Friday, 22nd October 2010, 22:32 hrs
During teenage years, my eldest brother taught me a Christian folk song that belonged to the conservative evangelical ethos and is eschatologically orientated. It goes as follows:
I'm just a poor wayfaring stranger
A-traveling through, this world of woe.
Yet there's no sickness, toil nor danger
In that bright land, to which I go.
I'm going there to see my father
I'm going there no more to roam;
I'm just a go-ing over Jordan
I'm just a go-ing over home.
I know dark clouds will gather round me
I know my way is rough and steep;
Yet beauteous fields lie just before me
Where God's redeemed, their vigils keep
I'm going there to see my mother
She said she'd meet me when I come;
I'm just a go-ing over Jordan
I'm just a go-ing over home.
I'll soon be free from every trial,
From every sorrow, and each deep grief,
Stressed by Christians I feel so tired,
I wish to leave this world in peace.
I'm going there to meet my dear wife,
Who's waiting for me everyday;
I'm just a go-ing over Jordan
I'm just a go-ing over home.
I want to sing salvation's story,
In concert with the blood-washed band;
I want to be with my dear Jesus,
When I get home to that good land.
I’m goin' home to see my Savior;
Who shed for me his precious blood;
I’m just a-goin' o'er Jordan,
I’m just a-goin' o'er home.
The above folk song somehow captures my thoughts and, perhaps, some of my 'emotions' (if there are any). I have reflected over the past two years on my journey to Hong Kong. I've wondered about the things that have happened to me and understood that in life, there would always be good and bad decisions, choices, regrets, and such like. What decisions and choices I have made and how I feel, I do not think it wise to explicitly express them here, since I'm in a community of rumour mongers. But the title of the song and some of the lyrics are so well written and reflect so much of what I feel.
Thank God for songs!
Thursday, April 7, 2011
I Life up My Eyes...
Co-workers’ Prayer Meeting
5th November 2010; 0800 hours
Psalm 121: The title – Song of Ascent
This is in fact a Song of Ascents, which really means ‘going up’. It means both a physical move upwards, suggesting a physical expression of worship, and a mental upward look, suggesting a certain psychological hope. But it also suggests to the congregation that the ‘song’ is meant to move up in tune, reaching a climax at the end where the people would declare and affirm the everlasting presence of Yahweh, and therefore of his ever abiding protection.
We do not know who in fact penned the psalm, nor can we tell who its author is. It has both very early wilderness connotations as well as post-exilic tones. Perhaps this is why we are able to use it more freely.
Verse 1
In verse one, the psalmist speaks of lifting his eyes to the hills, and there he raises a question: from whom does my help come? And he goes on to answer it himself.
‘Hill’ or ‘mountain’ in the Ancient Near East represented a dwelling of the divine, where worship usually took place. Thus, we read in the Old Testament that the kings of Israel committed sins by building places of worship on high places. Of course, ‘mountain’ also reminds us of the story of Moses’ ascent to Mount Sinai where Yahweh met and gave him the Ten Commandments. Similarly, we learn that Elijah encountered God in the mountains.
But over here in this verse, the psalmist uses the plural ‘hills’, as if to ask if all the gods might be able to help. He then goes on, in verse two, to refer to the God who created the heavens and the earth – thus he looks beyond hills and mountains to the one who transcends all creation.
Verse 2
Verse two is almost a declaration against all the gods of the nations by focusing on Yahweh as the creator of the heavens and the earth. What we see here is the ‘sovereignty’ of Yahweh, a concept of God that is relatively well developed, and therefore the verse suggests a relatively late date for this psalm.
Verses 3-4
When Israel was in the wilderness, and later during the exile, they had their own arrangements for centry and guards. They know how difficult it is to stay awake. But in the process they have experienced God’s protection and so concluded that the God who created the heavens and the earth does not slumber nor sleep (不打盹，也不睡覺). For they realise that those times when they fell asleep, it was their creator who preserved them and therefore ensured their continued existence.
Verse 5
Therefore in verse five, the psalmst is able to say that Yahweh is Israel’s ‘keeper’ (保護者) and ‘your shade’ (蔭庇者). Thus we see a move from understanding Yahweh as the creator of the heavens and earth, as someone who transcends the creation, to a national ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’.
This understanding shows us how they have come to understand God as not only universal but also national, and indeed personal.
Verse 6
That is why in verse six, the psalmist speaks about the sun and the moon (白日太陽和夜間月亮). Israel was in the wilderness and knew well the summer heat in the desert. The term ‘strike’ might well be a reference to ‘heatwave’ or ‘extreme sun-burns’. And the ‘moon’ will not pose a problem. The Chinese translation is interesting (夜間月亮不會害你). We know it is in the ‘dark’ that evil schemes plotted. The Israelites experienced sudden attacks in the night (突擊). The ‘sun’ and ‘moon’ also represent something beyond them, over which they have no control. But Yahweh is the creator and therefore is sovereign over his creation.
Verse 7
So from a high and lofty creator, the psalmist gradually comes to understand Yahweh as Israel’s ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’.
Here the term ‘keeper’ carries the concept of ‘保守’. And the psalmist understands this as ‘keeping Israel from all evil’; and the other way of looking at it is that Yahweh gives life when he keeps it (保守).
But how do we explain human plight, both natural and bilateral or transnationl?
Verse 8
In fact, this psalm was written for the purpose of Israel’s plight as well as restoration. Thus, the psalmist in this verse speaks about ‘your coming in and your going out’ (你出你入). The ‘going out’ and ‘coming in’ are not the ‘出入平安’ that we Chinese refer to, but are a reference to Israel’s history during which Yahweh was her ‘keeper’. Whether it was ‘going in’ to Egypt, ‘coming out of’ Egypt, ‘going into’ the wilderness’, ‘coming out of’ the wilderness’ and ‘going into’ the promised land, ‘being deported out of’ Jerusalem’ and later ‘back into’ Jerusalem’ (i.e. return), the high and lofty creator is their protector.
This final verse therefore suggests that the psalm was penned years after the return (post-exilic), after the destruction of the temple. That is why it is called Song of Ascent, perhaps there is no temple for them to go up to.
Conclusion
The psalm brings to mind the everlasting Yahweh, as the final clause says, who does not ‘slumber’ nor ‘sleep’. And the clause ‘henceforth and forever more’ became a central thought on which the people of Israel could draw for their national restoration in 1948, the years before which Jews everywhere basically kept in mind the ‘land of Israel’ (eretz Izra-el) as given by Yahweh.
He (Yahweh) goes on to deliver his people years later through Jesus Christ, so that a ‘new Israel’ was formed and ‘new people’ created. Today, believers in Christ Jesus are part of this ‘new people’, ‘new Israel’. And indeed, we are part of this.
It therefore calls for our similar act in ‘lifting up our eyes to the hills’ and re-affirm the fact that our help comes from Yahweh who made the heavens and the earth.
Let us pray:
Dear creator God and father of humanity, grant us eyes that lift up to the hills, and hearts that understand you as our ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’, our deliverer who will guard our ‘coming in’ and our ‘going out’, now and forever. Thank you in Jesus Christ. Amen.
5th November 2010; 0800 hours
Psalm 121: The title – Song of Ascent
This is in fact a Song of Ascents, which really means ‘going up’. It means both a physical move upwards, suggesting a physical expression of worship, and a mental upward look, suggesting a certain psychological hope. But it also suggests to the congregation that the ‘song’ is meant to move up in tune, reaching a climax at the end where the people would declare and affirm the everlasting presence of Yahweh, and therefore of his ever abiding protection.
We do not know who in fact penned the psalm, nor can we tell who its author is. It has both very early wilderness connotations as well as post-exilic tones. Perhaps this is why we are able to use it more freely.
Verse 1
In verse one, the psalmist speaks of lifting his eyes to the hills, and there he raises a question: from whom does my help come? And he goes on to answer it himself.
‘Hill’ or ‘mountain’ in the Ancient Near East represented a dwelling of the divine, where worship usually took place. Thus, we read in the Old Testament that the kings of Israel committed sins by building places of worship on high places. Of course, ‘mountain’ also reminds us of the story of Moses’ ascent to Mount Sinai where Yahweh met and gave him the Ten Commandments. Similarly, we learn that Elijah encountered God in the mountains.
But over here in this verse, the psalmist uses the plural ‘hills’, as if to ask if all the gods might be able to help. He then goes on, in verse two, to refer to the God who created the heavens and the earth – thus he looks beyond hills and mountains to the one who transcends all creation.
Verse 2
Verse two is almost a declaration against all the gods of the nations by focusing on Yahweh as the creator of the heavens and the earth. What we see here is the ‘sovereignty’ of Yahweh, a concept of God that is relatively well developed, and therefore the verse suggests a relatively late date for this psalm.
Verses 3-4
When Israel was in the wilderness, and later during the exile, they had their own arrangements for centry and guards. They know how difficult it is to stay awake. But in the process they have experienced God’s protection and so concluded that the God who created the heavens and the earth does not slumber nor sleep (不打盹，也不睡覺). For they realise that those times when they fell asleep, it was their creator who preserved them and therefore ensured their continued existence.
Verse 5
Therefore in verse five, the psalmst is able to say that Yahweh is Israel’s ‘keeper’ (保護者) and ‘your shade’ (蔭庇者). Thus we see a move from understanding Yahweh as the creator of the heavens and earth, as someone who transcends the creation, to a national ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’.
This understanding shows us how they have come to understand God as not only universal but also national, and indeed personal.
Verse 6
That is why in verse six, the psalmist speaks about the sun and the moon (白日太陽和夜間月亮). Israel was in the wilderness and knew well the summer heat in the desert. The term ‘strike’ might well be a reference to ‘heatwave’ or ‘extreme sun-burns’. And the ‘moon’ will not pose a problem. The Chinese translation is interesting (夜間月亮不會害你). We know it is in the ‘dark’ that evil schemes plotted. The Israelites experienced sudden attacks in the night (突擊). The ‘sun’ and ‘moon’ also represent something beyond them, over which they have no control. But Yahweh is the creator and therefore is sovereign over his creation.
Verse 7
So from a high and lofty creator, the psalmist gradually comes to understand Yahweh as Israel’s ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’.
Here the term ‘keeper’ carries the concept of ‘保守’. And the psalmist understands this as ‘keeping Israel from all evil’; and the other way of looking at it is that Yahweh gives life when he keeps it (保守).
But how do we explain human plight, both natural and bilateral or transnationl?
Verse 8
In fact, this psalm was written for the purpose of Israel’s plight as well as restoration. Thus, the psalmist in this verse speaks about ‘your coming in and your going out’ (你出你入). The ‘going out’ and ‘coming in’ are not the ‘出入平安’ that we Chinese refer to, but are a reference to Israel’s history during which Yahweh was her ‘keeper’. Whether it was ‘going in’ to Egypt, ‘coming out of’ Egypt, ‘going into’ the wilderness’, ‘coming out of’ the wilderness’ and ‘going into’ the promised land, ‘being deported out of’ Jerusalem’ and later ‘back into’ Jerusalem’ (i.e. return), the high and lofty creator is their protector.
This final verse therefore suggests that the psalm was penned years after the return (post-exilic), after the destruction of the temple. That is why it is called Song of Ascent, perhaps there is no temple for them to go up to.
Conclusion
The psalm brings to mind the everlasting Yahweh, as the final clause says, who does not ‘slumber’ nor ‘sleep’. And the clause ‘henceforth and forever more’ became a central thought on which the people of Israel could draw for their national restoration in 1948, the years before which Jews everywhere basically kept in mind the ‘land of Israel’ (eretz Izra-el) as given by Yahweh.
He (Yahweh) goes on to deliver his people years later through Jesus Christ, so that a ‘new Israel’ was formed and ‘new people’ created. Today, believers in Christ Jesus are part of this ‘new people’, ‘new Israel’. And indeed, we are part of this.
It therefore calls for our similar act in ‘lifting up our eyes to the hills’ and re-affirm the fact that our help comes from Yahweh who made the heavens and the earth.
Let us pray:
Dear creator God and father of humanity, grant us eyes that lift up to the hills, and hearts that understand you as our ‘keeper’ and ‘shade’, our deliverer who will guard our ‘coming in’ and our ‘going out’, now and forever. Thank you in Jesus Christ. Amen.
不再是个孤零零的老头子
週四、2010年11月11日、21:16時
在一個冬天的夜晚中，一個孤零零的中年人踏進他的晚年，成為一個老年人……
他坐下來，把放在床底下的箱子拉出來，箱子蓋充滿了灰塵，還有個鎖，他便把它打開，嘩啦一聲……哇，他一生的積蓄全都落出來……有銅幣、瑪瑙戒指 、金鏈子、鈔票、古董銅幣……他看著這些積蓄一陣子，舉起頭來望著在牆上的一面鏡子，看到自己所剩的頭髮都白了許多，面上也多了許多皺紋，兩字眼睛也沒什麼精神。他再往上望，看到自己家裡掛著的一副十字架，這麼久了，也已經充滿灰塵了。原來他是個基督徒，因十字架是個空的，他並非天主教徒……
他坐在那裡發呆一陣子，突然間客廳的時鐘響了，啊？他已經發呆了兩個半小時了！他開始想了……我是個基督徒……又怎樣呢？
他想到曾經在教會火熱的做事，即是所謂的“服事”，但是到頭來，他的家人一個一個的過世了，開始的時候，教會還鼓勵他，但是他的失去也改變了他，使他多想一些人生的事，因此他也變成一個很靜的人，教會就慢慢的拒絕他，最終，他就停止去教會了。最後，人人所說的“耶穌的愛”全都不知去了哪裡……
可是，他繼續的信下去，因為這是他唯一的信仰，也是他這麼多年來所得到的教導。雖然身旁沒有人，他總可以跟自己說話，跟自己說笑……
這一個晚上，他看著自己的樣子，想起年輕時的頭髮、精神的眼神、光滑的皮膚、寬闊的肩膀，但是現在的他卻只剩沒幾根白頭髮、一個稍微凸出的肚腩、兩隻沒什麽力量的腳，全身都在疼；而在這一個晚上，他又發覺他兩隻手已經不聽使喚，它們一直不停的抖，他問自己：“我是否患上了帕金森氏病？”然而，他也似乎不太憂慮，或許只有他自己一個人吧？
不久前，他結交了一些朋友，他們起初跟他挺好的，但是後來卻開始跟他爭這爭那，他不明白一個老頭子，爲什麽人家還要這麼對待他，後來他發覺，原來他一生中給他問題的人都有一個共同點：他們都是信耶穌基督的，且都炫耀自己很有靈命。他終於學習到，人生不是學習信仰，而是活出信仰……
老頭子在這一個晚上就坐在那兒，想啊想啊……
一個星期後，終於有人發覺在元朗的一間房子里，有個老頭子坐在那裡發呆，他身旁有一個箱子……他們報警了，後來證實了，他已經發呆一個星期了……
一個星期前，在天堂里有一個客人到訪，他是一個有一頭黑髮的年輕人，眼神很有精神，身體結實，許多天堂的人都伸出手來歡迎他……
在一個冬天的夜晚中，一個孤零零的中年人踏進他的晚年，成為一個老年人……
他坐下來，把放在床底下的箱子拉出來，箱子蓋充滿了灰塵，還有個鎖，他便把它打開，嘩啦一聲……哇，他一生的積蓄全都落出來……有銅幣、瑪瑙戒指 、金鏈子、鈔票、古董銅幣……他看著這些積蓄一陣子，舉起頭來望著在牆上的一面鏡子，看到自己所剩的頭髮都白了許多，面上也多了許多皺紋，兩字眼睛也沒什麼精神。他再往上望，看到自己家裡掛著的一副十字架，這麼久了，也已經充滿灰塵了。原來他是個基督徒，因十字架是個空的，他並非天主教徒……
他坐在那裡發呆一陣子，突然間客廳的時鐘響了，啊？他已經發呆了兩個半小時了！他開始想了……我是個基督徒……又怎樣呢？
他想到曾經在教會火熱的做事，即是所謂的“服事”，但是到頭來，他的家人一個一個的過世了，開始的時候，教會還鼓勵他，但是他的失去也改變了他，使他多想一些人生的事，因此他也變成一個很靜的人，教會就慢慢的拒絕他，最終，他就停止去教會了。最後，人人所說的“耶穌的愛”全都不知去了哪裡……
可是，他繼續的信下去，因為這是他唯一的信仰，也是他這麼多年來所得到的教導。雖然身旁沒有人，他總可以跟自己說話，跟自己說笑……
這一個晚上，他看著自己的樣子，想起年輕時的頭髮、精神的眼神、光滑的皮膚、寬闊的肩膀，但是現在的他卻只剩沒幾根白頭髮、一個稍微凸出的肚腩、兩隻沒什麽力量的腳，全身都在疼；而在這一個晚上，他又發覺他兩隻手已經不聽使喚，它們一直不停的抖，他問自己：“我是否患上了帕金森氏病？”然而，他也似乎不太憂慮，或許只有他自己一個人吧？
不久前，他結交了一些朋友，他們起初跟他挺好的，但是後來卻開始跟他爭這爭那，他不明白一個老頭子，爲什麽人家還要這麼對待他，後來他發覺，原來他一生中給他問題的人都有一個共同點：他們都是信耶穌基督的，且都炫耀自己很有靈命。他終於學習到，人生不是學習信仰，而是活出信仰……
老頭子在這一個晚上就坐在那兒，想啊想啊……
一個星期後，終於有人發覺在元朗的一間房子里，有個老頭子坐在那裡發呆，他身旁有一個箱子……他們報警了，後來證實了，他已經發呆一個星期了……
一個星期前，在天堂里有一個客人到訪，他是一個有一頭黑髮的年輕人，眼神很有精神，身體結實，許多天堂的人都伸出手來歡迎他……
狗是人的好友！
周二、2010年11月16日、22：51时
众所周知，狗是人的最好朋友！小时候，母亲经常喊着我们六个兄弟姐妹帮她做事，有时，我们的狗比我们抢先跑到母亲面前，故母亲经常说：“狗比你们好几十倍！”
是的，无论你的心情多么的差，在两条天真无瑕疵，可爱又无知的小狗面前，它们蹦蹦跳跳的向你叫、向你要，这就足以把你一切的烦恼都暂时抛到九云外了！
狗，我们中宣的两条狗，在上周五大约下午五时左右，天正下着雨，它们出现在我们学院，孤零零的，好可怜。但这两条可怜的无名小狗却唤起了我们人的一点本性：救它们！
这使我想起了我们自己，从一个保守神学的角度来看，我们就有如这两条孤零零的狗，无家可归，到处流浪，然后上帝看到我们了，便伸出祂那怜悯的双手，把我们抱了上来，洁净了我们，赐我们吃的，并以祂的爱来暖和我们。祂不要求什么，只要求我们忠心。
好多时候，我们想超越我们自己的身份、能力，自以为如此便能讨上帝的喜悦。我们大大声的祷告，或装出一副敬虔的样子，就是把背弯一弯，嘴唇拉直，皮笑肉不笑的把头点一点，然后说：“平安”，或“感谢主！”等等。但是，很多时候，上帝并不需要我们做这些，祂只需要我们忠诚于他，正如这两条可爱、天真、没有野心、没有勾心斗角的态度的狗，它们或许就是上帝赐给我们的一点小智慧。
若是我们能够像这两条狗这么纯、真，我想我们很快就能看到善和美了！
众所周知，狗是人的最好朋友！小时候，母亲经常喊着我们六个兄弟姐妹帮她做事，有时，我们的狗比我们抢先跑到母亲面前，故母亲经常说：“狗比你们好几十倍！”
是的，无论你的心情多么的差，在两条天真无瑕疵，可爱又无知的小狗面前，它们蹦蹦跳跳的向你叫、向你要，这就足以把你一切的烦恼都暂时抛到九云外了！
狗，我们中宣的两条狗，在上周五大约下午五时左右，天正下着雨，它们出现在我们学院，孤零零的，好可怜。但这两条可怜的无名小狗却唤起了我们人的一点本性：救它们！
这使我想起了我们自己，从一个保守神学的角度来看，我们就有如这两条孤零零的狗，无家可归，到处流浪，然后上帝看到我们了，便伸出祂那怜悯的双手，把我们抱了上来，洁净了我们，赐我们吃的，并以祂的爱来暖和我们。祂不要求什么，只要求我们忠心。
好多时候，我们想超越我们自己的身份、能力，自以为如此便能讨上帝的喜悦。我们大大声的祷告，或装出一副敬虔的样子，就是把背弯一弯，嘴唇拉直，皮笑肉不笑的把头点一点，然后说：“平安”，或“感谢主！”等等。但是，很多时候，上帝并不需要我们做这些，祂只需要我们忠诚于他，正如这两条可爱、天真、没有野心、没有勾心斗角的态度的狗，它们或许就是上帝赐给我们的一点小智慧。
若是我们能够像这两条狗这么纯、真，我想我们很快就能看到善和美了！
见不到，记不记得！
周四、2010年12月30日、23：07时
周二抵达新加坡，出来机场时已经大约半夜十二点多，福安已经到了，很快的，我们就回到三一神学院。接下来，就忙着安顿，一切做好之后已经是将近凌晨两点。第二天见了一位朋友，是目前新加坡神学院中文部主任，曾在英国的时候跟他在电话上聊过，后来就是在新加坡见面，以及在新加坡神学院有几次的交谈。不过，我们都是长老会之下的传道，他后来终于在2008年完毕博士学位。这就是我们的一些历史；我们在昨日早晨一起吃早餐、叙叙旧，也挺好的。
随着，我就到了医院，没想到从早上十点二十分，就一直在医院跑来跑去，跑上跑下，医生竟然特别的让我在同一日见他，而医院的护士也帮我安排在当日就做扫描（一般上必须先由医生写信，然后到扫描室申请一个日期，然后再跟医生安排扫描报告出来后下一次见面的时间等等），而且当日医生就能直接在他自己房间从电脑上看到我扫描的照片，而我下午见他时竟然不需要再付钱！从始至终，护士、医生、技术人员、行政人员等等特别的有耐性和专业，这也是一项让我感到欣慰的事。
今早，有两位过去的学生和我吃早餐，并向请教写作的一些技巧。她们俩是多么的认真，我们就足足谈了一个半小时。但是其他整天自己还是第一次不知道要做什么。虽然接着有时间见了岳母和二哥，但是每个人都似乎挺忙的。
这一次，我的岳母也似乎不太显得那么急着要见我。在我来说，这是个好的现象；这说明她开始有自己想做的事，且有自己独立的空间。然而，我反倒觉得好寂寞；或许我老二说的是很正确的：当一个人在自己的国家没有自己的房子，他将不会觉得有任何归属感。我许多朋友都不知在哪里，或许，英文的一句话说得蛮好的：当人见不到你，很快就会忘掉你。
其实，能够被人忘掉并非不好；我觉得当人人都忘了我的时候，我反而有了一个新的空间、新的机会、新的生命、新的自由。当然，被忘记或被忘掉有它自己的代价，但是这个代价很快就会过去的。
当我发觉我不要求别人记得我的时候，我反而不觉得怎样。当我发觉别人不需要记得我的时候，我反而得到释放。当别人忘了我、不记得我，我就可以更自由的当自己，好好的做一个人，做一个真正的人。
周二抵达新加坡，出来机场时已经大约半夜十二点多，福安已经到了，很快的，我们就回到三一神学院。接下来，就忙着安顿，一切做好之后已经是将近凌晨两点。第二天见了一位朋友，是目前新加坡神学院中文部主任，曾在英国的时候跟他在电话上聊过，后来就是在新加坡见面，以及在新加坡神学院有几次的交谈。不过，我们都是长老会之下的传道，他后来终于在2008年完毕博士学位。这就是我们的一些历史；我们在昨日早晨一起吃早餐、叙叙旧，也挺好的。
随着，我就到了医院，没想到从早上十点二十分，就一直在医院跑来跑去，跑上跑下，医生竟然特别的让我在同一日见他，而医院的护士也帮我安排在当日就做扫描（一般上必须先由医生写信，然后到扫描室申请一个日期，然后再跟医生安排扫描报告出来后下一次见面的时间等等），而且当日医生就能直接在他自己房间从电脑上看到我扫描的照片，而我下午见他时竟然不需要再付钱！从始至终，护士、医生、技术人员、行政人员等等特别的有耐性和专业，这也是一项让我感到欣慰的事。
今早，有两位过去的学生和我吃早餐，并向请教写作的一些技巧。她们俩是多么的认真，我们就足足谈了一个半小时。但是其他整天自己还是第一次不知道要做什么。虽然接着有时间见了岳母和二哥，但是每个人都似乎挺忙的。
这一次，我的岳母也似乎不太显得那么急着要见我。在我来说，这是个好的现象；这说明她开始有自己想做的事，且有自己独立的空间。然而，我反倒觉得好寂寞；或许我老二说的是很正确的：当一个人在自己的国家没有自己的房子，他将不会觉得有任何归属感。我许多朋友都不知在哪里，或许，英文的一句话说得蛮好的：当人见不到你，很快就会忘掉你。
其实，能够被人忘掉并非不好；我觉得当人人都忘了我的时候，我反而有了一个新的空间、新的机会、新的生命、新的自由。当然，被忘记或被忘掉有它自己的代价，但是这个代价很快就会过去的。
当我发觉我不要求别人记得我的时候，我反而不觉得怎样。当我发觉别人不需要记得我的时候，我反而得到释放。当别人忘了我、不记得我，我就可以更自由的当自己，好好的做一个人，做一个真正的人。
就算人人都记得你，那又怎样？
周六、2011年1 月1日、17：21时
就在一个又热闹又孤独的一个黄昏（我说又热闹，那是因为这是1月1日之前人人都在为即将来临的2011年做欢迎的准备；我说又孤独，那是因为在我自己的观察之下，乌节路是充满了非常多“一个人”的小组），人来人往，密密麻麻，这么多人，但却都是自个儿在走，包括我自己。他们是否孤独呢，或许。但是他们是否寂寞呢？那要看我们如何诠释他们为什么跟上帝创造人的时候的样子这么不同：人人的耳朵似乎多张了一条线，再看看，就会发觉这条线一直接到他们的一个包包里，或是一个扁扁的小盒子，就是所谓的手机，或是电子收音机，或是电子游戏，然后每个如此的人不是在跟自己说话（其实是在跟另一边同样的人说话），就是眼睛闭着（如果不走动的话），身体不时动着或摇着，原来他们再听歌。当然，还有各种各样的如此电子物件……
论手机，就想到，当我们彼此不见，久了就似乎会彼此给忘了。但是，就算是人人记得你了，那又怎样？还不就是联系沟通！那联系沟通又如何呢？当然，无人是一个孤岛（no one is an island），所以自然智慧告诉我们，我们乃是属群体的动物，且是属最高阶级的群体动物。但是，就算我们都是群岛，而不是孤岛，那又如何？人生就会更有意义吗？
或许，若是按我们电子年代来说，今天临晨时钟敲00：00时的时候，大多数应该收到一个新年祝贺的短信吧！或许要看我们的手机是属哪一个台，可能太贵我们不愿意发出去（那平时我们不发短信，大概今天不收到也不足为怪），可能有不同其他的原因令我们收不到，或不发祝贺短信。不过，或许我们会收到祝贺短信吧？抑或是祝贺的电话？好好，就算是没有在00：00时收到，可能别人或我们自己已经睡着了，但是至少今天应该有人向你祝贺吧？还是没有？或许你真的觉得人人都忘记你了！可是，就算人人都记得你了，那又怎样？
有许多种人不太喜欢记得别人，例如：欠人钱的人（可以说不记得某某人）、人家常常要向他借钱的人（可以说不记得要借钱的人）、怕麻烦的人（这大概是个牧师吧？哈哈！）、看人人为自己敌人的人（这大概是没有安全感的人吧？哦，对了，可能就是神学生吧？哈哈）、认为这世界只有自己才是人的人（哈哈，可能神学老师也不一定呢？哈哈！）、认为自己不需要别人的人（这可能是那些问题长老吧？！哈哈！），哇，如果我们多想想，可能想出更多呢！不过，也有许多种不太喜欢被人家记得自己的人，例如：欠人钱的人（最好债主忘记我们）、人家常常要向他借钱的人（最好没钱人忘记了我，可是糟的是没钱人总是记得有钱人！）、怕麻烦的人（对不起，牧师们，会友一定在有问题时记得你们了！）、看自己为人人的敌人的人（oops，或许就是那些给低分数的老师吧！哈哈！其实，那也要看什么是低分数！最好同学拿到不好成绩时忘记了我，可是他们就偏偏记得你！）、认为世界不需要自己的人（这或许要有朋友了！）、认为别人不需要自己的人（这是那种“救世主”态度的相反——你是否其中一个？）等等等！
从上述所言，“记得别人”、“被别人记得”等等并非是一件好或不好的事，而是要看背后的原因。不过，当我们觉得人人都忘了我们而感到失落的时候，或许要问自己：就算人人记得我了，那又怎样？最重要的或许就是：当人人忘记我的时候，那是他们有自己的原因，可能他们正希望我不会去麻烦他们，或向他们借钱，或其他的原因。上面所提到的原因，也可以反过来说，可能别人忘记我们的原因也正是我们忘记他们的原因！更重要的是，我们一定要记得上帝，因祂不会向我们借钱（祂只向我们要钱，就是所谓的奉献？哈哈，为了那些可怜没钱的牧师和宣教士吧？），更不会给我们麻烦等等。当然，就算我们忘记了上帝，祂还是记得我们的，否则，我们早就化为乌有了！
至少，在我们可能被忘记的新的一年，我们还能感恩，因就算人人记得你了，那又怎样？我还有创造宇宙万物的上帝记得我呢！阿门！
就在一个又热闹又孤独的一个黄昏（我说又热闹，那是因为这是1月1日之前人人都在为即将来临的2011年做欢迎的准备；我说又孤独，那是因为在我自己的观察之下，乌节路是充满了非常多“一个人”的小组），人来人往，密密麻麻，这么多人，但却都是自个儿在走，包括我自己。他们是否孤独呢，或许。但是他们是否寂寞呢？那要看我们如何诠释他们为什么跟上帝创造人的时候的样子这么不同：人人的耳朵似乎多张了一条线，再看看，就会发觉这条线一直接到他们的一个包包里，或是一个扁扁的小盒子，就是所谓的手机，或是电子收音机，或是电子游戏，然后每个如此的人不是在跟自己说话（其实是在跟另一边同样的人说话），就是眼睛闭着（如果不走动的话），身体不时动着或摇着，原来他们再听歌。当然，还有各种各样的如此电子物件……
论手机，就想到，当我们彼此不见，久了就似乎会彼此给忘了。但是，就算是人人记得你了，那又怎样？还不就是联系沟通！那联系沟通又如何呢？当然，无人是一个孤岛（no one is an island），所以自然智慧告诉我们，我们乃是属群体的动物，且是属最高阶级的群体动物。但是，就算我们都是群岛，而不是孤岛，那又如何？人生就会更有意义吗？
或许，若是按我们电子年代来说，今天临晨时钟敲00：00时的时候，大多数应该收到一个新年祝贺的短信吧！或许要看我们的手机是属哪一个台，可能太贵我们不愿意发出去（那平时我们不发短信，大概今天不收到也不足为怪），可能有不同其他的原因令我们收不到，或不发祝贺短信。不过，或许我们会收到祝贺短信吧？抑或是祝贺的电话？好好，就算是没有在00：00时收到，可能别人或我们自己已经睡着了，但是至少今天应该有人向你祝贺吧？还是没有？或许你真的觉得人人都忘记你了！可是，就算人人都记得你了，那又怎样？
有许多种人不太喜欢记得别人，例如：欠人钱的人（可以说不记得某某人）、人家常常要向他借钱的人（可以说不记得要借钱的人）、怕麻烦的人（这大概是个牧师吧？哈哈！）、看人人为自己敌人的人（这大概是没有安全感的人吧？哦，对了，可能就是神学生吧？哈哈）、认为这世界只有自己才是人的人（哈哈，可能神学老师也不一定呢？哈哈！）、认为自己不需要别人的人（这可能是那些问题长老吧？！哈哈！），哇，如果我们多想想，可能想出更多呢！不过，也有许多种不太喜欢被人家记得自己的人，例如：欠人钱的人（最好债主忘记我们）、人家常常要向他借钱的人（最好没钱人忘记了我，可是糟的是没钱人总是记得有钱人！）、怕麻烦的人（对不起，牧师们，会友一定在有问题时记得你们了！）、看自己为人人的敌人的人（oops，或许就是那些给低分数的老师吧！哈哈！其实，那也要看什么是低分数！最好同学拿到不好成绩时忘记了我，可是他们就偏偏记得你！）、认为世界不需要自己的人（这或许要有朋友了！）、认为别人不需要自己的人（这是那种“救世主”态度的相反——你是否其中一个？）等等等！
从上述所言，“记得别人”、“被别人记得”等等并非是一件好或不好的事，而是要看背后的原因。不过，当我们觉得人人都忘了我们而感到失落的时候，或许要问自己：就算人人记得我了，那又怎样？最重要的或许就是：当人人忘记我的时候，那是他们有自己的原因，可能他们正希望我不会去麻烦他们，或向他们借钱，或其他的原因。上面所提到的原因，也可以反过来说，可能别人忘记我们的原因也正是我们忘记他们的原因！更重要的是，我们一定要记得上帝，因祂不会向我们借钱（祂只向我们要钱，就是所谓的奉献？哈哈，为了那些可怜没钱的牧师和宣教士吧？），更不会给我们麻烦等等。当然，就算我们忘记了上帝，祂还是记得我们的，否则，我们早就化为乌有了！
至少，在我们可能被忘记的新的一年，我们还能感恩，因就算人人记得你了，那又怎样？我还有创造宇宙万物的上帝记得我呢！阿门！
A City that is Broken into...
Monday, 24th January 2011, 23:35 hrs
Most of us generally do not quite know what to do when a person bursts out in anger. Similarly, some of us are not quite sure what to do or say in the presence of a hurting person, particularly when he or she cries. Perhaps, most of us are made to avoid the extreme. But anger, depending on its context, may or may not be appropriate; at times it may even be wrong. 'Tears' should not be equated with 'crying', for 'tears' are usually a chemical response of our biological make-up that is linked to our psychological make-up. While anger is oftentimes viewed more negatively, 'tears', and even for that matter, 'crying' are not. I shall here talk a little about anger.
So when is anger appropriate, inappropriate, wrong? Why do I not ask when it is 'right'? Perhaps, I should say, as far as I know, anger is often judged by its expression. For example, anger at injustice is appropriate. But what are its expressions? We may say that anger at social inequality is appropriate, or even right, but violent expressions that result in the destruction of public property and even the loss of life would be wholly wrong. In this connection, the angry expression itself has become unjust.
But we cannot confine our discussion only to the violent expression of anger. Expressions of anger can take various forms, one of which is verbal while others might be psychological. Whatever it is, we need to ask what causes the anger. Anger again can be due to so many possibilities. But supposing we take the example of a man who gets angry because he fails to get what he wants. He then turns that anger into verbal abuse of those from whom he failed to obtain what he has hoped to obtain. Somehow, nothing appeases him and so he resorts to physically hurting those he thought ought to give him what he wanted. This sort of anger is childish and pertains to that of selfish and personal realm.
There are those who become angry at the establishment for the plight of the socially marginalised. They took to the streets and picketed against the authorities. However, nothing seemed to improve and so finally they decided to go on a rampage of burning and destroying public property. This sort of anger is just anger but its result or expression has not been desirable. There are those who become angry at a policy, to which they turn to address and redress the issue that is causing unnecessary hardship to the people. But nothing changes. They then take the matter further by seeking to address the issue in a civilised manner. Though they are angry, the turn their anger into strength and find the appropriate expression of that anger.
The above concerns anger in terms of a person or persons either wanting something or trying to address a social issue. But we do witness angry people almost daily, and none of the cases of anger that we have witnessed may not even be remotely related to social issues. We see anger at work, at home, in schools, among and between colleagues, between friends, etc. One of such expression can be seen in people who hold dear to certain conflicting ideas. And it is here that very often anger gets exhibited.
Proverbs 25.28 says 'Like a city that is broken into and without walls, is a man who has no control over his spirit'. This verse in fact refers to anger in general. And the author likens a person without self-control to a city broken into. This is no exaggeration, for if we compare a person to a city, then to govern a city requires that the governer be thoughtful, makes his plans and executes his plans with care. Without any proper management a city will lose its economic edge, and gets broken into easily. By comparing a person's spirit (over here the original really means one's anger) to a city, the author is showing that anger or its control is of utmost importance to a person's success, in addition to his overall well being. Thus if a person has no control of his anger, he would be like a city broken into.
Expressions of anger may be assessed according to its consequences. We at least read of such an account in the Gospels, about Jesus turning the tables of the money-changers and whipping those who sold various items in the temple precincts. We do not know the full details of the actual story; what we do know is that the act or physically violent action of Jesus is explained with these words, 'This house is a house of prayer; but you have turned it into a robbers' den'. If we were to look at this incident from the point of 'civility', then what Jesus did certainly failed to be 'appropriate'. However, given the context of the socially marginalised then, and the openly abusive attitude of the temple authorities towards God's temple and the poor, what Jesus did was what nothing better could have been done, and what nobody would have done. In that regard, Jesus has done something no one has the moral courage to perform.
Having said some of the above, we may return to the verse in Proverbs. What it says here is in fact a reference to a general hot-tempered, aggressive person. It does not take into consideration the nature of the anger. Its point here is the 'lack of self-control'. Thus it is our daily life that is in view here. We need therefore to consider the verse on a personal level, and apply the wisdom of the verse to ourselves, and so cultivate in ourselves a sense of self-control, if we indeed do not wish to be a city broken into.
Most of us generally do not quite know what to do when a person bursts out in anger. Similarly, some of us are not quite sure what to do or say in the presence of a hurting person, particularly when he or she cries. Perhaps, most of us are made to avoid the extreme. But anger, depending on its context, may or may not be appropriate; at times it may even be wrong. 'Tears' should not be equated with 'crying', for 'tears' are usually a chemical response of our biological make-up that is linked to our psychological make-up. While anger is oftentimes viewed more negatively, 'tears', and even for that matter, 'crying' are not. I shall here talk a little about anger.
So when is anger appropriate, inappropriate, wrong? Why do I not ask when it is 'right'? Perhaps, I should say, as far as I know, anger is often judged by its expression. For example, anger at injustice is appropriate. But what are its expressions? We may say that anger at social inequality is appropriate, or even right, but violent expressions that result in the destruction of public property and even the loss of life would be wholly wrong. In this connection, the angry expression itself has become unjust.
But we cannot confine our discussion only to the violent expression of anger. Expressions of anger can take various forms, one of which is verbal while others might be psychological. Whatever it is, we need to ask what causes the anger. Anger again can be due to so many possibilities. But supposing we take the example of a man who gets angry because he fails to get what he wants. He then turns that anger into verbal abuse of those from whom he failed to obtain what he has hoped to obtain. Somehow, nothing appeases him and so he resorts to physically hurting those he thought ought to give him what he wanted. This sort of anger is childish and pertains to that of selfish and personal realm.
There are those who become angry at the establishment for the plight of the socially marginalised. They took to the streets and picketed against the authorities. However, nothing seemed to improve and so finally they decided to go on a rampage of burning and destroying public property. This sort of anger is just anger but its result or expression has not been desirable. There are those who become angry at a policy, to which they turn to address and redress the issue that is causing unnecessary hardship to the people. But nothing changes. They then take the matter further by seeking to address the issue in a civilised manner. Though they are angry, the turn their anger into strength and find the appropriate expression of that anger.
The above concerns anger in terms of a person or persons either wanting something or trying to address a social issue. But we do witness angry people almost daily, and none of the cases of anger that we have witnessed may not even be remotely related to social issues. We see anger at work, at home, in schools, among and between colleagues, between friends, etc. One of such expression can be seen in people who hold dear to certain conflicting ideas. And it is here that very often anger gets exhibited.
Proverbs 25.28 says 'Like a city that is broken into and without walls, is a man who has no control over his spirit'. This verse in fact refers to anger in general. And the author likens a person without self-control to a city broken into. This is no exaggeration, for if we compare a person to a city, then to govern a city requires that the governer be thoughtful, makes his plans and executes his plans with care. Without any proper management a city will lose its economic edge, and gets broken into easily. By comparing a person's spirit (over here the original really means one's anger) to a city, the author is showing that anger or its control is of utmost importance to a person's success, in addition to his overall well being. Thus if a person has no control of his anger, he would be like a city broken into.
Expressions of anger may be assessed according to its consequences. We at least read of such an account in the Gospels, about Jesus turning the tables of the money-changers and whipping those who sold various items in the temple precincts. We do not know the full details of the actual story; what we do know is that the act or physically violent action of Jesus is explained with these words, 'This house is a house of prayer; but you have turned it into a robbers' den'. If we were to look at this incident from the point of 'civility', then what Jesus did certainly failed to be 'appropriate'. However, given the context of the socially marginalised then, and the openly abusive attitude of the temple authorities towards God's temple and the poor, what Jesus did was what nothing better could have been done, and what nobody would have done. In that regard, Jesus has done something no one has the moral courage to perform.
Having said some of the above, we may return to the verse in Proverbs. What it says here is in fact a reference to a general hot-tempered, aggressive person. It does not take into consideration the nature of the anger. Its point here is the 'lack of self-control'. Thus it is our daily life that is in view here. We need therefore to consider the verse on a personal level, and apply the wisdom of the verse to ourselves, and so cultivate in ourselves a sense of self-control, if we indeed do not wish to be a city broken into.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)