所以不會是正確的，但我認為我們有些擔心。」施密特因發現存在一種神祕的「暗能量」（dark energy）而獲獎。然而當年愛因斯坦提出這項觀點時，卻被批評是他「最大的愚蠢錯誤」。
研究者表示，上個月他們在日內瓦的歐洲核子研究組織（CERN）發射次原子粒子到義大利的格蘭沙索實驗室（Gran Sasso），發現速度竟超越光速，這一發現似乎動搖愛因斯坦的理論。但這些研究者在要求其他人來檢驗它們的發現時，卻也讓自己陷入窘困難堪的局面。
即使科學家已普遍贊成某一觀點，他們也會避免讓民眾感到驚奇，以免對新研究有過份期許。2011年獲諾貝爾醫學獎的史坦曼（Ralph Steinman）在1970年代發現一種可能可以治療癌症的樹狀細胞就是一例。
謝茲曼4月接受以色列《國土報》（Haaretz）的訪談時，回憶起當初那些難堪的畫面。1982年他參加美國一個研究團隊，當時他發現一種後來被認為是全新種類的實體，這種實體介於玻璃這類不規則的物質與規則的結晶體之間。然而研究團隊的負責人在某一天卻來到他的書桌前。
謝茲曼回憶道：「他給我一個奇異的笑容，然後把一本教科書放在我桌上，他說：『請讀讀這裡是怎麼寫的。』」隔天，這名以色列的研究員被要求離開研究團隊，因為他讓這個團隊「蒙羞」。
在倫敦大學學院（UCL）鑽研醫學史的李維茲（Carole Reeves）表示：「科學史上經常發生放逐荒野的情況，尤其是在即將發生典範轉移的時刻。」
哥白尼、牛頓、拉瓦節（Lavoisier）、愛因斯坦跟達爾文，這些後來都被當成是為科學帶來革命的科學家都開創出新的模形，但這同時也需要科學社群去駁斥現存的模型。李維茲以哥白尼為例，他極不願意出版自己的新理論，這跟達爾文的進化論一樣，他們都預見這勢必會引發爭論，特別是與神學觀點相牴觸。
擔任英國皇家天文學家（Astronomer Royal）主席，也是劍橋大學天體物理學教授的芮斯（Martin Rees）爵士表示，近來情況沒有變得更好，仍然有「一小群人不被重視，且正經歷艱困時期」的研究者。
不幸的是，史坦曼在獲獎前3天就撒手人寰，當他耗費無數光陰在致力於研究新型的免疫系統細胞時，有好一段時間沒有得到應有的重視。史坦曼的兒子亞當向《路透》表示，父親在追求研究時，面臨眾人的質疑。

典範交替路難行
科學進展並非總是斷裂的、違反直覺的，而是先提出一些重大觀念，然後屢經科學社群不斷試煉，才會達到斷裂點。
當選美國化學學會（ACS）主席的沙卡須利（Bassam Shakhashiri）表示，這就是遊戲的本質，他向《路透》表示：「這就是我們如何從事科學，我們仔細檢查、我們深思熟慮；我們要看證據、我們彼此對於證據的一制性及如何理解來進行激辯。」
美國化學學會在諾貝爾化學獎公布後，稱讚謝茲曼的重大發現。但在1980及1990年代初期，曾擔任ACS主席的鮑靈（Linus Pauling）就激烈批判謝茲曼的研究，他說：「根本不存在像準晶這樣的東西，只是個半調子科學家。。」
對於研究不符合既定教條的研究者來說，要在學術圈生存並不容易。美國科學促進會（AAAS）執行長雷希納（Alan Leshner）表示，比起點滴累進的研究進展，革命性的發現需要更多證據來支持，他說：「這就是科學的進程：向我證明，如果你無法證明，它就仍然會是個不及格的觀念。」
劍橋大學科學史暨科學哲學學系教授佛瑞斯特（John Forrester）指出，著有《科學革命的結構》的孔恩曾指出典範轉移，這是走在時代尖端的研究者所要面對的。佛瑞斯特說：「這是一個危險境地，因為這會賭上你的職業。但這就是孔恩說的故事，你會跟不同的群體產生摩擦爭議。」
愛因斯坦曾反駁量子糾纏（quantum entanglement），將之形容為「鬼魅般的超距作用」。然而在1970到1990年代，許多研究都肯定量子糾纏的效應，曾致力在這項研究的科學家，也是今年可能獲得諾貝爾物理學獎的候選人一。

尾大不掉應虛懷若谷
為何走在尖端的科學家總是如此孤獨？專家表示，科學革命的本質，就是新典範與原本的常態科學無法相容，新典範迫使科學社群必須去重新評估長期以來所熟悉的概念，但科學社群卻又不大願意放棄舊有的典範。
李維茲指出，類似的故事也發生在2005年諾貝爾醫學獎得主馬歇爾（Barry Marshall）與瓦倫的身上，他們發現有80％的胃潰瘍是由幽門螺旋桿菌所引起，但這項發現有好幾年的時間是受到冷落的。
李維茲表示，當時醫學界普遍認為，胃潰瘍是分泌過多胃酸所致，這項觀點在1980年代支持葛蘭素史克藥廠（GlaxoSmithKline）大量生產賣得極佳的善胃得（Zantac），善胃得的藥效主要是抑制胃酸。
李維茲指出，這是攸關數十億美元商機的產品，強而有力的藥廠、以及接受藥廠提供研究資金的科學家，都將重點放在胃酸分泌。儘管許多醫生在動胃部與12指腸手術時，已經發現胃潰瘍的因素可能與研究發現有出入。
歷史上，許多革命性的科學家都保持了堅強的風骨與信念。謝茲曼在得知獲獎後，回想起過去被人要求念點教科書的窘境，他只在推特上以簡單的一句話來表示自己的感想：「一名好的科學家，就是不會百分之百確信在教科書裡念到的內容的科學家。」

a sojourner reading Psalm 39

2011-10-12T09:47:00.001+01:00

that I may know what I lack... (alternative of let me know how fleeting I am!)

Psa 39:4, 7, 12
4 「耶和華啊，求你讓我曉得我的結局，我的壽數幾何，使我知道我的生命何等短暫！
7 「主啊，如今我等甚麼呢？我的指望在乎你！
12 「耶和華啊，求你聽我的禱告，側耳聽我的呼求！我流淚，求你不要靜默無聲！因為在你面前我是客旅，是寄居的，像我列祖一般。

5Γνώρισόν μοι, Κύριε, τὸ πέρας μου,
καὶ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἡμερῶν μου, τίς ἐστιν,
ἵνα γνῶ τί ὑστερῶ ἐγώ.
8καὶ νῦν τίς ἡ ὑπομονή μου; οὐχὶ ὁ κύριος;
καὶ ἡ ὑπόστασίς μου παρὰ σοῦ ἐστιν.
13εἰσάκουσον τῆς προσευχῆς μου, Κύριε, καὶ τῆς δεήσεώς μου,
ἐνώτισαι τῶν δακρύων μου.
μὴ παρασιωπήσῃς· ὅτι πάροικος ἐγώ εἰμι ἐν τῆ γῆ
καὶ παρεπίδημος· καθὼς πάντες οἱ πατέρες μου.

the absent father

2011-10-12T08:02:00.001+01:00

the absent father 「缺席的父親」...
the past of others should affect the present/ presence of us, the fathers...

source

喬布斯生父開腔﹕兒子成功我沒功勞

明報 – 2011年10月11日星期二上午6:42

【明報專訊】美國蘋果公司創辦人喬布斯因病離世後，曾表示希望能與其見面、最終心願永遠落空的生父詹達利（Abdulfattah John Jandali）昨日首度開腔，表示對喬布斯離世「只能感到傷心」。
詹達利上周三接獲喬布斯死訊，他說：「那不是震撼，基本上你只能感到悲傷」。當他嘗試與女兒莫娜（Mona Simpson）聯絡時，卻得不到回應。
現年80歲的詹達利於1955年與女友誕下喬布斯，但遭女友家人反對，因而將其交由他人領養。他後來與女友結婚，誕下莫娜，但這段婚姻只維持短短數年。他直至2005年始知兒子已成為叱咤科技界的大人物。他盛讚喬布斯是個天才，自己也是蘋果產品的擁躉，但自知是個「缺席的父親」，「兒女的成功沒有我的功勞」。
喬布斯逝前電郵覆「謝謝」
喬布斯曾在公開演說中提及自己被領養的經過，並承認與生母與親妹妹莫娜有聯繫，關係不錯，但從未公開談及生父詹達利。詹達利過去一直擔心被人質疑貪財，加上兩人已有各自的生活，「不知道見面時要說什麼」，沒有主動聯絡。
詹達利的友人稱，詹達利一直為與兒女的關係淡漠而感到後悔難過，希望可重新抉擇，改寫結局。近年得知喬布斯健康走下坡後，詹達利自言「感覺很糟」，於是開始給從未見面的兒子發電郵，祝福他「生日快樂」、「希望你的健康情况有改善」。雖然有知情人士稱喬布斯從沒回覆，但詹達利表示他曾收過喬布斯兩封簡短的回信，最後一封電郵來自喬布斯離世前6周，內容只是簡單一句「謝謝」。

new £5 coin clebrating the Queen's Diamond Jubilee

2011-10-11T13:50:00.000+01:00

dirige devs gressvs meos (Latin) = “May the Lord direct my steps”

辛亥革命與傳福音

2011-10-09T08:51:00.002+01:00

we need not "idolatrize" these figures (in particular 孫中山) as perfect but we don't have to bury their Christian identity all together. I think Prof. Lam's comment is fair enough. As a historian, what makes them so brave in revolutionary activities and how is it related to their Christian faith which is by far abnormal from the normal average Chinese at the time? These are all together legitimate questions. And Lam's argument with his evidences found should not be missed by Christians as a possible means to evangelism! I wish I could have seen it.

source

林治平籲華人教界重視歷史做好文化宣教
鄭主恩 / 基督日報記者

華人教會歷史界專家林治平教授本月在台灣推動「辛亥百年紀念活動」時強調，基督徒在這一百年歷史中佔有關鍵性的角色。（圖：基督教論壇報）

據《基督教論壇報》報道，華人教會歷史界專家林治平教授本月在台灣推動「辛亥百年紀念活動」時強調，基督徒在這一百年歷史中佔有關鍵性的角色，教會要主動拿回歷史的發言權。而透過圖片及戲劇等史料，讓「史實」說話，就是最好的文化宣教。

長期研究近代宣教史的林治平說，以參與辛亥革命的革命烈士來說，絕大多數都是基督徒。而在那段風雨飄搖的年代裏，他們能夠「置個人死生於度外」，很大的一個元素就是基督信仰。從諸多像書信的史料中可以看出，「效法主耶穌為世人捨命」的榜樣是很大的一個動力。

林治平感慨，這些對民國肇建有重要貢獻的基督徒，在台灣官方的歷史教學及文獻記載中，往往只提及其「義行」，卻刻意不提基督信仰是他們之所以能夠「視死如歸」的真正原因，更不用提包括晏陽初等對於奠基教育普及有重要貢獻的基督徒專業人士。

林治平說，由於接受資訊的片段極不完全，造成台灣许多的人對於教會及基督徒產生「不關心國家社會」的錯誤偏見。但事實上，不論是在教育、社福、藝術及醫療等領域，過往的基督徒都是扮演「先行者」的角色。

台灣教界在對10月10日百年紀念中有多項貢獻。《貢獻─基督教與辛亥百年同行的軌跡》電影紀錄片亦將於10月12日下午首映。影片總製作的台北市基督教教會聯合會創會理事長朱台深牧師說，《貢獻》紀錄片是以時間為主軸，從清末一直貫穿到台灣，並以基督徒在醫療、經濟及社福等方面代表性人物的故事來對社會發聲，強調基督徒的奉獻與摆上，與國家能發展至今息息相關。

擔任《貢獻─基督教與辛亥百年同行的軌跡》編劇的黃季珊姊妹則表示，很多人讀過國父孫中山先生「倫敦蒙難」的歷史，但大多數的人並不知道，國父在那段被軟禁的困難時刻，曾以書信寫下「日夜不絕祈禱…至第七日，心中突然安慰，全無憂色…自云此祈禱有應，蒙神施恩矣」的見證。

香港「從心會社」、《時代論壇》合辦的「『辛亥情懷，感動中華』祈禱會──香港基督徒為中國獻上感恩祭」，亦將於10月10日晚假中華基督教會合一堂香港堂舉行。祈禱會上將有中華基督教會合一堂香港堂主任牧師余英嶽主講的「辛亥革命與香港教會」及「從心會社」創辦人吳思源主講的「普及文化的百年璀璨」等內容。

相比之下，大陸地區較缺乏有影響力的教會、機構、教牧向社會發聲做出強有力的見證。大陸史學界及紀念活動對前人所擁有的基督徒身份、所效法之基督精神多有遺漏。




版權聲明：本文版權歸基督日報所有。未經基督日報授權，任何印刷性書籍刊物及營利性電子刊物不得轉載。歡迎非營利性電子刊物轉載，但須註明出處及鏈接（URL）。

国家地理2010十大考古发现(Best of Archaeology 2010: Nat Geo News's Ten Most Viewed)

2011-10-07T07:38:00.003+01:00

Best of Archaeology 2010: Nat Geo News's Ten Most Viewed

Chinese version -source
English original and previous news from NG

2.土耳其发现诺亚方舟遗迹 　一个由福音派基督徒组成的探险小组宣称，他们2010年4月在土耳其东部的亚拉拉特山附近发现了传说中的诺亚方舟的船身残骸，测试发现这些残骸的年代可追溯至4800年前，即《创世纪》中所描述的诺亚方舟的存在时期。不过，一些考古学家和历史学家表示，这一发现同过去的其他发现一样，可信度不高。

a balanced report this time. I wonder it could be listed to the second, just running after the DSS!

remembering Steve Jobs

2011-10-06T11:18:00.000+01:00

taken from my friend's blogpost:

Remembering that I’ll be dead soon is the most important tool I’ve ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure – these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.

(the text of his speech)

8 Essential Characteristics Your Church Needs

2011-10-04T09:42:00.000+01:00

I like this. a fresh reminder.

8 Essential Characteristics Your Church Needs

Monday October 03 2011 12:05 PM

Rick Warren

If you want your church to have the impact of the early church, the book of Acts shows us 8 essential characteristics we need in our congregations --
Supernatural power (Acts 2:3-4) -- We don’t just talk about God; we experience Him. This is what makes the Church different from every other organization on the planet. We have the Holy Spirit. Microsoft doesn’t have the Holy Spirit. The United States government doesn’t have the Holy Spirit. The Red Cross doesn’t have the Holy Spirit. No other organization has the power of God in it. God promised His Spirit to help His Church.
Use everybody’s language (Acts 2:4) -- This passage isn’t about speaking in tongues. It’s about the gospel being communicated in real languages. People actually heard the early Christians speak in their own languages -- whether that was Farsi, Swahili, German, Greek, or whatever. God says from the very first day of the church that the Good News is for everyone. It’s not just for Jews. It’s amazing grace for every race. But the power of Acts isn’t just about the language of your country of origin. It’s also about languages spoken only in particular subcultures -- like mothers of preschoolers or people into hip-hop or accountants or truck drivers. God says in His Church, everyone’s language gets used. Are you helping your people use their “language” to reach people with the Good News?
Uses everyone’s gifts (Acts 2:14, 16, 19, 21) -- In New Testament times, there weren’t spectators in the Church. There were only contributors -- 100 percent participation. Not everyone is called to be a pastor, but everyone is called to serve God. If you want your church to have the impact of the early Church, get everyone involved in the ministry of your church. Make it clear to everyone in the church that passivity isn’t an option. If they want to just sit around and soak up the service of others, let them find another church.
Offer life-changing truth (Acts 2:22-40) – The early Church didn’t offer pop psychology, polite moralisms, or nice-sounding inspiration. We must always offer the truth of the Gospel. God’s Word has the power to change lives. No other message changes lives like the Good News. No other message changes a guy from a wife-beater to being a loving, responsible husband. It’s when the truth of God’s Word gets into us that we change.
In Acts 2, Peter gives the very first Christian sermon, quoting the Old Testament book of Joel. Peter shares the Gospel in this message. Acts 2 says that the early Church devoted itself to the “apostles’ teaching” – the Bible. God’s Word gave the early Church power (For more about helping your church dig into God’s Word, check out 40 Days in the Word).
Provide loving support (Acts 2:42) -- The first Church loved and cared for one another. The Bible says in Acts 2:42, “They took part in the fellowship, sharing in the fellowship meals and in praying together.” One translation says, “They were like family to each other.” The Church isn’t a business. It’s not an organization. It’s not a social club. It’s a family. For our churches to experience the power of the early Church, we’ve got to become the family that they were.
Enjoy joyful worship (Acts 2:46) -- When the early Church gathered, they celebrated, “praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people.” We must understand and teach that worship is a celebration. It’s a festival, not a funeral. It’s the party for the kingdom of God. When worship is joyful, people want to be there because people are looking for joy. Do you think if our churches were full of glad hearts, joyful words, and hopeful lives, we’d attract other unbelievers? Sure they would.
Make generous sacrifices (Acts 2:44-45) – The Bible teaches us to make generous sacrifices for the sake of the Gospel. The Christians during the Roman Empire were the most generous people in the empire. In fact, they were famous for their generosity. They literally shared everything – with one another and the poor. The Bible says the early Church “shared everything they had … .” That’s a church worth dying for – which is exactly what first-century Christians did. They’d rather die with gladiators and lions in the Coliseum than renounce their faith and their brothers and sisters in God’s family.
Create exponential growth (Acts 2:47) -- When our churches demonstrate the first seven characteristics of the early Church, growth is automatic. People may have looked at the first Christians as weird, but they liked what they were doing. They saw their love for one another, the miracles that took place in their midst, and the joy that was in their lives, and they wanted what the Christians had.
Sign up for the Toolbox, my free email newsletter.
Saddleback Resources offers a small group Bible study related to these devotionals: The Invisible War-Winning the Battle of Temptation.

Rick Warren is the founding pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., one of America's largest and most influential churches. Rick is author of the New York Times Best Seller The Purpose Driven Life. His book, The Purpose Driven Church, was named one of the 100 Christian books that changed the 20th century. He is also founder of Pastors.com, a global Internet community for pastors. © Copyright 2011 Rick Warren.

food for thought as a preacher

2011-10-03T13:49:00.000+01:00

A Preacher’s Decalogue

Sinclair B. Ferguson
Themelios 36.2 (2011)

西方宣教士反鴉鬥爭

2011-09-27T16:07:00.001+01:00

umm... food for thought

source

西方宣教士反鴉鬥爭——揭開被遺漏的傳教士在華歷史

「抗爭鴉片毒害五十年」信仰與文化講座紀錄

黃肇怡 / 基督日報記者
2007年09月13日09時57分上午 Posted.

提起鴉片戰爭，大家都知道是關於1840年代初及1850年代中英國與中國爭戰的一段歷史。但這段歷史與基督教信仰有什麼關係？9月7日晚上，由溫哥華基督徒短宣訓練中心及浸信會信友堂合辦的「信仰與文化講座」，邀請洪予健牧師主講「抗爭鴉片毒害五十年」，揭開了抗爭期間被遺漏的西方傳教士在華歷史，從而顯露上帝對中國人的厚愛。

基督教宣教士與鴉片禍害不解之冤

鴉片在醫學上有麻醉鎮痛的作用，但若非用作醫藥用途，則歸類於毒品。洪牧師指，馬克思認為「宗教是人民的鴉片」，雖然沒有負面的意思，但意指當人民一旦接受了宗教，就會變得溫馴。而列寧則認為「宗教是麻醉人民的鴉片」，略帶負面的意識。

談到鴉片戰爭的歷史，當時滿清政府一直收緊外貿政策，英人為解決龐大的貿易逆差，於是從印度走私鴉片來華。那時候正值外國傳教士來華，當中也有乘搭鴉片船抵達的，因此政府便下令必須禁煙和禁教，把鴉片和基督教看成要打倒的第一個敵人。結果傳教士被驅逐、教民遭殺害。

洪牧師說，雖然我們說鴉片對中國是危害的，但是鴉片戰爭卻打開了中國的國門，就像舊約聖經中約瑟的哥哥本來要害他，後來神卻讓約瑟救了他全家。中國在鴉片戰爭戰敗，在1858年簽約的天津條約，使西人傳教及鴉片貿易同時合法化，自此英法人士便可在內地自由游歷及傳教。

西方宣教士反鴉鬥爭的歷史

事實上，無數西方宣教士為反鴉鬥爭作出的努力是鮮為人知的。洪牧師舉例說，在1835年來華的英籍傳教士麥都思 (W.H.Medhurst)，他堅決拒絕坐鴉片船來華，並認為傳教士若與鴉片貿易活動牽連，中國人會控訴基督徒；還有美籍傳教士裨治文，他是第一位使用新聞媒介表達反鴉片言論的先驅；美籍傳教士杜里時 (Ira Tracy)，他用文字勒索華人莫吸食鴉片，並發表《鴉片速戒文》；之後有美籍傳教士伯駕 (Peter Parker)，他在廣州開設博濟醫院，並於1838與裨治文發起組織「中國醫藥傳道會」(Medical Missionary Society in China)。

洪牧師指，當時對於英國政府的行動，最激烈的批評來自宣教士，他們發起反鴉運動，不單是同情受鴉片毒害的中國民眾，同時也深以自己國家的不法商人及政府的犯罪為恥。他們知道，中國人厭惡基督教，皆因信這宗教的外國人帶來了戰爭和鴉片。其中有一位丹拿牧師(Rev. turner)說：「英國在這事上是確切的有罪，鴉片貿易已經把我們帶到可恥又危機的位置，我們看不有什麼可以躲避的途徑。」

為決心掃除中國傳福音的絆腳石，傳教士展開了反鴉運動的兩個戰場。首先在英國，傳教士積極寫文章辦雜誌，向社會各界介紹鴉片的毒害。當時由英東反鴉會編寫的《中國之友》月刊，指出「公義使邦國高舉，罪惡是人民的羞辱。」

1858年以後的傳教士，普遍認為鴉片貿易的罪魁禍首不是那些商人而是英國政府。他們在教會中深入宣講，使教會成為反鴉的主力。1881年又與政界聯合召開全英反鴉大會，聯合譴責鴉片貿易違反了基督徒和國際的道德，又違反了國家的商業利益。他們認為英國不止有青任停止鴉片貿易，更要不再鼓勵印度種植罌粟。

至1877年至1991年間，英國各教會及傳教士不斷向政府發出請願信，共舉辦了560次的反鴉會，並蒐集了20多萬個簽名，呼籲英國停止生產和進行鴉片貿易，以及不要干預中國政府為抑制鴉片而高徵鴉片稅的自由。

另一方面在中國，傳教士推動聯合反鴉及醫治患者，他們在各地設立戒煙所，單是內地會就建立了101家，此外有席勝魔以自身見證協助同胞信耶穌戒除鴉片癮。 1877年，傳教士於上海召開大會，討論鴉片貿易妨礙了基督教的傳播，並指「有道德上的錯，就不可能有政治上的對。」在大會上他們呼籲基督教國家所有教會熱切向神禱告，求神使用各種方法，使這大惡可以盡快止息。

洪牧師分析說，傳教士不論在英國或中國，都遇到很大的困境。在英國推動反鴉運動，普遍英國人的心態是他們的工作有損英國的經濟利益；而在中國也未能得到中國社會和華人信徒的信任和尊重，而且滿清政治體制不容鼓動民間集會結社或策動社會運動、華人基督徒於質於量難以承擔領導整個社會反鴉重任，都造成未能推動中國群眾反鴉的原因。

反鴉抗爭取得最後的勝利為我們帶來的反思

然而，因著傳教士不屈不撓的精神，以及對中國無等的愛，歷時50年的反鴉抗爭終於取得勝利。在1905年英國國會大選，通過了鴉片貿易是違反道德的議案。洪牧師說，靠著英國教會的力量，上帝的愛透過傳教士給中國，而西方傳教士在反鴉抗爭中所表現的決心和毅力，對我們有何啓發和鼓舞？

他特別提到英國教會在四年間共舉辦了560次的反鴉會，並蒐集了20多萬個簽名，同樣地，今天我們遇到社會上不公義的事情，能否像他們一樣呢？回顧過往的歷史，在今天這個充斥著種種罪惡的時代，我們有沒有勇氣一起來戰爭？盼望會眾能有更多的省思。

Byzantine Greek minuscule script - the alphabet & varied letter forms

2011-09-26T14:33:00.000+01:00

I like this:
source

Byzantine Greek minuscule script - the alphabet & varied letter forms
Learn to write the cursive minuscule hand used for Medieval Greek.

And the ligatures:

Posted by Byzantine News at 6:38 AM

曾志英談教會理財之道

2011-09-26T13:48:00.001+01:00

can't agree more on this. should「守財奴」 apply to individual Christians also?

...但問題是很多人理財的同時奉獻的心變得越來越弱。

他就此提醒大家，每個人或每個教會都在大使命下服侍，日常的教會運作如唱詩、做禮拜等等也是服侍，但一旦失去異象，只顧追求滿足自身需要時，就會變得內斂；相反大家若看著同一個異象，就不會只將焦點放在理財，而是放在天國。而弟兄姊妹若因為開始退休而對奉獻卻步的話，這樣的教會就不能發展。

教會不應該做守財奴

曾Sir表示有些教會想將積蓄用去投資，也有些教會投資失利，又有的教會購置物業收租以平衡支出。他說曾有教會請教他如何投資，他認為不論教會或個人，最穩健的當算買人民幣。但他又認為嚴格來說無論是儲蓄投資、收租或買人民幣都是「有問題」的，因為教會不應該做「守財奴」將銀子埋在地底，而應該盡量運用資源去發展或奉獻出去支持事工。

他以中華福音使命團為例，他們不論是建立幼兒園、學生培訓中心，甚至最近準備興建泰國聖天神學院校園的事工等都幾乎是從零開始。不是已經有了足夠的錢才去做，但每次都仰望天父，並得到神的供應。

曾Sir總結說，他認為最佳的「理財工具」是仰望天父，而最佳的理財態度則是奮身發展天國：「教會不是以擁有幾百萬為富有，而是努力發展甚至欠下幾百萬的為『富有』。」

最後他以哈該書2章7至9節勉勵眾人：

「我必震動萬國；萬國的珍寶必都運來，我就使這殿滿了榮耀。這是萬軍之耶和華說的。萬軍之耶和華說：銀子是我的，金子也是我的，這殿後來的榮耀必大過先前的榮耀；在這地方我必賜平安。這是萬軍之耶和華說的。」

source

Psa 31:14

2011-09-22T23:10:00.001+01:00

וַאֲנִ֤י ׀ עָלֶ֣יךָ בָטַ֣חְתִּי יְהוָ֑ה אָ֝מַ֗רְתִּי אֱלֹהַ֥י אָֽתָּה׃
Psa 31:14 [31:15]

on Jesus devotion again

2011-09-20T11:06:00.002+01:00

excellent summarized ideas in this post of my supervisor (see more in the comments and responses):

source

The Dunn/Hurtado Dialogue on Jesus-Veneration
by larryhurtado on September 19, 2011
At the annual British New Testament Conference (1-3 September, Nottingham), one of the sessions was a dialogue with my long-time friend, Prof. Jimmy Dunn on “The Veneration of Jesus and the First Commandment.” Dunn and I have been in dialogue on this subject over several years, reviewing each other’s publications and trying to sharpen mutually our perceptions of the issues. This dialogue was for me a welcome opportunity to continue this engagement in live-time.
We chose to label the event a “dialogue” rather than a “debate”, mainly because we agreed that the aim shouldn’t be to score points in some contest, but instead to come at the evidence and issues with a shared concern for understanding things. That may have disappointed some who prefer minor blood-sport to scholarship. No apologies from me.
Dunn’s presentation seemed to me to focus on concerns that devotion to, and beliefs about, Jesus should not be at the expense of the primacy of God, and that Christian faith ought to be genuinely “monotheistic”. These are entirely understandable theological concerns about Christian faith today (with which I am sympathetic), but I was a bit surprised that they seemed to play such a role in a discussion that was to be focused mainly on the evidence of Jesus-devotion in the first-century Christian circles reflected in the NT writings.
In my own presentation, I reviewed briefly the constellation of devotional practices in which Jesus features centrally attested in the NT, noted that they are without precedent or analogy in the ancient Jewish setting (the religious matrix of Christian faith), and reiterated my contention that these phenomena reflect a distinctive and noteworthy “mutation” in ancient Jewish devotion to the one God.
Put another way, the NT writings reflect a distinctive “dyadic” devotional pattern. But it is a “shaped” dyad, Jesus’ significance and place in early Christian devotion rather consistently defined and justified with reference to the will and actions of God (“the Father”). E.g., Philippians 2:9-11 celebrates God’s exaltation of Jesus and the bestowal of “the name above every name”, with the intention that Jesus be given universal acclamation as “Kyrios”.
It remains a source of puzzlement to me that the historical significance of these remarkable devotional practices is not adequately grasped by some. To judge by NT writings, Jesus was not reverenced at the expense of God, but instead as the unique agent and expression of God (e.g., as God’s “Image,” “Son”), and in obedience to the one God, who has designated Jesus as the “Kyrios” to whom this robust cultic reverence is to be given.
In the historical context, it is a novel development: professing the “one God” of Israel and yet also including as rightful (even required) recipient of devotion a distinguishable, second figure. The NT evidences, not dreams of some future time when a messianic figure may be reverenced (as, e.g., in the “Similtudes” of 1 Enoch), but instead a real and dramatic re-formulation of regular devotional practice in historically identifiable circles of early Christians. Given the special significance attached to worshp practice, the programmatic inclusion of Jesus as co-recipient/recipient of their devotion is remarkable.
Of course, these first Christians insisted that they remained true to the “monotheistic” stance inherited from the ancient Jewish tradition. But, judging by the actual way that they practiced their worship and larger devotional life, theirs was a distinguishable form of “monotheistic” practice involving the programmatic inclusion of Jesus along with God.

quoting his review on Dunn's Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? The New Testament Evidence (London: SPCK, 2010):
source

As noted already, at points, though Dunn comes to a very similar view, he then also seems somewhat uncomfortable with it [that the devotion pattern of Jesus as a recipient of worship with God]. I think that this is perhaps because he finds the phenomena of early Christian worship unsettling for the theological stance that he advocates. But this need not be so. Worship of Jesus by Christians need not be (or lead to) what Dunn calls “Jesus-olatry”, a reverencing of Jesus to the neglect of God (the Father). Earliest believers as reflected in the NT texts seem variously to have given unhesitating cultic reverence to Jesus without the sort of anxiety that appears to trouble Dunn.

young-earth creationism exegetically superior ...

2011-09-20T10:54:00.001+01:00

ummm, I appreciate it:

In my view young-earth creationism is exegetically superior and scientifically viable and coherent. It’s possible, however, to err by overemphasizing the issue in a way that demonizes old-earth proponents and lumps them together with theistic evolutionists....
Contrast how Paul Nelson and John Mark Reynolds, who write the essay for young-earth creationism in Three Views on Creation and Evolution (ed. J. P. Moreland and John Mark Reynolds; Counterpoints; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999)

souce

O Sacred Head, Now Wounded

2011-09-19T16:09:00.000+01:00

O Sacred Head, Now Wounded

(J.W. Alexander's version, 1830)

O sacred Head, now wounded, with grief and shame weighed down,
Now scornfully surrounded with thorns, Thine only crown;
How pale Thou art with anguish, with sore abuse and scorn!
How does that visage languish, which once was bright as morn!

What Thou, my Lord, hast suffered, was all for sinners’ gain;
Mine, mine was the transgression, but Thine the deadly pain.
Lo, here I fall, my Savior! ’Tis I deserve Thy place;
Look on me with Thy favor, vouchsafe to me Thy grace.

Men mock and taunt and jeer Thee, Thou noble countenance,
Though mighty worlds shall fear Thee and flee before Thy glance.
How art thou pale with anguish, with sore abuse and scorn!
How doth Thy visage languish that once was bright as morn!

Now from Thy cheeks has vanished their color once so fair;
From Thy red lips is banished the splendor that was there.
Grim death, with cruel rigor, hath robbed Thee of Thy life;
Thus Thou hast lost Thy vigor, Thy strength in this sad strife.

My burden in Thy Passion, Lord, Thou hast borne for me,
For it was my transgression which brought this woe on Thee.
I cast me down before Thee, wrath were my rightful lot;
Have mercy, I implore Thee; Redeemer, spurn me not!

What language shall I borrow to thank Thee, dearest friend,
For this Thy dying sorrow, Thy pity without end?
O make me Thine forever, and should I fainting be,
Lord, let me never, never outlive my love to Thee.

My Shepherd, now receive me; my Guardian, own me Thine.
Great blessings Thou didst give me, O source of gifts divine.
Thy lips have often fed me with words of truth and love;
Thy Spirit oft hath led me to heavenly joys above.

Here I will stand beside Thee, from Thee I will not part;
O Savior, do not chide me! When breaks Thy loving heart,
When soul and body languish in death’s cold, cruel grasp,
Then, in Thy deepest anguish, Thee in mine arms I’ll clasp.

The joy can never be spoken, above all joys beside,
When in Thy body broken I thus with safety hide.
O Lord of Life, desiring Thy glory now to see,
Beside Thy cross expiring, I’d breathe my soul to Thee.

My Savior, be Thou near me when death is at my door;
Then let Thy presence cheer me, forsake me nevermore!
When soul and body languish, oh, leave me not alone,
But take away mine anguish by virtue of Thine own!

Be Thou my consolation, my shield when I must die;
Remind me of Thy passion when my last hour draws nigh.
Mine eyes shall then behold Thee, upon Thy cross shall dwell,
My heart by faith enfolds Thee. Who dieth thus dies well.

多元主義與Schüssler Fiorenza

2011-09-17T16:21:00.001+01:00

An experience of Dr. Yu worth mentioning:

事實上西方不少打著基督教旗號的神學家，其實已失去了基督教信仰，卻坐在基督教神學的教席上，幫助他人與他一同失去信仰。

一次我在德國與哈佛的神學教授 Elizabeth Fiorenza一同參加一個有關自由的神學及哲學會議。Fiorenza猛力批評新約聖經，說新約，特別是保羅，絕對沒有自由的觀念，有的只是奴隸觀，其宣揚的是一套divine slavery的觀念。

席上有人問她，基督教既是如此值得鄙棄，那你為何仍耗用你的生命教授新約？

她不慌不忙的回答說：「難道你不知仍有很多人，特別是女性，仍受這奴隸觀所壓制嗎？我就是要幫助這些人得解放。」我所批評的正是這種多元主義神學家。

source: 余達心, 「多元性」與「多元主義」 ──回應徐允傑先生的批評

he rightly warns that such people of pluralism are destroying the Christian faith (esp. for those who still believe in the myth that Harvard/ Yale represents the best things of the world)
this inevitably relates to religious pluralism and religious inclusivism, including John Hick, the problem of recent Catholic trends (e.g. that of Mother Teresa) etc.
do Christians need to differentiate ourselves from these problematic views? I think Yu hit to the point in a friendly manner yet from an evangelical perspective.

Charles Kingsley Barrett

2011-09-15T17:07:00.004+01:00

pondering on an essay of C. K. Barrett published in 1972... what a giant of NT studies now in the bosom of the Father.

“It [GJohn] represents rather a creative and perceptive handling of the earlier tradition, free in that it addresses to the basic Christian conviction whatever new questions a new age might suggest, obedient in that it is bound to the original apostolic witness to Jesus. The ‘dialectic theology of St John’ is not a novel invention, but an authentic insight into the meaning if Christian origins.
Whether this Johannine dialectic arose through external circumstances [i.e. Martyn’s proposal]… or within the mind of John himself, is a question we have no means of answering decisively. Probably the answer is, Both."

C. K. Barrett, “Dialetical Theology of St. John,” in New Testament Essays (London: SPCK, 1972), 49-69.

his news

C. K. Barrett, “Dialetical Theology of St. John,” in New Testament Essays (London: SPCK, 1972), 49-69

Ignatius' sacramentalism

2011-09-15T11:50:00.001+01:00

Ignatius' sacramentalism: the flesh and blood, the bread and wine, were a φάρμακον ἀθανασίας, a medine of immortality, indispensably necessary to the possession of eternal life, and automatically effecting it.
from C. K. Barrett.

-justification for a sacramental reading of John 6

Noah’s Winery and complaint to the unfriendly attitudes

2011-09-12T10:19:00.001+01:00

It's Noah again. Very interesting!
Who said that archaeology is up to the time of Abraham only? Who is distorting the point by mixing up the idea of showing evidence and "direct scientific proof"? Honestly, I think the video here is full of problematic ideas. It seems clear that they all have an opposing view (and even organization) in mind. I wonder why such "big profs/experts" would argue and attack some one/ organization implicitly and lay serious charges (e.g. blaming people not upholding justification by faith) without identifying who it is and letting his opponent to have a say.
Why is it that gospel organizations cannot work together or acknowledge each of their own distinctive but seems fighting each other?

source

BAR 37:05, Sep/Oct 2011

Was This Noah’s Winery?

Robert Mondavi may have been one of the best-known vineyard operators in recent years, but Noah was the first. This is often overlooked in the shadow of Noah’s deluge-defying ark accomplishment, but the Bible states very clearly in Genesis 9 that, after the ark ran aground in the mountains of Ararat, “Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard” (Genesis 9:20), the wine from which unfortunately led to another of Noah’s more famous stories—of drunken exposure. And although many scholars would be tempted to dismiss claims of Noah’s original vineyard as lacking any historical merit, scientists are discovering evidence of ancient wine making in that very same region.

In a recent article in the Journal of Archaeological Science,¹ archaeologists from a joint Armenian, American and Irish expedition announced the discovery of the earliest known wine-making operation in an Armenian cave near the southern border with Iran. This site, which lies about 60 miles from Turkey’s Mt. Ararat, the traditional site of the Biblical ark’s grounding, contained well-preserved ancient remains thanks to a dry, consistent temperature and a layer of sheep dung in the cave that formed a protective layer over the artifacts and organic remains.

The excavation of the cave started after the discovery of a few ancient grape seeds in 2007. The team has since revealed more grape seeds, the remains of grape vines and pressed grapes, a wine press, a clay collection/fermentation vat, potsherds with wine residue, as well as a cup and a bowl. (Last year this excavation also produced the oldest known leather shoe—laced cowhide about 5,500 years old.) Scientists date the wine-making facility to about 4100 B.C. based on the ceramic finds and radiocarbon dating of organic remains. The absence of a device for smashing grapes in the press was easily explained by Gregory Areshian, codirector of the excavation and assistant director of the UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, who said that these ancient people probably used their feet to stomp the grapes in the wide, thick-rimmed basin, as was standard wine-making practice throughout the Mediterranean world for most of history. The basin was positioned at an angle so that the juices would drain into the deep collection vat for fermentation. Areshian estimates the vat would have held 14–15 gallons. The grape remains were identified as belonging to Vitis vinifera vinifera, the domesticated grape species still used to make wine. Scientists also performed residue analysis on the potsherds and identified traces of malvidin, a plant pigment found only in grapes and pomegranates that gives red wine its color.

Although archaeologists claim to have evidence of wine dating back to at least 5500 B.C., before the Armenian cave complex, the earliest known example of a wine-production facility (found in an Egyptian tomb) dated to 3150 B.C., a thousand years later than this newest discovery. The archaeologists believe the wine produced here may have served a special ritual or cultic purpose, given the close proximity of ancient burials. They added that the relatively advanced setup indicates that wine production had already been developing here for quite some time.—D.D.R.

Reference for this article:

“Strata: Was This Noah’s Winery?.” Biblical Archaeology Review, Sep/Oct 2011, 20. http://members.bib-arch.org/publication.asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=37&Issue=5&ArticleID=18 (accessed 9/12/2011)

Didache 4.8 and the Christian view of properties

2011-09-08T10:10:00.006+01:00

(8) οὐκ ἀποστραφήσῃ τὸν ἐνδεόμενον, συγκοινωνήσεις δὲ πάντα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου καὶ οὐκ ἐρεῖς ἴδια εἶναι· εἰ γὰρ ἐν τῷ ἀθανάτῳ κοινωνοί ἐστε, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἐν τοῖς θνητοῖς.

(8) You shall not turn away from someone in need, but shall share everything with your brother, and not claim that anything is your own.19 For if you are sharers in what is imperishable, how much more so in perishable things!

Didache 4.8 (Holme's edition)

the reason put forward here (the gar clause) is striking to me
BE sharer of perishable things!
don't keep your fruits and food forever in your fridge as it will rot anyway... what about money? yes, it still perishes!
Can Christians nowadays do the same thing when compared to these (probably) mid-late 1st century Christians?
In any case, my supervisor's words prompt up to my mind regarding the need of revisiting the momentum of faith in the first 2-3 centuries of Christianity. It's the thrust of knowing why being a Christian and what it means. This thrust cannot be so obtained as from any other later period.

"I presume that the reference is to European “Christendom”, which resulted from what is often called the “triumph” of Christianity from the fourth century CE when Christianity was adopted by the Roman imperial state and thereafter increasingly exercised institutional and official influence on the broader culture.2 As a practicing Christian myself, I regard the period of “Christendom” and its aftermath with mixed feelings.

In any case, my focus in this paper will be on the period prior to “Christendom”, the time when Christianity was not officially sanctioned and authoritative, when Christians were a minority (often suffering both social hostility and governmental opposition). I contend that this earlier period gives us more useful precedents and resources for Christians seeking to live out their faith today in modern pluralist cultures and in societies where Christianity is not dominant. In such settings, Christians will want to maintain the non-negotiable particularities of Christian faith while also conducting themselves as good neighbors and citizens in a culture and
political system that they do not control, and should not seek to control coercively. I contend also that this earlier period also gives non-Christians and governments more useful guidance in how to accommodate Christian faith productively for the greater good of society."
source

quotable quotes

2011-09-03T22:15:00.000+01:00

John Piper
The reason God seeks our praise is not that he won't be fully God till he gets it, but that we won't be fully glad till we give it.

ummm, praising God is a blessing God bestows us for our own benefit then...

foul-mouth and roaming eyes

2011-08-26T10:58:00.000+01:00

(3) My child, do not be lustful, for lust leads to fornication.
Do not be foul-mouthed or let your eyes roam, for all these things breed adultery.
(3) τέκνον μου,
μὴ γίνου ἐπιθυμητής, ὁδηγεῖ γὰρ ἡ ἐπιθυμία πρὸς τὴν πορνείαν·
μηδὲ αἰσχρολόγος μηδὲ ὑψηλόφθαλμος, ἐκ γὰρ τούτων ἁπάντων μοιχεῖαι γεννῶνται.
Didache 3:3

quotable quotes

2011-08-25T09:27:00.000+01:00

海耶克曰：「通往地獄之路，常由善意鋪成。」

but indeed the proverb is not from Friedrich August von Hayek

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions is a proverb or aphorism."
(An alternative form of the proverb is "hell is full of good meanings, but heaven is full of good works")

according to wikipedia, it's from Saint Bernard of Clairvaux in 1150: "
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs" (hell is full of good wishes and desires)

ummm, good food for thought

1Tim6.7-9

2011-08-19T14:48:00.001+01:00

a timely reminder:
1Tim6.7-9
7 實際上，我們沒有帶什麼到世上來，也不能帶什麼去。 8 不過有了吃的、穿的，我們將以此為滿足。 9 至於那些想發財的人就會陷入試探、網羅以及很多無知有害的慾望裡；這些慾望使人沉溺在敗壞和滅亡中。http://bible.us/1Tim6.7.CSB

7 οὐδὲν γὰρ εἰσηνέγκαμεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον,
⸀ὅτι οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν τι δυνάμεθα·
8 ἔχοντες δὲ διατροφὰς καὶ σκεπάσματα, τούτοις ἀρκεσθησόμεθα.
9 οἱ δὲ βουλόμενοι πλουτεῖν ἐμπίπτουσιν εἰς πειρασμὸν καὶ παγίδα καὶ ἐπιθυμίας πολλὰς ἀνοήτους καὶ βλαβεράς, αἵτινες βυθίζουσι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰς ὄλεθρον καὶ ἀπώλειαν·

quotable quote

2011-08-19T14:37:00.003+01:00

“The Bible was never meant to replace God, rather to lead us into the heart of God." - A.W. Tozer

in light of this, I'm not ashamed to be called biblicist...

quotable quotes

2011-08-18T10:22:00.004+01:00

John Piper
The reality of hell and the riches of Christ have saved me from a thousand wrong turns.

another article remembering Stott

2011-08-12T16:08:00.001+01:00

本週評論：悼念司徒德：使命教會的牧者 (上)
司徒德 (或譯斯托得，John Stott) 於7月27日安息主懷，終年90歲。司徒德被譽為「廿世紀福音派教會最有影響力的領袖之一」。他確是聖道的卓越管家，也是忠心宣講聖經信息的牧者，更令人欣賞是他委身服侍眾教會，從不建立本身王國。

筆者年輕時，他的著作《真理的尋索》(Basic Christianity)、《別埋沒你的頭腦》(Your mind Matters)、《獨排眾議的基督》(Christ the Controversialist) 等，滋養我對信仰的認知。80年唸神學時，神學生定期獲贈《聖經信息系列》(The Bible Speaks Today)，其中數本由司徒德撰寫的《以弗所書》、《使徒行傳》、《羅馬書》等。筆者能近距離接觸司徒德，乃於2000年「阿姆斯特丹宣講式佈道者大會」，當時有來自香港的陳恩明、何能國與筆者作即時傳譯；司徒德為大會講員之一，他於聚會前前來，與各地傳譯員見面與交流。筆者去年出席南非洛桑會議，獲贈司徒德最後一本著作The Radical Disciple (筆者譯為「作根基的門徒」)；並今年於某堂會每月選講其一的門徒質素。司徒德的著作與講道 (前往「諸靈堂」網頁就可下載聆聽)，一直深化我的思考。

委身一體教會

司徒德於17歲清楚悔改得救後，就往住處附近的聖公會「諸靈堂」（All Souls Church）聚會。他於劍橋大學三一學院畢業後 (修讀法文與神學)，24歲被教會按立為會吏；當他29歲時，受任命為教區長；他定期在教會講道，直至80歲。他一生屬於一間地方堂會，並在母會忠心事奉；但他絕不是狹窄的堂會主義式牧者。

50與60年代的聖公會，自由神學流行；司徒德要在聖公宗內持守福音信仰，傳講聖經真道，困難重重。「福音派」於英國聖公會被視為「學術欠奉」、「理性不足」、「思想狹隘」等，福音信仰牧者受到排斥。據艾得理 (David Adeney)分享，司徒德首次於1963年來港時，當年中大崇基學院因聖公會主教何明華下了指令，於是司徒德未能於校園領會，只能私底下舉行聚會。多年後，聖公會有所改變，司徒德多次來港主領公開聚會。

1966年10月倫敦舉行「英國福音派會議」(National Assembly of Evangelicals)，英國著名牧者鍾馬田 (Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones) 倡導福音信仰牧者要從自由神學的教會分離出來，司徒德為會議主席，他即場表達相反意見，勸勉牧者要留守在本身宗派，才能帶來福音的更新與復興。司徒德成功使福音派教牧在本身宗派內服侍；陳衍昌牧師稱他為「開明與福音的結合」(2004年)，而「福音派聖公會」的承傳，功勞自然離不開司徒德。

司徒德於牧會期間，同樣面對靈恩運動的挑戰。1962年，他的助理牧師哈柏 (Michael Harper)於個人讀經後有「靈恩式經歷」，司徒德不認同有關經驗，但他容許哈柏繼續在堂會服侍 (哈柏於1964年離開「諸靈堂」，成立了Fountain Trust)。因著要面對來自各方的靈恩挑戰，他寫了《當代聖靈工作》(英文原著，1964年出版)。司徒德後期對靈恩運動表達友善與寬容，然而其基本立場不變。

他於Evangelical Truth 申明:「福音派未能一致同意有哪些屬靈恩賜現今可供運用，或若干恩賜較其它重要；但我們有可能同意 (i)恩賜的本質是非常多樣化；
(ii)恩賜的目的是達成共同美善，就是建立有質量的教會；(iii)恩賜的標準是以它能造就教會的程度來作衡量。」(123頁) 這是教會領袖要有的氣量，縱使個人對某些恩賜的運用，在見解上各有不同，但這不應成為教會合一的攔阻。

司徒德一生熱愛教會，他認識的聖公會不是完美的，甚至在神學思想與制度權力是與個人信念有衝突的；他看有形的教會必然是麥子與稗子共存，然而不是視之為理所當然，乃竭力建造成熟而有深度的教會。華人教會領袖需要有「我們共信一體聖而公之教會」的道統，不是實用性的事工主義。在追求教會增長的浪潮中，司徒德見証是不為了所謂數目式增長，而去掉了整全的教會觀。這為何陳喜謙的「只有事工、沒有教會」一語中的，說明了當今福音派教會的亂象。我們需要更多如司徒德一樣的「教會人」(churchman)，一生熱愛與服侍教會。

(待續)

(此篇文章分兩期刊登，將刊於《使命與領導》第17期。)

yes,we need such people to "stick" to the church, in order to change it...

quotable quote

2011-08-09T13:58:00.000+01:00

"Put your ear to the ground of God's word and listen to the rumble of His faithfulness coming." -John Piper

Hurtado retires on 1 Aug

2011-08-09T10:51:00.000+01:00

A tribute by his friend:

Larry W. Hurtado Retires at New College, Edinburgh: A Tribute to a War Buddy

August 7, 2011

original blogpost of his own

what makes a successful seminary?

2011-07-29T10:38:00.001+01:00

theological conservativeness?
a strong faculty -academic/ pastoral bkgd? like-mindedness? strong preaching?
big campus?
student hostels?
frequent public seminars?
various and flexible programs?
active engagement with the society or churches?
dress code and contemporaneity?
public image packaging?
a great president?

Is each of them really so important?
what do you think?

St. Philip's tomb unearthed in Turkey

2011-07-28T18:25:00.000+01:00

source

Jesus’ apostle’s tomb unearthed in Turkey

Font Size: Larger|Smaller

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

DENİZLİ - Doğan News Agency (DHA)

DHA photo

An Italian professor has announced the apparent discovery of the tomb of St. Philip, one of Jesus Christ’s apostles, at the ancient city of Hierapolis in the Aegean province of Denizli.
The discovery of the grave of the biblical saint, who was killed by the Romans 2,000 years ago, will attract immense attention around the world, said Francesco D’Andria. St. Philip, one of the 12 apostles, came to Hierapolis 2,000 years ago to spread the Christianity before being killed by the Romans, the professor said.
D’Andria has been leading archeological excavations at the ancient city for 32 years.
“Until recently, we thought the grave of St. Philip was on Martyrs’ Hill, but we discovered no traces of him in the geophysical research conducted in that area. A month ago, we discovered the remnants of an unknown church, 40 meters away from the St. Philip Church on Martyrs’ Hill. And in that church we discovered the grave of St. Philip,” said D’Andria.
D’Andria and his team have not opened the grave but are planning to do so soon.
“St. Philip is considered a martyr. In fact, the church built in his name on the Martyrs’ Hill is, for this reason, also called Martyrion, despite the fact there were no traces of the grave of St. Philip. As we were cleaning out the new church we discovered a month ago, we finally found the grave. With close examination, we determined that the grave had been moved from its previous location in the St. Philip Church to this new church in the fifth century, during the Byzantine era. We are extremely happy and proud to have discovered the grave of a saint whose name appears in the bible – this surely is an important discovery for religious tourism, archaeology and Christendom,” the professor said.

remembering John Stott 2 "I Know That My Redeemer Liveth"

2011-07-28T18:13:00.002+01:00

Before John Stott went to be with the Lord, he and his close family and friends listened to selections of Messiah, including this "I Know That My Redeemer Liveth":

I Know That My Redeemer Liveth
I know that my Redeemer liveth
And that He shall stand
At the latter day
Upon the earth

I know that my Redeemer liveth
And He shall stand
At the latter day
Upon the earth
Upon the earth

I know that my Redeemer liveth
And that He shall stand
At the latter day
Upon the earth

And though worms destroy this body
Yet in my flesh shall I see God
Yet in my flesh shall I see God

For now is Christ risen
From the dead
The first fruits of them that sleep
For now is Christ risen
For now is Christ risen
From the dead

I know that my Redeemer liveth
I know that my Redeemer lives
I know that Christ is risen
Yes, I know my Redeemer lives

remembering John Stott

2011-07-28T10:41:00.003+01:00

“We must be global Christians, with a global mission, because our God is a global God.” - John Stott

John Robert Walmsley Stott died on 27/7/11 3:15pm in London.

Rev. John Stott, Major Evangelical Figure, Dies at 90

懷念司托德牧師.

這位影響世界的福音派領袖, 一生高舉上帝的說話, 也致力培育後輩(我也有福份在其中). 他雖安息主懷, 但他的見證仍舊說話!!
他說過“我們必須要做個普世的基督徒, 要有普世的使命, 因為我們的神是一個普世的神."

弟兄姊妹, 讓我們今天一息尚存, 仍努力學習見證主, 不怕失敗! 最近看一份二世紀的教父講章, 感受到早期信徒其實也和我們一樣會失敗, 會軟弱, 但作者鼓勵他們, 要勇於並樂於悔改. "Moreover you know, brothers, that our stay in this world of the flesh is insignificant and transitory, but the promise of Christ is great and marvellous: rest in the coming kingdom and eternal life! What then, must we do to obtain these things, except to live a holy and righteous life, and to regard these worldly things as alien to us, and not desire them?....
So then, my brothers, let us compete in the games... While many come to enter the earthly competitions, not all are crowned, but only those who have trained hard and competed well... So then, while we are yet on earth, let us repent... as long as we are in this world, let us repent with our whole heart of the evil things that we have in the flesh..." (from 2Clement 5, 7-8)

Langham press release

John Stott Dies at 90

July 27, 2011

In Loving Memory...John Stott

PRESS RELEASE (FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE)
Preacher, Writer, Friend
JOHN R. W. STOTT CBE (1921-2011)
Time Magazine named him alongside Nelson Mandela and Bill Gates in its “most influential people” list of 2005. He was once described by Billy Graham as the “most respected clergyman in the world today”. And his leadership of the evangelical movement helped move it from a rather narrow-minded fundamentalism after the Second World War, to the fastest growing section of global Christianity it is today. John Stott, the former Rector of All Souls Church, Langham Place, London, and one of the most significant Christian leaders of the 20th century, died on 27th July 2011 aged 90. The work of Langham Partnership International (LPI, or John Stott Ministries in the USA) is perhaps his major legacy to the world Church. This strategic threefold initiative, now under the direction of Christopher J H Wright, works to strengthen the Church in the Majority World by (i) training preachers, (ii) funding doctoral scholarships for the most able theological thinkers so they will be equipped to teach in their country’s seminaries, and (iii) providing basic libraries at low-cost for pastors. John Stott’s own considerable royalties were all ‘recycled’ into the production and distribution of theological books for the global south.
John Stott’s remarkable ministry spanned the whole second half of the twentieth century, and even in his 80s he was making an impact on the twenty-first. John Stott was well known as a man of considerable intelligence and humble integrity. In his time at All Souls Church and in the various causes he was involved with, he contributed a renewed confidence, graciousness and intellectual strength to evangelicalism. Alongside Billy Graham, John Stott was a significant player in the Lausanne Movement which promotes worldwide Christian evangelism. He largely crafted its two major documents, The Lausanne Covenant (1974) and the Manila Manifesto (1989). George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, commented “John Stott’s contribution to developing a balanced evangelical faith and to a biblically rooted Anglican communion is probably without parallel in our generation.”
Classically evangelical, Stott emphasized the need for personal conversion, the authority of Scripture and the centrality of Jesus’ death for sinners. But he also emphasized the need for the Christian mind and stood against anti-intellectualism. Though a life-long evangelist, he refused to limit Christian engagement with the world to evangelism alone. He was passionately committed to the moral and social dimensions of the biblical gospel, including justice for the poor and the care of creation. David Brooks, New York Times columnist, wrote “To read Stott is to see someone practicing thoughtful allegiance to Scripture.”
He pioneered and advanced the renaissance of biblical expository preaching – that is, a method of preaching which follows the sequence of the text as it is given in a particular book of the Bible – throughout the evangelical world. John Stott asked that donations following his death might be given to the Langham Partnership, which he founded and which seeks to raise the standards of Biblical teaching and preaching around the world.
John Stott was the author of some 50 books, his farewell volume, The Radical Disciple, being published in 2010. His most significant books include Basic Christianity, The Cross of Christ, and Issues Facing Christians Today, along with many volumes in The Bible Speaks Today series. “His books have challenged and nourished millions of Christians into a balanced and thinking biblical faith,” said Chris Wright, Langham Partnership International Director. “His legacy through the global impact of the two organisations that he founded, Langham Partnership International and the London Institute of Contemporary Christianity, is incalculable.” John Stott, who never married, is the subject of two major biographies, one published in two volumes by Timothy Dudley-Smith in 1999 and 2001, and the other, a more popular narrative, by Roger Steer, in 2009. Both are published by IVP.
“For the vast majority of people whose lives he influenced profoundly,” said Chris Wright, “he was simply ‘Uncle John’ – a much loved friend, correspondent, and brother, to whose prayers we will never know how much we owe. Like Moses, he was one of the humblest men on the face of the earth, and yet at the same time he was one of the truly great leaders God has given to his people. He was, for all of us who knew him, a walking embodiment of the simple beauty of Jesus, whom he loved above all else.”
The list of movements and institutions he strengthened can be found in the biographical pages at www.langhampartnership.org and further information at the memorial website, www.johnstottmemorial.org.
Photographs are available on www.johnstottmemorial.org. Please acknowledge ‘Copyright: Langham Partnership International’

away from life as residents of this world

2011-07-17T10:57:00.002+01:00

2 Clement "5. Therefore, brothers, let us turn away from life as residents in this world (τὴν παροικίαν τοῦ κόσμου) and do the will of him who called us, and let us not be afraid to depart from this world....

(5) Moreover you know, brothers, that our stay in this world of the flesh is insignificant and transitory (μικρά ... καὶ ὀλιγοχρόνιος), but the promise of Christ is great and marvelous: rest in the coming kingdom and eternal life! (6) What, then, must we do to obtain them, except to live a holy and righteous life(εἰ μὴ τὸ ὁσίως καὶ δικαίως ἀναστρέφεσθαι), and to regard these worldly things as alien to us (τὰ κοσμικὰ ταῦτα ὡς ἀλλότρια ἡγεῖσθαι), and not desire them? (7) For when we desire to acquire these things, we fall away from the way of righteousness."

Michael William Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers : Greek Texts and English Translations, Updated ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999), 111.

this 2nd c. sermon actually sounds quite similar to modern ones with regard to its force and exhortations...

Google令人選擇性失憶自動忘記網上易搜尋內容

2011-07-17T01:42:00.000+01:00

very interesting. how clever is the human brain (and I, as I was aware of this for quite a while, ; p, but was "criticized" for quite a while too)!
how Christians should make use of this? I stick to memorizing the contents of Scriptures for the classes I taught at ES. These quiz/ test was an essential element in my syllabus. I told them that it has a beneficial result to them: to create their own index file in their brain. you can rely on software, Google later on, but you got to have the index file in order to connect one biblical idea/ concept with the other. That's what softwares cannot help you!
I think the "sword exercise," now less and less popular in churches, should be revised/ upgraded with the help of this proved trend. More thought on this is desperately needed.

Google令人選擇性失憶自動忘記網上易搜尋內容

...人類的記憶已非仰賴純粹的牢記，而是由資訊所在和電腦技術所湊成。情况如我們把腦袋的搜索功能，「外判」給電腦去做。此外，人們一旦毋須費神去死記日子、名字等「事實」，非但無損記憶力，反而有助集中精神，掌握抽象概念和在創意上動腦筋。研究員指出，這種記憶法其實無異於人類自古以來依靠親友、部落的「集體記憶」﹕「我們或者記不起姑媽的生日，高中老師的名字……但生活圈子裏的人，肯定會知道某些事。我們需要時，會去探索他們所知的。我們讓別人負責去記，一如我們用電腦的方式」。

英主教倡縮短崇拜時間以減低人數流失週五, 08 七月 2011 00:00 時代論壇

2011-07-16T15:05:00.000+01:00

is it really a matter of time??
will anyone complain that 90 mins of concerts, films etc too short?
is worship nowadays touching people's heart? or put it another way, are people prepared to be involved in a worship, to treat God as the centre of or the sole reason for our worship?

英主教倡縮短崇拜時間以減低人數流失

週五, 08 七月 2011 00:00 時代論壇

Historical Inquiry & Christian Origins

2011-07-16T09:00:00.000+01:00

a perfectly legitimate exercise or wild imagination? sometimes it depends on our presuppositions...

from Hurtado's blogpost, Historical Inquiry & Christian Origins:

In fact, to my mind, it’s one of the attractive features of Christianity that it is a historical faith, and doesn’t claim to be simply some set of timeless truths (e.g., to be discovered by contemplation). It means living with the nature of historical knowledge on a number of issues (limited by extant evidence, always provisional and subject to correction, and conclusions often disputed). But it can be an intriguing exercise to try to project ourselves back into the setting of earliest Christian centuries, when they were having to understand what they believed had happened to them, and without the later creeds, theologians and church structures of subsequent centuries.

critical review on John Knox

2011-07-09T14:40:00.000+01:00

a wonderful video and link

Why is there so much hate towards Christianity and its ways? : A critical review of John Knox

沒有經過流淚的雙目，永遠看不到人間疾苦

Jacob's unhappy biography

How to Lead an Unbeliever's Funeral

How to Lead an Unbeliever's Funeral by Jared C. Wilson

Reflections on the Church in Great Britain

Reflections on the Church in Great Britain by D. A. Carson

more insights from a freshing reading of Psa 119 in REB

how wonderful is the word of God

"Son of God" offensive to muslims?

港籠屋生活 成國際新聞

Christmas exegesis on Luk 2:7

ERE GOD HAD BUILT THE MOUNTAINS

ERE GOD HAD BUILT THE MOUNTAINS

Higgs boson: the particle of faith

Higgs boson: the particle of faith

There are parallels between the search for the ‘God particle’ and the search for God Himself, writes Alister McGrath.

Related Articles

good read for Christians and ministers

若有一天這個城市死亡，死因會是沉默和冷漠╱文﹕蔡子強

ברא in Gen 1:1

方舟與考古的回應與反思...

hebrew for today

Does an Unbelieving Child Disqualify an Elder?

You Asked: Does an Unbelieving Child Disqualify an Elder?

Faithful Leadership in the Church and Home

Must an Elder's Children Be Believers?

Four More Reasons

Profound Effect

尋找"雪花"驚世啟示?

64 位教牧領袖聯署呼籲 考慮應否支持影音使團

Accuracy in Oral Tradition

Accuracy in Oral Tradition

「方舟」是教會的三稜鏡

two Chinese scholars remembering John Stott

happy is Psa 84:12

when the famous pastors/ profs are arguing against "bad" or false archaeology

on John 3:16

How Different Christian Denominations See Each Other

two videos on gospel reliability

The Lord sees

盧龍光：因信稱義不是教義

Near-death experiences not glimpse of the afterlife

Why near-death events are tricks of mind

Reactions in the brain

Multi-sensory processes

Biological links

How Are the Synoptics “Without Error”

How Are the Synoptics “Without Error”?

First Illustration

Second Illustration

The Long-Proved Tradition

Cut and Sharpen: Sabbath and ministers

Titus 2:14-15

another manuscript of the Gospel of John?

New NASA technology reveals ancient texts

an example for me to avoid...

Does the Multiverse Really Exist?

Cosmology

Does the Multiverse Really Exist?

Abstract

Introduction

In Brief

Additional images and illustrations

Over the Horizon

Seven Questionable Arguments

Absence of Evidence

Too Much Wiggle Room

THE AUTHOR

MORE TO EXPLORE

Justification: Five Views

John Piper quoting Owen on decays of grace prevailing in us

moral bankruptcy in China

How bible reading changes one's life

what an awesome (and massive) book!

Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts

ES new website

那雙看不見的手

a good read for Bultmann

The Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Modern Western Theology -

the "religious" science and Christian faith

港籠屋生活成國際新聞

64 位教牧領袖聯署呼籲考慮應否支持影音使團

科學要革命先過同行這一關

喬布斯生父開腔﹕兒子成功我沒功勞

John Piper
The reason God seeks our praise is not that he won't be fully God till he gets it, but that we won't be fully glad till we give it.

John Piper
The reality of hell and the riches of Christ have saved me from a thousand wrong turns.

Google令人選擇性失憶自動忘記網上易搜尋內容

英主教倡縮短崇拜時間以減低人數流失週五, 08 七月 2011 00:00 時代論壇