以祂為樂，直到永遠  To Enjoy HimForever

作者: Sinclair Ferguson   譯者:  Maria Marta  

http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/enjoy-him-forever/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/Y8D1hKuvvN7

當牧師站在教會門口與會眾握手時，他們有時會本能地回應說「我真的以祂為樂！」--------隨即補充，「哦！我真的不該這麽說，對不對？」我通常握手時間会長一些，用力更重一些，並微笑著說，「西敏小要裡問答第一問不是鼓勵我們這麽做嗎？如果我們以祂為樂，直到永遠 ，為什麽不從現在開始呢？」

當然，排除在「榮耀上帝」以外，我們不能以祂為樂。西敏小要裡問答明智地繼續問道，「上帝已經賜什麼準則，指教我們如何榮耀祂，以祂為樂？」但請注意，聖經包含榮耀上帝和以上帝為樂的「準則」。我們知道聖經有很多榮耀上帝的指導，但它如何指導我們「以祂為樂」？

以上帝為樂是命令，而非額外的選擇：「你們要靠著主常常喜樂，我再說，你們要喜樂」（腓四4）。但現在嗎？我們不能「因命令喜樂」，對不對嗎？

的確如此。然而，聖經表明，受過良好的指導的信徒，他們培養出一種決心要喜樂的信念。他們以上帝為樂。哈巴谷是在艱難時期，在這方面的典範（哈三17–18）。他運用我們的祖先所謂的「行動的信心（acting faith）」--------一種強烈的決心，要經歷何為上帝的命令，包括喜樂，並使用上帝賜予的途徑來這樣做。以下是這些方法當中的四種，其中，我們也應注意榮耀上帝。

以救恩為樂

以上帝為樂意味著歡喜上帝在耶穌基督裡賜給我們的救恩。「我卻要因耶和華歡喜，以救我的　神為樂」（哈三18新譯本）。上帝因我們得救而歡樂（路十五6–7，9–10, 32）。所以我們應當歡樂。以弗所書一章3–14節巧妙地描繪在基督裡的這種救恩。它是福音的泉浴，我們應該常常沐浴其中，它是階梯的梯級，我們應該常常攀爬在上，以便經歷「靠耶和華而得的喜樂是你們的力量」這種體驗（尼八10）。當我們受命要有喜樂時，要這樣做的途径在我們自身以外，唯獨透過與耶穌基督聯合才能知道。

以啟示為樂

喜樂從道成為文字(inscripturation)的啟示中流溢出來。詩篇一一九篇反覆表明這一點。詩人「喜歡」上帝的法度「如同喜歡一切的財富」（詩一一九14；另參35、47、70、77、103、162、174節新譯本）。想想耶穌的說話，「我把這些事告訴了你們，好讓我的喜樂存在你們心裡，並且使你們的喜樂滿溢。」（約十五11新譯本）。祂的意思是指，祂會在我們裡面找到祂的喜樂，並使我們喜樂滿溢，抑或指祂的喜樂存在我們心裡，並使我們的喜樂滿溢。無疑，兩個意思都是。唯有當我們知道主在我們心裡找到祂的喜樂時，我們才能在主裡喜樂滿溢。因此, 喜樂的途徑，就是使自己盡可能多的接觸基督的道，並讓它們豐豐富富地存在心裡（西3:16）。喜樂之糧是為饑渴喜樂之靈魂而設的。

以相通（communion）為樂

有一種在基督裡的喜樂，要在敬拜中經歷，我們以相通為樂。教會是新耶路撒冷，這座不能隱藏的城市是全地所喜歡的（詩四十八2）。在聖靈主導的讚美與祈求；牧養靈魂；宣講聖道；詩章、聖詩、靈歌的對說與口唱；水、面包、與酒的領受等相通中，找到豐富的喜樂。上帝必因我們喜樂歡唱（番三17）。我們的心也以喜樂歡唱來回應。

以苦難為樂

這的確是一種神聖的悖論(divine paradox)。在痛苦之中，透過痛苦，尚可知道有喜樂。根據聖經的觀點，苦難是父上帝嚴懲的手，使用人生的痛苦和黑暗，將我們塑造為那一位的形象，那一位因為那擺在面前的喜樂，就忍受了十字架的羞辱（來十二1–2、5–11；參看羅八29）。保羅說，我們以苦難為樂，在苦難中歡欣，因為「患難產生……..盼望」（羅五3–4）。彼得和雅各重複同樣的原則（彼前一3 -8; 雅一2-4）。對護理中的上帝的可靠之手的認識，不僅帶給我們穩定，而且它更是喜樂的供應源。

所有這一切都說明喜樂在上帝自己裡面。在羅馬書第五章1–11節，保羅引導經歷我們從歡歡喜喜盼望上帝的榮耀（2節），到在患難中也是歡歡喜喜的（3節），到以上帝為樂（11節；見詩四十三:4）這一過程。非信徒認為這是不可思議，因為他被撒但的「喜樂喪失」的謊言蒙蔽了，以為榮耀上帝是通往不快樂的道路。感恩的是，耶穌基督在祂裡面的啟示正好相反-------因著我們的恩救，透過祂的啟示，在敬拜的蒙福相通中，藉著苦難的途徑，可讓我們喜樂滿溢。

是的，的確歡欣快樂！願「永遠的快樂……臨到你們的頭。」（賽五一11）。

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌2017年二月號 。

To Enjoy Him Forever

by Sinclair Ferguson

While shaking hands at the church door, ministers are sometimes greeted with a spontaneous, “I really enjoyed that!”—which is immediately followed by, “Oh! I shouldn’t really say that, should I?” I usually grip tighter, hold the handshake a little longer, and say with a smile, “Doesn’t the catechism’s first question encourage us to do that? If we are to enjoy Him forever, why not begin now?”

Of course, we cannot enjoy God apart from glorifying Him. And the Westminster Shorter Catechism wisely goes on to ask, “What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?” But notice that Scripture contains the “rule” for enjoying God as well as glorifying Him. We know it abounds in instructions for glorifying Him, but how does it instruct us to “enjoy him”?

Enjoying God is a command, not an optional extra: “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice” (Phil. 4:4). But how? We cannot “rejoice to order,” can we?

True. Yet, Scripture shows that well-instructed believers develop a determination to rejoice. They will rejoice in the Lord. Habakkuk exemplified this in difficult days (see Hab. 3:17–18). He exercised what our forefathers called “acting faith”—a vigorous determination to experience whatever the Lord commands, including joy, and to use the God-given means to do so. Here are four of these means—in which, it should be noted, we also glorify God.

Joy in Salvation

Enjoying God means relishing the salvation He gives us in Jesus Christ. “I will take joy in the God of my salvation” (Hab. 3:18). God takes joy in our salvation (Luke 15:6–7, 9–10, 32). So should we. Here, Ephesians 1:3–14 provides a masterly delineation of this salvation in Christ. It is a gospel bath in which we should often luxuriate, rungs on a ladder we should frequently climb, in order to experience the joy of the Lord as our strength (Neh. 8:10). While we are commanded to have joy, the resources to do so are outside of ourselves, known only through union with Christ.

Joy in Revelation

Joy issues from devouring inscripturated revelation. Psalm 119 bears repeated witness to this. The psalmist “delights” in God’s testimonies “as much as in all riches” (Ps. 119:14; see also vv. 35, 47, 70, 77, 103, 162, 174). Think of Jesus’ words, “These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full” (John 15:11). Does He mean He will find His joy in us, so that our joy may be full, or that His joy will be in us so that our joy may be full? Both, surely, are true. We find full joy in the Lord only when we know He finds His joy in us. The pathway to joy, then, is to give ourselves maximum exposure to His Word and to let it dwell in us richly (Col. 3:16). It is joy-food for the joy-hungry soul.

Joy in Communion

There is joy in the Lord to be tasted in the worship we enjoy in church communion. The church is the new Jerusalem, the city that cannot be hidden, the joy of the whole earth (Ps. 48:2). In the Spirit-led communion of praise and petition; soul pastoring; Word preaching; psalm, hymn, and spiritual song singing; and water, bread, and wine receiving, abundant joy is to be found. The Lord sings over us with joy (Zeph. 3:17). Our hearts sing for joy in return.

Joy in Tribulation

Here, indeed, is a divine paradox. There is joy to be known in the midst of and through affliction. Viewed biblically, tribulation is the Father’s chastising hand using life’s pain and darkness to mold us into the image of the One who endured for the sake of the joy set before Him (Heb. 12: 1–2, 5–11; see Rom. 8:29). We exult and rejoice in our sufferings, Paul says, because “suffering produces . . . hope” in us (Rom. 5:3–4). Peter and James echo the same principle (1 Peter 1:3–8; James 1:2–4). The knowledge of the sure hand of God in providence not only brings stability; it is also a joy-producer.

All of this adds up to exultation in God Himself. In Romans 5:1–11, Paul leads us from rejoicing in the hope of the glory of God (v. 2) to joy that comes in tribulation (v. 3) to exulting in God Himself (v. 11; see Ps. 43:4). The unbeliever finds this incredible, because he has been blinded by the joy-depriving lie of Satan that to glorify God is the high road to joylessness. Thankfully, Christ reveals that the reverse takes place in Him—because of our salvation, through His revelation, in worship’s blessed communion, and by means of tribulation.

Enjoy! Yes, indeed, may “everlasting joy . . . be upon [your] heads” (Isa. 51:11).

關於基督徒的經濟觀Toward a Christian View ofEconomics 

作者: Albert Mohler  譯者: Maria Marta  

http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/toward-christian-view-economics/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/bJC5YV9PeuZ

很遺憾，許多美國基督徒對經濟學所知甚少。此外，許多基督徒認為聖經根本沒有談及經濟。而實際上，一種符合聖經的世界觀，在經濟問題方面有大量的內容要教導我們。工作的意義、勞動的價值、以及其他的經濟問題都是聖經觀點的世界觀的一部分。基督徒必須容許以在聖經裡找到的經濟原則來陶塑我們的思想。以下十二條論題是關於基督徒的經濟認識所涵概的必須部份。

1.  它必須以上帝的榮耀作為它的最高目標。

對基督徒而言，所有的經濟理論都是以榮耀上帝的目標開始（林前十31）。我們有一個卓越的經濟權威。

2. 它必須尊重人的尊嚴。

無論何種信仰系統，無論工作的人知道與否，他們都在顯示上帝的榮耀。 人們可能相信他們是為自己的原因工作，但實際上他們都出於一種驅動，這種驅動是造物主為了祂的榮耀，將它放置在他們的內心的。

3. 它必须尊重私有财产和所有权。

有些经济制度把私有财产的观念视为问题。但圣经从不认为私有财产是需要解决的问题。圣经的私有财产观表明，拥有私有财产是人的劳动与管治的报酬。第八条和第十条诫命告诉我们，我们无权侵犯勤劳者的金钱回报。

4.  它必須對罪的勢力有足夠的估計。

充分考慮聖經關於罪的普遍影響，意味著我們預期，在每一種經濟體系裡壞事情都會發生。基督徒的經濟認識會竭力緩解罪惡的影響。

5. 它必須維護和獎勵正義（righteousness）。

每一種經濟和政體系統都包含激勵機制。這方面的一個例子是美國的稅務代碼，它刺激鼓勵所期望的經濟行為。它們是否得到貫徹實行，是一個無休止的，要在政治上一再校準的問題。然而，在基督徒的世界觀裡，這種「一再校準」必須繼續維護和獎勵正義。

6.  它必须奖励主动性、工业、与投资。

在基督徒的经济与神学詞彙中，主动性、工业、与投资是三个關鍵字眼。主动性超过行动。它是一种产生差别的行动。工业是人类协同完成的工作。投资是在圣经中找到的尊重私有财产的一部分。最终证实了投资与伊甸园一样古老。投资积累值是值得尊敬的，积累价值的驱动是值得尊敬的。因此，基督徒的经济理论控告任何不工作的体格健全的人，和任何不尊重私有财产或投资回报的人。

7. 它必須尋求獎勵和鼓勵節儉。

在一個墮落的世界，金錢和投資可能被迅速扭曲，變為偶像崇拜的目的。因此，節儉是基督徒世界觀中一個舉足輕重的議題。在墮落的世界裡，今天的充裕會轉變為明天的貧乏。在貧困時期，節儉能提供生存的資源。

8.  它必須維護家庭這種最基本的經濟單位。

思考一下植根於聖經開頭的經濟理論，管治的命令固然是核心，但神聖的婚姻制度也同樣重要。在創世記第二章描述的離開與連合的模式是我們的經濟認識的基礎。亞當和夏娃是第一個經濟單位。因此，聖經所定義的家庭是經濟最基本和最重要的單位。

9.  它必須尊重社區。

大多數世俗思想家和經濟學家都以社區為開始，然後在轉向家庭。然而，沿著較大到較小經濟單位這一思路，不僅在理論上行不通，而且在實踐上也是失敗的。從家庭單位開始，然後向社區進展是一個更明智的選擇。基層決定原則 (或稱輔助性原則  Subsidiarity) 的教義---------源自於自然法理論---------教導意義、真理、與權力屬於最小的，有意義的單位的可能性。如果家庭單位缺乏，沒有政府能滿足市民的需求。當家庭強大，政府可以弱小。

然而，當家庭弱小時，政府必須彌補其缺乏。借者對家庭的關注，我們尊重和改善社區。

10.  它必須獎勵慷慨與勝任的管家。

委身於上帝國度經濟和下一代益處的基督徒，必須活出面向未來的金融觀。我們每個人都有責任，不管我們擁有多少，我們務要慷慨，直到我們生命的年限。屬靈慷慨------在聖經中有如此清晰的教導-------對基督徒的經濟世界觀來說是必不可少的。

11. 它必須尊重教會和教會使命的優先順序。

基督徒必須擁抱經濟的優先順序，這是世上其余的人不能理解的。基督徒必須投資教會、神學院、與國際宣教使命。這些都是基督徒特別的財政承擔。我們最終的財務承擔並非為了我們自己，亦非為了我們自己的投資，而是為了基督的國度。因此，基督徒總要作好準備，經歷經濟優先次序與安排中的劇變，因為緊急的國度問題可能隨時會介入。

12.  它必須重視末世的審判和對末世的應許。

生命及其資源不能帶來最終的喜樂。基督徒的世界觀提醒我們，我們必須活出這種認識：我們要為我們的資源的管家職份向上帝交賬。同時，基督徒必須仰望新的天地這一末世應許，並視之為我們最終的經濟盼望。我們必須把財寶積聚在天上而非在地上。

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌2017年二月號 。

Toward a Christian View of Economics

by Albert Mohler

Regrettably, many American Christians know little about economics. Furthermore, many Christians assume that the Bible has nothing at all to say about economics. But a biblical worldview actually has a great deal to teach us on economic matters. The meaning of work, the value of labor, and other economic issues are all part of the biblical worldview. Christians must allow the economic principles found in Scripture to shape our thinking. Here, then, are twelve theses for what a Christian understanding of economics must do.

1. It must have God’s glory as its greatest aim.

For Christians, all economic theory begins with an aim to glorify God (1 Cor. 10:31). We have a transcendent economic authority.

2. It must respect human dignity.

No matter the belief system, those who work show God’s glory whether they know it or not. People may believe they are working for their own reasons, but they are actually working out of an impulse that was put into their hearts by the Creator for His glory.

3. It must respect private property and ownership.

Some economic systems treat the idea of private property as a problem. But Scripture never considers private property as a problem to be solved. Scripture’s view of private property implies that owning private property is the reward of someone’s labor and dominion. The eighth and tenth commandments teach us that we have no right to violate the financial rewards of the diligent.

4. It must take into full account the power of sin.

Taking the Bible’s teaching on the pervasive effects of sin into full account means that we expect bad things to happen in every economic system. A Christian economic understanding tries to ameliorate the effects of sin.

5. It must uphold and reward righteousness.

Every economic and government system comes with embedded incentives. An example of this is the American tax code, which incentivizes desired economic behaviors. Whether they work is an issue of endless political recalibration. However, in the Christian worldview, that recalibration must continue to uphold and reward righteousness.

6. It must reward initiative, industry, and investment.

Initiative, industry, and investment are three crucial words for the Christian’s economic and theological vocabulary. Initiative goes beyond action. It is the kind of action that makes a difference. Industry is human work done corporately. Investment is part of the respect for private property found in Scripture. Investment, as it turns out, is as old as the garden of Eden. That which accrues value is honorable, and the impulse to accrue that value is honorable. Thus, a Christian economic theory indicts any able-bodied person who won’t work and anyone who won’t respect private property or reward investment.

7. It must seek to reward and incentivize thrift.

In a fallen world, money and investments can quickly be distorted to idolatrous ends. For that reason, thrift is a very important issue in the Christian worldview. In a fallen world, abundance one day can turn into scarcity the next. Thrift may be what provides survival in times of poverty.

8. It must uphold the family as the most basic economic unit.

When thinking about economic theory embedded in the beginning of the Bible, the dominion mandate is central, but so is the divine institution of marriage. The pattern of leaving and cleaving described in Genesis 2 is fundamental to our economic understanding. Adam and Eve were the first economic unit. The result is that the family, biblically defined, is the most basic and essential unit of the economy.

9. It must respect community.

Most secular thinkers and economists begin with the community and then move to the family. However, thinking from larger to smaller economic units not only does not work in theory, it also fails in practice. Beginning with the family unit and then working out toward the community is a much smarter option. The doctrine of subsidiarity—which emerged out of natural law theory—teaches that meaning, truth, and authority reside in the smallest meaningful unit possible. If the family unit is deficient, no government can meet the need of its citizens. When the family is strong, government can be small.

When the family is weak, however, the government must compensate for the loss. By focusing on the family, we respect and better the community.

10. It must reward generosity and proper stewardship.

Christians who are committed to the economics of the kingdom and to the good of the next generation must live with a future-oriented financial perspective. We each have the responsibility, whether we own a lot or a little, to see that our generosity endures far beyond our lifespan. Spirited generosity, which is so clear in Scripture, is essential to a Christian economic worldview.

11. It must respect the priority of the church and its mission.

Christians must embrace economic priorities that the rest of the world simply will not understand. Christians must invest in churches, seminaries, and international missions. These are distinctive Christian nancial commitments. Our ultimate financial commitment is not to ourselves or to our own investments but to the kingdom of Christ. Thus, Christians should always be ready to experience upheaval in economic priorities and arrangements because urgent kingdom issues can intervene at any moment.

12. It must focus on eschatological judgment and eschatological promise.

This life and its resources cannot deliver ultimate joy. The Christian worldview reminds us that we must live with the recognition that we will give an account to the Lord for our stewardship of our resources. At the same time, Christians must look to the eschatological promise of the new heavens and earth as our ultimate economic hope. We must lay up treasures in heaven and not on earth.

你关心那些寡妇吗？DoYou Care About the Widows?

作者: R.C. Sproul   譯者:   Maria Marta  

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/do-you-care-about-widows/

http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/caring-widows/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/836odsH689y

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/7NqsX7jGa23

根據聖經的教導，做到心虔志誠，並不一定意味著你是敬虔的。成為虔誠的人可能只意味著你參與以宗教作裝飾的活動，也就是說你可能是一名假宗教成員。然而，聖經有時從積極的意義上談論宗教，即在實踐意義上，結出真正信靠基督，委身上帝話語的果子。

使徒雅各強調宗教是那些真正信靠耶穌基督的人的實踐，真敬虔是什麽模樣?  雅各說，真敬虔是表現出有在基督裡的得救信心（雅二14–26）。他告訴我們，真敬虔不僅是「在我們心思裏對正確教義的持守」的問題，盡管這是必要的。不，真敬虔是指用教義塑造我們的生命達到一個程度，以致我們表露出上帝希望我們活出來的那種生命。雅各給出真宗教、真敬虔的簡潔定義：「純潔無玷汙的虔誠，就是照顧患難中的孤兒寡婦，並且保守自己不被世俗所汙染。」雅各將照顧寡婦和孤兒的行動提升為「清潔沒有玷汙的虔誠」的本質。我深信這種觀念非常重要，但却被今天的教會漠視。

在這篇文章中，我想把重點特別放在「寡婦」這話題上。寡婦和照顧寡婦在上帝為祂的教會制定的議程中占據顯著的位置。在使徒時代的教會，「寡婦被忽略」是其中一個最早出現的問題。如果這是第一世紀教會的問題，那麼在二十個世紀之後，在我們當中多麼有可能犯有忽略寡婦的罪？

在我成長的過程中，在我的祖父去世後，我的祖母搬進我們家，與我們一起生活了很多年。有好幾次，她在深夜與我交談，哭著告訴我她的痛苦重擔，她覺得自己不僅失去了丈夫，而且也失去了社區的地位。自從她丈夫過世後，她突然感到被排除在丈夫活著時與她緊密相聯的事情之外。一個人失去自己的終身伴侶，就像失去他自己完整、親密的一部分，因為聖經告訴我們，丈夫與妻子在婚姻的奧秘中成為一體。所以，守寡的痛苦帶來孤單的獨特維度。當一個人長期習慣了配偶的穩定相伴，突然變成孤單一人，這是何等的悲痛欲絕。因為上帝是祂的子民的偉大的安慰者，所以祂對遭遇痛苦經歷的寡婦如此關心是有道理的。

那麼，為什麼雅各不提鰥夫？畢竟，鰥夫也經歷失去終身伴侶的相同痛苦的劇痛。每一個曾與我交談過的人都無例外地說，他們希望先離去，因為他們無法想象沒有妻子的生活。我不能證明這一點，但我認為這就是男人的正常平均壽命比女人的正常平均壽命短的原因之一，因為上帝恩待我們男人，祂知道我們不如女人堅強。但我確實知道，寡婦在每個時代和每種文化當中總會經歷特別的困難。在古代世界，她們面對特別的問題。沒有保險、年金、或其他各種各樣的資助，沒有丈夫，寡婦通常是社區中最易受傷和最無助的人。在古代社會，寡婦幾乎沒有生計來源。因此，舊約和新約把照顧寡婦的責任交給教會。

從耶穌的教導中得知，祂常常關心寡婦。  只要想想馬可福音十二章41–45節所記載的寡婦捐一個銅錢的故事便可看出來。在教會裡，通常誰會獲得人們的注意？是那些大的捐助者，那些其捐贈對教會預算的持續供資是如此重要的人。很少人會注意那些捐款微薄，對教會的預算底線無關緊要的貧困者。但是耶穌注意到每一個被忽視的人。祂告訴祂的聽眾看看貧窮的寡婦。盡管這位婦女只捐給聖殿等值兩便士的銅錢，但她比所有其他捐贈財寶的人投（進奉獻箱）的更多，因為她捐出她的不足，她捐出對上帝的忠誠。

在新約聖經- 約翰福音十九章19:16b–27節，記錄了其中一個最溫柔的瞬間。當耶穌基督在十字架上，朝母親的方向望去，她是祂受難的目擊證人，耶穌對她說：「母親，看！你的兒子。」耶穌不是要求祂的母親看祂。她顯然在看著祂。然後耶穌對約翰說，「看！你的母親。」耶穌臨終時，祂將照顧祂寡居母親的責任托付给祂心愛的們徒約翰。在十字架上，耶穌對約翰說：「約翰，你照顧我的母親。她是一個寡婦，所以她對你來說就是你的母親」，然後祂又對馬利亞說，「母親，約翰對你來說就是你的兒子。」

兒子有什麽用？照顧他們的母親。母親的作用只能照顧他們的孩子？想想這些年來，母親們把握所有的機會照顧她們的孩子，現在她們開始孤獨過日，我們首先要照顧的必然是尚存的家人。但決不能到此為止，因為較大的家是教會。雅各，耶穌的兄弟，認為照顧寡婦這個任務是如此的重要，以致他用「照顧寡婦」來描述真宗教的实質。你自以為虔誠，但你卻不關心寡婦？你的虔誠是有名無實的，因為雅各說純潔無玷汙的虔誠，就是照顧患難中的孤兒寡婦。

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌2017年二月號 。

Caring for Widows

by R.C. Sproul

In biblical terms, to be religious does not necessarily mean you are godly. To be religious can mean simply that you’re involved in the trappings of religion, that you may be a member of a false religion. Yet, the Scriptures sometimes speak of religion in a positive sense, in the sense of practice that is the fruit of true faith in Christ and commitment to His Word.

The Apostle James focuses on religion as the practice of those who have true faith in Jesus, and he says that true religion demonstrates the presence of saving trust in the Lord (James 2:14–26). What true godliness looks like, he tells us, is not a matter of merely holding to right doctrine with our minds, though that is essential. No, true godliness means that doctrine shapes our lives to such a degree that we manifest the kind of life God wants us to live. And James gives us a succinct definition of true religion, of true godliness: “Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: To visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.” James elevates the activity of caring for widows and orphans as the very essence of pure and unde led religion. That strikes me as being very significant, and it’s an idea that is neglected in the church today.

In this article, I want to focus particularly on widows. Widows and their care figure prominently in the agenda that God has set for His church. One of the earliest problems that arose in the Apostolic church was that the widows were being neglected. And if that was a problem in the first-century church, how much more likely is it that we, twenty centuries later, would be guilty of neglecting the widows in our midst?

After my grandfather died, my grandmother moved into our home and lived with us for many years as I was growing up. On several occasions, she would talk to me late at night and weep, telling me of the burden of pain she had in feeling like she had not only lost her husband but that she had also lost her place in the community. Once her husband passed, she suddenly felt excluded from the things she was intimately involved with alongside him while he was alive. When a person loses her lifelong mate, it’s like losing an integral, intimate part of one’s self because husband and wife, we are told, in the mystery of marriage are one flesh. So, the pain of widowhood brings a unique dimension of loneliness. It’s jarring to suddenly be alone when one has been accustomed to the constant companionship with one’s spouse over a long period of time. Since God is the great Comforter of His people, it makes sense that He would have such concern for widows given the pain they experience.

Now, why does James not mention the widowers? After all, the widower also experiences that same pang of suffering that goes with losing a lifelong mate. Well, every man that I’ve ever talked to always says they want to go first because they can’t imagine living life without their wives. I can’t prove it, but I think that’s one of the reasons why the normal life expectancy of the man is shorter than the life expectancy of the woman, because God is gracious to us men, and He knows that we’re not as strong as women. But what I do know for sure is that widows have always experienced particular difficulties in every age and culture. They faced particular problems in the ancient world. There weren’t insurance programs, annuities, or other sorts of things, and without a husband, the widow was usually the most vulnerable and helpless person in the community. Widows had little or no means of support in ancient societies. Thus, the care of the widows was given to the church both in the Old Testament and in the New.

Jesus frequently pays attention to widows in His teaching. Just consider the story of the widow’s mite in Mark 12:41–45. Who is it that normally gets the attention in the church? The people who are the big donors, the ones whose donations are so important to the ongoing funding of the church’s budget. Few pay attention to the poverty-stricken person who makes a tiny donation that’s insignificant to the budget’s bottom line. But Jesus noticed what everyone else overlooked. He told His hearers to look at the poor widow. Even though the woman gave only the equivalent of two pennies to the temple, she put in more than all the rest of the people who donated heavily to the treasury because in giving out of her own poverty, she gave out of her devotion to God.

One of the most tender moments recorded in the New Testament is found in John 19:16b–27. While Christ was on the cross, He looked in the direction of His mother, who was an eyewitness to His passion, and He said to her, “Woman, behold your son!” He was not asking His mother to look at Him. Obviously, she already was looking at Him. Then, Jesus said to John, “Behold your mother!” In His dying moments, Jesus was commending the care of His widowed mother to His beloved disciple, John. On the cross, Jesus said to John, “John, you take care of My mother. She’s a widow, so let her be to you as your own mother.” To Mary, He said, “Mother, let John be to you as your own son.”

What are sons for? To look after their mothers. What are mothers for but to look after their children? When you think of all of the years and the opportunities where mothers have looked after their children when they enter into their loneliness, the first line of care is to be the surviving family. But it by no means stops there, because the larger family is the church. James, the brother of Jesus, sees this mandate to care for widows as so important that he uses it to describe the crystallized essence of true religion. Do you think you’re religious, but you don’t care about the widows? Your religion is an exercise in futility, because James says pure and undefiled religion is the care of widows and of orphans in times of trouble.

約翰福音三章16節中的「世人」是什麽意思?WhatDoes “World” Mean in John 3:16?

作者: John Tweeddale   譯者:   Maria Marta  

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-does-world-mean-john-316/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/PqAJpKhnk91

對約翰福音三章16節經文其中一個最令人驚詫的曲解是,   我們被告知上帝愛「世人」（world）。我們可能會受到誘惑試探，認為上帝要愛很多的世人。畢竟，世人的這些方面有什麽不值得欣賞：城市風光、農田耕地、精致佳肴、後院燒烤、古典交響樂、民間歌謠、文藝復興時期的繪畫、幼兒園的塗鴉等？我們所認識的世界充滿特色、魅力、機會、與歡呼。問題是，盡管世界是美好、有趣、與美麗，但它充斥著罪人。自從亞當和夏娃在伊甸園裡違背上帝以來，世界已變成荒地。無論世界看起來是多麽的精彩，它也不配得上帝的救贖之愛。

明白世人是多麽不配得上帝的愛，是約翰福音三章16節的關鍵。只有這樣明白，我們才會為上帝所賜的意想不到的禮物感恩。許多年前，著名神學家華菲德（Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield）明確地闡述了這一點。在《上帝無法測度的愛》這篇證道中，華菲德為了探索上帝的愛的深度，他對約翰福音三章16節中「世人/世界」（希臘文Kosmos）一詞的含義作了詳細的查考。

這段經文中的「世人」是什麽意思？根據華菲德的見解，有四種可能的答案。

首先，許多人認為「世人」是指所有的人毫無例外。換句話說，當約翰三章16節說，上帝愛世人，其意思是指上帝愛每一個人，從最卑賤到最偉大，均等地愛每一個人。邏輯是這樣的：上帝愛每一個人；耶穌基督為每一個人而死；因此，每一個人都得可能得救。然而，這種觀點似乎暗示，上帝的愛是無能為力的，耶穌基督的死是徒勞無益的。不然，這一立場的自然結論是，每一個人實際上都得救，而不僅僅是可能得救。倘若上帝愛每一個人，耶穌基督為每一個人而死，上帝的愛不是無能為力的，耶穌基督的死不是徒勞無益的，那麽唯一能得出的結論是：每一個人都確實得到救恩。然而，這種觀點與聖經關於上帝審判的教導相矛盾，正如緊鄰的上下文，約翰福音三章17-21節所表明的。

第二，其他人认为「世人」是指所有的人没有分别。这种答案强调上帝爱一类型或一个族群以上的人。基督在十字架上被钉死，不仅是为了犹太人，也是为了外邦人。上帝的愛非但不受國界限制，而且延伸致各邦國、各支派、各文化、各方言、与各民族。对此，所有上帝的子民--------包括亚米念主义者和加尔文主义者--------都衷心地说「阿們」。虽然这种观点无疑是对的，亦符合约翰福音大脉络之下关于「上帝的孩子」的全球性身份认同（例如，约一9–13；四42），但它并没有完全捕捉到约翰三章16节所特意描绘的「上帝如此地愛」（God so loved）与「世人」（the world）之间的震撼性比较。

第三，一種被改革宗神學家廣泛接受的，與先前的答案有細微差別的觀點認為：約翰福音三章16節的「世人」是指選民。在整本約翰福音中，耶穌強調祂的恩典的特殊性。支持的經文包括：「凡是父賜給我的人，必到我這裡來」（六37）；「我是好牧人，我認識我的羊，我的羊也認識我……我為羊捨命」（十14–15）；「你們若屬於這世界，世人必定愛屬自己的；但因為你們不屬於世界，而是我從世界中揀選了你們，所以世人就恨你們」（十五9）；「我為他們求；我不為世人求，而是為你賜給我的人求，因為他們是你的」（十七19）等等。關鍵是，上帝的子民從一個不信的世界裡被揀選出來。再次重申，這種觀點表達了強調聖經的揀選教義的重要性，與其說約翰福音三章16節中「世人」一詞的重點在於上帝子民的身份認同，倒不如說它更在於上帝的愛的本質。

這就引導我們進入最後的答案。一個確鑿理由能使人相信「世人」是指上帝的愛的質量。華菲德令人信服地說明：

「在這兒與其說[世人]是一個表達範圍的詞語，倒不如說它是一個表達強度的詞語。其主要的含義是倫理上的，因為上帝愛世人，當祂賜下祂的兒子，使用這一詞的關鍵點並非要表明，世界是如此廣大，以致於它需要大量的愛去完全擁抱它；而是要表明這個世界是如此糟糕，以致於它絕對需要一種偉大的愛去愛它，更多的愛去愛它。」

「世人」代表罪惡的人性，不配得上帝的拯救之愛。在上帝的愛以外，世人處在在上帝的審判之下。但在基督裡，信徒經歷上帝奇妙、救贖、與永無止境的愛。約翰三章16節不是關於世人的偉大，乃是關於上帝的偉大的經文。

Dr. John W. Tweeddale is academic dean and professor of theology at Reformation Bible College. This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.

What Does “World” Mean in John 3:16?

FROM John Tweeddale

One of the most surprising twists of John 3:16 is that we are told God loves the world. We might be tempted to think that there is much about the world for God to love. After all, what’s not to admire about cityscapes and farmlands, fine cuisine and backyard barbecues, classical symphonies and folk ballads, Renaissance paintings and kindergarten squiggles? The world we know is filled with texture, intrigue, opportunity, and cheer. The problem is that for all that is good and interesting and beautiful about the world, it is overrun with sinners. Ever since Adam and Eve rebelled against God in the garden, the world has become a wasteland. No matter how wonderful the world may appear, it is not worthy of God’s redeeming love.

Understanding how undeserving the world is of God’s love is the key to John 3:16. Only then will we appreciate the unexpected gift that God gives. This point was well made many years ago by the esteemed theologian Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield. In his sermon “God’s Immeasurable Love,” Warfield probes the meaning of the term “world” (Greek kosmos) in John 3:16 in order to plumb the depths of God’s love.

What is the meaning of “world” in this passage? Drawing from the insights of Warfield, there are four possible answers.

In the first place, many people believe that “world” means all people without exception. In other words, when John 3:16 says that God loves the world, it means that He loves every person, head for head, equally. The logic goes something like this: God loves every person; Christ died for every person; therefore, salvation is possible for every person. However, this view seems to suggest that God’s love is impotent and Christ’s death is ineffectual. Otherwise, the natural conclusion of this position would be that every person is actually saved rather than just potentially saved. If God loves every person, and Christ died for every person, and God’s love is not impotent, and Christ’s death is not ineffectual, then the only conclusion one can draw is that salvation has been secured for every person. Yet this viewpoint contradicts the Bible’s teaching on God’s judgment as is evidenced by the immediate context in John 3:17–21.

Second, others argue that “world” means all people without distinction. This option emphasizes that God loves more than one type of person or ethnic group. The death of Christ on the cross was not only for Jews but also for Gentiles. The love of God is not confined to national boundaries but extends to all kinds of nations, tribes, cultures, tongues, and peoples. To this, all God’s people––Arminian and Calvinist alike––say a hearty “Amen.” While this view has the benefit of being undoubtedly right and fits within the larger context of John’s gospel concerning the global identity of the “children of God” (e.g., John 1:9–13; 4:42), it doesn’t quite capture the jolting contrast between “God so loved” and “the world” that John 3:16 deliberately draws.

Third, a popular nuance of the previous option among Reformed theologians is to argue that “world” in John 3:16 refers to the elect. Throughout John’s gospel, Jesus emphasizes the particularity of His grace. “All that the Father gives me will come to me” (6:37). “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me….I lay down my life for the sheep” (10:14–18). “If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (15:9). “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours” (17:9). And so on. The point is that God’s people are chosen from an unbelieving world. Again, this view strikes an important note by underscoring the biblical doctrine of election, but the focus of the term “world” in John 3:16 is not so much on the identity of God’s people but on the nature of God’s love.

This leads us to the final option. A solid case can be made for believing that “world” refers to the quality of God’s love. Warfield convincingly states:

[World] is not here a term of extension so much as a term of intensity. Its primary connotation is ethical, and the point of its employment is not to suggest that the world is so big that it takes a great deal of love to embrace it all, but that the world is so bad that it takes a great kind of love to love it at all, and much more to love it as God has loved it when he gave his Son for it.

The world represents sinful humanity and is not worthy of God’s saving love. Apart from the love of God, the world stands under God’s condemnation. But in Christ, believers experience God’s surprising, redeeming, and never-ending love. John 3:16 is not about the greatness of the world but about the greatness of God.

Dr. John W. Tweeddale is academic dean and professor of theology at Reformation Bible College. This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.