你認識你所跟隨的耶穌是誰嗎？(可六45-52)

對於門徒因耶穌在海面上走而甚驚慌的反應，作者馬可的評論是「因為他們不明白那分餅的事，心裡還是愚頑。」馬可的評論是否中肯？我們先要理解他所指的分餅是一回甚麼的事。若按故事的上下文，分餅應該是指我們熟識的五餅二魚的故事。對馬可來說，以五餅二魚餵飽五千人絕對是一件神蹟，而門徒應該從中認識耶穌是上主的兒子，但問題是，門徒似乎沒有從中認識耶穌的身分，以致他們因耶穌在海面上走而被嚇呆，甚至認為他是鬼怪。門徒的愚頑不是因為這是人的正常反應，而是因為他們還未真正接受耶穌是上主的兒子。讓我跟你們分享教會近日一件驚慌的事。



基督徒認識耶穌是祂滿有恩典和憐憫，而典範例子是與罪人、妓女和稅吏一同吃飯。罪人、妓女和稅吏等是否在耶穌眼中是罪人還是他們是被罪者？若他們是罪人，耶穌與他們吃飯的重點可能就是勸導他們不要再犯罪；若他們是被罪者（即受害者），耶穌與他們吃飯的重點就是要表達他站在他們一方，接納他們，挑戰傷害他們的人和制度。那一個理解正確？我們不知道耶穌是否有勸導他們不要犯罪，但從法利賽人對耶穌與罪人、妓女和稅吏吃飯的不滿意卻反映耶穌與他們吃飯的行動是挑戰主流社會對他們的標籤。耶穌的吃飯表達他們被上主所愛，也應被社會尊重而不是排斥。相反，若耶穌勸導罪人、妓女和稅吏悔改的話，我相信法利賽人必然很支持耶穌。至於耶穌是否有勸導他們和如何看他們的身分，這是耶穌與他們的事，與周遭的人無關。為何周遭的人那麼緊張？


有教會（香港浸信會聯會、基督教宣道會香港區聯會及中國基督教播道會總會）選擇以刊登廣告，以神的設計、神的律法和神的審判批評同性戀行為是罪，而不是刊登廣告，邀請他們一同吃飯，建立友誼，挑戰社會歧視。聲明說，「呼籲基督徒效法基督，要對罪惡心思行為絶不妥協，惟對陷入罪途及有相關傾向的人，則應予愛心關懷並援助（約三：17）；教會更須向會眾推行相關的聖經教導，以達成基督的大使命！」為何他們的呼籲沒有提及社會對同性戀的歧視，甚至多年來對他們造成的傷害？為何他們的呼籲不是朋友的邀請，一起吃飯，建立友誼？這些教會豈不是經歷和宣講那與罪人、妓女和稅吏吃飯，並滿有恩典和憐憫的上主，但他們對待同性戀卻完全忘記了上主的恩典。為何教會對同性戀變得如此驚慌，甚至「見鬼」？按馬可評論，「因為他們不明白耶穌與罪人、妓女和稅吏一同吃飯，心裡還是愚頑。」


門徒因耶穌在海面上走而感驚慌，因為他們將這行為聯想起鬼怪。門徒的聯想不是不可理解的，因為以捕魚為生的門徒對海上鬼怪的故事並不陌生。那麼，門徒的愚頑不必然因為他們不信，而是因為他們對耶穌的認識受制於他們昔日的經驗。一方面，昔日經驗指人生經驗。另一方面，昔日經驗也指信仰的經驗。以信仰經驗為例，信仰經驗讓我們對耶穌有很基礎的認識，但同時，我們要擺脫經驗的固定性，以致經驗沒有侷限我們，反而讓我們去開拓。例如，在福音書的記載中，患病的都被耶穌醫治。耶穌是醫治者是我們對耶穌很基礎的認識，但我們不應侷限以此對耶穌的認識。否則，當我們的病情或親朋的病情得不到醫治時，我們就很難接受耶穌是醫治者。另一例子就是早期教會所面對的情況。一方面，猶太人受猶太教主義所限，未能認識耶穌是彌賽亞。另一方面，成為基督徒的猶太人仍受猶太教主義所限，未能完全接受外邦人成為基督徒。然而，沒有猶太人彌賽亞經驗，我們不可能理解耶穌的身分。然而，個人的驚慌不只是對個人的影響，更由此影響周遭的人，因為他們被視為鬼怪了。我們與罪人、妓女和稅吏一樣，都是罪人和蒙恩的人，不要看待他們的鬼怪。


你認識你所跟隨的耶穌是誰嗎？祂餵飽五千人、在海面上走、與罪人、妓女和稅吏一同吃飯、醫治病人。這樣的一位主如何讓我們面對人生的不幸和突發、社會中的貧窮者、同性戀者和患病者。在驚慌中，耶穌向我們說，「不要怕！」我們要認識我們所跟隨的耶穌。

Aliens in their homeland (Mk 6:1-6)

    Jesus’ being rejected by his town is best described as an alien in his native town. Alien here is not related to the movie Alien about external invasion to the earth. Neither is this related to one's immigration status. But rather it is an experience of being rejected, marginalized and exclusion. Jesus’ experience strikes me in two ways. First, what is the purpose of Mark to give a record of this story? Second, why isn’t Jesus honored by his town? Regarding the first question, it seems to me that Mark intends to use this Jesus’ particular experience to establish a thesis that Jesus is not only not honored by his town, but also by the Jews and even his created world. Although this is not explicitly expressed in Mark’s Gospel, this thesis is fully articulated in John’s Gospel. John writes,

He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. (Jn 1:10-11)

Jesus’ historical experience of being not honored by his town is one of the his many, and finally, Jesus is ended up in crucifixion. Mark reminds us that this is the Lord whom we follow, and we Christians share the same destiny of our Lord Jesus.

    Apart from the theological implication of that Jesus is not honored by his town, there are political reasons. For instance, there is a suggestion that the radicalness of Jesus makes the people of his town hesitate to ally with him, for they do not want to be involved in the conflict with Pharisees. Another suggestion considers that there may be some people in Nazareth that have a high social status, and therefore, Jesus’ high reputation would be considered as a threat to them. These are possible reasons. But having an experience of my native land being colonized, I would suggest that Jesus not being honored is due to a kind of colonialized mentality found in Nazareth. Let me explain this. During the time of being colonized, the people of Hong Kong, 96% are Chinese, struggled to enter English-speaking schools, gave priority to purchase western products, and looked up to the Westerners. Ironically, the people of Hong Kong looked down on the Chinese language, the Chinese products and even the Chinese people. This may be because China was weak and uncompetitive at that time. There is truth in it. Nevertheless, the post-colonial theory reminds us that the experience of looking up on the West has been turned into a discourse that shapes our mind and even becomes our life, and as a result, we no longer question the discourse and accept this as the right and reasonable thing to do. Even though Hong Kong is no more a colony, the colonial mentality of looking up to the West and the Chinese authorities has not been challenged.

    In the light of the post-colonial theory, we have a different understanding of Jesus' experience of being rejected by his home town. At the time of Jesus, Nazareth was a small town with a population of around 600-800 people. It is definitely incomparable with a big city like Jerusalem in terms of opportunities, prosperities and civilization. It is common for the people of Nazareth to admire a big city. Therefore, they do not honor Jesus, not just because they do not have trust in him, but also because they do not have confidence in themselves. They are looking up to the big city, and believe that everything from big city is better than the local. Thus, Jesus’ experience reminds us that first, the colonial discourse is not only taken place in a colonial status, but at anytime and anyplace. Second, the colonial discourse is not just a belief, but it can deprive one’s potentiality, and even one’s identity. The Bible says

Jesus could do no deed of power there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and cured them.

    If my introduction to the post-colonial theory to understand Jesus’ experience is acceptable as one of the reasons of Jesus’ being rejected, our immediate concern is what this would mean for the followers of Jesus. First, we should be aware of and critical of different kinds of colonial mentality featured by both Chinese and western cultures, capitalism and liberalism that limits the freedom of our faith in Jesus. Second, we should have self-confidence so that we can have faith in our brothers and sisters, and their life can be blossomed. It is not their untrustful, but rather it is our suspicious that makes us disbelief.

    Being alien in his home is the experience of Jesus in Nazareth. We have seen how such status can deprive his potentiality and even his life finally. In fact, Jesus’ experience is found in different corners of our world, such as, Palestinians in the so-called Israelite land, ethics groups in Myanmar, people like Liu Xiaoboa and Ai Weiwei in China, homosexuals in Hong Kong. When the disciples at the time of Jesus are sent to teach, heal and cast out demons, let us go to teach the gospel of grace and embrace, heal the wound caused by exclusion and cast out the demon of ideology represented by suspicious and post-colonial mentality.

Believe the unbelievable (Mk 5;21-24, 35-43)

An event happened 30 years ago. When I finished the high school and applied for university, I was advised not to apply more than one (there is no JUPAS at that time), for this was treated as an act of unbelief to God. My mentor explained that if this was God’s will, one application was enough. Is what he said true? What is faith in God?

The story of Jairus is an example of faith. Put straightly, it is about to believe even in an unbelievable and impossible situation. When he knew that Jesus arrived the shore, he quickly went to meet Jesus, and requested him to heal his daughter at the point of death (v.23). At this moment, Jairus had a strong faith in Jesus in two ways. First, he believed that Jesus had the power to heal, and second, Jesus was willing to heal. Anyway, Jesus was touched by Jairus’ sincere. Unfortunately, Jairus’ daughter was dead before they arrived at his home. The story said nothing about any emotional disturbance of Jairus when he heard the news. Rather Jesus responded immediately by saying that ‘Do not fear, but believe’ (v.36). Jesus’ word was definitely a comfort to Jairus, but whether his daughter was really dead remained a problem for Jairus. If she was dead, what believe meant or whether believe could change the reality. We do not know whether Jairus’ daughter is dead or not, but the story is that it is Jesus who brings life to Jairus’ daughter.

The Bible does not go on to describe how Jairus reflects from this experience. As an observer, I have learnt three insights about ‘Do not fear, but believe’ from Jairus’ experience. First, the emergence of fear is not because we are afraid of something, such as, crockcoaches, but because we do not see any possibilities. Aung San Sui Kyi rightly explains that fear discourages one in pursuit for love and justice, and at the same time, fear makes one to be violence in order to cover up his fear. The latter is exactly what the police are in responding to the protestors in these two days. I have left Cheung Sha Wan Church for 23 years, and many people might have commented that the church would not be able to sustain too long, for there is no significant increase of the number of participants. This is true, but we should not be discouraged either giving in or madly looking for survival skill, not because we believe that we will bounce back one day, but because there is a mission to be completed.

Second, in order not to be discouraged by the disappointed reality, we have to be suspicious of the so-called reality. From the eyes of the people at that time, Jairus’ daughter is dead, and this is uncontroversial. But this is not what Jesus understands. Jesus says she is sleeping. This is not necessarily related to the power of Jesus, but rather this is about a different perspective. I am not suggesting that we should be optimistic all the time, but rather the reality is more than what we have seen. We Christians know this better. Death is the reality, but it is not just about the end. Ironically, there is resurrection in death. July 1 Rally has been held for 15 years, but there is nothing significant achievement, except 2003. Despite this, we should not be discouraged, for we are pleased to see the consciousness of the people is rising.

Third, when we focus on the reality, we may have forgotten that God is in human history. God is not a guest, but an actor in human history. God is never indifference. Jairus’ daughter is lucky, but this may not be the experience of many patients. Despite the fact of that we may not have the same experience as Jairus’ daughter, this would not discredit that God is in history. Since God is in history, the world is not as static and determined as what we see. God has his time, and we have to have faith in him.

Fatalism is alienated from the Christian faith, for the future is not yet determined, and God is in human history. However, there is a tendency that some Christians have turned to a kind of utopianism, and hold that God will do what they believe. Obviously, their belief in God is more about a manipulation of God instead of that ‘let God be God’. Returning to my experience that I have shared at the beginning, it is a mistake to reduce our faith in God to just a matter of one application. Why doesn’t God’s will have many options? Perhaps, the core issue is neither one nor many applications, but rather we should not be discouraged by the so-called reality. There are different dimensions of reality and God is in history.

耶穌到底是誰? (可四36-41)

透過耶穌對病患者的醫治、驅鬼和對大自然的控制，門徒認識耶穌不僅是先知中的一位，更是上主的兒子。今日所讀的聖經關乎耶穌對大自然的控制。經歷耶穌平靜風和海後，門徒彼此說，「耶穌到底是誰？」（節41）


福音書有關耶穌對大自然的控制只有這則故事，但不因只有這則故事，耶穌對大自然的控制就是次要。相反，沒有對大自然的控制，我們對耶穌是上主兒子的理解就不完整，因為耶穌的救贖只限於個人層面。事實上，人類從來離不開大自然對人生活的影響。從種植到畜牧，從房子設計到衣著等等無不受大自然的影響和決定。當時門徒的社會對大自然有兩種體會，第一，他們對大自然的變化沒太多掌握。雖然他們從觀看天色的轉變而預測天氣變化，但對於不動聲色和來得很急的大自然變化是無從入手。明顯例子，門徒與耶穌開船就是對風浪沒有任何預測能力，只看見眼前的平靜，以致他們不知道大旋風已開始形成。第二，因大自然力量是不可預測，而其力量也超出人類可以對抗，人不但感覺微少，更將大自然成為崇拜的對象。透過對大自然的崇拜，人希望從中獲得看顧。因此，當耶穌有能力控制大自然時，門徒都被嚇呆了，因為他們跟隨的耶穌竟比大自然力量還要大。作者將這事記錄，因為他要指出耶穌不只是赦罪和醫治的主，更是大自然的主。

以上對耶穌的認識可能不是當下生活的體驗。不計算人為製造出來的破壞外，我們經歷不同程度的地震、颶風、水災和旱災。若耶穌比大自然力量還要大，甚至有能力控制大自然的話，我們如何理解耶穌對當下大自然破壞我們的生活，甚至取去我們親友的性命而沒有甚麼行動。我們也跟門徒一樣呼喊，「我們喪命，你不顧嗎？」（節38）對香港人來說，我們相對地沒有遇上太多大自然帶來的傷害，但我們的國家和鄰近的國家正經歷不同程度大自然力量的破壞。我們與他們一起向上主呼喊「我們喪命，你不顧嗎？」

坦白說，我沒有答案。我不明白為何上主不停止汶川地震，也不明白為何上主不停止日本海嘯等。若真的要解辯的話，我有以下的嘗試：

第一，聖經用「斥責」來描述耶穌對風的吩咐。「斥責」一詞本身帶有趕除鬼魔勢力的意含。因此，耶穌不是「斥責」大自然的風和海，而是其背後的黑暗勢力。事實上，這是耶穌時代的人對大自然的理解，即大自然是有意識的。然而，今日的我們對大自然理解已有別於耶穌時代。雖然我們同樣受制於大自然，但大自然不是一個有意識和被邪惡勢力所控制。地震和風浪是大自然的秩序，與黑暗力量沒有關係。因此，耶穌不停止地震和颶風不是他不顧及人類的生命，而是他也尊重大自然的內在秩序。重點不在於停止，而在於人類與大自然如何相處和共融.

第二，面對門徒的呼喊，耶穌以行動回應了，但同時，他向門徒說，「為甚麼膽怯？」「你們還沒有信心嗎？」若相信耶穌是大自然的主，也相信上主是看顧我們的主，我們理應不需因面對生活的艱難而膽怯。我們甚至可以這樣說，大自然的破壞力沒有使我們膽怯，失去對上主的信心。問題是：這真的可以嗎？或許，這些問題的基本問題是，「耶穌到底是誰？」若他是一位逢凶化吉的上主，他可能要被更換了，因為他沒有解決我的困難。又若他是一位有能力，但拒絕行動的上主，他可能要被批評了，因為他視而不見。「耶穌到底是誰？」這是一個客觀問題，也是一個主觀問題。你會如何從你的生命遭遇中回答？

以上的嘗試並沒有解答我們的問題：為何上主不停止汶川地震？但以上嘗試帶出新一輪問題，即「耶穌到底是誰？」讓我跟你們分享一個故事：

.............................................

我會抱怨上主，但他是有恩典的上主。

種子與果實

人生第一次被邀請在幼稚園畢業禮 (六所幼稚園) 擔任主禮嘉賓. 帶著戰慄心情引用一個希伯來故事作為題辭: 我夢見我進入一間商店 站在服務臺後面是一位天使 我問，「這裡賣甚麼？」 天使回答，「任何你想要的東西。」 我說，「那真好！我想世界和平、家庭快樂、沒有饑荒．．．」 天使趕著回答，「等一等，你誤會了．我們這裡不賣果實，只賣種子．」

There is alternative (MK 4:26-32)

A sense of powerlessness and helplessness are the feelings of most contemporaries. For instance, we are unable to change the economic injustice characterized by hegemony of land developers. Likewise, we are unable to change the unjust political arrangement, that is, the functional constituencies of the Legislative Council. How to live in such unfavourable social context is the background of MK 4:28-32.

MK 4:28-32 is talking about God’s kingdom, and God’s kingdom is about God’s reign characterized by love and justice, not the number of converted, for the converted does not necessarily mean living in love and justice. In fact, love and justice is the one of the core messages in the Hebrew Scripture. For instance, Amos said, ‘But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.’ (5:24)These two parables are talking about the growth of God’s kingdom. It has its own time to flourish, and surprisingly, it is unnoticed. Although God’s kingdom is the smallest as the mustard seed, it will grow into maturity one day, and become ‘the greatest of all shrubs, and puts forth large branches, so that the birds of the air can make nests in its shade.’ Some may under what Jesus has said here is to reveal the work of God against the work of humans. Since Jesus’ parables are to respond to the feeling of helplessness and hopelessness of the disciples, an emphasis on God’s work in human work is appropriate, for the disciples need to be comforted more than to be encouraged to work. Despite the fact that we have no idea what exact difficulties the disciples are facing, the parables comfort them in two ways.

First, they are reminded that God is working implicitly, and God’s kingdom would flourish in an unnoticed way. When most people believe that the darkness has won, love and justice characterized by God’s kingdom would not be diminished. Second, our faith in God demands us to be patience. We cannot push the realization of God’s kingdom, but we can witness to it. Witness to God’s kingdom is more than a matter of doing, but also a virtue of patience. However, patience is no longer seen as a virtue, for patience is considered as equivalent to slow, toleration and passive. This equivalence is unjustified, for patience itself can be radical. The most recent example is Aung San Sui Kyi. She keeps patience for last 20 years, and during these 20 years, she is radical and never gives up the hope for human dignity. Patience is not doing nothing, but is learning to be not in control and keeping faith in God. Having faith in God and being patience are what we need in the midst of powerlessness and helplessness

‘There is no alternative’ (TINA) is the famous slogan of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. She was talking about economic liberalism, that is, free market, free trade and capitalist globalization. Nevertheless, TINA is no longer confined to economic liberalism, but has been expanded to everyday life. Put shortly, we cannot do anything to change the reality, and we have to accept it anyway. For instance, we are not able to change the education system even though we dislike it. We are not able to change the working condition even though we dislike it. Is TINA a reality or a discourse? The basic difference is that TINA as a discourse is to discourage us to look for alternative so that the privilege of the ruling class is unchallenged and protected. Since it is a discourse, any alternative proposal would be portrayed as utopia and surreal. As a result, we are trained to accept the so-called reality. This is the background that the parables of God’s kingdom intend to challenge. Two years ago, a Christian guy starts a campaign against the big businesses. He suggests an alternative, that is, no shopping in shopping malls, no octopus card and no public transport so that social life can be transformed. One may be suspicious of his proposal, but no matter how tiny his action is, his personal action has successfully aroused the public concern about the monopoly of big businesses, and that there is alternative. The alternative is not dependent upon how it is more effective, but characterized by love and justice. Another Christian man shares with me that he has left his post as chef, for he cannot accept that the food provided for students is beyond the best date. He has complained to his senior, but no response from the company. He has made the case known to the public, and finally, he is sacked. Some may criticize that he is stupid, for his tiny action would not be able to change the company. But our faith in God’s kingdom reminds us that there is alternative characterized by love and justice, and we have to keep patience in God’s kingdom.

A few days ago, Past Chu Yiu Ming asks me, ‘Why do you study theology?’ I reply straightly, ‘I believe there is alternative in contemporary life. The church is the alternative, because I believe in God’s kingdom.’ It is right that the church is a community of sinners and saints, but this is not an excuse not to be alternative, for we are called to witness to God’s kingdom, and this is the best what we serve the world .

靈性秩序與大自然秩序 (太六26-29)

耶穌的講道運用很多大自然的景象和事物來講解天國。例如，鹽、光、雀鳥、百合花、稗子、芥菜種等。對此，我們有一個很基本的問題。這些大自然景象和事物只是一個媒介用作講解天國還是大自然景象和事物所呈現的自然秩序與靈性秩序有一種內在關係？若大自然景象和事物只是一個媒介，我們會因我們已不再生活在一個農業社會，而放棄對大自然景象和事物的認識。再者，我們也不需對大自然景象和事物有任何尊重和肅立，因為他們只是工具。相反，若大自然景象和事物與靈性秩序有一種內在關係時，我們不但要投入大自然景象和事物中，更要以謙卑心靈尊重和聆聽他們向我們說話。 就今日經文，我只分享兩件事。第一，雀鳥的不種不收與天父的護理和照顧（太六26）。這經驗可能與我們當下的生活經驗並不吻合。例如，有很多人和動物真的餓死了。天父似乎沒有按耶穌所發現的照顧他們。然而，耶穌的發現不成立，不一定因為這經驗的限制，反而因為當下的饑荒是因：（一）人對大自然的破壞所致；（二）人的貪婪、浪費和資本主義的邏輯所造成；（三）人失去資源共享的美德。雀鳥讓耶穌體會天父的照顧，不是耶穌藉雀鳥說明天國的奧祕，以致他傳道的日子也倣效從雀鳥來的靈性體會，即不種不收，「食人地」。讓我們想一想，家中的動物或所接觸到的動物與靈性秩序的關係如何豐富和影響我們的生活。 第二，百合花與天父對生命的珍惜（太六28-29）。德蘭修女分享一個故事， 我們將一個在坑渠旁，而半身已被蟲蛀食了的男人帶回家，並為他清洗身上的蟲，但最終，我們救不了他。離世時，他說，「我活著時就像街頭一隻動物，但快要死時，我卻像天使，竟如此被愛和被關心。」 珍惜使上主不會因百合花只有很短暫的生命，就被否決他有美麗的外形；珍惜使上主不會因百合花沒有很高的藥物價值，就被否決他的存在。百合花讓耶穌體會上主對萬物的態度，不是耶穌藉百合花說明天國的奧祕，以致這成為他傳道日子對門徒和周遭人的態度。讓我們有想一想，家中的動物或所接觸到的動物與靈性秩序的關係如何豐富和影響我們的生活。 以上分享沒有傾向要絕對化美化大大自然的景象和事物，但肯定的，大自然的景象和事物參與靈性秩序，我們從中認識生命。