五月天 - 忘詞
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JitxsB3g6As&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1]

昨晚坐99公車感覺還蠻溫馨的, 以前去UBC通車通了三年半, 都是自己一個人上下學. 今天和一群朋友一起坐著瞎聊感覺很棒, 整個晚上和晚餐都蠻開心的. 我就說有快樂細胞嘛!! 嘻嘻!!

還有今天噴很久沒用的香水, 感覺有點奇怪, 但應該還好, 哈哈, 到現在身上都還有味道. (嗅嗅)

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()


To the holy, all things are holy.
It is not what people say or do outside in themselves that determines holiness, it is what's in the heart.
Therefore the Wisdom of God says, "keep your heart with all diligence,  for out of it spring the issues of life" (Prov 4:23).
Some will not believe no matter what evidence is provided for them, or what miracles of life are done--they don't see God in anything because they have already predetermined in their hearts that there is no God.
Einstein observed a mere straw and concluded that there must be a "god," or something/someone Divine.
Some see God in everything. They see Christ in everything that they do and say. For them there is not the dichotomy of the "religious" or "secular," for Christ is always before them and lived through in their hearts and lives. Jesus expressly said "blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Matt 5:8).
There are various degrees and forms of "seeing God," but it originates from the heart and not what's without.
And only the loving tender grace of God can transform a yielded heart with the fullness of His love--in love and in truth.
"To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled" (Titus 1:15).
Heaven is not far above, never too far, never further away than a thought, a will to allow the perfect love of Christ to fill your soul until overflowing.
It is a rest, it is a joy, it is what people have been seeking all through their lives to fill the emptiness they feel in their hearts. You can abandon yourself unreservedly in His arms because you're assured beyond a shadow of a doubt that He loves you no matter what. No matter what.
No matter what.
And before you know it, you're walking in God's holiness without straining or noticing it. And you will see and sense God in a deeper way. He is not a doctrine, He is not a moral code, He is not the authority figures that have hurt your life. He is love, He is your very own and personal Father God, wanting to embrace you each and every moment.
Peace (you can sense it).
^__^


有一種細胞叫做快樂的細胞
對抗所有生命的流行性病毒
無敵強
從祂而來

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

「他所賜的有使徒、有先知.有傳福音的.有牧師和教師.

為要成全聖徒、各盡其職、建立基督的身體.

直等到我們眾人在真道上同歸於一、認識 神的兒子、得以長大成人、滿有基督長成的身量.

使我們不再作小孩子、中了人的詭計、和欺騙的法術、被一切異教之風搖動、飄來飄去、就隨從各樣的異端.

惟用愛心說誠實話、凡事長進、連於元首基督.」

(以弗所書4:11-15)


今天五重職事的異象深深的烙印在我心中.
是的, 目前為止很少, 或是幾乎沒有任何教會有所有的五重一起成熟的運作. 使徒行傳所記載的初代教會就是因為有成熟的五重一起彼此搭配才帶來極大的復興. 那在台灣教會當中, 雖說近年來開始有很多個別的五重興起(但很多看似是五重卻只是有恩賜沒有職分), 但多半還是很零散, 要不然就是要強烈依靠外來講員. 還有很多的問題是出在不平衡的靈恩真理教導上, 要不是沒有深度, 要不就是只有理性上的片面理論傳輸.


這就是為什麼我堅持這個部落格很多東西還是盡量用中文打, 因為英文資源已經太多太多了. 我曉得神當初要我好好把英文和中文學好有祂的用意.

知道自己的職分呼召是一回事, 要負責訓練起五重職事又是完全另一回事. 如果沒有這個呼召, 就沒有必要去強求, 也是求不到, 最好的位置永遠是在神的純全心意裡. 但有這樣的呼召卻因自我的因素沒有達成又是另一件事.

現在還沒有太遲來付這個大代價.

我長假異夢的預言還在進行中, 我曉得那兩個人代表的是什麼. 很多異象異夢是要好多好多年才會完全成就. 我也知道神呼召我對台灣有負擔, 然後我也被告知在未來的一天我會拜訪那個曾被宣告為聖靈之南方大陸的澳洲(我在靈裡的畫布上也隱約看到了我站在那個地方). 諷刺的是, 唯一我還不是很確定是加拿大, 好像有一些感動, 但我不100%確定的事我都不會去做假設, 而要繼續尋求.

很多事實在是太奇妙了, 看似巧合卻不是, 那是羅馬書8:28節的能力, 讓這節經文有功效的唯一條件是真實的愛神. 在我2004年回台灣前爲一位在決定重要方向的姊妹所領受的經文, 居然就是我在七天禁食異象中領受的經文, 又是在前一陣子為另一位姊妹前程禱告神給的經文. 全部都是同一段經節. 很奇怪, 很奇妙, 有屬靈的蹊蹺.

我知道我現在該做的事, 是在神的話和神的靈上趕上進度. 忠心, 預備, 到時候看神如何指示. 有點緊張, 有點興奮. 但我想起長假異夢裡看到的是別忘了最初的純樸簡單愛祂愛人的一本初衷.

最後要歡慶我老師上個月在雪梨開始里程碑的教會, 我知道他靈裡會感受到我在這對他的真摯祝福, 這的的確確會是個榮耀的十年, 到2016還有八年. 我會加油的.
謝謝你老師,
沒有你, 沒有我.


真的.

Share the vision of the Fivefold, the perfection of the Church will not come until all of the Fivefold co-labour together, to bring forth a glorious Church, the most beautiful Bride of Christ.

這是從我信主後就一直看見基督最美麗新娘的異象, 如今扔在我心中燃燒著熊熊愛火.

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(2) 人氣()

  [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4lB31sKUBk&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

  • Nov 09 Sun 2008 20:05
  • 完滿

我說: 嘻嘻  看到了嗎

你說: 當然有啊  我在場

我說: (大聲的) 我-做-到-了-!!!

你說: (微笑)

我說: 以後要多信任我啊  我和你說我做得到 (俏皮)

很多人可以說的很好聽  可是真正做得到的了了無幾

你說: 99隻和一隻羊  還有大野狼呢?

我說: 其實沒有人知道  你給我的兩項不能說的秘密任務

報告  完滿達成

但我想知道  有些咒詛一定只有死才能打破嗎?

你說: 看看我的十字架就知道  沒有別的方法

我說: 嗯  我了解了  其實很多事你已先告訴我了

大野狼的事一百隻都不會明白

事情都照這夢裡一模一樣的發生了  我答應你沒有說出

一隻以為我不曉得  但它不懂

你說: 可是你還不是去救了它  為什麼?

我說: 跟你學的

我終於學會這個比喻不是你不在乎99隻

你說: 還有呢?

我說: 不要再問了 (生氣)

然後我要謝謝你  前幾天藉台灣那位姊妹深深鼓勵到我

我... 最終還是回歸了純樸簡單... (淚)

你說: (抱抱)

所以啊, 所以我安排星期一去慶祝啊!

我說: 我知道是你安排的

你說: (很燦爛的微笑)

知道秘密沒有什麼  是很多人因為知道會利用別人

或著  我們選擇了祝福.

我說: (不語)

(試著提起俏皮的勁)

嘻嘻... (很勉強)

你說: 恭喜你任務完滿達成, 乾杯!!

我說: (舉杯)

And I love You (輕聲細語的) (很快的)


(真心的)

(很多很多的)


爸比啊... (喜極而泣)

我想告訴你  我從來就沒有後悔接受這項任務

我們打勾勾約定

從此不再提這個不能說的秘密
哈哈...
全世界最可愛的傻瓜  笨蛋...  笨死了 (眼淚)


「便心滿意足」(賽53:11)

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

今天晚上的確有被深深感動到
從來不要為忙碌找藉口
讓我隨時都準備好
只要祢一句話
我可以放下一切所有的
為祢  猴媽永遠不會太忙
你知道嗎
其是那些
都不重要  真的一點都不重要
學業  服事  工作  或任何看似好的壞的事情
太忙太多
太複雜了  我不要
心的純真  愛的純真
誰失去了
我知道假如一輩子忙到老到離開這地上最終都沒有放手
沒有回歸純真
說穿了是太貪心  太不安心
太遲了
但我還不遲  一點都不遲
如果愛到極點
啊... 那是
愛的簡單  很單純很單純
不是我自己愛的方式  是祢愛的方式
不是勉強  是發自內心的願意
真心願意背負別人的痛苦疾病
只希望  看到一個他快樂
那瞬間很容易聽到祢的絮語
了解為什麼祢選擇了十字架
其實沒有人可以真正的背負旁人的痛苦
只有祢  只有十字架
但那卻是個心志  帶下祢神蹟的管道
當一顆心被祢自己的愛所滿溢時
它可以七十個七次甘心樂意的交替
啊... 好幸福喔
祢的愛好偉大...
Then I heard You say:
"Show the greatest compassion and mercy to all

Be very considerate

Be very kind and gentle

But never forget

The One standing in front of you

Never let anything come in between

Like lovers' eyes embracing each other only and only

Remember

The One standing in front of you

Is the One who you madly fell in love with

Behold the most beautiful countenance

The most important Person

Your Lover

The most important thing

To love Him--to be with, to walk with, to hold hands, to stretch arms, to kiss Him

He is standing in front of you

Beholding His lover"
愛很簡單  從來沒有這麼簡單過
「他誠然擔當我們的憂患、背負我們的痛苦.我們卻以為他受責罰、被 神擊打苦待了。那知他為我們的過犯受害、為我們的罪孽壓傷.因他受的刑罰我們得平安.因他受的鞭傷我們得醫治。」(賽53:4-5)

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

        James
I. Packer’s Keep in Step with the Spirit: finding fullness in our
walk with God
is a treatise on the Holy Spirit in view of the doctrine of
sanctification and the thriving charismatic movements of the 20th
century and the early years of the 21st century.[i]
The outline of this book review is divided into four major sections:
introduction, description, evaluation, and conclusion. Background information
of the author and the book is provided in the introduction, which includes this
prefatory paragraph. The author’s writing style, the book’s purpose and scope
are also discussed in the introduction. A general overview of the book and a
description of its contents are in the second major section. The book’s
strengths and weaknesses are assessed in evaluation. Lastly, a summary of the
overall analysis of the book and some final comments are offered in the
concluding portion of this review.

        Packer
identifies his personal and theological perspective in the preface of the
second edition. This is a real plus for the book inasmuch as a good
understanding of a book can never be apart from a good understanding of its
author. James Innell Packer was born on July 22, 1926 in Gloucester, England.
He is a British-born Canadian Christian theologian in the Calvinistic Anglican
tradition.[ii]
He currently serves as a Board of Governors' Professor of Theology at Regent College
in Vancouver, Canada (where I live!). Being a
prolific writer, his best-known book is probably Knowing God.[iii]
His theological persuasion is Reformed; hence he often appeals to the writings
of John Calvin and, especially, the Puritan theologian John Owen. In portraying
himself, Packer writes that he found himself at the same time a “theological
pietist and a pietistic theologian.”[iv]

The background information
of Keep in Step with the Spirit is mostly given in the two prefaces of
the first and second editions of the book. The first edition was published in
1984 when the Vineyard Movement and charismatic-like Third Wave Christians were
on the rise.[v]
A revised and expanded second edition was published in 2005 since much has
happened in Christendom and the charismatic circles worldwide during the
in-between twenty-one years timeframe. The book was born out of a number of
doctrinal and methodological issues in the charismatic and Pentecostal
movements that, as Packer observed, gave rise to concerns. The book’s title Keep
in Step with the Spirit
, taken from Galatians 5:25b (NIV), is vivid in
portraying the author’s intent. Its subject is on the Personhood and ministry
of the Holy Spirit in New Testament times as it relates to topics such as the
doctrine of sanctification, the charismatic life, and revival. Its style, in
Packer’s own words, “picks up not on contemporary academic pneumatology, but on
questions facing those who seek to live by the Bible with faith and a good
conscience.”[vi]
He feels modern-day theology is “not pastoral and catechetical,” and is “less
forthright [than him] in affirming the Spirit’s divine Personhood.” Its central
themes are wars with sin and temptation as they relate to sanctification, personal
charismatic piety, and the Holy Spirit’s work in revivals. According the
Packer, the book’s purpose is fourfold: to emphasize Christ-centeredness as the
heart of the Holy Spirit’s ministry, to reaffirm and present his view on
sanctification, to evaluate the charismatic movement, and to show that it is
not synonymous with Biblical revivals, thus exhorting readers to look beyond
it.[vii]
He tries to show that these purposes serve to usher believers into a fullness
of their walk with God in true purity and power. Therefore, the book is not
only intended for charismatics and Christians who practice similar type of
renewal spirituality, but also for all sincere Christians seeking spiritual
depth and fullness because they “mean business with God and are prepared to be
dealt with by [H]im.”[viii]

        Keep
in Step with the Spirit
contains two prefaces, eight chapters, an appendix,
endnotes, and Scriptural and topical indices.[ix]
The two prefaces, as stated above, deliver the author’s personal background and
the aims of the book. In the opening chapter (Getting the Spirit in Focus),
Packer begins by putting forth his view of the Holy Spirit’s New Covenant
ministry. He believes that the focus of the Spirit’s ministry has frequently
been blurred by misplaced emphases on themes such as power, performance,
purity, and presentation. In assessing them, Packer affirms their biblical
validity and importance as aspects of the work of the Holy Spirit; however,
they will always be out-of-place and inadequate as long as the centerpiece is
absent. In short, Packer believes that the main work of the Holy Spirit is to
mediate the presence and life of Christ to believers. This works out in terms
of fellowship with Jesus, transformation to Christlikeness, and assurance of
God’s love, redemption, and adoption. Consequently, every facet of the Spirit’s
ministry functions to serve this purpose. On the other hand, when this focal
point is not highlighted, a fuzzy and shallow pneumatology will result. All
subsequent chapters of the book seek to develop this thesis.

        In
the second chapter (The Holy Spirit in the Bible), Packer tries to show the
reader what the Bible teaches about the Holy Spirit and His assignment.
Firstly, he confirms the Trinitarian doctrine by establishing the fact that the
Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Godhead, not a force or influence,
coequal and coeternal with God the Father and God the Son in essence and
majesty. The Spirit was sent to the earth to dwell within believers by the
Father and the Son as the second Paraclete to guide and empower them when the
earthly ministry of Jesus, the first Paraclete, was completed.[x]
The Spirit’s main task now, therefore, is a floodlight ministry to make people
aware of Jesus’ presence and glory. The Spirit’s works in conviction,
regeneration, Spirit-baptism, assurance, spiritual gifts, inner sealing, daily
guidance, evangelism and other activities, are all means in which the Spirit
helps individuals to a deeper relationship with Jesus Christ—and this in turn
will bring one closer to the Father. Packer also defines certain key
charismatic terms in the second chapter. He identifies charismata[xi],
spiritual gifts, as “actualized powers” in which Christ works through His Body,
the Church, to the Body. He believes that charismata are for
edification. Hence, Christians may perform with their “giftings,” but if God
does not bless them to bring regular benefits to the Church, then they cannot
claim to have spiritual gifts. On Spirit-baptism, Packer believes that this
occurs at the same time as regeneration. He denies the Pentecostal two-stage
post-conversion baptism of the Spirit. Simply put, all genuine Christians are
baptized in the Spirit into Christ the moment when they are born again; thus,
there is no need to seek another Spirit baptism after one is saved. Packer
interprets John 20:22[xii]
as a prophetic act of Jesus rather than an actual and literal incident of the
disciples’ receiving the Holy Spirit.

        Chapter three (Mapping the Spirit’s Path:
The Way of Holiness) engages the topic of holiness. The author defines
“holiness,” in a word, as “Christlikeness.” He lists four reasons why he thinks
it is a much-neglected priority. First of all, today’s evangelicals are
preoccupied with controversy. Secondly, evangelicals are disillusioned with the
holiness teaching such as Keswick, or other second-blessing idea of
sanctification. Thirdly, gifts and talents preempt the holiness theme.
Fourthly, evangelicals are insensitive to the holiness of God Himself. Packer
then gives seven principles about holiness in regard to its: (1) nature; (2)
context; (3) root; (4) agent; (5) experience; (6) rule; and (7) heart. This is
a chapter that expresses the significance and urgency of recovering biblical
holiness in the lives of Christians today. In the fourth chapter (Mapping the
Spirit’s Path: Versions of Holiness), as the title suggests, Packer delineates
three prominent sanctification views and approaches: Augustinian Holiness
(Reformed), Wesleyan Perfectionism, and Keswick. Then he examines their
teachings in light of the Scriptures and discusses their strengths and
weaknesses. Although he points out and affirms the positive contributions of
Wesleyan and Keswick holiness, in the final analysis, he favors the Reformed
view of holiness—he sees it as the only biblical teaching concerning the
doctrine of sanctification.

The fifth chapter (Mapping
the Spirit’s Path: The Charismatic Life) attempts to assess the charismatic
movement. He outlines five general distinctives of the charismatic life:
post-conversion spiritual enrichment, speaking in tongues, spiritual gifts,
worship in the Spirit, and link to revival. In regard to theology, most
Protestant charismatics interpret their experiences in terms of restoration
of biblical truths. Catholic charismatics, on the other hand, tend to view the
renewal as a realization of biblical promises, which is the position
Packer takes. The positive aspects of the movement are twelve: (1)
Christ-centeredness; (2) Spirit-empowered living; (3) emotion finding
expression; (4) prayerfulness; (5) joyfulness; (6) every-heart involvement in
the worship of God; (7) every-member ministry in the Body of Christ; (8)
missionary zeal; (9) small-group ministry (10) attitude toward Church structures;
(11) communal living; and (12) generous giving. The negative aspects are ten:
(1) elitism; (2) sectarianism; (3) emotionalism; (4) anti-intellectualism; (5)
illuminism; (6) “charismania” (measures one’s spiritual health and growth by
the impressiveness of gifts and manifestations[xiii]);
(7) “super-supernaturalism” (constantly expects God to work miracle of all
sorts that transcends natural laws[xiv]);
(8) eudaemonism (characterizes the value of life in terms of happiness); (9)
demon obsession; and (10) conformism (peer pressure to perform certain
charismatic practices). Packer ends the chapter by arguing that charismatic
experiences are not unprecedented—there have been several charismatic-like
occurrences throughout the history of the Church.

        Chapter
six zooms in particular charismatic issues that Packer deems problematic. He
tries to show that Spirit Baptism is not separate from regeneration, and it
does not require any sign gift, normally tongues, as evidence. Though he
believes God can work supernatural miracles, but they are only similar
to the gifts that operated in the first century and are not the same (i.e. the
miraculous gifts are not the same as the gifts mentioned in 1 Cor 12, Eph 4,
and Rom 12). He views the gift of prophecy as primarily a sanctified natural
ability to share the Word of God in God’s wisdom and power, and not a divine
utterance of God’s direct revelation. Many who claim to speak in “tongues” are
actually not tongues at all, and the interpretation of tongues is almost
non-existent. In conclusion, Packer believes that charismatic theology is
immature, and it is quite flawed in its ideology, methodology and practice.
Chapter seven (Come, Holy Spirit) is an exhortation to Christians to seek for
revivals. Packer holds that the key to revival is the return to the heart of
the ministry of the Holy Spirit: Christ-centeredness. When believers turn from
their sins and seek to live a sanctified life continually, they will have hope
in witnessing God-send revivals in a lukewarm age of Christianity. The last
chapter (Heaven on Earth: A Pentecost Exposition) is a general exegesis of the
Pentecost event in Acts 2 and onward. Packer clarifies that what occurred on
that particular Sunday was a “Tower
of Babel in reverse.”[xv]
The Holy Spirit’s Christ-pointing ministry is seen in the Apostle Peter’s
sermon. The Spirit enlightened the audiences as well as the speakers’ hearts to
understand that Jesus is the Messiah, Savior and Lord of all. He ends the book
by bringing Romans 5:5[xvi]
and encourages the readers by reminding them of the incredible love of God
being poured out into the believers’ hearts by the Holy Spirit.

        Keep in Step with the Spirit has
many strengths and they are spread out all through the book. The construction
of the book is mostly coherent—its organization of chapters and thesis
development is well systematized. Packer’s method of argument is consistent
throughout the book. He does not use way too many technical jargons, thus it
appears fairly understandable to the average reader. The quality of notes and
references are good. The major strength of the book is it rightly brings out
the Spirit’s Christ-centeredness ministry back to center stage. The Spirit came
to glorify Jesus by declaring what He receives from Jesus to Christ’s followers
(John 16:14). I believe this book has done an excellent job in exposing the
superficiality of many present-day concepts of the Holy Spirit. In analyzing
the charismatic movement, the book placed equal emphases on its positive
contributions, subtle pitfalls and extremities. The list of ten negative
aspects of the movement is especially helpful for those who are seeking balance
in the surging movement. The other significant insight of the book is its
constant and strong stress on repentance, sins, and God’s sovereignty (as
expected from a Reformed theologian). These are topics often absent or treated
lightly in charismatic sermons and literatures. Only the “pure in heart,”
individuals or corporate bodies, can see God (Matt. 5:8). The chapter on
revival (Come, Holy Spirit) is right on target when Packer says that the
“Scripture shows that there is more to the renewing of the church than the
common charismatic emphases cover.”[xvii]
It is evident in reality that the charismatic movements are by and large not
synonymous with revivals. Only as one grasp this truth, will one continue to
seek and ask for greater renewals that are Heaven-born. Lastly, the book ends
well by encouraging its readers that “the love of God has been poured out in
[all believers’] hearts by the Holy Spirit,” leaving them hopeful and
forward-looking.

To my observation, the book has two main weaknesses: the definition
of perfection and the interpretation of charismatic theology. Firstly, Packer
does not really define what “perfection” is from the biblical perspective,
except that it is not “absolute perfection” and that one is “not perfect”
because one “can always do better or improve.” It seems that he just assumes
his own or common Christians’ idea of “perfection” (whatever it is) when
critiquing the various sanctification views. It might seem unnecessary to
define what “perfect” is—after all, “perfection,” in common terminology, means
“without fault or defect.”[xviii]
However, it would not be altogether improbable if God’s definition of
perfection diverges from that of finite, created human beings (Isai. 55:9).
This is not trying to play cute on semantics, seriously. There are numerous
Scriptures that seem to directly or indirectly indicate a type of perfection.
Packer lists twenty-six of them on p.230 in the notes, but he does not talk
about them much, which I think is a notable flaw. He does mention a few of them
when assessing the Wesleyan and Keswick holiness teachings, in which He uses
Romans 7:14-25 to counterclaim. However, it is not hard to see that a different
definition of perfection would probably result in a different Romans 7:14-25
exegesis. In my judgment, it would have been better to leave open the question
of which version of sanctification is most biblical open instead of
categorically rejecting both Wesleyan and Keswick as being unscriptural. He
could well argue that the perfectionist and Keswick views do not seem to
represent Bible sanctification, but it seems too narrow a view to leave the
readers with practically only one option when, in the first place, he does not
define perfection adequately (see Appendix: A Perspective on Christian Perfection).

The book’s second shortcoming is on its charismatic theology
appraisal. Packer comments that its common distinctives are “deeply unbiblical”
(p.161). However, I do not think he is, first of all, the best candidate to
critique the subject. How can someone who has never spoke in tongues judge
tongues speaking rightly? How can someone who is not very involved in the
charismatic ministry and practices see the whole picture just by looking from a
spectator’s perspective? A person is not going to teach others how to swim
effectively if he only has intellectual knowledge from books and consulting
others but has very little actual swimming experiences. It is like a non-Christian
writing a book on “knowing Jesus” trying to prove to Christians that their view
of Jesus is “deeply nonsensical.” In the same way, Packer is evaluating the
charismatic distinctives with his own measuring line. The reason why this
theology does not seem “straight” to him is because he is, in the first place,
not in the right position to judge it. He occasionally has an insight or two
throughout its review, but the bulk of it is, in my view, an unfair treatment
on the subject. For instance, he does not believe that the healing gifts of the
Spirit have been restored. In other words, charismatic healing ministries might
demonstrate a healing once in a while, but they are not the same as the healing
gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:9, 28, 30. His main argument is that
because many healing miracles are not instantaneous like those through the
hands of Jesus and the early church apostles; therefore, they are not the same.
Also, these healings never relapsed and almost every attempt to heal the sick was
successful. However, Packer fails to note that there are many instantaneous
healings throughout the entire 20th century and the early years of
the 21st century worldwide. Just because he does not witness
many instantaneous healings in his own environment, it does not mean
that this type of work is not being demonstrated. In fact, there are abundant
immediate healings happening all around the world in places such as China,
Africa, Southeast Asia, Latin America, Korea, just to name a few. In my own
church, there are also instantaneous healing testimonies. When this happens in
a small or medium-sized church, it will probably not get much public attention.
Packer never brings these into his analysis properly. One also needs to see
that Jesus, the apostles and the early church were much more mature than the
church today in general. Therefore, it should not be a surprise if there were
more instantaneous cases in the Scriptures. It would probably be right to say
that generally the Scriptures only recorded extraordinary healing incidents
(Acts 19:11) by virtue of their unusual element, since to record every little
single healing would produce a much larger volume (John 21:25). Furthermore,
careful readers will discover that there are notable gradual healing cases or
times when a healing is not successful instantly in the Bible (Mark 8:22-25; 1
Tim. 5:23; 1 Cor. 11:30; Phil. 2:27; 2 Tim. 4:20). The bottom line is we cannot
interpret the Bible by the “silence argument.” Just because the Bible only
recorded three dead persons raised by Jesus, it does not signify that this is
the total dead people that He ever raised in His ministry.[xix]
Another important aspect that Packer does not discuss is that unbelief plays a
pivotal role in receiving miracles (Matt. 8:13; Mark 11:22-24; James 5:15).
Could it be that because one does not believe in the gifts of the Spirit so
s/he does not receive the manifestations? The Bible is clear in that when the
people of God do not believe a particular Scripture to be true, that truth will
not become a reality to them. In conclusion, Packer is actually, at least in
some considerable portions, examining experiences to interpret Scriptures when
he should have examined the Scriptures to interpret experiences. This erring
principle is also subtly applied to his analysis of other subjects such as
Spirit-baptism, tongues and interpretation, and prophecies. Even if Packer has
rightly observed some charismatic phenomena, partial truths are still not the
whole counsel of God—sometimes it can even end up with the exact opposite
meaning.

In summary, Keep in Step with the Spirit is a good and
informative book for those who have a comprehensive understanding and
experience of charismatic theology, practices, and also the various views of
sanctification. The book is clearheaded in pointing out many Pentecostal
extremities and rightly tries to re-focus the Holy Spirit’s work back to
Christ-centeredness. On the other hand, I do not think it is as beneficial for
those who do not have much experience and knowledge in the topics discussed in
the book. Many readers in this category will likely just concur with Packer’s
arguments simply because of his academic credentials, intellectual giftedness,
and ability to convey his ideas in eloquence. I do not doubt the author’s God-given
talents in these areas, but without proper experiences, it is hard to exercise
discernment in charismatic subjects. In the original preface of the book,
Packer outlines his book like serving a meal: chapter one the appetizer;
chapter two the soup, chapter three to six the meat; and chapter seven and
eight the dessert (p.16). It would seem, in my opinion, that if the meat
portion were cut down somewhat, that is, the parts where he evaluates the
charismatic theology, the overall meal would be “healthier.” Also it would have
been a really valuable piece if the author provides a deeper study on biblical
perfection. However, all been said, the author’s intent for the book and his
brave attempt to bring some light to the Body of Christ is unquestionably worthy.
Taken as a whole, it is a work that has some useful insights if the readers can
apply a high level of wisdom, discernment, and humility to learn from the
book’s strengths as well as weak spots.




[i] Unless otherwise
indicated, the words “charismatic(s)” and “Pentecostal(s),” are used in this
review as broad terms describing and denoting all
Pentecostal/charismatic(-like) movements and their constituencies in a general
sense.



[ii] Additional
information on J. I. Packer is obtained from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. J.
I. Packer
. Retrieved January 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._I._Packer,
and also Regent College’s website:
http://www.regent-college.edu/



[iii] J. I. Packer, Knowing
God
(Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1973).



[iv] Packer, Keep
in Step with the Spirit
, p.10. By this he means he has both the qualities
and attributes of a pietist and theologian, which he thinks is atypical to be
found on an individual at the same time.



[v] The term “Third
Wave” is used to describe a movement similar to the charismatic movement that
involves groups of charismatic-like evangelical Christians in the
post-Neo-Pentecostal era. The Vineyard Movement and its leader John Wimber play
a vital role in the Third Wave movement. This term assumes Classical
Pentecostalism to be the First Wave of the charismatic revival/renewal of the
20th century. The Second Wave is Neo-Pentecostalism, or sometimes
called the Charismatic Renewal. The term “Third Wave” is coined by Peter Wagner
in 1983. He and John Wimber are dubbed by many as the key initiators of the
Third Wave Holy Spirit Renewal.



[vi] Also quotations
in the following sentence, J. I. Packer, Keep in Step with the Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Books, 2005, 2nd ed.), pp. 12-13.



[vii] Ibid., p.11.



[viii] Ibid., p.18.



[ix] The major
addition of the second edition includes a new preface (A Preface to the Preface
2005) and a new chapter (8. Heaven on Earth: A Pentecost Exposition). There are
other minor augmentations throughout other parts of the book, such as the fine
apparatuses at the end of the book, but they are small in amount and not as
significant. In its re-publication, Packer thinks the book is still quite
relevant to 21st-century Christianity, though less important than
when it was first published in 1984 (Packer, p.9).



[x] See John 14:16, 26; 15:26;
16:7. “Paraclete” (
παράκλητος) is a New Testament Greek word that has a wide range
of meaning such as “comforter, counselor, intercessor, helper, advocate, senior
partner,” etc. (Strong’s and Thayer’s New Testament Greek Dictionaries).



[xi] Three main
passages where spiritual gifts are mentioned are Romans 12:3-13, 1 Corinthians
12, Ephesians 4:7-15. “Charismata” (
χαρισματα) is the Greek
word translated as “gifts” and often understood in the context as “spiritual
gifts.” The root of “charismata” is “charis” (
χάρις), which is the Greek word translated as “grace” or
“favor” (Strong and Thayer). Therefore, spiritual gifts are also called “grace
gifts” or “spiritual graces” by some. The English terms “charismatic(s)” and
“charisma” were derived from this Greek word through ecclesiastical Lain in the
mid-17th century (Encarta Dictionary).



[xii]και τουτο
ειπων
ενεφυσησεν
και
λεγει
αυτοις
λαβετε
πνευμα
αγιον” (Greek New
Testament 4th Rev. Ed.).

“And when [Jesus]
had said this, He breathed on [His disciples] and said to them, ‘Receive the
Holy Spirit’” (New American Standard Bible).



[xiii] Packer, Keep
in Step with the Spirit
, p.156.



[xiv] Packer, Keep
in Step with the Spirit
, pp.156-157.



[xv] Packer
describes: “Just as mankind was dispersed throughout the world by the language
confusion back in the Tower
of Babel, here at the
birth of the Church, God is speaking to diverse people groups in their own
tongues and bringing them together in the Body of Christ.” (Packer, Keep in
Step with the Spirit
, pp.210-211)



[xvi]η δε
ελπις
ου
καταισχυνει
οτι
η
αγαπη
του
θεου
εκκεχυται
εν
ταις
καρδιαις
ημων
δια
πνευματος
αγιου
του
δοθεντος
ημιν” (Greek New Testament 4th
Rev. Ed.).

“And hope does not disappoint,
because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy
Spirit who was given to us” (New American Standard Bible).



[xvii] Packer, Keep
in Step with the Spirit
, p.194.



[xviii] However, even
the English word “perfect” has many meanings. The Merriam-Webster Online
Dictionary gives eight different definitions for the term “perfect,” and a
total of 18 including all sub-definitions. See
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/perfect



[xix] One of the
arguments that Jesus told the disciples of John the Baptist of His Messiahship
is that the “dead are raised up” (Matt. 11:5). Therefore, it is very likely
that Jesus actually raised more than three people to life. It would not be
unbiblical to speculate that Jesus might have raised dozens, or more, of dead
people since the Bible does not explicitly say how many came back to life again.


See also: Appendix: A Perspective on Christian Perfection

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Appendix
A Perspective on Christian Perfection
Since this is only part of
a book review and not a study on “Christian Perfection,” space will not allow
me to thoroughly discuss other approaches to Romans seven and eight and also
some possible definitions of “perfection” in the Bible. But I will attempt to
lay out another Romans 7:14-25 interpretation, in conjunction with Romans
8:1-11, that is different from the book’s (perhaps reveal some of its
interpretive inconsistencies). I will also try to bring up some Scriptures and
questions to show that many Christians’ idea of “perfection” might be very
different than what the Bible seems to say.

        First and foremost, Packer notes
“imperfection” as “when something can be improved upon,” or “when one can
perform better” (E.g. p.108). He means primarily “moral imperfection” due to
sin’s influence since his central non-perfection text is Romans 7:14-25. I
affirm a few summary points he has made from this passage: (1) the law in
itself is holy, just, good, and spiritual (v.12, 14); (2) its purpose is to give
men knowledge of sin (v.7); (3) it does not give men power over sin to do what
is spiritual and good. I also agree with Packer that the “wretched man” is
Paul, and it is Paul the Christian and not Paul the unconverted Jew. In a quick
analysis, Packer’s idea is one reasonable approach. However, I do not believe
that it is the only possible interpretation. It is true that verses 14
to 25 are talking about a present state. But it seems to me to interpret verse
25 and the first portion of chapter eight, which is unmistakably part of Paul’s
theme in 7:14-25 with the word “therefore” in the beginning of the chapter (and
there were no chapter divisions in the original manuscripts of the Bible), as
being largely futuristic is inconsistent. It makes no sense for Paul to talk
about something in the present, and then suddenly jump to something in the
future arbitrarily without any clear transitioning in less than one verse. It
is true that chapter eight did include the hope of future body redemption
(v.23), but it starts out with a present deliverance since Paul uses the
present and even the past perfect tenses, just like he did in 7:14-25, in the
beginning.

“There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are
in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according
to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me
free
from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that
it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the
flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do
not
walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who
live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but
those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be
carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and
peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to
the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot
please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the
Spirit of God dwells in you
. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of
Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of
sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him
who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the
dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in
you

(Romans 8:1-11; emphasis mine).

It seems to me that this passage does not negate 7:14-25, but rather
completes it. The promise of future deliverance of the physical body does not
contradict the fact that there is also a present provision available to offset
sin’s claws. Chapter eight begins with the present means of freedom
(counterbalance sin’s power) and then moves to the future means of liberation
(the total removal of sin nature). Paul is saying that, while on the earth,
there is a constant war between the flesh (sinful nature) and the Spirit that
is dwelling inside all believers (7:23). That is why both 7:14-25 and 8:1:11
are referring to a present state. He first describes the forces of sin-nature
on all living Christians. Then starting from 7:25, Paul begins to describe, on
the other hand, how the way for Christians to be victorious over sins has been
opened. Through Jesus Christ (7:25), believers are able (but not
automatic or easy) to win this war by God’s Spirit through the accomplished
work of Christ (8:3), and live a life free from the influence of sin (not
sinlessness). It is clear that the sin-nature inherent in the flesh will not be
completely removed in this present age. However, Romans seven and eight is
speaking of a potential and possibility of freedom from sin by
neutralizing the effects of sin-nature. Again, this is not applied to
believers automatically and permanently the moment when they are regenerated.
In other words, there is an ongoing tug of war between two opposing forces.
Even though the Spirit is more powerful, He respects human free choice;
therefore, when Christians do not submit to the Spirit’s way, sin’s influence
will dominate them. That is why verse 25b is not a “shattering anticlimax”
(p.224) but an explanation of this continuing conflict. Subsequently,
this struggle is more fully clarified in 8:1-11 with an emphasis on the
Spirit’s superiority (8:2), and thus exhorting believers to walk in this
victory since God’s Spirit is already in them (8:9-10).

Most probably, anyone who reads Romans 7:14-25 together with
8:1-11 without any colored spectacles produced by personal
experiences/theological/cultural background, will see that it is not talking
about an eschatological salvation but a present possibility of completely
neutralizing sin’s power. Therefore, the victory is not the removal of sin
nature, but walking free from its effects. Verse two does not say that the
Spirit has made Christians partially free from the law of sin and death;
neither does it say that the Spirit will make Christians free. This
verse uses past perfect tense “has made” (
ἠλευθέρωσέ με), meaning the potential for complete victory is now made possible
through Christ’s finished work by the Spirit Who is already living inside
followers of Christ. Whatever our experiences of failures and mistakes may
contribute to our thinking, theology is not based on experiences but on the
Word of God. The depths of God’s Word may not always make sense to (very)
finite minds, but this seems to be an alternative viewpoint to the Reformed
idea. I do not think this view is the only way of seeing these verses, but I do
think this interpretation is more convincing than the book’s arguments. I am
not simply presenting a version of Keswick Holiness teaching because I do think
the second-blessing sanctification theology is unscriptural. Although sanctification
is definitely progressive (Heb. 12:14; 1 Thess. 5:23; 2 Peter 3:18), but it
commences at the time of regeneration since believers are a “new creation” (2
Cor. 5:17) the moment they are saved.[i]
Furthermore, it is interesting to note that a significant part of Packer’s
critique of Keswick’s weaknesses is methodological- and temperament-oriented,
and not doctrinal. Issues such as elitism, man-centeredness, misleading
presentation, passivity, and poor pastoral advice are all problems that could
happen to all theologically sound doctrines. He uses a bad personal experience
to illustrate his point, but I think, depending on the reader, this may have
actually weakened his statements (Besides, there are also many who have
unpleasant experiences with Augustinian holiness). One might ponder whether
Packer’s own background gave rise to subjective evaluations.

        Although it is true that as long as sin
nature is in the body, then a Christian is not “perfect” in absolute terms.
This is right and valid. However, in another sense, if the powers of sin could
be completely cancelled by the indwelling Spirit, then it could be seen as a
type or quality of “perfection” (we have yet to explore the definitions of
“perfection”). The reason for this is because, in the final analysis,
Christians have the potential to be free from sins (I am differentiating “sin”
as “sin nature” from “sins” as the “influence of sin nature”). Christians will
not likely always remain in this freedom, nevertheless, this still does not
contradict the fact that it is, at least theologically and theoretically,
possible for Christians to be free from sins at times. This also does not imply
that many will achieve this, if only very few will ever and still fall short
every now and then. But the Bible does give the impression that it is possible
to be free from all sins regardless of whether the most majority of Christians
are walking in this truth or not. I believe this is one of the many Bible
teachings that Christians need to embrace by faith. Sometimes some doctrines
are even “contradictory” to human logics. For example, the Trinitarian doctrine
is clearly delineated in the Bible, but the Trinity is a paradox to finite
minds. How can three distinct and different Persons be, at the same time, the
same one God? It is the same with discussions on Christ’s nature. How can the
one single Person Jesus be human and divine at the same time? It is not
surprising that the Bible just tells the truth as it is without always
explaining them; Christians should accept its teachings by faith (without
contradicting other parts of the Bible) even when they do not yet have perfect
understanding. Bible-believing Christians should adjust their views to the
Bible rather than adjusting the Bible to fit their preconceived ideas. I am not
trying to defend either Wesleyan Holiness or Keswick, but only endeavoring to
show that there are other equally sound, if not more convincing,
interpretations other than the Reformed exegesis on sanctification.

        Another area where the book does not
discuss is perfection in the area of, for tripartitists, spirit, soul and body.
Is there such a thing as “spirit perfection,” “soul perfection,” and “body
perfection”? Can the spirit be perfect while the body is imperfect? I believe
regenerated human spirits are already perfect. They are “born again,”
re-created by God (Ezek. 11:19, 36:26; John 3), and hence, perfect (how can God
create anything that is not perfect?). The soul needs renewal (Rom 12:2), but
the aforementioned interpretation seems to indicate that it is possible that a
total renewal is attainable. If Paul says that believers have (not “will have”)
the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16), is the mind of Christ not perfect? (Read the
next paragraph to see the discussion on the definition of “perfection”). As for
the body, 1 Thess. 5:23 states that the body could be “preserved blameless”—the
verse is specifically speaking of a preservation of spirit, soul, and body prior
to Christ’s second coming. Whatever this “preservation” means, I will not go
into details. Suffice it to say that this is an important and interesting, but
unexplored area in the study of sanctification in Keep in Step with the
Spirit
.

        As to the meaning of perfection in
Scriptures,
the Hebrew (root) words translated as
“perfect” in the King James Version are:
תּמים
,שׁלם .כּוּן כּליל ,תּמם ,תּם ,מכלה ,גּמר (Aramaic) ,תּכלית
. The Greek (root) words
translated as “perfect” are:
τέλειος, ἀκριβῶς, καταρτίζω, τελειόω, ὁλοκληρία, ἀκρίβεια, ἀκριβέστερον, ἐπιτελέω, ἄρτιος, πληρόω. After reviewing the nuances of these words, the
general idea for words particularly describing “perfection” of certain
individuals or groups (or the lack of it), or God commanding them to be
“perfect” (e.g. Gen. 17:1 God commanding Abram to be perfect; Matt. 5:48 Jesus
commanding His disciples to be “perfect” like the Father), is that of
“completion,” “wholeness,” and/or “integrity” (Strong’s, Thayer,
Brown-Driver-Briggs). One can argue that “perfection” in these passages simply
means “integrity,” or something similar and not in the sense of “faultless.”
However the major connotation seems to be that of “completion” or “wholeness”
against the context. For example, when cross-referencing Matt 5:48 (“Therefore
you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect”), we find a
parallel saying in Luke 6:36 (“Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also
is merciful”), which substitutes the word “perfect” in Matthew with “merciful”
(New King James). Hence, it is not just talking about one’s integrity, but
mainly one’s heart attitude. Therefore, is there such a thing as “heart
perfection” (I know this sounds like John Wesley but I am not quoting from John
Wesley)? The passage reveals that being merciful is being like the Father. The
words “just as” clearly refers to the standard that Jesus has set for His
followers in that particular area, which is to be perfect in being merciful
(and the context points to being perfect in love and character), because the
Father is and will always be indisputably perfect in His Being. In John 15:12,
“My (Jesus) command is this: love each other as I have loved you” (NKJV), is
not the love of Jesus perfect? Would Jesus command something that believers
will never ever achieve in this life? In fact, the very word “command” implies
that there is potential to obey the commandment fully. Would Jesus command His
disciples while on the earth something that will only be possible when
they have all died and gone to Heaven? How about all the other passages that
exhort Christians to be perfect (see p.230; and there are many more that are
not listed)? It does not make sense to simply explain them as futuristic
in-heaven-we-will-all-be-perfect declarations. If we will be perfect in Heaven
(which all Christians will), what is the point of instructing us to be
perfect when all Christians will automatically be perfect in Heaven?
Whether perfection carries the sense of being faultless or sinless is intended,
the idea that where there is always room for growth does not imply
imperfection.

        On the other hand, there is a reality
that Christians will never be as merciful and loving exactly like the Father in
all eternity. The Father “cannot” love more and be more merciful in the sense
that His love and mercy are already perfect in absolute terms. Hence we see
that, when referring to human beings, “perfection” in the Bible does not imply
zero potential for further progression. Regardless of whether Packer may have
agreed or disagreed with this statement, his presentation of the concept
of perfection and imperfection seems insufficient, thus misleading at times. If
a Christian can be “perfect” while on the earth, as I have tried to argue, but
one will never be as godly as God, logic demands that there must be different
levels of perfection. Here is where we see that the idea of perfect is, as the
original Hebrew and Greek words suggest, more in the sense of “completion” of a
particular level of an aspect. 2 Corinthians 3:18 is outspoken in this matter:
“And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being
transformed into the same image from one degree of glory (
δόξα) to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit”
(italics mine; English Standard Version; Packer served as one of the general
editors for this version). In this verse, the “degree of glory” has its source
in the “glory of the Lord,” that is, the perfect glory of the Lord. When
a level of perfection is achieved, one goes on to the next level of perfection.
Undoubtedly, one could always fall back and regress at any given time when s/he
is not walking closely with the Lord. In the passages describing Lucifer’s fall
(Ezek. 27), he was made perfect by God (v.3-4), yet he fell. This tells us that
in each particular degree of perfection, there is a limit by its design. When
one crosses over that limit or function, imperfection comes. When Satan tried
to operate beyond his given design of perfection at the time, he became
imperfect and fell. It is the same with humans. Mankind was not designed for
sin, but when Adam and Eve sinned, imperfection comes. These illustrations
confirm that perfection for created beings is both progressive and limited in
each level. This is why the Hebrew and Greek words for “perfect” denotes
primarily “completion” rather than “absolute perfection.” I believe there are
many aspects of perfection, and there is not a specific “completion
requirement” measuring system for the various levels and areas in the Bible.
Perhaps it is because only God could judge one’s heart (which is so
complicated) rightly since the heart cannot be judged by external regulations.
At any rate, the Bible does seem to say that there are degrees of perfection.
This is best exemplified by the life and ministry of Jesus, Who is always
perfect in all things. Luke 2:40, 52 shows that when Jesus came as the God-Man
into Mary’s womb, He had to grow physically (obviously), as well as mentally
and spiritually (while remaining divine and human all the time). Jesus had to
learn the languages spoken at the time (Aramaic, biblical Hebrew and some
believe also Greek and Latin), and He had to learn the Torah Law (Luke 41-47)
as well as carpentry (Mark 6:3). Also, when Jesus was in His earthly ministry,
His human nature did not have perfect knowledge (Mark 5:30, 13:32; but not His
divine nature). Besides these growths, Jesus was capable of being physically
tired (John 4:6; Mark 4:38). Does His advancement in all these various
areas indicate that Jesus was not “perfect”? Certainly any Bible-believing
person would disagree. Jesus is God Himself, the perfect Lamb of God at all
times, even His human nature is perfect. Hebrews 2:10 says Jesus was made
perfect through sufferings. If Jesus was all the time “perfect” prior to His
suffering, and He was later “made perfect,” then it is showing that there are
degrees of perfection. Jesus could grow while on this earth as a Man, but this
does not mean He was not all the time walking in perfection. (In these
discussions on Christ, I am viewing from the evangelical Chalcedonian
Christology (A.D. 451)—two natures, one fully divine, one fully human, united
in the One Person of Christ (Grudem, Systematic Theology, 1994). Thus,
here I am referring to Jesus’ human nature and not His divine nature. For in
Jesus divinity, He is God, always and absolutely perfect in all things, and
therefore, is not “able” to grow. It is interesting, however, to mention that
for those who hold the Kenosis Theology, Jesus did actually temporarily gave up
some divine attributes while on the earth according to Phil. 2:5-7 (Kenotic
Christology does not deny Christ’s divinity. “Kenosis” is the Greek word
meaning “emptied” from verse seven).

The same argument can be applied to mankind. Adam and Eve were perfect
prior to their fall, but they could still grow in their capabilities. When
saints return to Heaven, all will be perfect, but it does not mean that they
will cease to “be better.” Therefore, words like “better,” “improvement,” or
“perfect” need to be clarified when examining the doctrine of sanctification.
In addition, it is a fact that the use of these terms is oftentimes very
subjective. There is no more sin in Heaven, so one’s love for God will be
without sin’s effect. But “perfection” is not just a synonym for “sinlessness,”
and “sinlessness” is not synonymous with “no more room for growth.” If “perfect”
means that there is no more possibility for advancement (I am using the words
“growth,” “improvement,” and “advancement” interchangeably meaning the same
thing, that is, further progression of whatever type or quality), then it is
saying that Christians’ love for God will not grow anymore for eternity the
moment when they enter into Heaven. But this is certainly not true. Saints and
angels will continue to grow in the heavenly realm, maturing from “one degree
of glory to another” for eternity. It is true that when one comes short in a
particular area and level of perfection, s/he then is not perfect. A student
getting 80% on an exam can do better because it is not a perfect score.
However, as I have tried to contend from Romans seven, eight, and other passages,
that it is nevertheless theoretically and theologically possible to achieve
100%, spiritually speaking. Even if we assume that no one has or will ever
attain a level of perfection for a time in this earthly journey, it still does
not counter this Bible truth. In the same way, I do not believe any human has
or will figure out the mystery of the Trinity or the Incarnation completely in
every little detail in this life, but this does not suggest that sincere
Christians should stop believing these two fundamental doctrines. However, I
believe there have been saints who have realized a degree of perfection and
Christlikeness for a time. Could one of the reasons that Enoch and Elijah were
translated directly to Heaven without seeing death is that they have walked in
a certain level of holiness while on earth for a time (I am not saying they are
free from sins 24-7, but perhaps for a time)? Since death is the result of sin,
it is not inconceivable that if sin’s power were so neutralized that God
decided to take them home by-passing sin’s wages (through the blood of Christ).
It does not mean we have to constantly walk in a degree of perfect state in
order to live a life pleasing to God. Believing in Christian Perfection also
does not mean we should be overly concerned if we make mistakes. Elijah was “a
man with a nature like ours” (James 5:17), and he has made blunders even not
too long before his translation. It is the same with men of God like Abraham,
Joseph and David, whom have acted foolishly. However, God’s grace is not only
sufficient to cover their mistakes, but it is also the source of
ever-increasing perfection (2 Cor. 12:9-10). It is also possible that because
Moses lived a divine-like holy life (Exo. 34:29; Deu. 34:10), relatively
speaking, so that his body was buried by God Himself (Due. 34:6) and later
taken up by Michael the archangel (Jude 1:9) before all other Old Testament
saints at Christ’s resurrection (Matt. 27:52). The fact that when the
120-year-old Moses died, “his eyes were not dim nor his natural vigor
diminished” (Deu. 34:7) seems to confirm that his body was preserved (1 Thess.
5:23) because he was walking in a degree of perfection (maybe for some time).
This is also true of Caleb’s life in Joshua 14:10-11 (NKJV): “And now,
behold, the Lord has kept me (Caleb) alive, as He said, these forty-five years,
ever since the Lord spoke this word to Moses while Israel wandered in the
wilderness; and now, here I am this day, eighty-five years old. As yet I am
as strong this day as on the day that Moses sent me; just as my strength was
then, so now is my strength for war, both for going out and for coming in

(emphasis mine). I do not think these words are merely figure of speech meaning
something like “Moses and Caleb were still relatively strong and healthy in
their old age.” If we do not interpret these verses as literal descriptions of
their physical conditions, we might as well interpret Jesus’ bodily death and
resurrection as symbolic—which is not true of course. I am aware that some
theologians think the best candidates for the two witnesses in Revelation 11
are from these three: Enoch, Elijah and Moses. Therefore, Enoch and Elijah will
probably taste death as well. I also understand that some believe Old Testament
saints were not raised up together with Christ’s resurrection but rather they
ascended to heaven the moment they passed away. However, these theological
differences do not deny the fact that these saints probably have entered into a
realm of holiness that produced what they experienced in their lifetime.

I believe if this is true, then this potential to live perfectly
sanctified life is available for all Christians since God “shows no partiality”
(Acts 10:34). Furthermore, those folks were living under the Old Covenant, and
the New Covenant is a better covenant than the old (Heb. 7:22, 8:6). Not to
mention that the Scriptures did not say that these were the only ones who have
walked closely with God and/or translated, there were probably more unrecorded
or unstressed saints like them (cf. 1 Kings 19:18). It would be wrong to
conclude that everyone who lives a perfecting life will experience exactly the
same things in the same ways, because each has a different calling and gifting.
However, it would be senseless to say that there are special people whom God
favors in the past but whatever they experienced, in terms of relationship with
God, is not available under a better covenant today. The first Church
martyr Stephen probably is one good example of someone who exemplified a degree
of perfected life. His face shown like an angel when he was about to be stoned,
which is actually quite reminiscent of Moses’ glory-shining face (Exo. 34:29;
Acts 6:15). Jesus promised that He would sanctify and cleanse the Last-Day
Church, so that He might “present her to Himself a glorious church, not having
spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without
blemish” (Eph. 5:26-27). Could it be that as the Church learns to walk in the
truth of Christian Perfection more and more, to prepare for Christ’s coming, in
the last days, that part of the reasons for the Rapture (for those that believe
in the Rapture) is because she will have attained a certain beauty of
perfection that God decided that it is time to take her home just like Enoch
and Elijah were taken up without seeing death? (I know some view that the old
physical body being transformed is a type of “death” since the old is no more;
nevertheless, this rapture transformation is still vastly different than the
normal bodily death that most people experience on earth). At any rate, it is a
common reality that those who aim higher usually end up achieving higher than
those who do not aim as high. In the same way, it is likely that those who
believe in that Christians can walk in a certain measure of perfected
completeness while on earth will finish with a more sanctified life than those
who do not believe in it. Here I close with another Bible promise depicting the
Last-Day glorious Church from the Amplified Bible Ephesians 4:12-13:

[God’s]
intention was the perfecting and the full equipping of the saints (His
consecrated people), [that they should do] the work of ministering toward
building up Christ's body (the church), [that it might develop] until we all
attain oneness in the faith and in the comprehension of the [full and accurate]
knowledge of the Son of God, that [we might arrive] at really mature manhood
(the completeness of personality which is nothing less than the
standard height of Christ's own perfection
), the measure of the stature of
the fullness of the Christ and the completeness found in Him

(emphasis mine).




 

[i] However, there
are others who say that the Keswickians teach that the “’fullness of the
Spirit’ (sanctification) is a definite act of faith, distinct from but usually
coincident with regeneration
” (Stanley M. Burgess and Eduard M. van der
Maas, The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic
Movements
, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002, 2003, pp. 820-821.), which is
an opposite view from Packer’s understanding. He thinks that Kewsickians
believe that sanctification is always subsequent to salvation (p.124).
Moreover, Packer also did not mention the influence of Keswick on the great
Welsh revival.




See also: Review of "Keep in Step with the Spirit" (Main Body: On Sanctification & Charismatic Theology)

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

牽引我心
 
心中的渴望,惟你能滿足,翻騰的心情,惟你能平息,
我靈甚渴慕你,更深的認識你,主你的恩典,是何等的甘甜。

 
牽引我心,更深的愛你主,緊抱著我在你的懷裡,
牽引我心,每一刻更深的愛你主,

我只要永遠的愛你主,我渴慕藏在你的愛裡。
 
一日復一日,我尋求你面,
聖靈吸引我,進入恩典的應許,我心充滿盼望,
從此不再畏懼,來到你跟前,是何等的甘甜。

 
 
專輯: 祂的應許 祂的軍隊 (約書亞)

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Finish Strong by Nick Vujicic
  [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0DRk8dFjI&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
Must see!!! Great testimony!!!


2008金鐘最佳女主角
  [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZa32VRv-eE&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1]
競爭之激烈, 不僅比演技也比人氣. 第一次入圍, 第一次得獎, 我認為她早就該得到的. 終於脫穎而出, 實至名歸, 有真才實學的人, 不求名而名自至. 還有張韶涵沒得我沒關係啦, 這不是唱歌是戲劇.

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

我大概永遠永遠都不會厭倦分享祢的故事

在那一瞬間我感受到一種簡單, 純淨, 強烈的大愛

我感受到心中的耶穌

那一時刻我的心中置身於天堂

我感受祢的真實

祢的愛

就這樣自由的流露出去

那是一個最偉大的愛戀故事


祢和我們之間的距離

就在一個呼吸

在一個充滿祢愛的心中


所以我一定要寫

一定要見證

讓祢以後翻閱的時候

告訴祢

這不是我一帆風順的時候對祢說的


是什麼...?

是什麼...?

告訴我

哦!

從亙古到永遠的愛

是耶穌基督的大愛



The love of Jesus Christ!

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Oct 1, '08

外貌體型啊, 真的會騙人.

Oct 2, '08

勇於嘗試不同的路線, 這很重要, 挑戰自己不是別人. 過程會覺得很彆扭嗎? 會啊, 超級的吧, 但醜小鴨要變成美麗的天鵝也不是一兩天的事,
如果因為怕過程旁人的眼光就不敢踏出或中途放棄, 那就永遠沒辦法發覺並開發自己的潛力, 學不到勇敢的功課, 無法突破,
墨守成規的老頑固就是這樣來的. 是什麼打敗了你? 一張紙, 一句話, 一個眼神, 一個關係, 一個意念, 一段往事, 一次失敗, 還是一個人?
把勇氣加滿向前跨一步吧, 準備好, 讓別人嘲笑你, who cares, 有什麼關係!!!


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


這幾天猴媽擊落超過60隻果蠅(得意), 我姊就問我有沒有聽過鋼彈ace pilot... ... ...

Oct 3, '08

猴媽, 奇幻探險之旅出發!!!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


最新最高紀錄, 兩個禮拜多沒有刮鬍子.

Oct 4, '08

剛剛作的夢雖然醒來後什麼都不記得了, 卻有個很幸福的感覺, 好像是個很幸福的夢, 感覺很棒.

「你手心的太陽, 有種安定的力量, 就算世界再亂我也不心慌」.
那種感覺, 我能體會, 只要一個小小的角落, 比世界所有的艷麗還要迷人. 「再沒有人相信, 愛能永恆那一秒, 我們正堅定的微笑」.


Oct 6, '08

百變

猴媽的異想世界越來越大, 現在的殼裝不下. 我居然沒有停止的在改變.
感覺好像又再一次要經歷大學時期那時的大改造.
有時會有點心慌, 有些迷惘, 有時會很多, 因為突破就是嘗試以前不習慣, 沒做過, 或很難改掉的步調. 但最終我知道是個正向的改變.

原來我是需要一個更大更暖暖的窩.

需要被愛, 很多很多的.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


很鍾愛. 雖然沒有亮麗花俏的裝扮, 樸樸素素的美, 我喜歡. 簡單純潔的樣子, 真實的美, 真實的愛, 真實情感自然的流露. 可愛...!!!

貼心又超溫柔, 很會體諒又幽默淘氣, 具有現代公主的特質.


Oct 7, '08


有的時候對自己的感覺會只知其然而不知其所以然, 有時連其然是什麼都搞不清. 那是一種很不由自主卻又無哩頭的心裡狀態, 極不舒適. 不過今天有朋自遠方來, 很多不亦樂乎喔. 謝謝!!!

我想是我的情感太多了.

Oct 8, '08

明年畢業後有回台灣的想法, 替代役頂多一年, 運氣好的籤感覺還蠻有意義和有趣的, 哈哈. 不想每四個月就出入境一次.
但感覺好像五年內會有完全改成募兵制, 如果等個幾年到時候再回去連替代役都免了. 前面的方向還有幾件重要的事需要禱告清楚, 我記得祂給我的使命,
答應我的事. 我也記得我答應祂的事. 搶灘已成功, 等學業告一段落後, 繼續踏上第三樂章, 繼續為愛而前行. 我會認真的跟隨尋求,
猴媽生命永遠的光(賽60:19-20), 這裡只會有滿滿的感謝.


Oct 10, '08

Psalm
91 by Lincoln Brewster is one of my fave Christian songs, and one of my
fave psalms, too. I really, really like this melody coupled with the
words of Ps 91. It's one of the most powerful passages in the Bible.
When sang with spirit and truth, the presence of Christ just comes
overwhelmingly. The dwelling place of the Most High is where the
God-kind of love and courage can be found. This love will make the
weakest soul the bravest heart--it is a zillion times more powerful
than any strength man can ever draw from himself.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


嘿, 想說這次感恩節長週末要在家裡趕期末報告就有點唉聲嘆氣的, 沒想到爸比就給我這個寶貝禮物, 啊哈哈,
還不曉得有這種節目(Angela張韶涵音樂愛情故事 - 誓愿玫瑰). 我覺得張韶涵演的好自然, 因為她本身的性格就是差不多那樣,
無敵淘氣可愛又溫柔, 自然甜!!! 我最喜歡裡面配曲都是韶涵第二張專輯歐若拉裡的. 芭樂的劇情, 我卻還是那麼著迷, 嘻嘻.
其實我覺得還有些張力的說, 有被感動到. 張韶涵的音樂故事陪我度過2008的感恩節!!!



Oct 12, '08

當有一個喜歡願意和你一起演配角的在一起時, 你會想演配角也沒有關係, 幻想, 期許著有一天也要演主角, 你們兩個在自己的世界其實早就都是男女主角了. 嘿嘿, 我不曉得我在說什麼啦!!! ^^

Oct 14, '08

在那個地方, 發現生命只要從簡單的方法就可以獲得力量.

得到一種沒有壓力的快樂.


Oct 16, '08


I
saw in a mini flash vision that Jesus was carrying an adult ESL newspaper and distributing it to the students.
Then I saw Him carrying the green chair in church. I know who this person is and what he is doing. It
was an encouragement from God that he's learning to allow Christ to
live through his service to people for love's sake. Although these are menial ordinary tasks, but they are significant in the eyes of God when done purely out of Christ's love for God and people.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

「有時候殘缺  才能造就完美」

就某些方面上來說  我非常的同意


這個地球上試煉  看似會讓人殘缺

但什麼時候完全的愛出現時  就會看到一種更加的美好

耶穌的死  才有復活  更榮耀的復活


重點是  祂是為愛而死

「自己的幸福不是幸福」

讓別人幸福  看到喜歡的人幸福  才是真正的幸福

所以  祂不是帶著悲哀上十字架的

祂是喜樂的  勇敢的  幸福的

「仰望為我們信心創始成終的耶穌.〔或作仰望那將真道創始成終的耶穌〕他因那擺在前面的喜樂、就輕看羞辱、忍受了十字架的苦難、便坐在 神寶座的右邊。」(來12:2)

Oct 17, '08


彩虹是上帝和人類約定的記號, 就象徵著上帝說, 我聽到了. 出處是聖經創世紀的九章12-14節: 「神說:我與你們並你們這裡的各樣活物所立的永約是有記號的。我把虹放在雲彩中,這就可作我與地立約的記號了。我使雲彩蓋地的時候,必有虹現在雲彩中」. 這就是那個永不消失的彩虹哦...!!! 嘻嘻!!! 彩虹, 還真浪漫!!!


Oct 19, '08

我的小透明昨天已經換好囉, 整個很棒的神氣! Yah!
昨天許下願說, 必要的時候我也要扛男人. 猴媽加油!

那說到海角七號呢, 我終於看了.
非常的突顯台灣本土特色的道地, 中間的時候我感覺有點沉悶, 但堅持看到後面居然越來越好看, 越來越好看,
到最後我要說這是一片非常值得看的電影, 真的很棒很特別. 劇情有很多讓人發人深省的東西. 還有裡面那個「破銅爛鐵」本土樂團的那幾首歌都超超超優
的, 天籟之聲. 下一部我想看的國片是不能說的秘密, 還沒看過呀! 期待!!!


Oct 20, '08

兩千年的歷史

最近開始上教會歷史的課. 兩千年的歷史, 光榮恥辱.

我的生命也許只是其中的一句話, 甚至一個字.


但這並不代表不重要.

我的禱告是, 這句話或這個字的每一撇, 每一劃, 每一點,

都是愛的言語.

都是滿滿的愛.

如果這樣的話,

在神和人的心中,

將會是道永不消失的彩虹.

永永遠遠的,

愛.

Oct 21, '08

Don't be sad.

Be very, very, happy.


Is my prayer for you.

I know He hears this prayer.

So promise me.

Don't be sad anymore.

Is my gift for you.

Much happiness to you.

And bless me too.

We will each find our own felicity.


Oct 22, '08

傷痛一定會度過

但愛會留下

Oct 23, '08

Yah, 翻滾精簡不會拖戲, 很喜歡, 最少有和轉角一樣好看. 最後好浪漫也很激勵人心. 我最喜歡幾位主角他們人都很好,
而且都有很成熟透明溝通的表達方式, 所以啊, 不管結果是如何, 就像米麒麟說的, 傷痛一定會過去, 但愛會留下來. 真的是這樣耶!!
每個都超Nice超有風度的. 嘿嘿, 現實, hun, 不相信啊, 就是因為不相信所以才經歷不到, 嘻嘻!!!


哎呀猴媽!!!

Oct 24, '08

感謝神垂聽了為他的禱告, 我曉得不容易. 但只要一顆心是充滿著愛所發出的每一個意念, 每一個字, 每一個有聲無聲的真摯祈禱, 我在看見改變,
不管多慢, 不管需要禱告多久. 我相信, 有一天我會訝異, 他還會讓我刮目相看, 因為我看見了神在他生命中的潛力, 好大好深. 那一天,
我會看見愛的花朵綻放, 而愛的最大考驗就是時間, 愛是恆久忍耐, 愛是永不止息. 我的天父, 是獨行奇事上天下地的神. 嘻嘻!!!



Oct 26, '08

這個世界應該已經太多怒氣怨氣了,
大鬼趕小鬼看似一時改善結果只會比原本更差, 今天世界才會從完美的狀態變成現今這附德性. 以善勝惡才是神道, 難怪神說「惟獨從上頭來的智慧,
先是清潔, 後是和平, 溫良柔順, 滿有憐憫, 多結善果, 沒有偏見, 沒有假冒. 並且使人和平的,
是用和平所栽種的義果」(雅3:17-18). 「不要以惡報惡... 你不可為惡所勝, 反要以善勝惡」(羅12:17-21). 即使是正確的事情也要用對的態度和方法去作才行. 這當然無敵知易行難, 但我想這世界如果有人能作得到, 應該是基督徒,
也有這樣的責任, 靠著神的幫助, 在祂沒有難成的事, 如果我們可以相信(可9:23).
(而且基本上依照屬靈定律惡人作惡就已是他們的虧損了--加6:7).



這是我自己要很多很多學習的, 我相信, 我也禱告朝這個方向前進. 謝謝霖是聆聽我的雙耳, 超nice, 你最棒了!!!! 看我送你猴媽最喜歡超可愛Lara唱的歌!!! ^.^ !!!

Oct 27, '08

最近要作的事, 買花生給老媽吃, 還有弄一個鈴鼓還有shaker, 都是被Lara, 海角七號那個破銅爛鐵樂團, 還有大姊影響的. 嘿嘿, 好好玩!

Oct 28, '08


我喜歡彩虹, 彩虹給我很溫柔很舒服的感覺. 看到彩虹會讓我忘掉所有煩惱. 因為彩虹是上帝和人立約的記號.
其實彩虹的七道顏色只是我們肉眼能見的部分, 還有太多其他的顏色是因為頻率的不同所以我們的肉眼看不見. 看不見卻是這麼的真實,
在天堂我們會親眼目睹更多的顏色, 還有創造這一切讓我們開心的慈愛天父. Love and peace are the portion of
the righteous in Christ.



我呢, 想要實際的付諸行動完成一些事. 在地上的生命每個人都會有遲早要結束的一天, 所以我想要做些有意義的事. 我要寫一首簡單的歌,
想了很久卻遲遲拖延, 自從回台灣以前就在沒寫了. 我也要好好鍛鍊身體, 才能有健康的身體去作有意義的事. 然後想學好中文,
把過去16年忘記怎麼寫的中文字再次學會.


目的都只有一個.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


我喜歡

優美的人格

猴媽 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Blog Stats
⚠️

成人內容提醒

本部落格內容僅限年滿十八歲者瀏覽。
若您未滿十八歲,請立即離開。

已滿十八歲者,亦請勿將內容提供給未成年人士。