挥霍的福音，挥霍的信仰第二讲Prodigal Gospel，prodigal faith：section 2
主讲：林慈信牧师_校对：刘加立、陈弟兄、Cherry姐妹_文字：余波弟兄
挥霍的福音，挥霍的信仰：第二讲We now go into the detail on the forth critique by Gary Gilley on Timothy Keller’s book the Prodigal God.下面是Gary Gilley牧师对提摩太·凯勒牧师的《挥霍的上帝》八个批判的第四点，
No.4: Reading too much into the elder brother (pp. 48-72).把太多的事情读进去长子这个角色（原著48-72页）。
Keller believes that churches are full of elder brothers and he wants to expose them. 凯勒相信教会里充满着长子们，他要暴露他们。While he makes some good points he moves far beyond the text by claiming that elder brothers have a dry prayer life (p. 64)，虽然他说出一些精彩的要点，但是他远远超越了圣经的经文，他宣称长子们的祷告生活都是枯干的（原著64页），and the reason the younger brother wants to leave home in the first place is partly because of the attitude of the elder brother (p. 66)，而为什么小儿子想要离开家呢？一部分的原因就是因为长子的态度（原著66页），just as many are leaving the church today (pp. 67-69).正如很多人今天在离开教会（原著67-69页）。
He almost dismisses the prodigal’s sin of defiance，blaming it on his brother: 他差不多不理浪子的抗拒权威的罪，而怪责了他的哥哥，it is the “elder brothers [who] turned them into younger brothers” (p. 69). 是那些长子们使弟弟们成为浪子的（原著 69页）。Elder brothers are even responsible for social injustice，长子们甚至乎要为社会上的不公义负责，war and violence in the world (p. 67).也要为世界上的战争和暴力负责的（原著67页）。
What Keller seems to miss most of the time (there are exceptions，see p. 70) is that neither boy in the parable is originally depicted believers. 在这本书的大部分的地方，除了70页这种的例外情况以外，凯勒没有看到故事里面两个儿子原来都不是指信徒们。Therefore，the elder brother is not a hard-hearted，legalistic Christian；因此长子并不是一个心中刚硬律法主义的基督徒，he is a self-righteous true Pharisee，他是一个自以为义的真正的法利赛人，who has invented his own gospel，他是发明了自己的福音，and is not saved. 不是一个得救的人。This was the point Jesus was making concerning the older sibling. 耶稣讲到长子是要讲到这一点的。
No.5 第五点，Adding to the story. 在故事上加盐加醋。
Keller informs us that Jesus deliberately left someone out of the parable. 凯勒告诉我们，耶稣故意地把另外一个人物在故事里面删除，或者漏掉。Inexplicably，Keller is not only going to add a character to the story，我们不理解为什么凯勒不单单要在故事里面多加一个人物，he is going to wax eloquent about him. 甚至乎用最好的措辞来形容他。This character is the “true elder brother” (pp. 72-89). 这个人物就是真的长子（原著72-89页）。
First it is obvious even to the beginning reader of Scripture that Keller is no longer explaining the Bible，首先对一个初出茅庐的读经者都应该非常明显的，就是到了这个地步，凯勒不再是在解释这个故事了，he is adding to it.他在增加内容。This is both dangerous and condemned by the Lord (Rev 22:18).这个一方面是很危险的，另一方面是主耶稣所禁止，定罪的（启示录22：18）。
If Jesus wanted another actor in His story，He would have supplied one，but He obviously did not. 假如主耶稣想要他的故事里面有另外一个人物的话，祂就会提供这个人物，很明显地祂没有这样做。In Keller’s imagination the true elder brother (Jesus) would go looking for the prodigal and bring him home (pp. 81，84-85). 在凯勒的想象中，这位真长子（耶稣）就会跑去找浪子，把他带回家的（原著81页，84页，85页）。
The truth is that Jesus is neither brother. 事实是，耶稣既不是浪子，也不是长子。He came to earth to seek and save the lost，祂来到世界上是要寻找、拯救失丧的人，and that included both the outwardly rebellious and the self-righteous. 这些失丧的人当然就包括外表上反叛的和心中自以为义的人。
No.6第六点，Distorting Scripture. 扭曲圣经。
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。
中华网络圣约学院ccnci.org中华展望圣约学院[email protected]（PayPal）
In the vein of adding to the Scripture，就正如凯勒在圣经上加添一些的要点，Keller informs us that God tells Cain he is his brother’s keeper (p. 81).凯勒同样地告诉我们，上帝告诉该隐，他是他的弟弟的看守者（原著81页）。This fits well with the “social gospel” that I will address next，这个与下面要讲的凯勒的所谓社会福音是很符合的，but God said no such thing to Cain.但是上帝并没有这样和该隐说。In Genesis 4:9 Cain asks this question and God does not respond.在创世记第4章第9节该隐是问这个问题，上帝是没有回答的。
No.7 第七方面，The social gospel agenda. 社会福音的企图。
Since Keller teaches that Jesus was bringing in the kingdom of God (p. 100) (rather than that the kingdom was at hand，as Jesus stated in Mark 1:15)，凯勒既然教导说，耶稣来是要把天国带来的（原著第100页），而不是耶稣在马可一章15节说“天国近了”，he also believes that part of the Christian mandate is solving social problems (pp. 110-113):他也相信，基督徒的使命的一部分是解决社会问题的（原著110-113页），he says他是这样说的：“The ultimate purpose of Jesus is not only individual salvation and pardon for sins，耶稣至终的目的不仅仅是个人的得救和罪得赦免，but also the renewal of this world，也更加是这个世界的更新，the end of disease，病痛的终止，poverty，injustice，violence，suffering and death” (p. 110).还有贫穷、不公义、暴力、苦难和死亡的终止（原著110页）。
While Keller is strictly correct in this statement，虽然严谨来说，狭义来说，凯勒这句话是对的，Jesus Himself will accomplish all of this through creation of a new heaven and earth，not through social programs.耶稣让这些的事情都终止是透过创造一个新天新地而成就，不是透过社会工作计划。Keller goes so far as to say，凯勒甚至乎这样说，（原著112页）
“The inevitable sign that you know you are a sinner saved by sheer，costly grace is a sensitive social conscience and a life poured out in deeds of service to the poor” (p. 112).你若知道你是一个罪人，完全透过上帝的付重价的完全的恩典得救的，那一个毫无疑问的记号，清楚知道自己是得救的罪人的毫无疑问的记号，是一个充满着敏感的社会良心，还有把一生倾倒出来为穷人做服侍（原著112页）。
Not only is this whole discussion completely foreign to the parable，这段的讨论不单单完全是置于浪子的故事以外，being implanted by Keller，是凯勒把它放进去故事的，but also nowhere in Scripture are the people of God，either Old Testament Israel or the New Testament church，given a mandate to attempt to solve the social problems of the entire planet.不但如此，整本圣经里面不论是旧约的以色列或者新约的教会，上帝的子民从来没有从上帝领受一个使命，要去尝试去解决整个地球所有的社会问题的。
As the citizens of earth，we are to be responsible caretakers of God’s creation，我们是大地的公民，我们有责任好好地管理上帝的创造，but nowhere in Scripture，including Matthew 25 which Keller uses out of context (pp. 111-112)，are Christians specifically given the assignment of serving the poor.但是整本圣经没有一处——包括马太福音25章，当然凯勒使用马太25章是断章取义的（原著111页到112页），整本圣经没有一处是指定基督徒要服侍穷人的。For more on this see my articles，“The Social Agenda” Part 1 and 2，作者说：参考我另外的文章“社会工作的计划”第一跟第二部分。www.svchapel.org/ministries/think-on-these-things-ministries。
No.8 第八，the last point最后一点，The gospel，福音。
Keller is not so much wrong about the gospel as confused.凯勒对福音的宣讲不算是错，但是是非常混乱。As mentioned above，Keller does give the gospel clearly，前面说过，凯勒清楚地讲出福音，however he muddies the water in two ways.但是两方面他越讲越乱。He writes on P.86，“The difference between a Pharisee and a believer is inner-heart motivation” (p. 86).他在原著86页说，一个法利赛人和一个信徒之间不同是他的内心的动机。
Throughout much of the book Keller has depicted Pharisees as legalistic Christians，整本书里面多处凯勒形容法利赛人是律法主义的基督徒，but here he rightly demonstrates that the Pharisees were not saved.但是在这里（就是86页原著）他正确地指出法利赛人并不是得救的。Yet the author teaches that it is inner-heart motivation that distinguishes the believer from the non-believer.然而凯勒教导说，信徒和非信徒不同之处是内心的动机。Scripture says it is faith，not inner-heart motivation，that is the mark of a true Christian.圣经说，一个真的基督徒的标志是信心，而不是内心的动机(Eph 2:8-9以弗所书二章8-9节）。
While motivation is important if we must discern our motives to have certainty of salvation，虽然我们应该查验我们的动机，这样子我们才有得救的确据，所以动机还是重要的，our assurance of redemption is unattainable.假如我们真地是要靠着考察我们的动机才能有得救的确据的话，得救的确据是不可能达到的。Even Paul said he was not always sure of his motives (1 Cor 4:1-4)，就算是使徒保罗也说，他不是每一次都确定他的动机的（哥林多前书4章1-4节），and the same is true of all of us.对我们每一个人来说都是如此的。
The second error of concern has to do with his use of Roman Catholics as examples of believers.第二方面关于福音的混乱，是关于凯勒怎么用罗马天主教徒作为信徒的榜样。
Flannery O’Conner is an implied believer (p. 37)，Flannery O’Conner一位20世纪的天主教的女作家，and G. K. Chesterton is explicit (p. 46).那位女作家在原著37页暗示是基督徒，然后Chesterton是很清楚说明是基督徒（原著46页）。As staunch Catholics both of these authors rejected the gospel of Christ.这两位坚决的天主教徒，他们既然是天主教徒，都拒绝了基督的福音的。In fact，both would be accurate examples of Pharisees who add their own message to God’s Word，事实上这两位的作者都应该是法利赛人的样品，就是说把他们的信息加在神的话之上，yet Keller uses them as those who understand and teach the gospel.而凯勒用他们来说是那些明白而且教导福音的人。This is surely a problem.这个当然就是问题。
As can be discerned，（结论conclusion。）如读者会看出，I view The Prodigal God as a mess.我看《挥霍的上帝》这本书是乱七八糟的。There are，to be sure，portions that are helpful，很确定的是，有一些的部分是有帮助的，but overall，Keller misses the point of the parable at almost every turn.但是整体来说，在浪子的故事的每一个环节，凯勒都错过了那个重点。
If the reader wants a good book on this great parable，假如读者想要读一本关于浪子的故事的好书的话，I suggest he scrap this one，我提议他丢掉这本书，and read John MacArthur’s excellent work，The Tale of Two Sons.而去读MacArthur的非常好的著作《两个儿子的故事》。
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）