物质主义与教会 Materialism and the Church
作者: Rev. Lane
Keister 翻译: 骆鸿铭
Sittema提到的第二颗“狼牙”是物质主义。世俗主义看重现世（here and now），而物质主义则是看重你所拥有的。所以，世俗主义与时间比较有关，而物质主义与空间比较有关（55页）。这里的问题是，西方教会是非常富有的。基本上，如果你有任何可以自由运用的收入，你就属于富有的阶级，大部分美国人都属这个阶层。但是物质会生出贪婪，拥有越多，想要的越多，而人的欲望是无穷的。曾有人问美国的富翁洛克菲勒，拥有多少财富才算是足够，他的回答很经典，足以代表物质主义：“只要再多一点就够了。”物质永远无法填满上帝在人心所造的那个空洞。
The second “tooth”
of the wolf that Sittema talks about is materialism. Secularism is the idea
that the here and now is all that’s important.
Materialism says that stuff is all that’s important. So, secularism has more to do with time,
whereas materialism has more to do with space (see p. 55). The problem here is
that the church is incredibly wealthy in the West. Basically, if you have any
discretionary income at all, you are wealthy, and that would describe most
Americans. But stuff breeds greed for more stuff. It is intoxicating to have
more and more. And yet, those who are honest with themselves would admit that
it’s never enough. John D. Rockefeller, a very rich American, was asked how
much is enough, and his answer was the classic statement of the problem of
materialism: “Just a little bit more.” It will not fill the God-shaped hole in
anyone’s life.
广告世界靠的就是物质主义，它用的是不满足的诱饵，刺激你想要得到更多。Sittema指出，这危险在于物质主义否认财富所蕴含的属灵危机（58页）。Sittema不是指财富本身是邪恶的，而是说，拥有越多，诱惑就越大。这看法当然是正确的。在这章其余的部分，Sittema总结了圣经的回应。我认为他提到的最能抵抗物质主义的一点是圣经的管家原则，包括我们当看自己所拥有的财富，是上帝为了祂的国度所讬付给我们的。这会让我们更容易地把钱财施舍出去，因为从一开始，这些财富就不是属于我们的。Phillip Ryken 会这样说：“我的就是上帝的。”
The advertising world banks
on materialism, because it uses the classic hook of dissatisfaction with what
you have in order to entice you to want more. The danger here, as Sittema
points out, is that materialism denies the spiritual dangers inherent in wealth
(p. 58). Sittema is not here saying that wealth is inherently evil. Rather, he
is saying that with much comes much temptation, and he’s certainly correct in
this assessment. In the rest of the chapter, Sittema outlines a biblical
response. I think the most helpful point here that he mentions in combating
materialism is the principle of biblical stewardship, which includes a view of
one’s possessions as not one’s own, but merely entrusted to us by God to be
used for His kingdom. This makes giving away possessions and wealth much
easier: it’s not really ours to begin with. Phillip Ryken would put it this
way: “What’s mine is God’s.”
其次，我们需要明白，财富会变成何等可怕的偶像，我们需要辨识这个偶像，并且悔改。我们心中的偶像也许不像洛克菲勒的那么露骨：也许只是以神国为代价，追求舒适的生活。但是舒适通常只是“再多一点”的美丽说辞而已。舒适是我在美国中西部所看到的偶像之一。找到原因并不难：北达科达州的冬天非常酷寒，但是人们所想出的各种避寒方法，往往到了奢侈的程度。我不是專找北达科达州人的麻烦，美国其他地方的人也会用其他的方式表现出他们的偶像崇拜，只是因为我住在这里，那是我看到的。
And, secondly, we
need to realize what a terrible idol wealth has become, and we need to identify
it and repent of our own idolatry. Our idolatry may not be as blatant as Rockefeller’s:
it may come in the form of desiring our own comfort at the expense of the
kingdom of God. But comfort is often just another way of saying “a little bit
more.” Comfort is one idol I see up here in the Midwest. And it is not hard to
find out why: North Dakota is absolutely brutal in the winter-time. It is not
exactly comfortable. But people usually build things in order to make them
comfortable here. There are different ways this idol makes itself manifest
elsewhere in the US, so I’m not singling out North Dakota, by any means. But
that’s just where I am, and that’s what I see.
