《与提摩太凯勒交锋》书评第三讲：Engaging with Keller
主讲：林慈信牧师_校对：刘加立弟兄_文字：Cherry姐妹
The fourth essay，第四篇文章，“The Church’s Mission: sent to ‘do justice’ in the world?” “教会的使命是否被差进去世界行公义呢？”is by Dr. Peter J. Naylor，是由Naylor博士写的，founding minister of Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Cardiff.是在威尔士的Cardiff这个城的以马内利长老会的创堂的牧师。 Dr. Naylor’s essay focuses on Dr. Keller’s teaching on the mission of the church:Naylor博士的论文，就专注于凯勒博士对教会的使命的教导：
Keller’s main thesis is that 凯勒的主要的论点是the church has a twofold mission in this world:教会在世界里有一个双重的使命： (1) to preach the gospel 第一宣讲福音，and (2) to do justice，二、行公义，which involves social and cultural transformation and renewal (105).行公义就牵涉到社会和文化的转变和更新。
Dr. Naylor believes that there are several principles that should be considered in determining the mission of the church: Naylor博士认为要决定，教会的使命是什么呢？要考虑到几个原则：
As we consider the church’s mission，we must bear these five principles in mind. 当我们考虑到教会的使命，我们要注意到五个原则：
(1)第一个原则，The church cannot act without a mandate from God. 教会若没有上帝的命令或者差遣，是不能够做出行动的。(2) 第二个原则，The God-given boundaries between the three spheres of family，nation，and church must be respected. 上帝所定的家庭、国家和教会这三个范围之间的界限需要被尊重。(3) 第三个原则，The distinction between the body and its members must be carefully observed. 我们应该观察到基督的身体的整体和个别的肢体之间的区别。(4)第四个原则，The distinction between the office bearers and the members must be respected. 任职的，就是长老牧师等等，和会友之间的区别，也必须受到尊重。(5) 第五个原则，Jesus’commission from his Father was unique 耶稣基督从父所领受的差遣是独特的，and the church cannot assume that Jesus’ commission is its own mission (110). 教会不可以假设耶稣所受托的就是她–教会所受托的。
Given those principles，既然Naylor博士列出这五个原则Dr. Naylor considers whether the church is called，as a body，to work for social and cultural transformation.他就考虑究竟教会作为一个整体一个身体是否受到上帝的呼召，为社会和文化的转变来努力。He distinguishes between what individual Christians might have as a calling and what the formal mission of the church is. 他区分出个别的基督徒可能所有的、所领受的呼召，和教会正式的使命是什么。Any Christian，as a citizen of a country，is free to pursue social and political change (110). 作为一个国家的国民，任何一位基督徒都有自由去寻求社会和政治的转变。
Dr. Naylor also points out: Naylor博士也指出：No one is suggesting that “the church is not to do justice at all.”没有人在说“教会不要做任何的行公义的事 。”That is a straw man. 那个是稻草人。The church’s elders and deacons serve the interests of justice and mercy (119). 教会的长老们和执事们就是为了公义而怜悯努力的。
After considering several Scriptures that Dr. Keller uses to support his teaching on the mission of the church，Dr. Naylor concludes: 当Naylor博士考虑到凯勒博士提出的几段经文来支持他的教会使命论之后，做出这样的一个结论：Naylor说，How shall we respond to Keller’s doctrine of the church’s mission? 我们要如何回应凯勒的教会的使命的教义呢？We must reject it for several reasons: 我们必须因为好几个原因、几个理由拒绝：
(1) 第一个理由He fails to establish his case on the basis of Scripture. 凯勒要用圣经来建立他的论点，在这点上他失败了。
(2)第二个理由 He focuses too narrowly on the problem of material poverty 他的注意力是太多的狭窄于物质上的贫穷的问题and thereby takes away from a concentration on the deeper spiritual plight of man，所以他就偏离了那个人的深层的属灵的困境这方面的专注，which is what the church is really to address. 而教会真正要处理的是人的属灵的困境。
(3) 第三个理由，He has misunderstood the Mosaic Law 他误解了摩西时期的律法，and has taught an unbiblical concept of wealth redistribution. 他所教导的关于财富的重新分配的概念是不符合圣经。
(4) 第四个原因，He has failed to observe proper distinctions between the spheres of church and state and between the Christian and the church (members and the body) (125). 凯勒也没有遵守教会和政府之间不同范围的区别，也没有遵守个别基督徒跟教会、肢体和身体之间的区别。
Dr. Naylor is especially concerned that the work of social and cultural transformation can and will divert the resources that a church should use to preach the gospel (125). 博士特别的关注，用在社会和文化转变的工作上的资源，就让教会把这些应该用在宣讲福音的资源就留到别的地方去。He goes on to summarize his conclusions: 他进一步的总结他的结论：Naylor说，
未经同意，请勿擅自在其它网站或平台转载和刊登课程的逐字稿；课程的逐字稿的版权归「中华展望」，禁止复印出版等商业用途。
ccnci.org中华展望圣约学院[email protected]（PayPal）
We deny that the church has a dual mission; 我们不承认教会有一种双重的使命；we affirm that 我们承认、我们相信，the Christian should exercise love and mercy in all his relationships; 基督徒在他所有的人际关系中，都要活出爱和怜悯；we distinguish between the commission given to the body and the commission given to the member; 我们要区别给教会的使命和给个别肢体的使命，给身体的使命、肢体的使命；and we distinguish between the church’s role and the state’s (126). 我们也区别教会要扮演的角色，和政府要扮演的角色。
下面是第五篇文章：
Rev. Richard Holst，Holst牧师，retired church planter 一位退休的开拓教会的牧师and chairman of the International Conference of Reformed Churches，他是国际改革宗教会的会议的主席，considers Dr. Keller’s methods of Scriptural interpretation in his essay，在他的论文里面，考虑到凯勒博士的解释圣经的方法，论文的题目是“Timothy Keller’s Hermeneutic: an example for the church to follow?”“提摩太凯勒的释经是否教会要效法的榜样呢？”Rev. Holst uses three basic questions to consider Dr. Keller’s hermeneutical approach: Holst牧师用三个基本的问题来考虑凯勒博士的释经的进路：
第一个问题Do the interpretations represent the truth that is chiefly taught in that place? 我们所做出的解释是否表达了那段经文主要所教导的真理呢？第二个问题Are the clearer parts of Scripture used to interpret the less clear? 我们有没有用比较清楚的经文来解释没有那么清楚的经文呢？And finally，最后第三条问题，are the deductions from Scripture good and necessary consequences? (138). 我们从经文所作出的推论是否一个很妥当的必须的一个的结果呢？
Given Dr. Keller’s influence，既然凯勒博士具有这么重大的影响力，Rev. Holst seeks to determine if Dr. Keller is a good example of Reformed methodology for others to follow. (138) Holst牧师要决定凯勒博士是不是一个很好的榜样，一个改革宗的方法论的榜样，让其他人可以跟随。There are three concerns with Dr. Keller’s hermeneutics，according to Rev. Holst: 根据Holst牧师，凯勒博士的释经有三方面值得关注的，第一，the use of parables，使用比喻，就是耶稣的比喻，第二the use of secondary aspects of passages，使用经文的次要的层面，第三，and logical fallacies in exegesis. 在解经上逻辑的错误。
First，the use of parables: 第一使用比喻：arables are intended to be ambiguous. 比喻的用意就是意义含糊。Thus，the only safe way to understand a parable is to pay close attention to the inspired interpretation that is usually given in the passage itself，and then by clearer texts elsewhere (138) 因此，理解一个比喻的唯一的安全的方法，就是特别注意那段经文本身所提出的神所默示的解释，还有用其他更加清楚的经文。
Rev. Holst gives the example of how Dr. Keller uses the parable of the prodigal son: Holst牧师举一个例子，凯勒博士怎么样使用浪子的比喻：Holst说，The problem is in the very design of the book (The Prodigal God)，问题就是《挥霍的上帝》这本书的问题，就是在它的宗旨本身，which is to use this parable as a lens to understand everything else (139). 就是要用这个比喻做一副眼镜去了解所有其他的事。
Even if the result of such an approach was free from error，就算这个进路所带来的结果是没有错误，Rev. Holst explains that the method is itself problematic: Holst牧师解释这个方法本身就有问题的：One can hardly conceive of a concept more contrary to good hermeneutical procedure 我们不能想象有一个更加违背正确解经的做法的一个例子，than to use a parable to define the Christian faith 就是用一个比喻来为基督教信仰作定义，（他说没有更差的解经的方法了）and，thereafter，to understand the rest of Scripture in this light (139-140) 然后，把整本圣经都从这个比喻的亮光来理解。（没有比这个更加违背好的释经的原则的。）
Second，第二，Rev. Holst finds Dr. Keller’s use of secondary aspects of Scriptural passages to be concerning. 第二，Holst牧师看到凯勒博士怎么用圣经经文的次要的层次是值得关注的。The example he gives is 他所给的例子是Dr. Keller’s use of the parable of the good Samaritan 凯勒博士怎么使用好撒玛利亚人的比喻and the discussion with the rich young ruler to say that Jesus is explaining a key part of what it means to be a Christian:还有，就是他怎么讨论到耶稣和少年人的官这个事件来说耶稣在这里的解释做基督徒的意义的一个很关键性的一部分：
“It appears that Jesus sees care for the poor as part of the essence of being a Christian” (144). 凯勒说我们看到好像是耶稣认为照顾穷人是做一位基督徒的核心意义的一部分。Rev. Holst points out ，Holst牧师指出that care for the poor is not the focus of either passage 这两段经文的焦点都不是关注穷人but is，instead，a secondary aspect that Dr. Keller has chosen to highlight。乃是经文里面次要的层次，而凯勒博士选择了要把它特别的显著。
Lastly，最后，Rev. Holst is concerned with logical fallacies in Dr. Keller’s exegesis of certain passages. Holst牧师特别关注凯勒博士如何解释某一些的经文里面的逻辑的错误。He uses an example from Dr. Keller’s Ministries of Mercy 他用了凯勒博士那本的书《怜悯事工》里面一个例子where Dr. Keller writes: 凯勒博士是这样写的：
“The kingdom of God is the means for the renewal of the entire world and all of the dimensions of life. 神的国度是整个世界的更新和人的所有不同的层面的更新的方法，或者是工具。… If this is the ministry of the Kingdom 这个假如是天国的事工– to heal all the results of sin in all areas of life，在所有生命的范围里面，去医治治疗所有罪所带来的后果，then the church must intentionally use its resources to minster to every ‘circle’” (146). 那么教会必须要刻意的用她的资源来服事每一个圈子每一个范围。
Rev. Holst explains his concern:Holst牧师解释他的关注：The main problem，however，is with the logic of Keller’s “if，then”transition between the future state and his conclusion regarding the church’s mission. 但是重要的问题是凯勒的逻辑，就是说“假如是这样，就这样”，从将来的状态转移到教会的使命这个结论。Christ will certainly return on the last day to make a new heavens and a new earth in which no trace of the curse remains.耶稣基督肯定在末日要回来，要造一个新天新地，在那里没有任何咒诅的痕迹会存留。 … Just because we are promised that there will be no curse in the New Heavens and New Earth，没有错，上帝应许我们在新天新地没有咒诅。虽然是如此，this does not mean that但这并不意味着 the church’s mission is to try to get their now，并不意味着教会的使命是现在就要达到那种的状态，in contradiction of Scriptures that speak clearly on the matter (146). 这样就是矛盾了圣经清楚的教导。
Rev. Holst concludes: Holst牧师的结论：I think the answer would have to be我想我们的回答必须是如此 that Keller is not consistent in adhering to these principles [explained above]. 凯勒对上列原则不是很彻底的遵守，… For this reason，因为这个缘故，we must conclude that his work does not provide us with the best example to follow (147).因此我们的结论是：凯勒的著作并没有给我们一个可以效仿的，最好的榜样。
下面有第六篇的文章，是由Dr. Schweitzer就是这本书的编者之一所写的，“Not
Quite” Theistic Evolution: “不完全是：上帝所指导的进化论：does Tim Keller bridge the gap between creation and evolution? 提摩太凯勒是否在创造论和进化论之间能够跨过这个鸿沟呢？这个是第六篇的文章，我们下一讲继续讲。
提示：逐字稿文字只限于个人和教会私下学习交流，目的是造就教会和教会负责带领、讲道的同工们；未经同意，请勿擅自在其它网站或平台转载和刊登课程的逐字稿；课程的逐字稿和图片的版权归「中华展望」，禁止复印出版等商业用途。当文字和录音不符时，以录音为准。愿上帝赐福文字编辑和校对的肢体来雅正！若是有修改的地方、奉献支持或是其他任何问题请使用以下邮件方式联系我们。中华网络圣约学院ccnci.org中华展望圣约学院 [email protected]（PayPal）