- Sekolah Tinggi Theologi Aletheia

1
JURNAL THEOLOGIA ALETHEIA
Volume 5 Nomor 9
September 2003
DAFTAR ISI
Catatan Redaksi
4
Riwayat Singkat: Pdt. Peterus Pamudji, Ph.D.
Melani Gunawan
Trust and Obey (Suatu Refleksi Pribadi)
Peterus Pamudji
Mendengar dan Melakukan: Perumpamaan Tentang
Dua Macam Pembangun (Luk 6:48-49; Mat 7:24-27)
Kornelius A. Setiawan
Trust and Obey: A Current Retrospective and Assessment
Luder G. Whitlock, Jr.
Ketaatan: Suatu Respons Yang Menentukan Untuk
Mengalami Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Akan Datang
(Studi Eksegetis Keluaran 19:1-8)
Sia Kok Sin
Trust and Obedience From Calvin to The Second Reformation
James A. De Jong
The Shema‗ And The Parable of The Good Samaritan
Tan Kim Huat
Tragedy & Triumph In The Theater of God:
A Reformed View of The Relationship of Faith,
Obedience And The Image of God
Thomas Harvey
An Anatomy of Belief and Faith: A Theological and
Pastoral Reflection
Joseph Tong
Tinjauan Buku
Penulis Artikel
Penulis Ringkasan
Penulis Tinjauan Buku
5
12
21
36
49
63
89
113
143
168
171
173
174
2
Jurnal Theologia Aletheia
Diterbitkan oleh:
Institut Theologia Aletheia (ITA)
Dua kali setahun (Maret dan September)
Alamat Redaksi:
Institut Theologia Aletheia
Jl. Argopuro 28-34 (PO Box 100)
Lawang 65211, Jawa Timur
Telp. : 0341-426617, 426571
Fax. : 0341-426971
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.ital.ac.id
Staf Redaksi
Penasehat
Pemimpin Redaksi
Anggota Redaksi
Bendahara
Publikasi
Distributor
: Peterus Pamudji, Ph.D.
: Melani Gunawan, M.A.
: Iskandar Santoso, M.Th.
Lanna Wahyuni, M.Th.
Alfius Areng Mutak, M.Th.
Kimiko Goto, M.Th.
: Sia Kok Sin, M.Th.
: Suwandi
: Marthen Nainupu, M.Th.
Tujuan Penerbitan :
Memajukan aktivitas karya tulis Kristen melalui medium penelitian dan
pemikiran di dalam kerangka umum disiplin teologia Reformatoris.
3
Trust and Obey
Yohan Pamudji, Ibu Paula Pamudji, Susana Pamudji, Pdt. Peterus Pamudji bersama
dengan Prof. Louis H. Campbell dalam rangka Wisuda Susana Pamudji
di Belhaven College, USA pada Mei 2000
Diterbitkan Sebagai Penghargaan
Untuk Pdt. Peterus Pamudji, Ph.D.
Yang Telah Melayani Sebagai REKTOR
Di Institut Theologia Aletheia Lawang
Tahun 1985 - 2003
4
CATATAN REDAKSI
Puji Syukur patut kita panjatkan kepada Allah yang senantiasa
melawat umat-Nya. Dengan anugerah Tuhan, Jurnal Theologia
Aletheia boleh menjumpai anda kembali dalam suatu edisi yang
khusus.
Edisi khusus kali ini mengambil tema ―Trust and Obey‖ yang
secara khusus dipersembahkan kepada Bapak Pdt. Peterus Pamudji,
Ph.D. yang telah memimpin ITA Lawang selama 18 tahun, dan
pada tahun ini akan menyerahkan kepemimpinannya kepada Bapak
Pdt. Kornelius A. Setiawan, D.Th.
Para penulis artikel dari edisi kali ini adalah para hamba
Tuhan dari dalam dan dari luar negeri yang telah mengenal dan
dikenal dengan cukup baik oleh Bapak Pdt. Peterus Pamudji, Ph.D.
Kami yakin dan percaya bahwa artikel-artikel yang ada akan
menjadi berkat bukan hanya bagi Bapak Pdt. Peterus Pamudji,
Ph.D., tetapi juga bagi semua pembaca.
Biarlah Tuhan senantiasa memberkati hidup dan pelayanan
kita semua. Soli Deo Gloria.
Redaksi JTA
Nomor AC Bank untuk JTA adalah:
BII, Malang AC Nomor 1052055031
a/n Lanna Wahyuni dan Kornelius A.
Setiawan
5
RIWAYAT SINGKAT:
Pdt. Peterus Pamudji, Ph.D.
Melani Gunawan
B
apak Pendeta Peterus Pamudji adalah seseorang yang sudah banyak dikenal
di lingkungan Sinode Gereja Kristus Tuhan (G.K.T.) dan gereja-gereja lain
di Indonesia. Secara pribadi, penulis mengenal beliau dengan baik karena
penulis pernah menjadi anak didik beliau selama kurang lebih lima tahun di
Institut Theologia Aletheia (I.T.A.) Lawang. Pengenalan dan pendidikan itu
tidak berhenti dengan kelulusan penulis dari I.T.A., karena beliau terus
memberikan perhatian dan nasehat kepada eks-anak-anak didik beliau. Penulis
mengenal dari banyak hal bahwa beliau adalah seorang yang “tahan banting.”
Beliau begitu tenang dan tidak menuruti emosi, ketika banyak masalah dan
persoalan timbul di dalam pelayanan dan kehidupannya. Ketenangan dan
kesabaran beliau akan terusik hanya bila kepentingan kerajaan Allah dan
karya-Nya, khususnya di I.T.A. diganjal, dianggap remeh atau dihambat dan
dirusak. Penulis percaya bahwa kesabaran, ketekunan dan keuletan beliau di
dalam melayani Tuhan, telah banyak menjadi panutan dan berkat bagi hambahamba Tuhan yang lebih muda dan orang-orang Kristen lainnya. Siapakah
beliau sebenarnya? Melalui rubrik khusus ini, kita akan mengenal beliau
dengan lebih mendalam.
RIWAYAT HIDUP, PENDIDIKAN DAN PELAYANAN
Bapak Pendeta Peterus Pamudji dilahirkan di Malang pada
tanggal 28 Oktober 1945. Setelah melewati masa pendidikan dari
tingkat T.K. sampai S.M.U., pada tahun 1965 beliau melanjutkan
kuliah di Universitas Brawijaya, jurusan Tehnik Sipil; disamping
itu, beliau juga mengajar ilmu ukur dan aljabar di S.L.T.P. Kalam
Kudus, dan membantu pelayanan di kantor Sinode G.K.T. Pada
tahun 1967, karena situasi politik yang tidak memungkinkan beliau
untuk mendapatkan perkuliahan yang baik; juga karena meresponi
panggilan Tuhan yang sudah dirasakan sejak beliau duduk di
6
bangku S.L.T.P., beliau memutuskan untuk meninggalkan bangku
kuliah. Selama masa persiapan untuk memasuki sekolah Theologia,
beliau tetap membantu pelayanan di kantor Sinode G.K.T.
Pada tahun 1969, beliau memasuki masa penempaan sebagai
hamba Tuhan, angkatan yang pertama di Institut Theologia
Aletheia, Lawang. Dalam status masih sebagai mahasiswa, pada
tahun 1971-1972 beliau melayani di G.K.T. Jember selama satu
tahun, karena disana tidak ada gembala sidang. Pada tahun 1973,
beliau melayani sebagai pembina rohani dan guru agama di sekolah
Aletheia Surabaya, disamping itu beliau juga mengambil beberapa
mata kuliah untuk penyesuaian. Beliau menikah dengan ibu Paula
pada bulan Juni, 1973. Selanjutnya beliau lulus dari I.T.A. pada
tahun 1974, dan melayani sebagai gembala sidang di G.K.T.
Lumajang dan koordinator dari sekolah Kristen Aletheia di
Lumajang. Anak pertama, seorang putra yang diberi nama Yohan
Pamudji, lahir di Surabaya pada tahun 1975. Anak kedua, seorang
putri yang diberi nama Susana Pamudji, lahir di U.S.A. pada tahun
1979.
Allah terus berkarya di dalam kehidupan Bpk. Pdt. Peterus
Pamudji, dan terbukalah kesempatan bagi beliau untuk
melanjutkan studi di U.S.A., pada tahun 1976. Beliau memberikan
kesaksian bahwa semua ini adalah anugerah Tuhan semata; melalui
pertolongan dari seorang dosen I.T.A. yang bernama Bpk. John
Tracksel (mengajar di I.T.A. pada tahun 1970-1972), beliau dapat
diterima dan studi di Vennard College di University Park, Iowa dan
mendapatkan beasiswa penuh. Bpk. John Trachsel dan Bpk. Joseph
Tong telah menjadi panutan secara rohani bagi Bpk. Pdt. Peterus
Pamudji dan menjadi orang-orang yang terus melekat di hati
beliau, yang tidak akan beliau lupakan seumur hidup beliau.
Pertolongan Tuhan melalui dukungan dalam banyak hal dari kedua
hamba Tuhan tersebut telah memungkinkan beliau berhasil
menyelesaikan studinya dengan baik. Beliau studi disana pada
tahun 1976-1977, dan mendapatkan gelar B.A. Dalam kehidupan
dan studi selanjutnya, mereka (beliau dan keluarga yang menyusul
dua tahun kemudian) hidup dan bergumul dari hari ke hari dengan
7
pimpinan dan anugerah Tuhan, karena tidak ada dukungan dari
Indonesia. Beliau hanya mendapatkan beasiswa sebanyak sepertiga
dari tuition, sehingga untuk menunjang kebutuhan hidup
sekeluarga dan biaya kuliah beliau harus bekerja enam jam setiap
hari sambil kuliah, dan bekerja penuh waktu dalam masa liburan.
Itupun tidak mencukupi kebutuhan hidup dan biaya kuliahnya,
sehingga Ibu Paula Pamudji harus juga bekerja keras setiap hari
untuk menunjang kebutuhan keluarga. Tetapi Tuhan sungguh luar
biasa, Ia terus membuka jalan, sehingga setahap demi setahap
beliau tetap dapat melanjutkan studi. Pada tahun 1978-1980, beliau
studi di Western Evangelical Seminary di Portland, Oregon, dan
mendapatkan gelar M.A. dalam bidang Perjanjian Baru. Sekolah
terakhir dimana beliau studi adalah Drew University di Madison,
New Jersey, pada tahun 1980-1985. Beliau mendapatkan gelar
Master of Philosophy pada tahun 1984, dan gelar Ph.D. dalam
bidang Historical and Systematic Theology pada tahun 1985.
Setelah selesai dengan studinya, apakah yang beliau lakukan?
Banyak tawaran, yang secara manusia menjanjikan kehidupan yang
lebih baik dan enak di Amerika Serikat; tetapi beliau selalu teringat
akan komitmennya kepada Tuhan sejak beliau pertama kali masuk
ke I.T.A., yaitu pulang kembali ke I.T.A. untuk mengajar dan
membangun I.T.A. Beliau yakin akan pemeliharaan Tuhan selama
masa studinya, sehingga walaupun ada tawaran-tawaran tersebut,
beliau tetap setia untuk memenuhi komitmennya kepada Tuhan.
Beliau berkata bahwa kalau kita tidak setia, kita akan ―miss the
good things.‖ Pengalaman hidupnya menyatakan bahwa Tuhan itu
baik. Juga karena pimpinan Tuhan dan dorongan dari Bpk. Pdt.
Joseph Tong (baik semasa beliau studi maupun setelah selesai
studi), beliau meresponi panggilan dari Sinode G.K.T. untuk
menjadi pimpinan di I.T.A. Akhirnya beliau pulang dan menjadi
pimpinan di I.T.A. dengan segala kegentaran hati dan hati yang
bersandar kepada Tuhan, karena kondisi di I.T.A. yang pada saat
itu sangat memprihatinkan.
Bpk. Pdt. Peterus Pamudji telah menjadi pimpinan di I.TA.
sejak tahun 1985 sampai tahun 2003. Beliau selalu merasakan
8
bahwa hidup, studi, pelayanan dan segala sesuatu yang telah
dilaluinya adalah anugerah Tuhan, sehingga beliau mempunyai
komitmen untuk terus mengasihi I.T.A. Prinsip hidupnya bahwa
segala sesuatu hanya oleh anugerah Tuhan, oleh karena itu beliau
mempunyai semboyan hidup untuk selalu ―Trust and Obey.‖
Semua yang dikatakan oleh beliau telah terbukti melalui
kesetiaannya terhadap Tuhan dan I.T.A. Badai gelombang,
kesulitan, dan masalah yang timbul di dalam perjalanannya sebagai
seorang hamba Tuhan tidak membuat beliau meninggalkan I.T.A.
dan pelayanan; beliau setia memimpin I.T.A. sampai selesai,
meskipun tawaran-tawaran ketempat lain selalu berdatangan.
Selama beliau menjadi Rektor I.T.A., beliau juga
mendapatkan kesempatan untuk membantu pelayanan di Sinode
G.K.T. sebagai Wakil Ketua B.P. Sinode G.K.T. (1985-1989;
1993-1997) dan sebagai Ketua Departemen Dogma dan Penelitian.
Diluar G.K.T. beliau pernah menjabat sebagai anggota pengurus
Organisasi Sekolah-sekolah Theologi, PASTI dan PERSETIA.
Secara Internasional beliau pernah menjadi anggota Komisi
Akreditasi dari Asia Theological Association. Lalu apa kesan dan
pesan selama beliau melayani Tuhan?
SUKA DAN DUKA SEBAGAI HAMBA TUHAN
Bpk. Peterus Pamudji merasakan bahwa melayani Tuhan
tidak pernah susah karena hak istimewa yang sudah diberikan
Tuhan kepadanya, serta kasih dan penyertaan Tuhan yang
dirasakannya; walaupun memang duka dan kesulitan itu tidak bisa
dihindari di dalam melayani Tuhan. Bagi keluarga misalnya,
mereka harus mengalami sesuatu yang tidak seharusnya mereka
alami, seperti anak-anak beliau tidak boleh jajan di I.T.A.
sebagaimana peraturan yang dikenakan kepada para mahasiswa.
Juga beliau sering berduka ketika merasa kesepian di tengah
keramaian, karena pergumulan yang tidak mungkin untuk
diutarakan dan diterangkan kepada orang lain. Tetapi beliau merasa
bersyukur kepada Tuhan, karena secara umum beliau mendapatkan
9
dukungan sepenuhnya dari keluarga, baik dalam suka maupun
duka. Juga ada rekan-rekan kerja dan para mahasiswa yang cukup
dekat dengan beliau, dan selalu mendukung.
Sebagai seorang pimpinan dari para pengajar, beliau merasa
bersukacita karena mempunyai rekan kerja yang cukup baik;
walaupun duka juga muncul ketika ada di antara mereka yang
mengecewakan, seperti mereka mempunyai loyalitas yang kurang
terhadap gereja dan I.T.A. Semuanya itu tidak membuat kesetiaan
beliau terhadap I.T.A. surut. Bagi beliau, orang lain boleh tidak
setia, tetapi beliau akan setia kepada I.T.A. selama beliau dipercaya
untuk melayani di I.T.A.
Sebagai seorang pimpinan dari I.T.A., beliau bersukacita
karena dengan anugerah Tuhan, I.T.A. terus mengalami
perkembangan dan memberikan kontribusi bagi gereja-gereja di
lingkungan Sinode G.K.T. dan gereja-gereja tetangga. Hal ini
bukan berarti tidak ada kekurangan, tetapi kita dapat melihat
bahwa beliau sudah berusaha untuk memberikan yang terbaik bagi
gereja-gereja Tuhan.
Sebagai seorang pengajar dan Bapak dari para mahasiswa
dan mahasiswi, beliau merasa seperti seorang Bapak bagi mereka.
Jika ada yang merasa segan, menghargai, tidak senang, dll adalah
lumrah, karena beliau tidak bisa memuaskan semua mahasiswa.
Beliau merasa bersukacita ketika melihat para mahasiswa dapat
menjadi hamba Tuhan yang melayani Tuhan dengan baik. Beliau
merasa berduka ketika melihat para mahasiswa jatuh dan gagal
dalam pendidikan, kehidupan dan pelayanan mereka. Hati seorang
Bapak yang senantiasa mengasihi anak-anaknya. Duka dan
kekecewaan itu tidak membuat beliau membenci mereka yang
telah gagal, tetapi beliau dengan hati dan kasih kebapakannya
senantiasa berusaha untuk merangkul dan membawa mereka
kembali kepada jalan yang benar. Tidak jarang beliau
disalahpahami, jika demikian halnya, apa yang beliau lakukan?
Hanya satu hal, yaitu mendoakan mereka.
10
Secara umum, beliau merasakan mujizat Tuhan dalam
berbagai peristiwa, dimana hal ini membuktikan bahwa Tuhan
mengasihi I.T.A. dan kita semua yang mengasihi Tuhan dan
mempunyai motivasi yang benar dalam melayani Tuhan.
Setelah mengalami banyak hal di dalam melayani Tuhan,
apa yang menjadi angan-angan, harapan dan rencana beliau?
ANGAN-ANGAN DAN HARAPAN
Sejak awal beliau berharap bahwa akan ada generasi penerus, sehingga
beliau mengirim orang-orang untuk studi lebih lanjut sejak tahun 1987 sampai
sekarang. Supaya dengan demikian banyak orang-orang I.T.A. yang akan
berhasil dan dipakai oleh Tuhan sesuai dengan bidangnya masing-masing. Hal
ini terbukti dengan adanya orang-orang muda yang sekarang sudah kembali ke
I.T.A. Dulu mereka adalah murid-muridnya, sekarang dengan segala
kelapangan dada, mereka diterima sebagai rekan kerja beliau.
Beliau juga berharap bahwa orang-orang I.T.A. akan selalu
mengasihi almamater mereka, karena dari I.T.A. lah mereka telah
dibentuk dan dapat menjadi sebagaimana mereka ada sekarang.
Kasih itu dapat ditunjukkan dengan cara mendukung I.T.A. dalam
hal keuangan dan menjadi promotor tentang I.T.A., sehingga
banyak orang akan tertarik untuk ditempa di I.T.A.
Biarlah harapan yang sudah terlebih dahulu direalisasikan
melalui diri beliau itu, juga menjadi tekad kita untuk selalu
mendukung dan mengasihi I.T.A. dalam hal apapun. Kalau bukan
kita, siapa lagi yang akan mendukung dan mengasihi I.T.A?
Bukankah I.T.A. milik kita semua?
RENCANA KE DEPAN
-
Beliau ingin mewujudkan keinginannya untuk menulis.
Beliau ingin mempunyai lebih banyak waktu untuk
penggembalaan terhadap mahasiswa.
11
-
Beliau ingin mendukung I.T.A. dengan sepenuh waktu dan
tenaga.
Akhirnya beliau ingin bersyukur kepada Tuhan, karena
melalui anugerah Tuhan beliau sudah dipercayakan oleh Tuhan
untuk memimpin I.T.A. dari tahun 1985 sampai tahun 2003.
Penulis sungguh banyak mendapatkan berkat melalui apa
yang sudah penulis dengar dan ungkapkan melalui tulisan ini.
Seorang Bapak, hamba Tuhan dan pemimpin yang berusaha untuk
selalu setia dan mengasihi Tuhan. Biarlah ―trust and obey‖ yang
sudah menjadi motto hidupnya, akan menjadi teladan bagi kita
untuk selalu ―trust dan obey‖, sehingga kita juga boleh merasakan
anugerah Tuhan di dalam kehidupan dan pelayanan kita.
12
TRUST AND OBEY
(Suatu Refleksi Pribadi)
Peterus Pamudji
Rektor Emiritus Institut Theologia Aletheia Lawang, Jatim
efleksi pribadi penulis tentang ‗Trust and Obey‖ (Percaya dan
Taat) ia lakukan pada akhir masa jabatannya sebagai Rektor
Institut Theologia Aletheia Lawang yang telah ia emban selama 18
tahun, sejak 23 Agutus 1985. Masa pelayanan penuh waktu penulis
telah mencapai 34 tahun sejak ia memasuki pendidikan theologia di
Institut Theologia Aletheia Lawang mulai 12 Februari 1969. Trust
and Obey (Percaya dan Taat) telah menjadi falsafah kehidupan dan
pelayanannya di dalam ladang Tuhan. Corak dan gaya
kepemimpinan serta pengajaran yang ia terapkan adalah cerminan
dari falsafah tersebut di atas.
R
Dalam melakukan refleksi ini ada tiga hal penting yang telah
membantu penulis untuk memahami dan menghayati falsafah
‗Trust and Obey‖ tersebut. Ketiga hal tersebut adalah‖ I. Firman II
Tokoh-tokoh Panutan III. Lagu-lagu Rohani cerminan falsafah
tersebut. Berikut ini penulis hendak menguraikan secara ringkas
ketiga hal tersebut di atas.
FIRMAN
Penulis mengingat firman Tuhan yang tertulis dalam Roma
12:1 yang berbunyi: ―Karena itu Saudara-saudara demi kemurahan
Allah aku menasehatkan kamu, supaya kamu mempersembahkan
tubuhmu sebagai persembahan yang hidup, yang kudus dan yang
berkenan kepada Allah: itu adalah ibadahmu yang sejati‖. Kata
‗Persembahkan‖ dalam bahasa Perjanjian Baru berbunyi thusia.
Kata ini secara simbolis menunjuk pada persembahan diri kita
untuk pelayanan bagi Tuhan, bagi kemuliaan Tuhan dan
13
persembahan rohani orang-orang percaya secara umum, sebagai
imamat kudus (Roma 12:1, Ibrani 13:15 dan 1 Petrus 2:5)1. Bagi
penulis ayat ini mengandung makna inti ―Trust and Obey‖ –
Percaya dan Taat. Mempersembahkan diri sebagai kurban yang
hidup itu berarti mentaati panggilan Allah tanpa syarat. ‗Kurban
yang hidup‖ itu mengingatkan kita pada kurban bakaran dalam
Perjanjian Lama, yang berarti keseluruhan kurban itu harus
diletakkan diatas mezbah dan disembelih serta dibakar sampai
habis. Lawrence O. Richards memakai bahasa persembahan korban
Perjanjian Lama untuk berbicara tentang pola kehidupan Kristen.
Menurut Richards, ibadah yang sejati (Roma12:1) itu bersangkut
paut dengan õlâh, yaitu persembahan korban bakaran. Ini adalah
cara simbolis yang dipakai oleh Paulus untuk menggarisbawahi
makna dari kehidupan, komitmen dan pelayanan Kristen.2 Hal ini
juga mengingatkan kita pada ujian Abraham, tatkala Allah
menghendaki dia mempersembahkan anaknya, Ishak, untuk
menjadi korban bakaran, ia telah taat sepenuhnya dan akhirnya
justru mendapatkan kembali anaknya itu. Korban yang sebenarnya
adalah Ishak, telah diganti oleh Allah dengan seekor domba jantan
yang dikaruniakan kepada Abraham. Abraham sungguh-sungguh
menjalani kehidupan yang trust and obey. Ibrani 11:17, 19
menerangkan bahwa karena iman (trust) maka Abaraham tatkala
diuji, telah rela mempersembahkan Ishak, yang adalah anak
tunggalnya dari janji Allah. Ini terjadi karena Abraham percaya
bahwa Allah berkuasa membangkitkan orang-orang sekalipun
sudah mati. Disini kita melihat bahwa Abraham percaya (trust) dan
mewujudkannya dalam sikap dan tindakan ―taat‖, ―obey‖.Lebih
lanjut kita perlu memahami bahwa taat (obey) itu bukan suatu
perintah yang dingin dan tidak personal atau tidak manusiawi.
Tuhan Yesus mengajarkan ketaatan yang sangat erat hubungannya
dengan kasih. Hanya orang yang sungguh mengasihi Tuhan akan
menaati-Nya (Yohanes 14:15, 23). Maka jelaslah sekarang bahwa
secara Alkitabiah, mempercayai Tuhan, mengasihi Tuhan dan
1
W.E. Vine, M.F. Unger and W. White, Jr., An Expository Dictionary of
Biblical Words, New York: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984, p.985
2
Lawrence O. Richards, Encyclopedia of Bible Words, Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1991, p. 468.
14
menaati Tuhan itu mempunyai suatu hubungan yang pasti, vital
dan erat. Ini semua adalah hasil karya Tuhan di dalam kehidupan
seorang Kristen.3
Beckwith dalam artikelnya di New Dictionary of Biblical
Theology, menunjukkan bahwa melalui persembahan korban
penebusan
Kristus,
orang-orang
Kristen
juga
dapat
mempersembahkan suatu persembahan yang berkenan kepada
Allah (Ibrani 13:15; I Petrus 2:5), meskipun tentunya bukan
persembahan penebusan. Persembahan rohani orang-orang Kristen
itu mencakup tindakan-tindakan ibadah seperti pujian dan doa
(wahyu 5:8, 8:3); juga tindakan kesaksian dan pelayanan (Roma
15:16-17; Filipi 4:18; Ibrani 13:16); juga penyerahan diri orang
Kristen kepada kehendak Allah (Roma 12:1) dan pengorbanan diri
seseorang bagi Injil (Filipi 2:17; II Timotius 4:6; Wahyu 6:9).4
Penulis belajar dari hal tersebut diatas bahwa yang Tuhan
kehendaki dari kita sebagai anak-anak Allah, apalagi sebagai
hamba-hamba Tuhan ialah hati yang sepenuhnya mempercayai
Allah dan penyerahan diri kita sepenuhnya kepada Allah. Dan hal
itu harus kita wujudkan dalam sikap taat sepenuhnya kepada Allah,
apapun dan bagaimanapun juga kondisi hidup kita, ―Trust and
Obey God without any reservation‖. Ini hanya bisa terjadi bila kita
sungguh-sungguh mengasihi Dia.
TOKOH-TOKOH PANUTAN
Dalam masa menempuh pendidikan theologi yang dialami
oleh penulis di ITA pada masa awal didirikannya ITA, ia melihat
contoh teladan beberapa orang dosen ITA yaitu Pdt. Dr. Joseph
Tong, Pdt. Baring L. Yang dan Pdt. Philip Wangsa serta Rev. John
Trachsel. Kehidupan mereka adalah wujud nyata dari pemahaman
ajaran Tuhan tentang ―Trust and Obey‖. Dalam hal pendirian ITA,
3
Richards, p.464.
T. Desmond Alexander & Brian S. Rossner, eds. New Dictionary of Biblical
Theology, Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 2000, p. 761.
4
15
Dr. Joseph Tong sebagai salah seorang pendiri telah menghadapi
banyak hambatan, perlawanan, serangan, ejekan dll dari banyak
orang, bahkan dari orang-orang yang dekat dengan beliau. Namun
demikian tekadnya untuk percaya dan taat pada kehendak Allah
dalam mendirikan ITA, tidak surut. Satu hambatan demi satu
hambatan beliau hadapi dengan tabah dan rendah hati. ITA yang
memang Tuhan kehendaki tetap dapat didirikan dan exist dan
berkembang sampai saat ini. Dalam kehidupan sehari-hari, penulis
melihat dengan jelas sikap trust and obey itu juga. Dalam
keberadaan awal ITA, meskipun keadaannya sangat sederhana dan
miskin secara materi, tetapi beliau menghadapinya dengan sukacita
dan tanpa bersungut-sungut. Beliau melakukan banyak hal sendiri,
dari seorang dekan, dosen, tukang bangunan, Bapak asrama, dll
dengan penuh semangat dan sikap Trust and Obey.
Rev. Baring L. Yang juga seorang panutan dalam hal trust
and obey. Seorang yang telah lanjut usia, lebih dari tujuh puluh
tahun usianya dan yang telah berstatus emiritus pada saat itu rela
memikul beban berat sebagai seorang rektor. Seorang yang telah
hidup sebagai emiritus dan layak mengalami kenyamanan hidup
masa tua dan itu juga sedang beliau alami di Surabaya bersama
dengan anaknya, telah rela meninggalkan kenyamanan dan
memikul tanggung jawab berat bahkan hidup di ―desa‖ Lawang
dalam kondisi yang sangat sederhana dan memprihatinkan untuk
ukuran orang sekaliber beliau. Ia hanya menempati sebuah kamar
asrama putra berukuran 4 x 3 meter tanpa perabotan yang
memadai. Yang menemani adalah enam orang mahasiswa awal
yang tinggal di kamar sebelah beliau. Rev. Yang tidak bersungutsungut karena kondisi itu. Rasa kesalnya timbul, hanya bila
mahasiswa tidak menunjukkan sikap sebagai seorang hamba Tuhan
yang trust and obey God.
Setiap akhir pekan sampai Senin pagi, Rev. Baring L. Yang
masih juga mondar mandir dari Lawang ke Surabaya dan balik lagi
ke Lawang untuk melakukan pelayanan-pelayanan gerejawi dan
menjenguk keluarga. Pelayanan sebagai rektor seperti di atas beliau
lakukan terus dengan rela hati dan sabar serta tekun sampai batas
16
kekuatan beliau tidak memungkinkan lagi. Dalam usia lebih dari
delapan puluh lima tahun beliau terpaksa harus berhenti karena
kesehatannya sudah tak mengizinkan lagi. Selama itu, yang penulis
amati ialah bahwa baik dalam ajarannya maupun sikap dan tindak
tanduknya, Rev. Baring L. Yang adalah seorang teladan nyata
falsafah ―trust and obey‖, bersandar (percaya) dan taat.
Pdt. Philip Wangsa adalah teladan nyata pula dari falsafah
―trust and obey‖ ini. Beliau saat itu adalah seorang gembala jemaat
dari salah satu jemaat terbesar GKT. Dengan kesibukan yang sudah
beliau pikul sebagai gembala beliau masih rela memikul beban
tambahan untuk mengajar di ITA. Pada saat itu GKT Hok Ciu yang
beliau gembalakan mengalami gejolak internal yang sangat hebat,
yang akhirnya menimbulkan perpecahan. Salah satu sebabnya ialah
berdirinya ITA yang beliau dukung. Proses peristiwa perpecahan
itu sungguh menyakitkan hati dan diri banyak orang, termasuk Pdt.
Wangsa sendiri, tetapi beliau tak pernah mengucapkan keluhan
atau umpatan melawan mereka-mereka yang memojokkan dan
mendepak beliau dan yang sangat terpuji ialah bahwa beliau tak
sekalipun mengeluh dan mengatakan apa-apa untuk menjelekjelekan orang-orang yang menyusahkan beliau. Meskipun penulis
cukup dekat dengan beliau, tetapi sepanjang kami bertemu dan
berbincang, beliau tak pernah mengungkap masalah-masalah
internal tersebut. Apa lagi menjelek-jelekkan orang lain. Beliau
sabar sekali, dan tahan menderita karena ―trusting God and
obedient to God‖.
Rev. John J. Trachsel, seorang missionary yang berhati
lembut, sabar dan wajahnya penuh dengan senyum. Sifat
kebapakan dan hati yang ―trust and obey‖ itu nampak terwujud
dalam sikap, pengajaran dan perilaku kehidupan. Seorang
missionary karier yang telah melayani Tuhan di beberapa negara,
sampai pada masa tuanya, menjelang emiritusnya masih rela
datang di Indonesia untuk menjadi dosen di ITA. Dalam masa
singkat kurang lebih tiga sampai empat tahun, beliau bersama istri
telah menjadi suri teladan bagi banyak orang, khususnya bagi
penulis. Seluruh cerita hidupnya sebagai hamba Tuhan sudah
17
mencerminkan dengan jelas falsafah ―trust and obey‖. Ia telah
memeteraikan juga falsafah itu di dalam diri penulis oleh
pertolongan Tuhan. Selama penulis mengenal beliau, penulis tak
pernah mendengar ucapan-ucapan yang negatif dari beliau baik
terhadap orang lain maupun terhadap pengalaman dirinya. Sukacita
dan kesabaran dan kasihnya adalah perwujudan sikap ―trust and
obey‖ secara nyata.
Tentunya berbicara tentang tokoh-tokoh panutan itu tidak
terbatas pada empat orang tersebut di atas. Tetapi yang penulis
ungkapkan ini adalah tokoh-tokoh panutan yang penulis kenal dan
yang telah memberi kesan yang sangat dalam pada kehidupan
penulis semasa penulis kuliah di ITA Lawang.
Penulis yakin dan melihat dengan jelas di dalam Alkitab
bahwa ―trust and obey‖ itu adalah inti ajaran firman Tuhan tentang
kehidupan orang Kristen yang berhasil dan bahagia. I Samuel
15:22 mencatat Firman Tuhan demikian: ―Tetapi Samuel
menjawab: ―Apakah Tuhan itu berkenan kepada korban bakaran
dan korban sembelihan sama seperti kepada mendengarkan suara
Tuhan? Sesungguhnya, mendengarkan (taat) lebih baik dari pada
lemak domba-domba jantan.....‖ Inti dari ayat ini ialah
mempercayakan diri (trust) dan menaati Firman-Nya (obey).
Penulis melihat dan yakin bahwa keempat tokoh panutan diatas
telah menunjukkan sikap yang dikehendaki Tuhan seperti didalam
I Samuel 15:22 tersebut diatas. Berikut ini akhirnya penulis ingin
merefleksikan falsafah trust and obey melalui dua lagu rohani yang
beritanya sangat melekat dalam hati dan kehidupan serta
pelayanannya.
LAGU-LAGU ROHANI
Lagu-lagu rohani warisan para seniman musik Kristen pada
abad-abad yang telah silam sungguh sangat bagus. Syair maupun
lagunya sangat menggetarkan hati. Di antara sekian banyak lagulagu rohani, ada dua lagu yang sangat berpengaruh dalam
18
kehidupan rohani penulis sehubungan dengan falsafah ―Trust and
Obey‖. Lagu-lagu itu masing-masing berjudul ―Serahkan yang
Terindah Pada-Nya‖ dan ―Trust and Obey‖. Berikut ini adalah
refleksi penulis tentang kedua lagu rohani tersebut.
Serahkan yang Terindah Pada-Nya (PPR GKT No. 346)
Lagu ini kami (mahasiswa angkatan pertama I.T.A.)
nyanyikan dalam pembukaan semester I bersamaan dengan acara
kebaktian peresmian berdirinya I.T.A. pada tanggal 12 Februari
1969 di kampus I.T.A. Lawang. Lagu itu kami nyanyikan dengan
iringan organ dari Ibu Joy Tong (Istri Pdt. Joseph Tong). Syair lagu
itu antara lain berbunyi:
Serahkan yang terbaik pada-Nya
Serahkan tenaga mudamu
Serahkan tubuh, jiwa rohmu
Berperang untuk kebenaran
Yesuslah teladan terindah,
Berani, teguh, tak gentar
Pada Tuhan mengabdilah
Serahkan yang terbaik pada-Nya.
Ref :
Serahkan yang terbaik pada-Nya
Serahkan tenaga mudamu
Lengkapkan senjata Injil
Setia berperang pada-Nya
Serahkan yang terbaik pada-Nya
Lekas serahkan dirimu
Waktu lalu tak terulang
Jangan lagi menunggu
Jiwa yang sesat berseru
Tuhanmu pun berseru
Segera jawab seruan itu
Serahkan yang terbaik pada-Nya
19
Lagu ini pada dasarnya mengajar kita untuk hidup
bersandar/percaya pada Tuhan dan taat pada-Nya. Berserah diri
untuk melaksanakan kehendak Allah di dalam kerajaan-Nya itu
membutuhkan suatu hati yang bersandar/percaya dan taat pada
Tuhan. Untuk memberitakan Injil menyelamatkan jiwa dan
menggembalakan jiwa-jiwa itu membutuhkan hati yang trust and
obey. Kita sebagai laskar Kristus dituntut untuk percaya dan taat
perintah panglima kita dan berkonsentrasi untuk berperang
melawan iblis bagi Tuhan. Lagu ini sangat berkesan dan
menggetarkan hati penulis pada saat menyanyikannya pada 12
Februari 1969 itu, dan sekaligus menggerakkan hati penulis untuk
mengambil komitmen Trust and Obey the Lord. (bersandar dan taat
kepada Tuhan) dalam kehidupan dan pelayanan penulis.
Trust and Obey (PPR GKT No. 108)
Penulis mengutip syair asli lagu ini dalam bahasa Inggris
sebagai berikut:
When we walk with the Lord in the light of His word,
What a glory He sheds on our way!
While we do His good will He abides with us still,
And with all who will trust and obey,
Ref :
Trust and obey, for there‘s no other way
To be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey
Then in fellowship sweet we will sit at His feet,
Or we‘ll walk by His side in the way;
What He says we will do, where He sends
We will go – Never fear, only trust and obey.
Lagu ini juga lagu yang termeterai dalam jiwa penulis. Kalau
lagu pertama tadi menolong penulis di dalam komitmen untuk
berserah diri pada Tuhan pada awal perjalanan penulis sebagai
seorang hamba Tuhan, dan juga untuk mengingatkan penulis dalam
sepanjang perjalanan pelayanan penulis; maka lagu kedua ini yang
20
senantiasa Tuhan pakai untuk menguatkan dan menolong serta
menuntun penulis dalam menghadapi segala tantangan, tentangan,
kesulitan dan segala bentuk hambatan serta pencobaan dan ujian
dalam perjalanan hidup sebagai seorang hamba Tuhan. Trust and
Obey telah menolong penulis untuk melaksanakan tugas panggilan
Tuhan dan untuk bersuka cita selalu di dalam Tuhan meskipun
jalannya sulit, tidak nyaman dan berbahaya sekalipun. ‗Trust and
obey for there is no other way to be happy in Jesus, but trust and
obey‖. ―What He says we will do, where He send we will go, never
fear, only trust and obey‖. Percaya/bersandar dan taat, karena tak
ada jalan lain untuk berbahagia di dalam Yesus, kecuali percaya
dan taat. Apa yang Ia perintahkan kita lakukan, kemana Ia utus kita
pergi, jangan takut, hanya percaya dan taat.
Ia telah mati dan bangkit pula bagi kita, yang telah menang
dan selalu menang bagi kita, pasti akan memenuhi janji-Nya untuk
menyertai kita senantiasa, oleh sebab itu penulis akan tetap trust
and obey the Lord.
Akhir kata di dalam refleksi ini, penulis ingin mengajak
semua rekan-rekan dosen I.T.A., para mahasiswa dan rekan-rekan
hamba Tuhan dimana-mana selalu berpegang pada ketekadan
untuk Trust and Obey the Lord, Your God. Inilah satu-satunya cara
untuk menyenangkan hati Tuhan dan untuk mengalami
kemenangan dan kebahagiaan di dalam Tuhan, hal ini mudah
dikatakan, tetapi sangat sukar kita laksanakan. Hanya oleh
anugerah dan pertolongan Tuhanlah semua ini dapat terjadi di
dalam kehidupan penulis dan kita semua. Soli Deo Gloria!
21
MENDENGAR DAN MELAKUKAN:
Perumpamaan tentang Dua Macam Pembangun
(Luk 6:48-49; Mat 7:24-27)
Kornelius A. Setiawan
ema jurnal kali ini adalah ―Trust and Obey‖ atau ―Iman dan
Ketaatan dan jurnal kali ini diterbitkan sebagai penghargaan
atas pelayanan Pdt. Peterus Pamudji Ph.D. sebagai rektor di Institut
Theologia Aletheia Lawang selama 18 tahun (1985-2003). Iman
dan ketaatan adalah bagian penting dari pengajaran Yesus dan ini
nampak khususnya dalam beberapa mujizat yang Yesus buat.
Misalnya, saat ada sepuluh orang kusta datang untuk memohon
kesembuhan, ternyata mereka bukan hanya perlu iman saja. Yesus
meminta mereka untuk pergi dan memperlihatkan diri pada para
imam, sekalipun penyakit kusta tersebut masih ada pada diri
mereka. Iman mereka perlu diikuti dengan ketaatan mereka dan
saat mereka mentaati perintah Yesus, mereka mengalami
kesembuhan (Luk 17:11-19). Contoh lainnya adalah saat Ia
menyembuhkan seorang yang buta sejak lahir. Yesus mengoleskan
tanah di mata orang buta tersebut dan memintanya untuk
membasuh di kolam Siloam. Sekali lagi iman orang buta tersebut
harus disertai dengan ketaatan, baru kemudian ia dapat mengalami
kuasa Allah (Yoh 9:1-41). Dalam pengajaran-Nya, Yesus juga
menekankan pentingnya untuk ―mendengar dan melakukan atau
mentaati‖ pengajaran atau firman-Nya. ―Mendengar‖ disini
tentunya bukan hanya sekedar mendengar saja sebagaimana orang
mendengar begitu banyak suara di sekitarnya, tetapi ―Mendengar‖
disini, apalagi mendengarkan Firman Allah, berarti mendengar
dengan penuh perhatian sampai seseorang dapat mengerti,
menerima
dan
mempercayai-Nya.
Sebagaimana
Paulus
mengatakan: ―Jadi, iman timbul dari pendengaran, dan
pendengaran oleh firman Kristus‖ (Roma 10:17).
T
22
Pentingnya ―mendengar dan melakukan‖ dalam pengajaran
Kristus nampak dengan diberikan sebuah perumpamaan yang
sering disebutkan dengan berbagai macam judul seperti:
Perumpamaan tentang dua macam rumah, perumpamaan tentang
dua macam pembangun dan perumpamaan tentang dua macam
dasar.5 Perumpamaan ini dapat kita temukan dalam Injil Matius
(Mat. 7:24-47) dan Injil Lukas (Luk. 6:47-49). Sekalipun ada
kemiripan antara keduanya, tetapi ada beberapa perbedaan dalam
detail yang dapat kita temukan dalam kedua perumpamaan
tersebut. Matius mencatat rumah tersebut dibangun oleh orang
bijak di atas batu dan oleh orang bodoh di atas pasir, sedangkan
Lukas hanya menyebutkan bahwa rumah tersebut dibangun oleh
―seseorang‖ (
dengan menggali dalam-dalam dan
meletakkan dasarnya di atas batu dan oleh seseorang yang lain
dengan membangunnya di atas tanah tanpa fondasi. Dari sini dapat
disimpulkan bahwa penyampaian Matius lebih menekankan pada
terjangan badai, sedangkan dalam Lukas lebih menekankan pada
usaha mempersiapkan fondasi yang baik.
Dalam Injil Matius, gambaran yang diberikan adalah
berkaitan dengan hujan deras di musim gugur yang disertai badai
dan hal ini akan datang secara tiba-tiba untuk menguji kekokohan
fondasi rumah tersebut.6 Lukas menggambarkan peristiwa tersebut
dengan gambaran yang lebih umum, yang menurut Nolland ―Less
Palestinian phenomenon,‖7 yaitu ketika air meluap dari sungai saat
terjadi banjir dan kemudian mengalir dengan derasnya menerjang
rumah itu, rumah itu tetap kokoh berdiri. Menurut Kistemaker,
perbedaan detail catatan tersebut lebih dikarenakan perbedaan
penerima surat. Matius menulis suratnya untuk orang Yahudi yang
hidup di Israel, sedangkan Lukas menulis Injilnya untuk orang5
Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, New York: Charles Scribner‘s sons,
1972, p. 194; Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7, trans. by Wilhelm C. Linss, Edinburgh:
T & T Clark, 1989, p. 450; Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His
Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1994, p. 133.
6
Jeremias, p. 194.
7
John Nolland, Luke 1-9:20, Texas: Word Books, 1989, p. 310.
23
orang Yunani yang tinggal di Asia kecil dan beberapa daerah
Mediterania.8
Sekalipun memang ada beberapa perbedaan detail dalam
kedua catatan tersebut, tetapi tujuan utama kedua perumpamaan
tersebut tidaklah berbeda.9 Keduanya menjelaskan perlunya
kebijaksanaan dan kerja keras dalam membangun rumah dan
keduanya membuat pernyataan atau kesimpulan yang sama bahwa
adalah bodoh apabila seseorang mendengarkan pengajaran Yesus,
tetapi tidak melaksanakannya. Demikian juga, perumpamaan ini
diberikan oleh kedua penulis Injil sebagai penutup dan sekaligus
tantangan bagi para pendengar atau pembacanya untuk meresponi
pengajaran Yesus yang diberikan dalam Khotbah di Bukit (Mat 57) dan Khotbah diatas Tanah Datar (Luk 6:20-49).
Catatan Matius tentang Khotbah di Bukit boleh dikatakan
lebih panjang dibandingkan dengan catatan Lukas tentang Khotbah
di atas Tanah Datar sebagaimana nampak dalam catatan
perbandingan di bawah ini:
Khotbah di Bukit
(Matius 5-7)
Khotbah di atas Tanah Datar
(Luk 6:20-49)
Ucapan Bahagia (5:1-12)
Ucapan Bahagia dan Peringatan
(6:20-26)
Garam Dunia dan Terang Dunia
(5:13-16)
Yesus dan Hukum Taurat (5:17-48)
Hal Memberi Sedekah (6:1-4)
Hal Berdoa (6:5-15)
Hal Berpuasa (6:16-18)
Hal Mengumpulkan Harta (6:19-24)
Hal Kekuatiran (6:25-34)
8
Kasihilah Musuh (6:27-36)
Simon J. Kistemaker, The Parables of Jesus, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980, p.7.
I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text,
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978, p. 275.
9
24
Hal Menghakimi (7:1-5)
Hal yang Kudus dan Berharga (7:6)
Hal Pengabulan Doa (7:7-11)
Jalan yang Benar (7:12-14)
Hal Pengajaran yang Sesat (7:15-23)
Dua Macam Dasar (7:24-27)
Hal Menghakimi (6:37-42)
Pohon dan Buahnya (6:43-45)
Dua Macam Dasar (7:24-27)
Sekalipun demikian, dapat dikatakan bahwa ada kemiripan
dalam struktur antara keduanya. Paling tidak keduanya diawali
dengan Ucapan Bahagia (Mat 5:1-2; Luk 6:20-23) dan kemudian
membahas beberapa topik yang sama seperti mengasihi musuh dan
hal menghakimi. Keduanya kemudian ditutup dengan panggilan
untuk meresponi khotbah atau pengajaran Yesus tersebut dengan
perumpamaan tentang Dua Macam Pembangun (Mat 7:24-27; Luk
6:48-49).10 Respon yang diharapkan tentunya adalah bahwa
mereka akan mendengar dan menerima dalam arti mengimaninya
serta melaksanakannya dengan mentaatinya. Karena respon mereka
tersebut akan sangat menentukan bagi kehidupan rohani mereka
yang digambarkan sebagai sebuah rumah atau bangunan yang
suatu kali akan diuji.
Dalam artikel ini, secara khusus penulis akan membahas
perumpamaan tersebut dari catatan Lukas, mengingat tema
―mendengar dan melaksanakan‖ mendapat penekanan khusus
dalam Injil Lukas. Memang tema ini juga dapat kita temukan
dalam bagian lain Perjanjian Baru. Yakobus, misalnya,
mengatakan ―Tetapi hendaklah kamu menjadi pelaku firman dan
bukan hanya pendengar saja; sebab jika tidak demikian kamu
menipu diri sendiri‖ (Lih juga Yoh 15:14; Rom 2:13). Sekalipun
demikian, kita dapat melihat bahwa Lukas menilai bahwa tema ini
cukup penting, karena itu ia menampilkan tema tersebut beberapa
10
Sekalipun ada beberapa bagian dari Khotbah di Bukit yang tidak dapat kita
temukan dalam Khotbah diatas Tanah Datar, tetapi bagian tersebut dapat kita
temukan dalam bagian lain Injil Lukas. Sebagai contoh: Doa Bapa Kami (Mat
6:9-13; Luk 11:2-4), Hal Mengumpulkan Harta (Mat 6:19-21; Luk 12:33-34),
Hal Kekuatiran (Mat 6:25-34; Luk12:22-31) dan Hal Pengabulan Doa (Mat 7:711; Luk 11:9-13). Demikian juga ada beberapa ayat-ayat dalam Khotbah di
Bukit yang dapat kita temukan dalam Injil Lukas.
25
kali dalam Injilnya. Misalnya dalam Lukas 8:21, mencatat
perkataan Yesus yang mengatakan Ibu-Ku dan saudara-saudara-Ku
ialah mereka, yang mendengarkan firman Allah dan
melakukannya‖ dan dalam Lukas 11:28 “Yang berbahagia ialah
mereka yang mendengarkan firman Allah dan yang
memeliharanya."
Konteks Lukas
Lukas meletakkan perumpamaan ini dalam konteks ―Khotbah
di atas Tanah Datar‖11 (Luk 6:20-49). Pengajaran Lukas dalam
bagian ini diawali dengan Ucapan Bahagia dan Peringatan (6:2026), Mengasihi Musuh (6:27-36), Hal Menghakimi (6:37-42),
Pohon dan Buahnya (6:43-45) dan Khotbah ini kemudian diakhiri
dengan tantangan untuk meresponi pengajaran Yesus yang
diumpamakan dengan dua macam orang yang membangun rumah
mereka. Perumpamaan tersebut boleh dikatakan berfungsi sebagai
tantangan dan mengharapkan respon positif atas pengajaran Yesus.
Hal itu digambarkan seperti orang yang membangun diatas dasar
yang kokoh (Luk 6:46-49), yaitu dasar yang tidak mudah
tergoyahkan (Luk 6:47) dan dalam hal ini adalah seluruh
pengajaran Yesus. Respon tersebut juga memanggil setiap orang
percaya pada hari ini untuk mampu mengaplikasikan kebenarankebenaran tersebut dalam kehidupan mereka (lih Luk 6:20, 27).
Memahami Perumpamaan tentang Dua Macam Pembangun
Kalau kita lihat inti perumpamaan ini dengan bagian
terdahulu, maka kita bisa melihat keterkaitannya. Dalam bagian
terdahulu dibahas tentang Pohon dan Buahnya yang
menggambarkan tentang orang yang baik dan orang yang jahat
(6:45). Dalam bagian ini Yesus memberikan perumpamaan untuk
menunjukkan suatu fakta yang bersifat kontras. Orang yang
pertama adalah mereka yang mendengar dan melakukan perkataanperkataan-Nya dan orang ini bisa dipandang sebagai orang yang
11
Bandingkan dengan Matius yang juga meletakkan perumpamaan ini dibagian
akhir Khotbah di Bukit (Mat 5-7).
26
baik, sedangkan orang yang kedua adalah yang mendengar, tetapi
yang tidak melakukannya dan orang ini bisa dipandang sebagai
orang yang bodoh atau jahat. Sekalipun ada kaitan erat dengan
bagian terdahulu, tetapi berdasarkan perbandingan dengan Khotbah
di Bukit, maka perumpamaan ini lebih tepat dilihat sebagai
penutup dari keseluruhan khotbah Yesus.
Rumah di daerah pedesaan pada jaman Yesus biasanya
dibangun dari tanah liat yang dikeringkan baik untuk dinding
maupun atapnya, sehingga ―pencuri membongkar serta
mencurinya‖ (Mat 6:19). Dalam Injil Markus dicatat bahwa ketika
Yesus sedang mengajar, empat orang membongkar atap rumah di
tempat Yesus sedang mengajar dan kemudian menurunkan teman
mereka yang sakit lumpuh (Mk 2:3-4). Dengan kebiasaan
membangun seperti itu, maka setiap orang akan mencari lokasi
yang tepat untuk membangun rumahnya. Mereka akan memilih
tempat yang jauh dari aliran air untuk menghindari terjangan air
dan banjir yang mungkin saja bisa datang dengan tiba-tiba dan
akan menghanyutkan rumah mereka.12
Matius menyebutkan bahwa pembangun tersebut adalah
(seorang laki-laki bijak) dan
bodoh).
Lukas menyebutkan dengan lebih sederhana
| dan sebutan
ini hendak menunjukkan lebih kepada usaha, kerja keras atau
kerajinan dari sang pembangun dan bukan melihat kepada
kebijakan atau kebodohan orang yang membangun. Hal ini
nantinya juga hendak menunjukkan bahwa dalam meresponi
perkataan Yesus, hal tersebut bukan bergantung pada kebijakan
atau kebodohan seseorang, melainkan pada kemauan mereka untuk
menjadi pendengar dan sekaligus pelaksana. Dengan membangun
rumah mereka di tempat dan dengan cara yang benar, maka
12
Simon J. Kistemaker, yang mengutip E.E.E. Bishop, menyebutkan adanya
rumah dari tanah liat di antara Gaza dan Ashkelon. Sekalipun telah dibangun
jauh dari aliran air, tetapi pada salah satu musim dingin di padang pasir Negev,
sebuah sungai yang kering tiba-tiba dipenuhi dengan air dan hal ini
menyebabkan perubahan aliran air yang kemudian menghanyutkan seluruh
perkemahan orang Badouin (Parables, p.7, n.1).
27
pembangun tersebut tidak perlu lagi menguatirkan akan datangnya
hujan dan aliran air yang amat deras yang akan menghanyutkan
rumah yang dibangunnya.
Sebagaimana telah disebutkan di atas, bahwa setiap penulis
Injil mempunyai penekanan pada detail yang berbeda. Lukas
mempunyai penekanan utama pada usaha dan kerja keras dari sang
pembangun. Ia menjelaskan tentang fondasi yang kokoh tersebut
dengan tiga deskripsi yang tidak dimiliki Matius. Pertama, orang
tersebut ―menggali‖ yang dalam bahasa Yunaninya
yang
berasal dari kata
yang berarti ―dig, dig around‖13 dan
secara literal berarti ―telah menggali sekeliling.‖ Dalam konteks ini
kata tersebut berarti telah menggali lapisan tanah. Kata kedua
adalah
yang berbentuk aorist dan berasal dari kata
yang berarti make deep atau go down deep‖14 dan secara
literal berarti ―membuat menjadi dalam atau pergi jauh ke dalam.‖
Gabungan kedua kata ini hendak menggambarkan usaha atau kerja
keras dari si pembangun yang disebutkan ―telah menggali, bahkan
pergi jauh ke dalam.‖ Kedua kata ini kemudian diikuti dengan kata
Kata
berbentuk aorist dan berasal dari
kata
yang bila diikuti dengan bentuk akusatif berarti ―set
above.‖ Apabila digabungkan dengan kata
yang berarti
―foundation‖ dan secara literal berarti ―dasar atau fondasi,‖ maka
kedua kata ini berarti ―set a foundation above‖ atau ―meletakkan
fondasi di atas.‖15 Kata
ini kemudian diikuti
oleh kata
dan kata
berarti ―rock‖ atau
secara literal berarti ―batu karang atau batu yang kokoh.‖ Jadi
Lukas disini menekankan bahwa pembangun tersebut telah
menggali, bahkan menggali sampai ke dalam sampai ia
menemukan batu yang kokoh dan kemudian meletakkan fondasi
13
E. Plumacher, ―
in Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical
Dictionary of the New Testament vol. 3, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993, p.250.
14
O. Hofius, ―
in Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical
Dictionary of the New Testament vol. 1, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993, p. 190.
15
W. Bauer, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Chicago: The University
Chicago Press, 1979, p. 816,
28
bangunan tersebut di atas batu tersebut. Jadi penekanannya disini
adalah pada usaha serius si pembangun dalam meletakkan fondasi
dan hal ini juga yang menjadikan alasan bagi penulis untuk
memilih judul ―Perumpamaan tentang Dua Macam Pembangun‖
dan bukan ―Dua Macam Rumah atau Bangunan.‖
Banyak ahli yang setuju bahwa detail yang digambarkan oleh
Matius lebih dekat dengan teks asli Alkitab dan mereka
memandang bahwa Lukas berusaha menjelaskan bagaimana
biasanya orang pada jaman itu membangun rumah, khususnya
dalam konteks orang Yunani yang menjadi penerima atau pembaca
Injilnya.16 Penyampaian detail cerita yang berbeda tidak perlu
terlalu dipermasalahkan, sebagaimana Darrel L. Bock
berargumentasi:
―Such treatment of the parable need not be seen as a problem,
since summarizing occurs and the point is not altered by
telling the story or using a figure in a way that the audience
can appreciate the image. It is type of contextualizing that
does not alter the basic image‖.17
Sebagaimana telah didiskusikan di atas, Lukas mencatat
bahwa kedua bangunan tersebut sama-sama didirikan di atas tanah
dan yang membedakan keduanya adalah fondasinya. Pembangun
pertama meletakkan fondasinya jauh ke dalam tanah (Luk 6:48),
sedangkan pembangun kedua membangun rumah di atas tanah
tanpa fondasi (Luk 6:49). Sekali lagi, disini hendak ditekankan
bahwa keduanya sama-sama membangun rumah di lokasi atau
tempat yang sama dan yang membedakan mereka adalah yang
seorang disertai dengan kerja keras, sedangkan yang lain tidak.
Hasil kerja mereka akan nampak saat terjadi hujan, banjir dan
aliran air yang amat deras. Dalam bahasa Indonesia disebutkan:
―Ketika datang air bah dan banjir melanda rumah itu‖ (Luk 6:48),
16
Marshall, p. 275; Jeremias, p. 27 n.9.
Darrell L. Bock, Baker Exegetical Commentary vol. 1: Luke 1:1-9:50, Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1994, p. 621; Lih juga Robert H. Stein, The American
Commentary vol. 24: Luke, Nashville: Broadman Press, 1999, p.215.
17
29
sedangkan dalam bahasa Yunaninya, disebutkan
o
yang secara literal berarti
―ketika air sungai meluap dan mengalir dengan amat deras karena
terjadinya banjir dan hujan.‖ Kata
secara literal berarti
―laut pasang‖ dan dalam konteks ini berarti banjir.18 Kata
adalah bentuk aorist dari kata
hanya
dipakai dalam bagian ini dari seluruh Perjanjian Baru. Kata ini
dalam bahasa Inggrisnya ―burst upon‖ yang secara literal berarti
―meledak atau keluar.‖ Jadi kata ini menggambarkan ledakan air
yang menyembur keluar dengan keras atau deras.19 Aliran yang
deras tersebut kemudian menerjang kedua rumah tersebut, maka
rumah yang dibangun dengan fondasi yang baik akan berdiri
kokoh, sedangkan rumah yang dibangun tanpa fondasi akan
dihanyutkan oleh aliran air yang amat deras tersebut.
Dengan gambaran tersebut di atas, kita dapat melihat bahwa
ada dua macam orang yang mendengar perkataan Yesus. Mereka
yang hanya mendengar saja dan mereka yang bukan sekedar
mendengar,
tetapi
menerima
dan
meyakininya
serta
mewujudnyatakannya dalam ketaatan mereka. Orang semacam
itulah yang oleh Matius dikatakan sebagai orang yang bijak.
Perumpamaan ini sekaligus berfungsi sebagai peringatan bagi
pendengar atau pembacanya, agar mereka tidak menyepelekan
pengajaran Yesus, karena akibatnya bisa merupakan malapetaka
yang besar.20
Mendengar dan Melaksanakan (Luk 8:21; 11:28)
Sebagaimana telah disinggung pada bagian terdahulu, bahwa
tema mendengar dan melaksanakan juga menjadi topik yang
mendapat tekanan dalam Injil Lukas. Pertama, Lukas mencatat
pernyataan Yesus bahwa ―Ibu-Ku dan saudara-saudara-Ku ialah
mereka, yang mendengarkan firman Allah dan melakukannya‖
18
Francois Bovon, Hermenia: Luke 1, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002, p. 255.
Arland J. Hultgren, The Parables of Jesus, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000, p.
133.
20
Bock, p. 623.
19
30
(Luk 8:21). Ayat ini boleh dikatakan sebagai respon penutup dari
pengajaran yang diberikan Yesus dalam Luk 8:4-21. Lukas
mengawali catatannya dengan memberikan Perumpamaan tentang
Penabur (8:4-15) dan Perumpamaan tentang Pelita (8:16-18).
Kedua pengajaran ini ditutup dengan kisah tentang pertemuan
Yesus dengan ibu dan saudara-saudaranya. Pertemuan ini
kemudian dipakai oleh Yesus untuk membuat pernyataan penting
yang hendak menegaskan perlunya pendengar-pendengar-Nya
bukan hanya menjadi pendengar-pendengar saja, tetapi juga
menjadi pelaku Firman: ―Ibu-Ku dan saudara-saudara-Ku ialah
mereka, yang mendengarkan firman Allah dan melakukannya.‖
Dari pernyataan ini jelas dikatakan bahwa setiap orang yang
mendengar Firman Allah dan kemudian melakukannya, mereka
disebut sebagai anggota keluarga Yesus.
Di sisi lain, Lukas 8:4-20 boleh dikatakan sebagai bagian
yang utuh yang membahas tentang mendengar dan melakukan
perkataan Yesus. Mereka yang mendengar Firman Allah tersebut
ditunjukkan melalui keyakinan penabur berkaitan dengan benih
yang ditaburkannya (8:4-8), hal itu menunjukkan bahwa mereka
mengetahui misteri kerajaan Allah (8:9-10), melaksanakan Firman
akan memimipin pada kehidupan iman yang berbuah (11–15),
mereka juga digambarkan sebagai pelita yang bersinar karena
mereka hidup sesuai dengan Firman yang mereka dengar dan pada
akhirnya mereka akan menemukan diri mereka sendiri menjadi
bagian dari keluarga dekat Yesus.21 Menjadi keluarga Kristus atau
dalam bahasa Paulus menjadi anggota keluarga Allah (Lih. Efe
2:19; 1Tim 3:15) dapat dimungkinkan bagi setiap orang, bukan
karena pertalian lahiriah, tetapi melalui mereka mendengar dan
melaksanakan Firman Allah. Sebagaimana yang juga disebutkan
oleh Fred B. Craddock
―... Luke has the coming of Jesus‘ mother and brothers
become the occasion for Jesus to teach that the family of God
includes all who hear and do God‘s will … and that the
21
Marshall, p. 332; Nolland, p. 395.
31
family of God is created by hearing and doing the word; this
included Jesus‘ Nazareth family‖.22
Kedua, dalam Lukas 11:28 disebutkan ―Yang berbahagia
ialah mereka yang mendengarkan firman Allah dan yang
memeliharanya.‖ Dalam bagian ini sekali lagi Lukas menekankan
betapa pentingnya mendengar dan melaksanakan Firman Allah.
Bagi Lukas Firman Allah adalah ―pengajaran Yesus,‖ sehingga
dalam bagian ini Yesus hendak menegur mereka agar mereka
bukan hanya sekedar mengkritik mujizat yang dilakukan Yesus,
tetapi mereka juga harus mendengar dan melaksanakan perkataan
Yesus.23 Lukas dalam bagian ini menegaskan kembali tentang
―mendengar dan melakukan,‖ karena pengaruh dari Injil Markus
yang menempatkan kedatangan ibu Yesus dan saudara-saudaranya
setelah kontroversi tentang Belzebul (Mk 3:20-35). Karena bagi
Maria dan semua orang yang lain mendengar dan melakukan
perkataan Kristus membawa kebahagiaan.24
Bagian ini diawali dengan pernyataan seorang wanita yang
memandang bahwa ibu Yesus adalah yang paling berbahagia.
Yesus justru menegaskan bahwa yang berbahagia adalah mereka
yang mendengarkan dan memelihara Firman Allah. Pernyataan
Yesus ini diawali dengan kata
yang merupakan gabungan
kata
yang dapat berfungsi untuk memberikan
pendahuluan yang menunjukkan kontras ―tidak, tetapi,‖
menunjukkan penegasan ―ya, pasti‖ dan berfungsi sebagai koreksi
atau modifikasi ―ya, tetapi.‖25 Dari ketiganya, nampaknya yang
ketiga yang lebih tepat, sehingga kalimatnya berbunyi demikian
―Ya, tetapi yang berbahagia adalah…..‖
22
Fred B. Craddock, Interpretation: Luke, Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990,
pp. 113-114.
23
Marshall, p. 480.
24
Craddock, p. 157.
25
Lih. M.E. Thrall, Greek Particles in the New Testament: Linguistic and
Exegetical Studies. NTTS Leiden: Brill, 1962, pp. 34–35; C.F.D. Moule, An
Idiom Book of New Testament Greek. 2nd ed. Cambridge: University Press,
1963, pp.163–64; Nolland, p. 649.
32
Dalam bagian terdahulu, Lukas memakai kata
dan
(Luk 8:21; bdk 6:47, 49), sedang dalam bagian ini
Lukas memakai
dan
Menurut beberapa
ahli, kata
yang secara literal berarti ―memelihara,‖
yang dipakai oleh Lukas dalam bagian ini mempunyai penekanan
yang sama dengan kata ―melakukan‖ dan kata ini dipakai dalam
kaitannya dengan bagaimana seseorang harus ―memelihara hukum
Taurat.‖
Kesimpulan
Salah satu fokus utama dari perumpamaan ini adalah
berkaitan dengan pengajaran Yesus dan secara khusus berkaitan
dengan respon atas tuntutan pengajaran-Nya. Dari pernyataan
Yesus ―setiap orang yang mendengar perkataan-Ku,‖26 kita dapat
melihat otoritas yang dimiliki Yesus. Ia bukan sekedar pengajar
atau penyampai firman, tetapi Ia adalah Allah yang menyampaikan
Firman itu dan ini memberikan kepada-Nya otoritas untuk
menuntut pendengar-Nya melaksanakan apa yang Ia ajarkan.
Nolland mengatakan ―Jesus knows the absolute importance of his
own teaching because he knows himself to be the one who
decisively reveals the will of God.‖27
Di sisi lain, perumpamaan ini memberikan jaminan bagi
setiap kita, baik secara pribadi maupun dalam konteks gereja. Bagi
setiap orang yang percaya kepada-Nya, dalam arti mereka mau
mendengar, mempercayai dan mentaati Firman Allah, maka
mereka tidak perlu bimbang. Kita mendapat jaminan, karena kita
berdiri diatas dasar yang pasti dan kokoh, seperti yang disimpulkan
oleh Robert H. Stein, ―Whether within the Church or without, the
parables offer the same opportunity for ultimate security.‖28 Hal ini
26
Michael P. Knowles, ―Everyone Who Hear These Words of Mine: Parables of
Discipleship‖ (Matt 7:24-27//Luke 6:47-49; Luke 14:28-33; Luke 17:7-10; Matt
20:1-16) in Richard N. Longenecker, The Challenge of Jesus‘ Parables, Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000, p. 290.
27
Nolland, p. 311
28
Stein, p.134.
33
tentunya harus diikuti dengan total komitmen, yaitu percaya penuh,
ketaatan dan melakukan apa yang Dia perintahkan kepada kita.
Salah satu implikasi dari perumpamaan tentang dua
pembangun ini boleh dikatakan juga berkaitan erat dengan
bagaimana menjadi murid yang setia, karena penampilan seringkali
bisa berbeda dengan kenyataan. Sebagaimana kekokohan atau
kerapuhan kedua rumah tersebut masih belum bisa dilihat, sampai
terjadi krisis, demikian juga halnya dengan kesetiaan murid-murid
Yesus. Mereka akan terbukti setia manakala mereka dapat tetap
berdiri kokoh di tengah derasnya tantangan dan pengajaran sesat,
apabila mereka tetap berdiri kokoh di atas dasar yang benar yaitu
firman Allah sendiri. Firman yang bukan sekedar mereka dengar,
tetapi juga mereka lakukan.
Perumpamaan ini, baik dalam catatan Matius ataupun Lukas,
diberikan sebagai tantangan bagi para pendengarnya atas khotbah
yang disampaikan Yesus, baik dalam konteks Khotbah Yesus di
Bukit atau di Tanah Datar (Mat 5-7; Luk 6:20-49). Demikian juga,
tantangan tersebut ditujukan kepada para murid (Luk 6:20) serta
―orang-orang yang mendengarnya‖ (Luk 7:1; Mat 5:1-2; 7:28-29).
Jadi dapat disimpulkan bahwa perumpamaan ini juga berbicara
kepada setiap orang yang mendengar atau membaca pengajaran
Yesus ini. Hal ini juga mempunyai penekanan penting bahwa
setiap pendengar maupun pembacanya mempunyai tanggung jawab
untuk meresponi pengajaran-Nya dengan benar dan hal itu harus
ditunjukkan dalam Iman dan Ketaatan mereka.
Penekanan tentang ―mendengar dan melaksanakan‖ dalam
perumpamaan ini, dipertegas oleh dua catatan Lukas lainnya yang
juga menggarisbawahi pentingnya tema tersebut. Mereka yang
―mendengar dan melakukan‖ Firman Allah disebutkan menjadi
anggota keluarga Kristus (Luk 8:21) dan bahkan mereka
disebutkan sebagai orang yang berbahagia (Luk 11:28).
Dengan segala kemajuan di bidang teknologi pada hari ini,
kita tetap adalah manusia yang tak berdaya, khususnya dalam
34
menghadapi bencana alam. Hampir setiap hari kita membaca,
mendengar dan melihat adanya kecelakaan dan bencana alam yang
telah menghancurkan dan membuat manusia menderita. Karena itu,
perumpamaan ini sekali lagi berbicara kepada setiap kita apakah
kita berdiri di atas dasar yang benar dan kokoh yang memampukan
kita tetap teguh berdiri dalam menghadapi hidup yang penuh
tantangan ini dengan tetap menunjukkan iman dan ketaatan kita
kepada Allah. Atau sebaliknya kita berdiri diatas dasar yang rapuh
dan ketika tantangan itu datang kita menjadi tergoyah dan bahkan
kita dengan mudah dihanyutkan serta dihancurkan mereka.
Perumpamaan ini juga menantang gereja, agar mereka tidak berdiri
diatas fondasi yang salah, sehingga
mereka akan ditegur
sebagaimana saat itu Yesus menegur orang-orang Farisi ―Bukan
setiap orang yang berseru kepada-Ku: Tuhan, Tuhan! akan masuk
ke dalam Kerajaan Sorga, melainkan dia yang melakukan
kehendak Bapa-Ku yang di sorga‖ (Mat 7:21).
Kebahagiaan yang digambarkan dalam oleh Lukas bukan oleh
karena mereka memiliki ikatan persaudaraan lahiriah dengan Yesus
(Luk 8:21; 11:28), tetapi oleh karena respon mereka pada
pengajaran Kristus. Mereka yang berbahagia adalah mereka yang
bukan hanya mau mendengar, menerima dan meyakini Firman
Allah saja, tetapi yang juga menjadi pelaksana-pelaksana Firman
yang kemudian menunjukkan semuanya itu dalam iman dan
ketaatan mereka kepada Kristus.
Bibliografi
Balz, Horst, and Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New
Testament, vol 1, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.
Balz, Horst, and Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New
Testament, vol 2, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.
Balz, Horst, and Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New
Testament, vol 3, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
35
Bauer, W., Arndt, W.F., Gingrich, and Danker, F.W. A GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature, Chicago: The University Chicago Press,
1979.
Bock, Darrell L., Baker Exegetical Commentary vol. 1: Luke 1:19:50, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.
Bovon, Francois, Hermenia: Luke 1, Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
2002.
Craddock, Fred B., Interpretation: Luke, Louisville: John Knox
Press, 1990.
Gundry, Robert H., Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for
a Mixed Church under Persecution, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1994.
Hultgren, Arland J., The Parables of Jesus, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2000.
Jeremias, Joachim., The Parables of Jesus, New York: Charles
Scribner‘s sons, 1972.
Kistemaker, Simon J., The Parables of Jesus, Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1980.
Knowles, Michael P., ―Everyone Who Hear These Words of Mine:
Parables of Discipleship‖ (Matt 7:24-27//Luke 6:47-49; Luke
14:28-33; Luke 17:7-10; Matt 20:1-16) in Richard N.
Longenecker, The Chalenge of Jesus‘ Parables, Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
Luz, Ulrich, Matthew 1-7, trans. by Wilhelm C. Linss, Edinburgh:
T & T Clark, 1989.
Marshall, I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary
on the Greek Text, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.
Moule, C.F.D. An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek. 2nd ed.
Cambridge: University Press, 1963.
Nolland, John., Luke 1-9:20, Texas: Word Books, 1989.
Stein, Robert H., The American Commentary vol. 24: Luke,
Nashville: Broadman Press, 1999.
Thrall, M. E. Greek Particles in the New Testament: Linguistic and
Exegetical Studies. NTTS 3. Leiden: Brill, 1962.
36
TRUST AND OBEY:
A Current Retrospective And Assessment
Luder G. Whitlock, Jr.
J
ustification by faith is part of the doctrinal bedrock of the
Reformation. Sola fide—by faith alone—means that as the
righteousness of God is imputed to believers, they are declared just
and therefore acceptable by God. This doctrine is right at the heart
of the Reformation movement and is also the essence of the
Gospel.29
Central to this Reformation heritage is the understanding that
we are unable to earn or even contribute to our salvation by our
good works, no matter how many there may be. The Apostle Paul
described it in his Romans letter by asserting that ―all have sinned
and fall short of the glory of God‖ (Rom. 3:23). ―The wages of sin
are death,‖ and ―no one seeks God or does good‖ (Rom. 6:23, 3:1112). From what Paul says it is clear that if anyone is to be saved, it
will be by the grace of God through faith and not of ourselves or
our works (Eph. 2:8-9). All humans are, by the very fact of their
sinful nature and acts, unable to save themselves. That is why it
was necessary for Christ—the sinless Son of God—to suffer the
punishment our sins deserve so that he atones for us as by faith we
receive forgiveness and cleansing.
Yet this certainly does not render good works unimportant or
worthless. To the contrary, as Paul also reminds us, we are saved
in order to do good works (Eph. 2:10). Why is this the case?
Because, Paul adds, when you are transformed by God‘s grace into
a person who does good things or good works, you glorify God
because you mirror God. Ultimately, that is the purpose of our
29
Gordon Rupp, The Righteousness of God, London: Hodder and Stoughton,
1953, p.121f.
37
salvation, to be remade into the image of God so that the
magnificence of his attributes comes to expression in our lives,
both in our character and in our good works. Obedience, then,
becomes a distinguishing mark of a believer. Of course, the
position of James, coupling works with faith, is well known (James
2:17-26).
The Teaching of Jesus
For the purposes of this paper, we shall consider the
importance of obedience to the life of faith and examine it in terms
of existential compliance. Although considerable attention has
been directed to the teaching of Paul and James and suitably so, as
well as Old Testament examples such as Abraham, there is value in
concentrating on the teaching of Jesus for obvious reasons. At the
very least, he provides a bridge from Old Testament to New
Testament understanding. For many believers, the teaching of
Jesus would be central or essential to any such consideration
because he is the most important person in the Bible. Since all
Scripture is God-given and authoritative, the only factor that would
significantly alter our understanding would of necessity emerge
from the unfolding nature of biblical revelation following the
Resurrection. That does not appear to be a factor here.
As a centerpiece of his teaching ministry, the Sermon on the
Mount provides us with a helpful illustration of Jesus‘ thinking in
regard to this matter. It clarifies God‘s expectations regarding
obedience to his will. Jesus corrects misunderstandings by noting
―It has been said,‖ then adding, ―But I say to you.‖ Early in his
sermon he makes it clear that disciples are called to a distinctly
different life that will, by its good works, glorify God (Matt. 5:16).
As he draws the sermon to a conclusion, he leaves absolutely no
doubt as to his intent. The concluding illustrations provide an
excellent working example to drive the point home forcefully. For,
he says, it is not the person who says ―Lord, Lord‖ or who has
done spectacular things such as prophesying or casting out demons
who will be accepted by the Father; rather it is the one who has
38
done the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21-23). Obedience is the key
concept providing the difference.
This may be understood as minimizing the importance of
religious ritual or of superficial religiosity.
Dutifully and
deferentially intoning the Lord‘s name or participating in
appropriate religious ceremonies has no benefit unless it is
anchored in genuine faith that expresses itself in joyful and willing
obedience. This is congruent with Old Testament examples such
as Samuel‘s stern rebuke of Saul as he returned victoriously from
defeating the Amalekites: ―Has the Lord as great a delight in burnt
offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord?
Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice‖ (1 Sam. 15:22).30 Jesus
says the one who does the will of the Father is accepted—that it is
by their fruit you recognize who the true believers really are (Matt.
7:20).
The Christian who is being conformed to the righteousness
of God, therefore, must try to bring his or her life into conformity
with God‘s law as revealed in the Bible. That alignment includes
one‘s thoughts and feelings as well as actions. Christians who love
God also love his law. His commandments are no longer
burdensome but a source of joy and satisfaction (1 Jn. 5:2-3). If
you love God, then nothing makes you happier than doing what
delights him. If you really want to obey God and keep his
commandments, you must go beyond superficial compliance to a
genuine understanding of the intent of each commandment. Once
you understand that intent, you may begin to bring your life into
alignment with it. The Pharisees‘ problem was that, while they
appeared to be enthusiastic and sincere about obeying the law, they
used words to construct their own code of conduct, a code that
often missed the true intent of God‘s law. Rather than being the
most zealous keepers and perpetuators of the law, they were
30
Cf. also Leviticus 10:1-3; Isaiah 1:10-17; Jeremiah 6:19-20, 7:21-26; Hosea
6:6.
39
actually leading people to misunderstand and disobey it. In their
own perverse way, they were on a course to destroy the law.31
The final and clinching illustration may be referred to as
―The Two Builders.‖ Simple and straightforward, it depicts a wise
and a foolish builder (Matt. 7:24-27). The wise one builds his
house on a rock while the foolish one builds on sand. When the
storm comes, the house of the wise builder stands while that of the
foolish builder is swept away. The results speak for themselves.
However, the key to this illustration is found in the behavior of the
two. The wise builder hears the words of Jesus and practices or
obeys them while the foolish builder listens but does not practice or
obey what he hears. The message is repetitive and clear: God
expects obedience from his family by faith. The absence of willing
obedience expresses an absence of genuine faith. Speaking the
truth while living a lie earns a resounding rejection from God.
The parable of ―The Two Sons‖ reinforces the Sermon on
the Mount (Matt. 21:28-32). The intriguing aspect of this parable
is the juxtaposition of talk and behavior. One son is very
agreeable, promising to do what their father asks, yet fails to
deliver on his promise. It is not that he initially disobeys or
explicitly disobeys; rather, he fails to obey. Meanwhile, the other
brother who said he would not do what their father requested had a
change of heart and did what the father asked. Only one son
obeyed. Jesus asks: ―Which of the two did what the father
wanted?‖ (Matt. 21:31). By singling out taxpayers and prostitutes
as examples of those who repented in contrast to religious leaders
who gave every outward indication of desiring to do God‘s will but
disobeyed, Jesus underscored the difference between true
obedience and the sham of hypocrisy.
The demonstrable intent seems unassailable. Those who
would be united to God and become beloved children do so by
faith, and that faith will automatically express itself in obedience,
31
Luder Whitlock, The Spiritual Quest, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998,
pp. 80-81.
40
willing happy obedience, to the will of God. This understanding,
as we have seen, aligns readily with the teaching of Scripture as a
whole.
As you review the Sermon on the Mount, you cannot dismiss
the compelling moral claims placed upon the Christian, a mortality
deeply rooted in the enduring moral law of the Old Testament
(Matt. 5:17-20). This mortality must not be taken lightly or
superficially because it is supremely important to God and critical
to our identity as those who have the attributes of our Father in
heaven. The care Jesus gave to correct misinterpretation and
misunderstanding of moral obligation reveals the far-reaching
implications of God‘s moral law.32
Principles underlie each of the Lord‘s commandments, and
we must attempt to understand them as well as their implications if
we intend to conform to God‘s expectations. Therefore, it is
important to ask why the command ―you shall not steal‖ was given.
What is implied by this commandment? How did God intend for it
to shape our lives? It is readily apparent that there are principles
underlying this commandment such as the right to possess
property, the right to work and to earn so that you can purchase and
possess. Because you have the right of ownership or possession,
you may not take or steal what belongs to someone else. Paul
seems to have taken this a step further by insisting that once you
become a believer, not only are you prohibited from stealing but
you have a responsibility to work so that you will have enough to
share with those who are needy in addition to providing for your
own needs (Eph. 4:28). The mature believer will not steal, nor will
he selfishly cling to what he has, but will gladly share of his
abundance with the poor. We gradually grasp the fact that the right
to work and possess creates an opportunity for good stewardship,
which in its turn makes possible generosity to others. How
different from the selfish accumulation of one whom Jesus referred
to as a rich fool.33
32
33
The Spiritual Quest, p.83.
The Spiritual Quest, pp.81-82.
41
This adds nothing new to our understanding of the
relationship of faith and obedience, but in the application of this
doctrine we may explore some factors worthy of additional
reflection. Here I am thinking of the existential experience and its
demands or the agonizing difficulty faith may experience as it
obeys. The other matter for contemplation is a comparison of the
heroic and mundane as they occur in our obedience.
The Cost of Obedience
Faith gives birth to obedience. That obedience, though
willing, may sometimes be accompanied by adversity. There is no
reason to expect that obedience, because it is of faith and blessed
by God, will always be easy or painless. The example of Jesus
serves us well here, too, for Hebrews reminds us that he proved his
true sonship by his suffering obedience (Heb. 5:8). Jesus was
perfectly obedient to the will of the Father. He left his exalted
position in Heaven and assumed a human identity to fulfill the
Father‘s plan. His experiences, culminating in his arrest and
crucifixion, were repugnant to his very nature. Ultimately, he
suffered the horrible wrath of the Father in judgment against sin so
that he could complete the Father‘s plan for salvation. Because he
endured the pain and suffering, in obedience to the will of God, he
has been exalted to God‘s right hand with all power and authority.
But his suffering obedience was required in order to satisfy the
Father‘s will.
So why should Christians expect it to be different for them?
Discipleship is costly, not cheap, as Bonhoeffer so aptly observed.
34
Sacrifice and suffering may be part of that cost. The apostles
quickly learned that reality following the death of Jesus. Paul
became aware of the cost of obedience to the heavenly vision as he
suffered at the hands of those who for various reasons persecuted
him (2 Cor. 11). Eventually that faithful obedience landed him in
prison and cost him his life.
34
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, New York: Macmillan, 1959
42
As I reflect on my own experiences during nearly forty years
of ministry, I am reminded of those instances when obedience
meant difficulty. There were occasions when decisions resulted in
misunderstanding and estrangement. Other decisions brought
financial sacrifice. Often the greater the awareness of the
difficulties involved, the more one‘s obedience of faith is tested.
Although I recall well several occasions when the obedience of
faith resulted in agonizing decisions and sacrifice, there were also
some instances where the agony lay more in the decision-making
process itself because it was difficult to determine the right thing to
do.
As an example, during our seminary years, my wife was
exposed to German measles in her first trimester of pregnancy. It
was a traumatic experience because we were well aware of the
potential damage to our child. Birth defects were likely. At this
point in time, babies born to mothers who had taken thalidomide
were born with grotesque deformities and became a sensation in
the media; consequently, people were alarmed about these new and
unexpected problems and it caused anxiety about related matters,
such as her exposure to measles.
My wife was urged by her
doctor to have a therapeutic abortion in order to avoid anything
similar. He was kind and did not press the issue, but the fact that
he, our competent doctor, was concerned enough to recommend the
abortion created a traumatic situation for us.
We were faced with a tough decision. On one hand, the
Bible was clear. Abortion is wrong, so we knew that we should not
agree to therapeutic abortion, but on the other hand, we faced the
likelihood of giving birth to a child with mental or physical
deformities. About that time, a prominent pastor preached about a
couple who birthed a mongoloid child. That sermon, in addition to
the daily photographs of deformed thalidomide babies and the
warning of our physician, was enough to cause tremendous mental
and emotional anguish as we wrestled with the possibility of
raising such a child. We were unable to sort out all those feelings,
nor could they be dismissed by force of will. The undesirable
43
possibilities seemed to be very possible, perhaps likely. The
emotional upheaval was overwhelming. The only thing that
sustained us was the certainty that abortion was wrong and so,
before God, we could not agree to it.
We had to trust God to help us through those interminably
long months until delivery, and it was a constant struggle. The fact
that we knew what God expected and wanted to obey him did not
lessen the level of stress we experienced. It was a matter of
constantly placing the situation before the Lord in believing prayer,
trusting him to sustain us no matter what the outcome. And, in this
instance, the unknown made it especially difficult. As it turned
out, my wife gave birth to a daughter with no birth defects, and we
rejoiced immensely with the good news.
It was an unforgettable lesson regarding the obedience of
faith, and we could no longer speak glibly of it or other matters.
These heroic-type experiences often become defining moments in
our lives leaving us forever changed, as was the case with
Abraham when he was commanded to sacrifice Isaac. Our faith
was strengthened through the ordeal and that experience left an
indelible mark on both of us. We can honestly say that our
marriage was strengthened, too.
Obedience and the Ordinary
On the other hand, it seems to me that the mundane or
routine experiences of daily life are equally open to challenge or
abuse precisely because they are mundane and seemingly
unimportant. The truth is that we are typically unreflective of
them. An unreflective life is open to a myriad of problems, not the
least of which is banal disobedience. Of course, without any selfconscious examination of its value, the disobedient Christian guilty
of such behavior generally remains unaware of the problem
because it is an accepted practice.
It has been argued by C.S. Lewis that most of the time the
ordinary forms the core of our lives because the ordinary decisions
44
of life hold a character-forming power. Eternal issues are at stake
in the mundane choices of everyday life yet these important
choices seldom present themselves in extraordinary appearance.35
They are incorporated into the seamless flow of daily activities,
comfortably positioning us to fasten our attention on seemingly
important matters. Meanwhile, the very fabric of our lives is
shaped by this innocuous flow.
Leon Kass takes a similar approach in The Hungry Soul,
noting that the first and most urgent activity of human life is eating,
yet we spend more time thinking about how to make it possible or
engaging in the activity that reflecting about the meaning of
eating.36 Food and eating in many cultures carry social memory
and ethnicity. In some cultures, food is as important as religion.37
Yet here is the issue: how can these matters consume such a
major part of our lives without some sense of obligation to reflect
on their meaning and be sure that these activities are in alignment
with God‘s will? If we fail to do so, we may be guilty of
disobeying the Lord because we have disregarded or neglected to
discover what his will really is.
In such instances this may be unintended and that is probably
most often the case, but it is nonetheless inexcusable. In The Way
of the (Modern) World, Craig Gay writes:
It is said that ideas have consequences, and this is
undoubtedly true. Still it seems that the ideas with the most
profound consequences are frequently taken for granted.
They are the ideas that lie just behind conscious thought,
providing a kind of foundation for the deliberations of
35
Gilbert Meilaender, Things That Count, Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2000, pp.
123-143.
36
Leon Kass, The Hungry Soul, New York: The Free Press, 1994, p.3.
37
Jeffrey Selingo, ―How Food and Memory Come Together,‖ The Chronicle of
Higher Education (30 July 1999): 7.
45
everyday life. They are the ideas that define the way things
are and demarcate the possibilities of life.38
Gay presses the issue by suggesting that one of the most
important ideas embedded in modern institutions and habits is the
idea that ―God is largely irrelevant to the real business of life.‖39
He suggests that the structural coherence of our world probably
depends less on religious or theological understanding than at any
previous time in history. So, he says, we are tempted to live as if
God does not exist, a temptation to practical atheism. Yet because
these practices are so much a part of our daily lives, Gay reminds
us, the implications are not immediately evident and may go
unnoticed.40
Insensitivity and arrogance may be rooted in such attitudes
of neglect. One may argue to the contrary and with some
plausibility in regard to new or naïve believers, yet the obligation
of every Christian is to discern the will of God and obey it. Unless
there is a commensurate effort to study the Scriptures and glean the
riches from our Christian heritage, we shall remain oblivious to
these obligations, but our ignorance does not excuse our
responsibility. When we fail to measure up to God‘s expectations,
we are culpable of disobedience.
In recent Christian history, the Puritans exemplified a high
commitment to reflect on these things so that God would be
honored in the details of daily life. The same determined effort is
needed today if we are to truly obey God and glorify him.
Kierkegaard stressed this concept of expressing the sublime in the
pedestrian.41 We do well to follow this example and pursue
obedience in the copious but ordinary details of life.
38
Craig Gay, The Way of the (Modern) World, Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998, p.1.
39
Ibid., p.2.
40
Ibid., p.12.
41
Soren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, New York: Penguin Books, p. 68f.
46
Conclusion
While it is generally acknowledged in the Protestant
community that one cannot earn salvation by good works,
obedience is the fruit of true faith. Sometimes a heroic obedience
is required, a costly obedience. More often obedience is attached
to the ordinary and requires a higher level of reflection and
discernment than may be anticipated in order for the Christian to
render true obedience. Becoming more discerning and intentional
about the ordinary is as essential to the path of obedience as is
heroic obedience.
47
Ringkasan :
TRUST AND OBEY:
A Current Retrospective And Assessment
P
ertama, Dr. Whitlock, Jr menggarisbawahi bahwa Pembenaran
oleh Iman sebagai salah satu doktrin utama Reformasi. Hanya
oleh iman (Sola fide) kepada Kristus bukan oleh usaha dan
perbuatan baiknya - seorang yang berdosa dapat dibenarkan.
Walaupun demikian hal ini tidak berarti bahwa perbuatan baik
tidaklah penting atau tidak berarti. Sebaliknya bahwa Alkitab
mengajarkan bahwa seorang yang telah diselamatkan supaya ia
dapat melakukan perbuatan baik. Perbuatan baik dalam wujud
ketaatan adalah tanda yang nyata dari orang yang beriman.
Kedua, Dr. Whitlock, Jr. mengungkapkan bahwa tujuan dari
tulisannya adalah menunjukkan pentingnya ketaatan dalam
kehidupan orang beriman. Walaupun ia menyadari bagian-bagian
Alkitab lain yang juga penting, dalam tulisannya ia menfokuskan
uraiannya berdasarkan pengajaran Yesus. Ia beralasan bahwa
pengajaran Yesus ini memberikan suatu jembatan dari pemahaman
Perjanjian Lama kepada pemahaman Perjanjian Baru. Pengajaran
Yesus dalam Khotbah di Bukit menyatakan pentingnya ketaatan
atau perbuatan baik dalam kehidupan orang beriman atau para
murid. (band. Mat. 5:16,7:21-23) Ketaatan merupakan buah
pertobatan, yang mana bukti iman yang benar (Mat. 7:20).
Perumpaman tentang Dua Macam Dasar Bangunan (Mat. 7:24-27)
juga menekankan pentingnya ketaatan dalam kehidupan orang
percaya. Masih banyak lagi pengajaran Yesus yang menekankan
pentingnya ketaatan dalam kehidupan orang percaya.
Ketiga, dalam bagian selanjutnya Dr. Whitlock, Jr.
membahas pengajaran ketaatan dan iman dalam kehidupan orang
Kristen masa kini. Ia menekankan bahwa ketaatan menuntut ada
harga yang harus dibayar, yaitu penderitaan. Ia juga mengutip buku
The Cost of Discipleship karangan Dietrich Bonhoeffer yang
48
terkenal itu. Dr. Whitlock, Jr. juga menceritakan pengalaman
pribadinya ketika dokter menyarankan untuk mengaborsi anak kemungkinan mengalami cacat fisik dan mental- yang dikandung
oleh istrinya. Ia diperhadapkan untuk hidup dalam iman dan
ketaatan atau tidak. Ia memilih untuk hidup dalam iman dan
ketaatan. Ketika anak itu dilahirkan dengan sehat dan tidak cacat,
imannya makin dikuatkan. Kemudian ia mengungkapkan
pentingnya menghayati pengajaran iman dan ketaatan dalam
kehidupan sehari-hari.
Iman dan ketaatan tidak hanya perlu diwujudkan dalam saatsaat yang khusus, tetapi juga dalam saat-saat yang sederhana dan
sehari-hari. Ketaatan adalah buah iman yang sejati.
Sia Kok Sin
49
KETAATAN:
Suatu Respons Yang Menentukan Untuk Mengalami
Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Akan Datang
Studi Eksegetis Keluaran 19:1-8
Sia Kok Sin
T
ulisan ini dipersembahkan kepada Pdt. Peterus Pamudji Ph.D.
yang telah banyak memberikan bimbingan dan pertolongan
kepada penulis selama ini. Secara khusus oleh karena pertolongan
dan rekomendasi beliau, penulis mendapatkan kesempatan untuk
dapat melanjutkan studi di Calvin Theological Seminary, USA.
Penulis memilih tema ―Ketaatan: Suatu Respons Yang Menentukan
Untuk Mengalami Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Akan Datang‖,
oleh karena Dr. Peterus Pamudji sering sekali menekankan
pentingnya ―Trust and Obey‖ atau ―Percaya dan Taat‖ dalam
kehidupan umat Allah. Dengan latar belakang ini, penulis ingin
mengungkapkan konsep ketaatan berdasarkan studi eksegetis dari
Keluaran 19:1-8.
Keluaran 19 merupakan catatan lembaran baru bangsa Israel,
karena mereka sudah tiba di Sinai, setelah melalui perjalanan
keluar dari Mesir. Keluaran 19:1-15 merupakan suatu pendahuluan
dari apa yang disebut sebagai narasi Sinai.42 Keluaran 19:1-15 ini
dapat dibagi menjadi 2 bagian, yaitu ayat 1-8 dan ayat 9-15. Ayat
1-8 merupakan pendahuluan umum dari seluruh narasi Sinai dan
ayat 9-15 merupakan perintah bagi umat Israel untuk menyiapkan
diri mereka dalam menyambut kedatangan atau penampakan
Tuhan.43 Jadi Keluaran 19:1-8 merupakan suatu bagian yang
menjadi pendahuluan narasi Sinai. Walaupun sebagai pendahuluan,
42
James I. Durham, ―Exodus‖, Word Biblical Commentary 3, Waco: Word Book
Publisher, 1987, p. 258.
43
Ibid., pp. 260-1.
50
bagian ini sangat penting, oleh karena di dalamnya –khususnya
pada ayat 4-6- seseorang akan menemukan ringkasan atau inti
teologia perjanjian.44
TEKS KELUARAN 19:1-845
Teks Ibrani46
~AYB; ~yIr'cm. i #r,a,me laer'f.yI-ynEB. tacel. yviyliV.h; vd,xoB;
`yn"ysi rB;d>mi WaB' hZ<h;
~ydIypir>me W[s.YwI :
yn:ysi rB;d>mi WaboYw" :
rB'd>MiB; Wnx]Yw: :
`rh'h' dg<n< laer'f.yI ~v'-!x;YIw:
~yhil{a/h'-la, hl'[' hv,mWo
rh'h-' !mi hw"hy> wyl'ae ar'q.YwI :
rmoale
bqo[]y: tybel. rm;ato hKo
`laer'f.yI ynEbl. i dyGEt;w>
~t,yair> ~T,a; 4
~yIr'cm. li . ytiyfi[' rv,a]
~yrIv'n> ypen>K;-l[; ~k,t.a, aF'a,w"
`yl'ae ~k,t.a, abia'w"
yliqoB. W[m.v.Ti [;Amv'-~ai hT'[w; > 5
ytiyrIB.-ta, ~T,r>m;v.W
~yMi[h; '-lK'mi hL'gUs. yli ~t,yyIh.wI
`#r,a'h-' lK' yli-yKi
44
1
2
3
Durham, pp. 260-1.
Teks Keluaran 19:1-8 dalam bahasa Ibrani dan Indonesia sengaja dimasukkan
untuk memudahkan pembaca dalam memahami tulisan ini.
46
Bible Works 4.0
45
51
~ynIh]Ko tk,l,m.m; yli-Wyh.Ti ~T,a;w> 6
vAdq' yAgw>
rv,a] ~yrIb'D>h; hL,ae
`laer'f.yI ynEB.-la, rBed;T.
hv,mo aboYw" :
~['h' ynEq.zIl. ar'q.YIw:
hL,aeh' ~yrIb'D>h;-lK' tae ~h,ynEp.li ~f,Yw" :
`hw"hy> WhW"ci rv,a]
wD'x.y: ~['h'-lk' Wn[]Y:w:
Wrm.aYOw:
hw"hy> rB,DI-rv,a] lKo
hf,[n] :
`hw"hy>-la, ~['h' yreb.DI-ta, hv,mo bv,Y"w:
7
8
Terjemahan Bahasa Indonesia47
1. Pada bulan ketiga setelah orang Israel keluar dari tanah Mesir,
mereka tiba di padang gurun Sinai pada hari itu juga.
2. Setelah mereka berangkat dari Rafidim, tibalah mereka di
padang gurun Sinai, lalu mereka berkemah di padang gurun;
orang Israel berkemah di sana di depan gunung itu.
3. Lalu naiklah Musa menghadap Allah, dan Tuhan berseru dari
gunung itu kepadanya: ―Beginilah kaukatakan kepada
keturunan Yakub dan kauberitakan kepada orang Israel:
4. Kamu sendiri telah melihat apa yang Kulakukan kepada orang
Mesir dan bagaimana Aku telah mendukung kamu di atas sayap
rajawali dan membawa kamu kepadaKu.
47
Penulis merasa tidak perlu untuk membahas variasi-variasi yang ada, oleh
karena variasi-variasi yang ada tidak cukup menyakinkan untuk mengubah teks
Masoret dan Terjemahan Baru Alkitab Bahasa Indonesia dalam bagian ini
sangatlah setia kepada teks Masoret. Alkitab, Jakarta: Lembaga Alkitab
Indonesia, 2000, hal. 83-84.
52
5. Jadi sekarang, jika kamu sungguh-sungguh mendengarkan
firmanKu dan berpegang pada perjanjianKu, maka kamu akan
menjadi harta kesayanganKu sendiri dari antara segala bangsa,
sebab Akulah yang empunya seluruh bumi.
6. Kamu akan menjadi bagi-Ku kerajaan imam dan bangsa yang
kudus. Inilah semuanya firman yang harus kaukatakan kepada
orang Israel.‖
7. Lalu datanglah Musa dan memanggil para tua-tua bangsa itu
dan membawa ke depan mereka segala firman yang
diperintahkan TUHAN kepadanya.
8. Seluruh bangsa itu menjawab bersama-sama:‖Segala yang
difirmankan TUHAN akan kami lakukan.‖ Lalu Musapun
menyampaikan jawab bangsa itu kepada TUHAN.
TATA BAHASA
Dari segi tata bahasa ada beberapa hal yang menarik untuk
diperhatikan:
1. Kalau memperhatikan ayat 4 dengan teliti, seseorang dapat
melihat dan menemukan pemunculan berulang dari kata
―telah‖.
4. Kamu sendiri telah melihat apa yang (telah) Kulakukan
kepada orang Mesir dan bagaimana Aku telah mendukung
kamu di atas sayap rajawali dan (telah) membawa kamu
kepadaKu.48
Bagian ini mengungkapkan apa yang telah Allah lakukan bagi
orang Israel atau dengan kata lain karya Allah pada masa yang
lampau.
2.
Dalam ayat 5a seseorang dapat menemukan kata
―sekarang‖ dan juga kalimat bersyarat.
5a. Jadi sekarang, jika kamu sungguh-sungguh mendengarkan
firmanKu dan berpegang pada perjanjianKu,
48
Penggunaan bentuk QTL, QTL, waw konsekutif+YQTL, waw
konsekutif+YQTL menunjuk kepada suatu peristiwa pada waktu lampau. Band.
Thomas O. Lambdin, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew, New York: Charles
Scribner‘s Sons, 1971, pp. 107-8.
53
yliqoB. W[m.v.Ti [;Amv'-~ai hT'[w; > 5
ytiyrIB.-ta, ~T,r>m;v.W
Kata ―sekarang‖ menekankan aspek kekinian. Suatu tawaran
Allah yang diberikan kepada bangsa Israel pada saat kini atau
sekarang untuk diresponi. Kalimat bersyarat yang ditandai
dengan kata penghubung ―jika‖ ini menunjukkan bahwa Tuhan
memberikan suatu tawaran dan bukan suatu keharusan.
Respons kepada tawaran Allah ini tergantung sepenuhnya
kepada kehendak Israel. Allah tidak memaksa.
Kalimat W[m.v.Ti [;Amv' (Infinitive Absolutus + YQTL)
memberikan suatu penekanan.49 Penekanan ini berkaitan
dengan
kata
kerja
utamanya,
sehingga
dalam
menerjemahkannya dapat ditambahkan kata keterangan,
seperti: sesungguhnya, sungguh-sungguh atau pasti.50 Jadi
terjemahan LAI sangatlah baik, yaitu jika kamu sungguhsungguh mendengarkan …‖
Sedangkan dalam kalimat bersyarat ini, dua kata kerja
utamanya W[m.vT
. i (YQTL-mendengarkan) dan ~T,r>m;v.W
(QTL-memelihara) dapat menunjuk kepada suatu tindakan
yang terus menerus atau berulang-ulang, baik pada masa
sekarang maupun pada masa yang akan datang.51 Hal ini
menunjukkan suatu kebenaran, yaitu bahwa ketaatan
(mendengarkan dan memelihara) adalah suatu tindakan yang
mempunyai aspek terus menerus atau berulang-ulang, baik
pada masa sekarang maupun masa yang akan datang.
49
Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax. An Outline, Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 1988, pp. 37-38.
50
Lambdin, p. 158.
51
Lambdin, An Introduction, p. 277 dan Williams, Hebrew, p. 85. Paul Joüon, A
Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Vol. II. Translated and revised by T. Muraoka,
Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1991, p. 630.
54
5b. maka kamu akan menjadi harta kesayanganKu sendiri dari
antara segala bangsa, sebab Akulah yang empunya seluruh
bumi.
6. Kamu akan menjadi bagi-Ku kerajaan imam dan bangsa
yang kudus. Inilah semuanya firman yang harus kaukatakan
kepada orang Israel.‖
Ayat 5b dan 6 merupakan suatu akibat yang akan terjadi,
jikalau syarat dari ayat 5a terpenuhi. Dalam ayat-ayat ini
terdapat pengulangan kata ―akan‖ yang menunjuk pada sesuatu
yang terjadi pada masa yang akan datang.
3. Penggunaan kata ganti orang
~T,a'
(kamu sekalian) digabung
dengan ~t,yair> (kamu sekalian telah melihat) memberikan
suatu aspek penekanan. Penekanan ini menunjuk kepada suatu
fokus psikologis.52 Bagian ini oleh Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia
diterjemahkan sebagai ―Kamu sendiri telah melihat.‖
4. Penggunaan kata ganti orang ~T,a' (kamu sekalian) dalam ayat
6 juga memberikan suatu aspek penekanan dan juga menunjuk
kepada suatu fokus psikologis.
5. Bentuk YQTL hf,[]n: (kami akan melakukan)
mempunyai nuansa suatu tekad atau keinginan.
dapat
STRUKTUR
Melalui pembacaan dan penyelidikan yang teliti, Keluaran
19:1-8 mempunyai struktur sbb:
1. Latar Belakang (ayt. 1-2)
2. Musa Menghadap Tuhan (ayt. 3-6)
a. Perintah Tuhan Kepada Musa (ayt. 3b)
52
Bruce K. Waltke and M. O‘Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew
Syntax, Winona Lake, Indiana, 1990, p. 296.
55
b. Firman Tuhan Bagi Israel (ayt. 4-6a)
1) Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Lampau
2) Tawaran Masa Kini: Ketaatan
3) Akibat Ketaatan (Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Datang)
c. Perintah Tuhan Kepada Musa (ayt. 6b)
3. Musa Menyampaikan Firman Tuhan Kepada Israel (ayt. 7)
4. Respons Bangsa Israel (ayt. 8a)
5. Musa Menghadap Tuhan (ayt. 8b)
Adanya inklusio ―Musa menghadap Tuhan‖ dalam ayat 3
dan 8 menunjuk bahwa ayat 3-8 merupakan suatu kesatuan unit,
dan inklusio ―Firman Tuhan bagi Israel‖ dalam ayat 4 dan 6b tidak
hanya menunjukkan bagian ini sebagai suatu kesatuan unit, tetapi
juga menunjukkan bahwa bagian ini adalah suatu fokus atau pusat
bagian ini. Melalui pengamatan di atas, dapat dikatakan bahwa
fokus atau pusat bagian ini adalah Firman Tuhan bagi Israel yang
terdapat dalam ayat 4-6.
GENRE
John I. Durham berpendapat bahwa bagian ini adalah
merupakan pendahuluan dari Narasi Sinai.53 Para ahli
mendiskusikan apakah dalam bagian ini terdapat sesuatu yang
bernuansakan formula perjanjian,54 tetapi kebanyakan ahli sepakat
bahwa walaupun bagian ini bukan formula perjanjian, namun
bagian ini bernuansakan suatu perjanjian. Jadi dapat dikatakan
53
Durham, pp. 258, 260.
Brevard S. Childs, The Book of Exodus, Old Testament Library, Louisville:
The Westminster Press, 1976, pp. 348. Dennis J. McCarthy, Treaty and
Covenant, Analecta Biblica 21A, Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981, pp. 245,
272-3. Banyak ahli yang sepakat tentang adanya persamaaan formula perjanjian
antara Allah dan Israel dengan formula perjanjian bangsa Het. Kesejajaran
formula perjanjian bangsa Het dengan perjanjian dalam Perjanjian Lama dapat
dilihat dalam G.E. Mendenhall,‖Covenant.‖, The Interpreter‘s Dictionary of the
Bible, A-D. G.A. Buttrick (Gen.Edit.), Nashville: Abingdon, 1981, pp. 719-20.
54
56
bahwa genre bagian ini adalah suatu narasi yang bernuansakan
suatu perjanjian.55
PENAFSIRAN
Latar Belakang (ayt. 1-2)
Bagian ini merupakan ringkasan tentang perjalanan keluarnya
bangsa Israel dari Mesir dan ketibaan mereka di padang gurun
Sinai. Perjalanan bangsa Israel yang telah menghabiskan waktu
kurang lebih 2 bulan dan telah melewati banyak tempat, hanya
diungkapkan dalam beberapa kalimat dan hanya sebuah tempat
yang disebutkan, yaitu Rafidim. Bagian ini hanya ingin
menekankan suatu kenyataan bahwa bangsa Israel telah tiba di
Sinai dan mereka berkemah di sana.
Musa Menghadap Allah (ayt. 3-6)
Bagian ini menceritakan bahwa Musa menghadap Tuhan di
gunung Sinai, lalu Tuhan memberitakan suatu firman untuk
disampaikan kepada bangsa Israel. Firman Tuhan itu
diperuntukkan bagi bangsa Israel dan Musa berfungsi sebagai
mediator antara Allah dan bangsa Israel.
Ayat 4-6 merupakan fokus atau pusat dalam bagian ini. John
I. Durham mengomentari bagian ini sbb:
―The speech that follows this formal messengerintroduction is a poetic summary of covenant theology, and
the careful economy and memorable pharsing of its
language suggests that it was a set piece, composed for
repeated use at covenant renewal ceremonies.‖56
Bagian ini terdiri dari:
Karya Allah Pada Masa Lampau
55
Childs menempatkan bagian ini sebagai bagian dari perjanjian Allah dengan
Israel di Sinai (Kel. 19-24). Lihat Childs, p. 365.
56
Durham, p. 261.
57
Tuhan dalam bagian ini mengingatkan bangsa Israel bahwa
mereka sendiri telah melihat karya Allah yang luar biasa pada masa
lampau, khususnya dalam proses pembebasan mereka dari
perbudakan Mesir dan perlindungan Allah dalam perjalanan
mereka dari Mesir menuju ke Sinai. Terence E. Fretheim
mengungkapkannya sbb: ―God briefly recapitulates what has been
done on Israel‘s behalf, delivering them from Egypt and bearing
them on eagle‘s wings to Sinai, where God dwells in an especially
intensified way.‖57 Tiga karya Allah disebutkan dalam bagian ini,
yaitu:
Tindakan Allah kepada orang Mesir.
Bagian ini mengingatkan 10 tulah Allah kepada orang Mesir
dalam proses pembebasan Israel dari perbudakan Mesir (Kel. 7:1412:42) dan penghancuran tentara Mesir di laut Teberau (Kel. 14).
Allah mendukung Israel di atas sayap rajawali
Bagian ini mengingatkan bagaimana Allah memimpin,
memelihara dan menjaga bangsa Israel dalam perjalanan mereka
dari Mesir sampai ketibaan mereka di Sinai.58 Sayap rajawali
merupakan suatu gambaran yang mengungkapkan ―the strong and
loving care of God.‖59 Pemeliharaan Allah atas Israel dapat dilihat
dalam peristiwa pemberian Manna (Kel. 16), pemberian air minum
di Masa dan Meriba (Kel. 17:1-7) dan kemenangan peperangan
atas orang Amalek (Kel. 17:8-15).
Allah membawa Israel kepada-Nya
57
Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, Interpretation, Luoisville: John Knox Press,
1991, p. 209.
58
Durham, p. 262.
59
C.F. Keil and F. Delitzch, The Second Book of Moses (Exodus), The
Pentateuch, Vol. I, Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983,
p. 96.
58
Bagian ini mengungkapkan bagaimana Allah membawa
Israel ke gunung Sinai, di mana Israel mengalami kehadiranNya
yang khusus.60 Di Sinai inilah bangsa Israel semakin mengenal
siapa Allah dan apa kehendakNya.
Karya Allah bagi Israel pada masa lampau melandasi tawaran dan
kehendak Allah lebih lanjut kepada bangsa Israel.
Tawaran Allah Bagi Israel: Ketaatan
Setelah Allah mengingatkan apa yang telah Ia lakukan bagi
bangsa Israel, Ia mengungkapkan kehendakNya lebih lanjut kepada
bangsa pilihanNya ini. Kata ―sekarang‖ menekankan bahwa
hubungan Allah dengan umatNya tidak hanya berdimensi dalam
pengalaman masa lampau, tetapi ―masa kini‖ merupakan suatu
dimensi yang sangat penting dan menentukan.
Ayat 5 mengungkapkan sbb:
―Jadi sekarang, jika kamu sungguh-sungguh mendengarkan
firmanKu dan berpegang pada perjanjianKu, …‖. Ungkapan
―mendengarkan firmanKu‖ dan ―berpegang pada perjanjianKu‖
merupakan suatu paralel yang sinonim, yang keduanya menggarisbawahi hal yang sama, yaitu ketaatan. Penggunaan kalimat
bersyarat ―Jika…‖ dalam bagian ini menunjukkan bahwa tawaran
Allah bagi Israel untuk hidup dalam ketaatan adalah sesuatu yang
bersifat sukarela dan tanpa paksaan.61
Walaupun bagian ini merupakan suatu tawaran yang tidak
memaksa,62 tetapi respons bangsa Israel terhadap tawaran ini
sangat menentukan bagi kehidupan dan keberadaan bangsa ini pada
60
Durham, p. 262, Childs, p. 367.
Durham, p. 262.
62
Fretheim menyebutkan sebagai suatu perintah (―commandment‘). Fretheim, p.
210. Tetapi penulis tidak menyetujuinya, oleh karena ini merupakan suatu
kalimat bersyarat. McCarthy menyebutkan bukan sebagai ―stipulations‖, tetapi
sebagai suatu ― a conditional blessing.‖ McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant, p. 272.
61
59
masa yang akan datang. Durham sangat menekankan pentingnya
bagian ini bagi keberadaan bangsa Israel. Ia mengungkapkannya
sbb:
―An affirmative response to Yahweh‘s ‗if‘ on the part of the
people of Israel will mean the birth of ‗Israel‘ as Yahweh‘s
people. Without that affirmative response, indeed, there
would be only ‗sons of Israel,‘ the descendants of Jacob.
With the affirmative response, ‗Israel,‘ a community of
faith transcending biological descendancy, could be into
being.‖63
Fretheim dan Childs juga mengungkapkan bahwa ketaatan
sebagai respons terhadap tawaran Allah ini akan membawa Israel
ke dalam suatu hubungan yang lebih khusus dan mendalam. 64 Atau
dengan kata lain jika Israel mewujudkan ketaatan sebagai respons
kepada tawaran Allah, mereka akan mengalami karya Allah yang
lebih lanjut pada masa yang akan datang.
Akibat Ketaatan (Karya Allah Pada Masa Yang Akan Datang)
Jikalau bangsa Israel hidup dalam ketaatan terhadap
kehendak Allah, maka mereka akan mengalami karya Allah yang
lebih mendalam pada masa yang akan datang. Karya Allah pada
masa yang akan datang itu hanya akan dialami jika mereka
memenuhi persyaratannya, yaitu ketaatan. Ketaatan merupakan
suatu respons yang menentukan untuk mengalami karya Allah pada
masa yang akan datang.
Ada 3 akibat yang akan terjadi dalam kehidupan bangsa Israel, jika
mereka menaati Allah, yaitu:
Akan Menjadi Harta Kesayangan Allah
Dalam menjelaskan istilah ―Harta Kesayangan‖, Durham
menulis sbb: ―The image presented is that of the unique and
63
64
Durham, p. 262.
Fretheim, pp. 210-1, Childs, p. 367.
60
exclusive possession, and that image is expanded by what appears
to be and addition (‗for to me belongs the whole earth‖) to suggest
the ―crown jewel‖ of a large collection, the masterwork, the oneof-a kind piece.‖65 Keil dan Delitzsch mengungkapkan bahwa
istilah ini menunjuk kepada harta milik yang berharga dan khusus,
bukan harta milik yang umum.66
Akan Menjadi Kerajaan Imam Bagi Allah
Durham mengungkapkan bahwa istilah ―kerajaan imam‖
menunjuk kepada peranan bangsa Israel sebagai ‖the extension
throught the world of ministry of Yahweh‘s Presence.‖67
Selanjutnya ia mengungkapkan ―a kingdom run not by politicians
depending upon strength and connivance but by priests depending
on faith in Yahweh, a servant nation isnteading of a ruling
nation.‖68 Dalam kaitan dengan hal ini Childs mengungkapkan
sbb.:‖Israel as a people is also dedicated to God‘s service among
the nations as priests function with a society.‖69 Selanjutnya Keil
dan Delitzsch menambahkan bahwa sebagai imam Israel dipanggil
untuk menjadi saluran pengetahuan dan keselamatan Allah bagi
seluruh manusia.70 R. Alan Cole mengungkapkannya dengan
baik:‖God‘s ‗particularist‘ choice of Israel has a wider
‗universalist‘ purpose.71
Akan Menjadi Bangsa Yang Kudus
65
Durham, p. 262. Walaupun Durham menganggap bahwa kalimat ―sebab
Akulah yang empunya seluruh bumi‖ adalah tambahan, tetapi penulis tetap
menganggap bagian ini sebagai bagian yang harus dipertahankan.
66
Keil and Delitzsch, Exodus, p. 96.
67
Durham, p. 263
68
Ibid.
69
Childs, p. 367.
70
Keil and Delitzsch, p. 98.
71
R. Alan Cole, Exodus, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. 2, Downers
Grover: Inter-Varsitty Press, 1973, p. 145.
61
Sebagai bangsa yang kudus, bangsa Israel dipisahkan untuk
suatu maksud Allah yang khusus.72 Selanjutnya Fretheim
mengungkapkan: ―Israel is to embody God‘s own purposes in the
world.‖ 73 Durham mengungkapkan bahwa sebagai bangsa yang
kudus, Israel dipisahkan dan menjadi ―a display-people, a show
case to the world of how being in covenant with Yahweh changes
people.‖74
Tiga hal di atas mengungkapkan suatu akibat yang luar biasa
bagi bangsa Israel, jika mereka mau hidup dalam ketaatan kepada
Allah. Karya Allah pada masa yang akan datang itu hanya akan
dialami jika mereka memenuhi persyaratannya, yaitu ketaatan.
Ketaatan merupakan suatu respons yang menentukan untuk
mengalami karya Allah pada masa yang akan datang.
Musa Menyampaikan Firman Tuhan Kepada Israel dan Respons Bangsa Israel
(ayat. 7-8)
Bagian ini mengungkapkan bahwa Musa menyampaikan
Firman Tuhan kepada bangsa Israel dan bangsa Israel memberikan
respons bahwa mereka akan melakukan segala yang difirmankan
Tuhan. Kemudian Musa melaporkan respons Israel ini kepada
Tuhan.
KESIMPULAN
Keluaran 19:1-8 mengungkapkan suatu peristiwa yang sangat
menentukan bagi kehidupan bangsa Israel. Bangsa Israel telah
mengalami karya Allah yang luar biasa. Sebagai wujud kesetiaan
Allah kepada perjanjianNya dengan Abraham dan kepedulian
Allah terhadap penderitaan mereka, Allah telah melepaskan bangsa
Israel dari perbudakan Mesir dan memimpin mereka tiba di padang
gurun Sinai. Allah telah membebaskan, memelihara dan membawa
72
Fretheim, pp. 212-3.
Fretheim, p. 213.
74
Durham, p. 263.
73
62
bangsa ini untuk menikmati dan mengalami persekutuan
denganNya. Tetapi karya Allah bagi Israel tidak berhenti sampai di
sini. Ini merupakan karya Allah bagi Israel pada masa yang
lampau. Allah masih mempunyai rencana yang luar biasa bagi
Israel. Allah masih ingin menyatakan karyaNya bagi Israel pada
masa yang akan datang. Kunci untuk mengalami karya Allah pada
masa yang akan datang itu tergantung pada respons Israel terhadap
tawaran Allah, yaitu hidup dalam ketaatan. Ini merupakan suatu
tawaran dan bukan suatu paksaan Allah kepada umatNya. Ketika
Israel mewujudkan ketaatan kepada Allah sebagai respons sukarela
mereka, mereka akan mengalami karya Allah yang luar biasa
dalam kehidupan mereka, yaitu untuk menjadi saluran berkat bagi
seluruh umat manusia di dunia ini melalui kehidupan dan
pelayanan mereka. Ketaatan adalah suatu respons
yang
menentukan untuk mengalami karya Allah pada masa yang akan
datang.
63
Trust And Obedience From Calvin
To The Second Reformation
James A. De Jong
T
rust and obedience are hallmarks of the theology of John
Calvin. On the ―trust‖ side of the equation, the reformer of
Geneva is credited with purging worship of such medieval
accretions as saints days, relics, sacramentalism, unintelligible
Latin, and ―implicit faith‖ in the power of the church unto
salvation. He is praised for restoring true and clear preaching of
the Word in an effort to elicit living faith—true trust--in the hearer.
True trust is created through true religion. On the ―obedience‖ side
of the equation, he is popularly accused of over-regulating
Genevan life with statutes imposing a conformity to the gospel that
amounted to legalism and invited hypocrisy. His battles with the
antinomian and Libertine elements in the city are well documented.
If he had his way theologically and morally in the various civic
councils and the consistory, it was only for half his career, from the
early 1550s until his death in 1564. For the first half of his
reforming work, his preaching and teaching were openly and
frequently resisted and his influence on civic life was tentative and
partial. Yet, from his earliest writings in the 1536 Institutes of the
Christian Religion, through his sermons, catechisms, and
commentaries to the end of his life he maintained a consistent, if
deepening, emphasis on true faith in the living Christ fed and
nourished by the true and faithful preaching of the Word, as
fortified by the pure administration of the holy sacraments. Trust
in God the Creator, God the Redeemer, and God the Sanctifier—
even in times of intellectual doubt and emotional despondence,
both of which Calvin acknowledged as afflictions sometimes
visited upon believers—was the essence of true religion for Calvin.
Such trust yielded unwavering gratitude, which was displayed in
the grateful living shaped by Calvin‘s new doctrine of the third use
64
of the law. Living fully, willingly according to the revealed will of
God was essential and nothing short of a display of the believer‘s
union with Christ, who was obedient even to death on the cross.
Trust and obedience were the core of what Calvin taught.
Calvin‘s heirs inherited an enormous and a complex
theological legacy. Simply to read, let alone to apprehend and to
embrace the body of his writings was a daunting task. Problems of
language and translation affected Reformed leaders and believers
in Hungary, Germany, the Netherlands, Scotland, and England.
Life in the second half of the sixteenth century was demanding, in
many of these places preoccupied with the Counter-reformation,
persecution, political instability and change, and economic
hardship. The leisure of reading, study, reflection, and extended
discussion was often impossible. Other theological emphasis
contended with the Reformed faith in many arenas. Sometimes
political expedience or toleration foisted on Reformed churches a
civic order and social patterns not always congenial to obedience
as Calvin understood and articulated it. New scientific theories and
discoveries posed new issues and questions. Global commercial
enterprise became a preoccupation in Protestant, northern Europe
during the seventeenth century. Wealth and the flowering of
culture ensued.
Philosophical reflection forced theological
reconsideration and adjustment in places like Saumur, Leiden,
Utrecht, Edinburgh, Debrecen—even Geneva. Calvin‘s influenced
faded.
Examining how the legacy of Calvin‘s understanding of trust
and obedience fared in any of a dozen settings would be
instructive. In this essay we shall venture a comparison of his
views on faith and obedience with those of Jean Taffin, sometimes
regarded as a father of the Dutch Second Reformation, in his book
The Distinguishing Marks of God‘s Children. This project seems
applicable to the Indonesian scene in the early twenty-first century,
since the Dutch Reformed influence on so much Indonesian church
life and theology was seasoned by Calvin and the Second
Reformation. It is also appropriate since Taffin‘s work was
65
addressed to those suffering religious oppression and persecution, a
situation not unknown in the present Indonesian setting.
Taffin and the Second Reformation
John Calvin and his writings need no introduction to readers
of this journal. Taffin and the Dutch Second Reformation do.
Jean Taffin was born most likely in 1529, although some
sources give 1528 as his birth date. He was born into a prominent
Roman Catholic family in the city of Tournai in the southern part
of what is today Belgium. His father was a civil administrator,
chief magistrate of the city. The father provided his children with a
fine education; Jean was taught by good tutors, then attended the
University of Leuven at a time when it was one of the best in
Europe. He also spent time at the University of Padua, in Italy.
His education exposed him to the best Renaissance learning of the
age, including knowledge of Greek and Roman classical writers
and Christian patristic sources. In the 1550s he held the position of
secretary and librarian to the Catholic bishop of Atrecht. It was
during a decade of spiritual unrest and ferment in the Flemish and
Walloon cities. Taffin somehow became exposed to the Protestant
preaching and literature of the time, and he became active in the
underground ―churches under the cross.‖ In 1557 he resigned his
post and devoted the rest of his life to the Reformed cause.
For the next several years Taffin was a refugee hunted by the
Counter-Reformation. He spent time in a number of cities
congenial to the Reformation, including Geneva, where he
certainly heard and knew John Calvin.
Subsequently he
corresponded with both Calvin and Theodore Beza. From late
1560 or early 1561 until 1569 he served as one of several
Reformed pastors in the city of Metz, in northeastern France. This
was a decade, before the infamous St. Bartholomew‘s Day
massacre in 1572, when the Reformed faith flourished in certain
places in France. It did in Metz, and the church grew rapidly.
During these years Taffin worked with such better know leaders of
66
the Walloon and Dutch reformation as Guido de Bres, Caspar
vander Heyden, Herman Moded, and Peter Datheen. He spent a
year in Antwerp, endeavoring to consolidate the reformation in that
city about the time of the well-know iconoclastic riots in the Low
Countries.
He also participated in consultations with the
disaffected nobility, who sided with the persecuted population and
sought concessions, then independence, from the Spanish
monarchy. When the religious tide turned against Protestants,
Taffin fled again. In exile, he continued to work for the building of
the Reformed church by providing leadership, often as secretary or
clerk, at the early, formative synods of the Dutch Reformed
Church.
In 1573 Taffin accepted the position of chaplain in the court
of Prince William (the Silent) of Orange. As one of two or three
such chaplains, Taffin advised William on matters related to the
emerging Dutch Reformed Church, its relation to the civil
authorities, and its polity and theology. In this capacity he also
acted as William‘s emissary to ecclesiastical assemblies. Taffin‘s
position was strategic and formative. His decade of service in this
role coincided with the seven northern provinces, or what today is
know as The Netherlands, emerging as a separate, Protestant nation
known as The Dutch Republic, and with the formation of the Dutch
Reformed Church. These were also years of hardship and
uncertainty, as the Spanish armies and the southern (Belgian)
nobility restored a post-Tridentine Catholicism in that part of the
Low Countries where Taffin had been raised and where he had
labored. As a Reformed leader he both experienced and witnessed
persecution of the cruelest kind. In that context he brought the
gospel and provided pastoral service. These experiences shaped
his understanding and application of the Bible‘s teaching on faith
and obedience.
From 1583 until his death in 1602, Taffin served as the pastor
to Walloon or French-speaking congregations in Antwerp and
Haarlem, and finally in Amsterdam. It was after the disheartening
return of the southern provinces to the Roman Catholic Church,
67
and the collapse of the Reformed church in Antwerp, that Taffin
spent a year in Emden, East Friesland. Just across the border from
the northern province of Groningen, Emden had been a city of
refuge and a center of Reformed activity for many decades. Here
many early Reformed books and other materials were published. It
was here that Taffin and others had convened the synod of Emden
in 1571. Now in exile there, in 1585-1586, Taffin wrote The
Distinguishing Marks of God‘s Children. In 1588 it was translated
from its original French into the Dutch language. And in 1590 it
appeared in English. The book went through many reprints in all
three languages for the next half century. It was a landmark book
in teaching the Reformed community what trust and obedience
meant under conditions of repression and persecution. Taffin also
wrote three other books: one opposing the teachings of the
Anabaptists, one on alms-giving, and one on the contrite life.
Jean Taffin‘s life and teachings are characterized by a deep,
authentic, disciplined spirituality. He was read and appreciated by
both the Puritans in England and those Dutch Reformed religious
leaders and theologians who opposed the religiously tepid
humanism of their day. Dutch culture and life of the late sixteenth
and early seventeenth centuries were prone to the pleasures and
indulgence that luxury often fosters. A significant segment of the
Dutch Reformed leadership known as ―the precisionists‖ warned
against worldliness. Their sermons and literature advocated a life
of daily, spiritual vigilance, self-denial, prayerful dependence on
God, reading and mediation on Scripture, and holiness. This
concern produced continual self-examination, scrutiny of one‘s
thoughts and motives and desires, chaste living, Christian service
to others, and strict Sabbath observance. Advocates of this brand
of Dutch Reformed piety were known as people of ―the Second
Reformation,‖ or ―the Further Reformation.‖ Theirs was a
spirituality indebted to the moderate mysticism of the Brethren of
the Common Life as well as to the thought of John Calvin. It was
fortified by Puritan spirituality, with which it was highly
compatible and contemporary. It flourished in the seventeenth and
early eighteenth centuries. It was a Dutch pietism that pre-dated
68
and to some extent nourished the later, more well-known German
Pietism of Spener and Francke. Finally, it lived on as the body of
literature of ―the old writers‖ (de oude schrijvers) that nourished
the nineteenth century rekindling Reformed piety and theology.
The thesis of this paper is that Taffin‘s notions of trust and
obedience are so substantially consistent with those of Calvin and
the later writers of the Second Reformation that he is an important
link between the two and a broker of Calvin‘s spirituality to the
Dutch Reformed faith.
The First Edition of The Institutes
Very early in his reforming work John Calvin expressed
himself on faith and obedience. These ideas constitute the
substance of the first two chapters of his first edition of The
Institutes of the Christian Religion. This work was written from
Basal in 1535-1536, shortly after his conversion to the Protestant
religion and while he was fleeing from the retaliation of King
Francis I against Protestant intellectuals in Paris. Calvin was only
in his mid-twenties. The book was written as a primer or
introductory manual to ―true religion‖ as Calvin had come to
understand it from his study of Scripture. The book is divided into
six chapters.
Chapter One is called ―The Law: Containing an Explanation
of the Decalogue.‖ Its subject matter is obedience, or ―piety,‖ as
Calvin preferred to call it. It begins with the classic juxtaposition
of ―knowledge of God‖ and ―knowledge of self‖ for which The
Institutes is famous and which Calvin retained in every subsequent
edition of this book. To know God, we must know ourselves as
created to know, love, and serve God, but as impeded in this
purpose by our fall into sin; to know self, we must know God in his
brilliant glory and burning justice, which shows our inability and
need of a Savior. Calvin defines these dimensions of true
knowledge in two paragraphs, then introduces the law.
69
The law of God is written on every human heart, he
continues. It is our conscience, or
the witness within of what we owe God; it sets before us
good and evil, thus accusing and condemning us, conscious
as we are within ourselves that we have not discharged our
duty, as was fitting. Yet man is swollen with arrogance and
ambition and blinded by self-love. Consequently, he is
unable to see himself and, as it were, to descend into himself,
and confess his misery. Seeing our condition, the Lord has
provided us with a written law to teach us what perfect
righteousness is and how it is to be kept.75
The written law of God clarifies and reinforces the obedience that
we sinners owe God. It also makes clear how incapable we are of
rendering God this obedience. Here already Calvin calls the
written law ―a mirror‖ in which we see ourselves, knowing
ourselves as religiously and morally scarred and blemished. In this
condition, we also know that we are totally dependent on the love
of our Heavenly Father and Creator shown to us in the sending of
his Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Calvin briefly sketches the
saving work of Christ in all its major dimensions. If we embrace
Christ in true faith, we share in his saving benefits. If we do not,
we remain in ruin, confusion, and under judgment.
At this point Calvin launches into an extended exposition of
the decalogue. The first four commandments, or the first table, is
given to ―instruct us in what we owe God,‖ the last six, or the
second table, to ―explain love and the duties of love to be
practiced, for God‘s sake, toward our neighbor.‖76 Calvin‘s
emphasis here is on the written law as disclosing our inadequacy to
meet God‘s expectations.
Calvin‘s exposition of each
commandment indicates both what is forbidden and what is
75
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion—1536 Edition, translated and
annotated by Ford Lewis Battles, Grand Rapids: The H.H. Meeter Center for
Calvin Studies and William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986, pp.16-17.
76
Ibid. pp.18-19.
70
expected of us on each subject. Both the context of the expositions
and their content do not yet reflect Calvin‘s so-called ―third use of
the law.‖ The law as a guide for gratitude was a later development
in his thought.
For young Calvin there was already a well developed sense
that obedience is not mere external conformity to conscience and
the written law of God. He summarizes his exposition of the law,
saying, ―He lives the best and holiest life who lives and strives for
himself as little as he can; and . . . no one lives in a worse of more
evil manner than he who lives and strives for himself alone, and
thinks about and seeks only his own advantage.‖77 Thoughts as
well as ―inward affections‖ are commanded and forbidden the law,
he adds. Paul calls the law ―spiritual‖ in Romans 7:14 because it
demands obedience of the mind, soul, and will as well as external
conformity to the law. Keeping the law in this way is neither
optional nor advisory, as some say; it is obligatory for all. Nor
does keeping the law partially suffice, as others contend. Divine
righteousness demands ―what is whole and perfect, and
uncorrupted by any filth.‖78 But nothing we offer is. Even if
people were capable of partially perfect obedience, partial
righteousness cannot and does not compensate for even one sin.
Thus, all are at enmity with God. The law demonstrates, therefore,
that all people are under God‘s curse and condemnation. It is only
through faith in Christ that we acquire liberation from the
condemning power and bondage of the law. Salvation rests on
God‘s righteousness in keeping his promises, not on our
righteousness in keeping the law. ―By Christ‘s righteousness then
are we made righteous and become fulfillers of the law,‖ he
concludes.79
From what he has said to this point in the first chapter of his
1536 edition of The Institutes, Calvin suggests that there are three
uses of the law. First, it convicts us of sin. Second, it restrains or
77
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion—1536 Edition, p.29.
Ibid., p.31.
79
Ibid., p.34.
78
71
deters sin by the threat of punishment. Third, in those in whom
God‘s Spirit reigns, it stimulates people to do what honors and
pleases God. That this last use is still not the mature and
developed motive of gratitude to God for his salvation in Christ is
evident from Calvin‘s accent.
Moreover, however much they may be prompted by the
Spirit and eager to obey God, they are still weak in the flesh,
and would rather serve sin than God. The law is to this flesh
like a whip to an idle and balky ass, to goad, stir, arouse it to
work.80
Rather, in presenting biblical teaching on these matters faithfully,
and thus in avoiding many theological disagreements and errors,
we should begin by building on the foundation that Christ has laid
(I Corinthians 1:10-11). What is that? It is that he has chosen us in
him from before the foundation of the world for new life in him.
Thus everything we have is by virtue of his obedience. Our
obedience is to deny self and to exalt Christ. Our obedience is to
be so conformed to Christ that his image comes more and more to
expression in us. This is not to abolish good works and preach
―easy forgiveness,‖ as some accuse us of doing, says Calvin. ―We
do not deny good works, but those that are good we contend to be
from God, and ought to be credited to him.‖81
Obedience to the law, for Calvin in this chapter, is to be freed
from keeping the law as the source of our righteousness, and to
believe in Christ as the only source of our righteousness,
endeavoring to live out his righteousness in us.
Calvin turns his attention in the second chapter to the subject
of faith, or trust. As he had used the decalogue in chapter one to
80
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion—1536 Edition, p. 36. Battles‘
annotation on this point compares Calvin and leading contemporaries on the uses
of the law, and it does not suggest the law as a guide for gratitude, but as a goad
for obedience in Calvin. (250)
81
Ibid., p.38.
72
explain what God expects by way of obedience, he used the
Apostles Creed in chapter two to explain the content of faith. Two
kinds of faith are historical faith and trust. The first merely assents
to the existence of God and Christ; it is unworthy of the name
―faith,‖ since even the demons acknowledge as much. The second
puts all its hope in God and lives with the assurance that what he
promises he will do. It relies on his Word, and through it we
receive what we ask, insofar as God judges that it is for our good.
The creed has four parts and deals with each of the three persons of
the Trinity and finally with the church as the people receiving the
benefits of Christ. Calvin explains at length each part. He
concludes the chapter with reflections on the companionship of
hope and love with faith. Speaking of the other two, he says, ―If
these are utterly lacking, however learnedly and elaborately we
may discuss faith, we are proved to have none. Not because faith
is engendered in us from hope or love, but because it can in no
wise come to pass without hope and love forever following
faith.‖82 Hope is the longing for that of which faith is assured.
Love embraces him in whom one believes. The three are
interdependent and nurture one another.
Calvin‘s third chapter explains the life of prayer by
examining the Lord‘s prayer. Thus, in the first three chapters of
this first edition of The Institutes Calvin explores the three classic
components of Christian catechesis: Decalogue, Apostles Creed,
and Lord‘s prayer. The fourth deals with the two biblical
sacraments: baptism and the Lord‘s supper. The fifth chapter treats
the five false sacraments, demonstrating how they lack biblical
basis and have been employed to shore up the sacramentalism
which has enslaved the church to the hierarchy. And the last
chapter explores the notion of Christian freedom as freedom from
the yoke of the law, but as a spiritual liberation to serve God gladly
and freely according to the Word. It is a freedom concerning
things not specifically prescribed or proscribed in the Word to use
them or not use them, according to the Spirit‘s guidance. Calvin
discusses how this freedom relates to the true authority of the
82
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion—1536 Edition, p. 65.
73
church and the authority of the magistrate, both of which are
secondary authorities under the Word and to which the believer
owes secondary obedience insofar as they are faithful to the Word.
Where they are, obedience to them is obedience to Christ.
In summary, then, the biblical imperatives ―trust‖ (faith) and
―obey‖ (obedience) are thoughtfully developed, biblically defined
foundations of Calvin‘s theology from the outset.
In his
commentaries—for which The Institutes are the doctrinal
framework and summary—his catechism, church polity, polemical
essays, and sermons, Calvin consistently works with the notions of
faith and obedience outlined in this first edition. The material is
amplified, clarified, deepened, and rearranged in the many
subsequent editions of The Institutes. But the basic contours of
faith and obedience remain unchanged.
The 1559 Edition
In Calvin‘s final, 1559 edition of The Institutes faith and
obedience are discussed at length in book three, which deals with
the appropriation or receiving of the salvation brought by Christ.
In this edition book one deals with God the Father and his works of
creation and providence, and book two treats God the Son and his
work of redemption. Book three examines God the Holy Spirit and
his work of applying salvation to the believer. The last book
explains the church (and the state). At the outset of book three
Calvin introduces the Holy Spirit, faith as the main work of the
Spirit, and the obedient life as the expression of faith. This
represents a different setting or context and a different sequence
than in the 1535 edition. Now obedience follows faith as subjects
for consideration; there obedience preceded faith. Here the two
ideas are not explained in the context of the decalogue and the
Apostles‘ Creed, as they were there; they are embedded in the
dynamic life and activity of the third person of the Trinity.
Since we are incapable of the obedience that honors and
glorifies God and is articulated in his law, Calvin begins, God has
74
sent his Son that by believing in him we might have everlasting
life. Because the Word explains Christ, faith and the Word are
always joined. Calvin rejects at length the ―implicit faith‖ taught
by the Roman Catholic church of his day—a faith in the church
and its work as sufficient for salvation—since it obscures Christ
and mutes the Word. It imperils both true faith and salvation. True
faith is ―a firm and certain knowledge of God‘s benevolence
toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in
Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts
through the Holy Spirit.‖83 Calvin rejects the scholastic distinction
between ―formed‖ and ―unformed‖ faith, acknowledges that even
the reprobate may display what appears to be faith, and admits the
ambiguous meaning of the word ―faith.‖ Sometimes, as in the
pastoral letters, it means ―sound doctrine.‖ Sometimes it is
directed toward a specific goal or objective, sometimes it refers to
a power of ability. But true faith is a higher, spiritual knowledge
marked by assurance or certainty concerning things unseen or not
fully realized. It is an inner conviction that yields confidence and
peace.
But then Calvin pauses, recognizing that faith is often
assailed and that assurance is not perfect.
Surely, while we teach that faith ought to be certain and
assured, we cannot imagine any certainty that is not tinged
with doubt, or any assurance that is not assailed by some
anxiety. On the other hand, we say that believers are in
perpetual conflict with their own unbelief. Far, indeed, are
we from putting their consciences in any peaceful repose,
undisturbed by any tumult at all.84
While honestly acknowledging the imperfection of faith and
assaults on genuine faith, Calvin affirms its resoluteness. ―Yet,
83
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 vols., John T. McNeill,
editor; translated and indexed by Ford Lewis Battles (The Library of Christian
Classics, vols. 20-21; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), I, p.551.
84
Ibid., p.562.
75
once again,‖ he adds, ―we deny that, in whatever way they are
afflicted, they fall away and depart from the certain assurance
received from God‘s mercy.‖85 David is good example of
imperfect, troubled, but resolute faith. Calvin even introduces the
notion of ―imperfect faith‖ in this connection. ―It never goes so
well with us that we are wholly cured of the disease of unbelief and
entirely filled and possessed by faith,‖ he acknowledges.86
Unbelief lurks in the remnants of the flesh that remain in us, and it
from time to time rises up to attack our faith. But faith ultimately
triumphs over these attacks. Calvin‘s realistic, pastoral theology is
evident in his assurance that even weak faith is authentic faith. His
counsel is for believers to remain in the Word, for the gospel
fortifies them when faith is assailed. One of the ways it does this is
by instilling in them a holy fear of God‘s wrath against sin and
unbelief; this acts as a deterrent to the evils of the flesh, and thus
strengthens faith. What finally preserves faith is our union with
Christ, for we not only receive his benefits but he lives in us and
we live in him.
Faith is more afraid of offending God than of punishment for
the offense, for it is fortified by God‘s promised grace. Word and
Spirit sustain faith, for together they lead us to Christ. Faith is a
matter of heart as well as mind. It is not established or affirmed by
the faulty scholastic teaching of ―moral conjecture,‖ that is, that
speculate that we possess true faith by gauging our moral integrity.
Rather, grasping God‘s promises and affirming the in-dwelling
Spirit, we find our faith deepened. Finally, in his treatment of faith
in 1559, Calvin returns to relationship of faith, hope, and love, the
theme with which he concluded his treatment of faith in 1535.
Concerning faith and love he asks, ―How can the mind be aroused
to taste the divine goodness without at the same time being wholly
kindled to love God in return?‖87 Faith in God engenders love for
God. Calvin rhapsodizes about the relation of faith and hope in
words closely parallel to those he wrote twenty-five years earlier.
85
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 562
Ibid., p.564.
87
Ibid., p.589.
86
76
Hope is nothing else than the expectation of those things
which faith has believed
to have been truly promised by God. Thus, faith believes
God to be true, hope awaits the time when his truth shall be
manifested; faith believes that he is our Father, hope
anticipates that he will ever show himself to be a Father
toward us; faith believes that eternal life has been given to us,
hope anticipates that it will some time be revealed; faith is
the foundation upon which hope rests, hope nourishes and
sustains faith.88
Having explored faith in a long, sometimes discursive and
repetitive chapter, Calvin devotes the next chapter of book three to
regeneration. The Spirit who is the author of the faith, Calvin has
just explained, is also the Spirit who renews the heart and produces
repentance. The repentant life crucifies the flesh and puts on
Christ. Calvin contrasts the biblical doctrine of repentance with the
scholastic sacrament of penance in chapter four and with the
selling of indulgences and with the doctrine of purgatory in chapter
five. These two chapters demonstrate how thoroughly Calvin
contrasted what he considered the biblical teachings on the Spirit,
faith, and regeneration, with the Roman practices and teachings of
his day.
Chapters six through ten deal with obedience. They are a
unit on sanctification. They are Calvin‘s teaching on the Christian
life, and are often referred to as ―The Golden Book on the Christian
Life.‖ They have frequently been printed separately, in a number
of languages, as a brief manual or guide for how the believer
should live. Together they are some forty pages long, only slightly
longer than half of his entire chapter three on faith. Yet they are
chapters laden with spiritual insight and wisdom on our life in
Christ. Together they weave a tapestry of all dimensions of
Christian living. They give coherence and completeness to our
88
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p.590.
77
understanding of the Christian life that is spiritually exhilarating
and theologically enduring. They are some of the best material in
the entire Calvin corpus. They are at the basis of what is often
tritely called the Calvinistic ―world-and-life view.‖
The purpose of the new or regenerate life in believers is to
display ―a harmony and agreement between God‘s righteousness
and their obedience.‖89 This confirms their adoption into God‘s
family. Much has been and could be written on the subject of the
Christian life. But two basic features of this new life are first, a
love of righteousness, and second, a guide to follow. The love is
rooted in our union with Christ and communion with God. The
guide is the image of Christ, our pattern, coming to expression in
us.
The Christian life, then is not merely a matter of
―understanding and memory,‖ but obedience ―possesses the whole
soul and finds a resting place in the inmost affection of the heart.‖90
While such obedience is never perfect in this life, the believer
ought to be able to see continuous progress toward it.
Having introduced the subject of obedience, Calvin turns his
attention to the guide for it. Here he shows that he has
significantly deepened his thought since he wrote the first edition
of The Institutes. The law is still important; but Calvin here goes
further. ―Even though the law of the Lord provides the finest and
best-disposed method of ordering a man‘s life,‖ he writes, ―it
seemed good to the Heavenly Teacher to shape his people by an
even more explicit plan to that rule which he had set forth in the
law.‖91 It can be summarized as Paul did in Romans 12:1, namely
as presenting our bodies as living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to
God. It could be summarized in terms of ownership, recognizing
that we belong entirely to God in Christ, as is shown in I
Corinthians 6:19. Another way of summarizing this obedience
could be in terms of renewing our minds (Ephesians 4:23). A
fourth idea is that of Christ living and ruling in the believer‘s life
89
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p.684.
Ibid., p.688.
91
Ibid., p.689.
90
78
(Galatians 2:20). But the ―more explicit plan‖ for obedience that
Calvin settles on in outlining the Christian life is Matthew 16:24.
To deny ourselves, to take up our crosses, and to follow Jesus is the
heart and soul of Christian obedience. This verse is the framework
around which Calvin organizes the rest of his discussion of
obedience in ―The Golden Book of the Christian Life.‖
Self-denial is the opposite of self-love. Self-love is the root
of pride, arrogance, materialistic display, avarice, lust,
lasciviousness and other self-indulgent passions that rage
unfulfilled in the unregenerate, natural person. But self-denial is
at the spiritual core of obedience. Calvin explores the idea
biblically. He demonstrates that it reflects the proper attitude
toward others. It reflects the proper attitude toward our resources,
of which we are stewards and which are to be used in the service of
others. It positions us to love God above all and our neighbors as
ourselves, thus to fulfill the whole law. It generates benevolence
toward the destitute and forgiveness of those who wrong us. Selfdenial also inoculates us against an ungrateful, bitter heart in the
day of adversity. ―He who will be thus composed in mind,
whatever happens, will not consider himself miserable nor
complain of his lot with ill will toward God.‖92 Self-denial is the
spiritual state of the soul for Calvin in which obedience, the
keeping of God‘s law, is able to flourish. It reflects the image of
Christ. It is the expression of the regenerate life. It is the seal of
Spirit‘s presence.
In chapter eight Calvin addresses cross-bearing.
An
important dimension of our union with Christ, our Head, is sharing
his sufferings. ―Just as he has passed from a labyrinth of all evils
into heavenly glory, we may in like manner be led through various
tribulations to the same glory.‖93 The greater our adversity, the
greater our communion with Christ is confirmed. Christ‘s crossbearing was an expression of his obedience to the Father. We are
too inclined to overestimate our virtue, but God has ways to
92
93
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 700.
Ibid., p.702.
79
impress on us our frailty. ―He afflicts us either with disgrace or
poverty, or bereavement, or disease, or other calamities. Utterly
unequal to bearing these, in so far as they touch us, we soon
succumb to them.‖94 Humbled by the weight of such crosses, we
call on God and learn to stand only by his grace. Tribulation builds
trust and then character: patience, perseverance, hope, and so on.
These are the qualities of obedience. Thus, our cross is medicine
for our soul. Afflictions are often divine reminders of past
disobedience, and thus serve to reinforce present obedience.
Believers accept them in faith as the chastisements of a loving
Father who is correcting his children. Suffering persecution for the
sake of righteousness is a comfort and privilege, for in this we
honor God and reflect Christ. Our endurance and patience in the
context of real suffering is submissiveness. Spiritual joy and
thanks for what God accomplishes in us through suffering follow.
These are the responses of obedience.
At this point Calvin‘s treatment takes an interesting turn.
Self-denial and cross-bearing lead him to consider reflection on the
life to come.
When it comes to a comparison with the life to come, the
present life can not only
be safely neglected but, compared to the former, must be
utterly despised and loathed. For, if heaven is our homeland,
what else is the earth but our place of exile? If departure
from the world is entry into life, what else is the world but a
sepulcher? And what else is it for us to remain in life but to
be immersed in death? If to be freed from the body is to be
released into perfect freedom, what else is the body but a
prison? If to enjoy the presence of God is the summit of
happiness, is not to be without this, misery?95
94
95
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 703.
Ibid., p.716.
80
One might expect that in following the pattern of Matthew 16:24,
Calvin would at this point launch into a long presentation of
Christian ethics. ―Follow me‖ needs to be detailed for daily life.
But Calvin turns to meditation on the future life! Is this
obedience?
He acknowledges that the present life is to be ―hated‖ only
insofar as it subjects believers to sin and its effects. Meanwhile we
are to remain here as sentries posted by God. We must be faithful
in this life, until in his wisdom and timing he calls us into the next.
Obedience here seems to mean longing for the next, better world,
while being patiently faithful in this world. ―How are we to use the
present world?‖ he asks in chapter ten. We can use what God
gives us in this life both for necessity and for enjoyment. But we
must do so avoiding the extremes of severe abstinence and
licentious indulgence. Defining obedient use of this life‘s gifts is
left to the conscience of the believer, guided by the principle of
using them for the intent or purpose for which the Creator gave
them. Food, for example, God ―meant not only to provide for
necessity but also for delight and good cheer.‖96 Moderation and
gratitude are the marks of obedient use of the gifts of the present
life for Calvin. They are, moreover, to be employed in the pursuit
of the calling God assigns each of his children.
In comparing the two editions of The Institutes—the earliest
and the latest—one asks what has happened to the decalogue in the
intervening years. Why has Calvin disengaged it from the
Christian life? The answer is that he has not. But Calvin has
moved consideration of the law into book two, the book on God the
Son and his mediatorial work. The law was given, he argues in
chapter seven of book two to foster the hope of salvation in Christ.
And today its ―third and principal use‖97 is for believers, to confirm
in their hearts by the work of the Spirit the nature of God‘s will.
But it is Christ who has kept the law, not the believer. So Calvin
gives his long exposition of the requirements for obedience in the
96
97
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p.720.
Ibid., p.360.
81
law in the context of his treatment of the work of Christ. Our
righteousness as believers is the righteousness of Christ, who kept
the law perfectly. We are made beneficiaries and participants in
Christ‘s obedience by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit,
who works faith in our hearts. Joined to Christ by faith, we are
made participants in Christ‘s righteousness. The life of obedience
is the life of faith in Christ—self-denial, cross-bearing, meditation
on the future life, and properly receiving and using God‘s gifts of
the present life.
Taffin’s View of Faith and Obedience
Jean Taffin spent time in Geneva within three years of the
time Calvin completed his 1559 edition. How long he stayed or the
extent of his interaction as a relatively new, young believer with
Calvin himself is not known. Did he attend Calvin‘s lectures on
books of the Bible? Did he hear him preach for an extended
period? Did the two men converse personally on theological
matters? We do not know. We know that Taffin knew Calvin
personally and that he later corresponded with him. It is almost
certain, although undocumented, that he read some of Calvin‘s
publications. That French was the primary language of both men
makes Taffin‘s reliance on and respect for Calvin even more
certain. That he invited Calvin to the Low Countries to mediate
theologically and ecclesiastically in the early 1560s demonstrates
Taffin‘s high regard for the Genevan reformer.
We might expect, therefore, theological evidence of the
relationship. Did it appear with regard to the concepts of faith and
obedience?
Remarkably and understandably, Taffin‘s The Marks of
God‘s Children begins with a consideration of the blessedness of
the life to come. The opening chapter is, as Calvin would call it in
book three, chapter nine, ―meditation on the future life.‖ The
incomparable blessedness of the life to come is disclosed by the
Holy Spirit, ―who searches the depths of God, grants us some
82
knowledge of these matters,‖ and imparts something of the hope
and glory related to the life hereafter.98 Taffin was driven to this
contemplation by the loss, a year before, of the southern provinces
of the Low Countries (present-day Belgium) to the Protestant cause
and by the demise of his own congregation in Antwerp. His book
was written for the consolation and encouragement of believers
who had been ravaged by the persecution of the CounterReformation. In his context, contemplation of the life to come,
future blessedness, brought reassurance and healing. With Calvin,
perhaps better than Calvin, Taffin understood existentially the pain
and disappointment of twenty years of prayer and work devastated.
But it is Bernard of Clairvaux, not Calvin, whom Taffin quotes in
his first chapter. Blessedness consists of loving God to the depth
and extent that we contemplate him. In mystical fashion, he
anticipates boundless, limitless blessedness of the future life,
guaranteed by unending contemplation of God in Christ.
How can we be assured that we are on the road to this future
blessedness, Taffin asks in the second chapter? First, by belonging
to the true church, where the Word is purely preached, the
sacraments faithfully administered, and God is invoked only in the
name of Jesus, he responds. These external sources of assurance
are fortified by the internal witness of the Spirit, who opens the
eyes and ears of our understanding and certifies our adoption as
God‘s children. The faith he works in the believer is ―a pledge‖
that we belong to God and share in Christ‘s benefits.99 A number
of internal marks fortify assurance as does obedient service. So,
faith and obedience are major contributors to assurance that we
belong to God and are heirs of future blessedness.
How can one internalize or appropriate the marks that
produce assurance, Taffin asks? By faith, he answers. ―Now, faith
is both the knowledge and the confidence that it is God‘s will to
98
Jean Taffin, The Marks of God‘s Children, translated by Peter Y. De Jong and
edited by James A. De Jong; ―Classics of Reformed Spirituality,‖ [volume 1]
(Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), p.26.
99
Ibid., p.38.
83
save you and to embrace you as his cherished child in Jesus
Christ.‖100 As with Calvin, the knowledge side of faith is
insufficient, for even the devils understand. But to trust in God ―is
an act of obedience that is well pleasing‖ to God.101 As with
Calvin, faith is a gift of God worked through the Holy Spirit by
preaching and sacraments. In chapter four Taffin deals with the
reality that the marks of God‘s children are ―small and weak.‖
Faith, too, can be small and weak. In this extremity God‘s children
should appeal to God for stronger faith and clearer marks. God
will respond. The desire and the prayers are themselves marks of
God‘s presence that assure believers. So, ―the faith of God‘s
children does not stop being true faith when they experience many
doubts, many fears, and much unbelief,‖ says Taffin in teaching
that echoes Calvin‘s.102 Moreover, the fruit of faith is a ―quiet
conscience‖ and obedience or sanctification. In beautifully
reassuring and vivid words, he explains that weak faith is still
authentic faith.
Faith has such power within itself that even a kernel, no
matter how small it may be, by virtue of God‘s promise has
Jesus Christ in it. It is Jesus Christ who saves us; not our
faith. Faith is no more than an instrument, like a hand, by
which we grip Jesus Christ. No matter how small, faith grips
and appropriates Jesus Christ—not halfway but fully, like a
young child taking an entire apple in his little hand and
holding it tightly, even though not with the strength of a man.
Through the pupil of our eye, though ver small, we can see
very large mountains or even the sun, which is much larger
than the earth. Similarly with our faith. Even when it is very
small it grips and appropriates the entire Christ, the Sun of
Righteousness.103
100
Taffin, p.44.
Ibid., p.45.
102
Ibid., p.50.
103
Ibid., p.53.
101
84
Similarly obedience is small and weak, and thus often undermines
assurance of our election. Taffin acknowledges and laments the
reality of imperfect obedience. But as with faith, he states that the
desire to obey and honor God, resistance to sin, and signs of
progress in holiness are all marks of God‘s true children.
Both apostasy and persecution militate against faith and
undermine assurance. But suffering for the sake of Christ should
serve rather to confirm believers‘ adoption, since the most worthy
Christians have always been the most severely persecuted. Taffin
devotes several chapters to biblical and historical examples of
believers‘ suffering as well as to reflecting on the spiritual impact
of suffering. Suffering drives us to prayer. It teaches us hope. But
it also tests our obedience, he says.
By means of trials God puts our obedience to the test. When
all goes well according to the flesh, it is not difficult for us to
yield to his will and to recognize his goodness and love
toward us. But when he visits us with sickness, poverty,
reproach, or some other misery, it is then true obedience to
feel that he loves us, to embrace his divine guidance, and to
submit to his will.104
Taffin celebrates martyrdom as the ultimate mark of obedience
under the duress of suffering for the sake of the gospel. The gospel
―is not merely doctrine to be tucked away in your mind. It needs to
live in your heart. Nor is it only to be talked about with the tongue
but must be expressed in your behavior and actions.‖105 His
treatment of the ―marks‖ of God‘s children culminates with a
litany, a recital, of biblical admonitions to holiness, faithfulness,
obedience.
That man is spiritually well schooled who knows that he is
nothing in himself and who has abandoned all personal
power and glory. He lives entirely for God, submitting his
104
105
Taffin, p.107.
Ibid., p.136.
85
own reason to him and desiring to obey his will with quiet
confidence. He is led by it. No disease is more difficult to
heal than self-love. No instruction, therefore, is more
necessary than what the Lord Jesus gave his disciples when
he commanded them to deny themselves106
as he does in Matthew 16:24. This could be Calvin talking! From
the ―The Golden Book of the Christian Life,‖ structured according
to this passage in the gospels, to the insight on self-love, Taffin
articulates themes related to obedience that Calvin had developed
and expressed in his 1559 edition of The Institutes.
Conclusion
While he acknowledges his indebtedness to Augustine,
Chrysostom, and Bernard of Clairvaux in The Marks of God‘s
Children, Taffin nowhere names Calvin as an influence on his
thought. But no sixteenth century sources are named. Further, the
academic standards for documentation were not the same in his
time as they are today. While it is speculative to claim direct
dependence on Calvin for themes in Taffin‘s theology of trust and
obedience, it is obvious from our treatment here that his discussion
reflects a remarkable compatibility with Calvin‘s ideas. When one
remembers Taffin‘s sojourn in Geneva toward the end of the
reformer‘s life, just after the 1559 edition had been issued, and
when one notes their correspondence and Taffin‘s invitation to
Calvin to assist with consolidating reform in the Low Countries in
the early 1560s, it is obvious that Taffin respected the thought and
wisdom of Calvin.
To understand and to embrace the Christian life as one of
obedience under duress, as self-denial, cross-bearing, and
completing the sufferings of Christ is still surprisingly
contemporary. Evangelical, confessional, and Orthodox Christians
who kept the faith while enduring suffering under decades of
atheistic communism in Russia, Eastern Europe, Cuba, or China
106
Taffin, p.138.
86
would have been, and possibly were, sustained by the themes of
trust and obedience articulated by Calvin. They would have read
Taffin with profit as well. Christians living as a minority group in
contexts where militant, fundamentalistic Islam flourishes
understand what it means to be intimidated for the sake of the
gospel. Calvin and Taffin speak to them as well. Calvin fled for
his life from the ire of Francis I against the Paris reformers of the
1530s and lived his entire life as an refugee from his homeland.
He witnessed first-hand how intense suffering for the faith could be
as reports of violence against Protestants in France reached
Geneva. He listened to the accounts of those who escaped and
found refuge in Geneva—from France, from the Low Countries,
from England under Henry and then under Mary. Taffin fled from
a cruel Counter-reformation three different times during his
lifetime.
Calvin and Taffin knew whereof they spoke when they
articulated trust and obedience in terms of suffering. Both
understood the temptations to capitulate, to compromise, to
acquiesce. But both also understood the glory and the peace that
comes with enduring to the end and bringing glory and honor to
their Lord through steadfastness. Both were realistic about the
weakness and vulnerability of faith, even true faith. But both
experience and recognized the sustaining and protecting power of
the Spirit as well. Both were pastors who offered encouragement
in the pursuit of obedience. Both were preachers who fortified and
inspired faith and trust through their preaching of the gospel of
grace. Both were brothers in the faith whose treatment of trust and
obedience minister to us today, as they did to their contemporaries
more than four centuries ago.
87
Ringkasan :
Trust And Obedience From Calvin
To The Second Reformation
K
epercayaan (trust) dan ketaatan (obedience) merupakan inti
dari teologia John Calvin. Kedua ajaran tersebut dijabarkan
secara mendetail, baik di dalam edisi pertama dari bukunya yang
sangat terkenal yaitu The Institutes of the Christian Religion (15251536) dan juga di dalam The Institutes edisi 1559. Ajaran Calvin
tentang kepercayaan dan ketaatan ini ternyata memiliki pengaruh
yang sangat besar di dalam kehidupan seorang teolog yang
bernama Jean Taffin. Jean Taffin adalah seseorang yang dilahirkan
dalam keluarga Roma Katolik dan beralih menjadi seorang
reformed, bahkan kemudian menjadi tokoh pendorong munculnya
gerakan Reformasi Kedua di Belanda.
Ternyata perubahan keyakinan dari Roma Katolik menjadi
Reformed harus dibayar dengan harga yang mahal. Dia mengalami
serta menyaksikan penganiayaan yang dilakukan oleh mereka yang
menentang Reformasi. Pengalaman sulit yang dialami oleh Jean
Taffin mempertajam pemahamannya tentang ajaran Alkitab perihal
iman dan ketaatan. Di dalam masa pembuangan (1585-1586), Jean
Taffin menulis sebuah buku yang sangat berpengaruh bagi kaum
Reformed didalam memahami tentang kepercayaan dan ketaatan di
tengah-tengah penganiayaan dan tekanan yang mereka alami.
Kehidupan dan pengajaran Jean Taffin diwarnai dengan suatu
disiplin rohani yang dalam dan otentik. Hal tersebut sangat
dihargai dan disambut baik oleh kaum Puritan di Inggris dan kaum
Reformed di Belanda yang mana mereka sangat prihatin melihat
kehidupan duniawi yang berlangsung dalam kehidupan dan
kebudayaan Belanda diakhir abad ke 16 dan awal abad ke 17.
keprihatinan ini memicu terjadinya Reformasi kedua di dalam
gereja Reformed Belanda.
88
Ajaran Jean Taffin tentang kepercayaan dan ketaatan sangat
konsisten dengan apa yang diajarkan oleh John Calvin dan para
pengikut Reformasi Kedua dari gereja Reformed Belanda. Hal ini
menunjukkan bahwa Jean Taffin adalah sebagai penghubung ajaran
antara John Calvin dengan gereja Reformed Belanda.
Artikel ini ditulis dengan tujuan agar ajaran John Calvin
tentang kepercayaan dan ketaatan yang telah memiliki pengaruh
yang sangat besar di dalam kehidupan Jean Taffin yang
menghadapi penganiayan dan tekanan karena iman mereka, dapat
menguatkan iman orang percaya dan gereja-gereja di Indonesia
yang juga sedang menghadapi penganiayan dan tekanan karena
mempertahankan iman mereka. Memang untuk percaya dan taat
harus ada harga yang diharus dibayar, yaitu penderitaan; namun
dibalik semuanya itu, kemuliaan dan damai sejahtera telah
disiapkan bagi mereka yang bertahan hingga kesudahannya.
Mengingat bahwa sebagian besar gereja Reformed di
Indonesia berasal dari gereja Reformed Belanda, maka artikel ini
sangatlah relevan bagi gereja-gereja Reformed Indonesia yang
menjadikan trust (kepercayaan) dan Obedience (ketaatan) sebagai
pilar di dalam teologia dan kehidupan mereka hari lepas hari.
Agung Gunawan
89
The Shema‘ And The Parable
of The Good Samaritan
Tan Kim Huat
T
here is a charitable organisation in Singapore which calls itself
the Samaritans of Singapore (SOS). This is set up to help
people facing crises in life, especially those who are contemplating
suicide. From the ethnic point of view, the name is quite a
misnomer as it is almost certain there are no Samaritans in that
organisation or in Singapore, for that matter. Such a name could be
chosen only because of the parable Jesus told. The central character
of the parable inspired the name.
This parable is also the subject of much study and speculation
by the Christian church. Throughout the long years of church
history, the parable has been understood either in an allegorical or
moral way. The parable was understood in the first few centuries
after the demise of the apostles as telling the story of the fall of
Adam or mankind and their redemption through Christ, who is
represented by the figure of the Samaritan. The details may differ
but the tenor remains the same.107 Such a line of interpretation
continued even to the 19th century with no less than a figure as R.C.
Trench108 advocating it. Since the publication of the work of Adolf
Jülicher,109 such interpretations have now been largely abandoned
and most scholars working on this parable regard it as an example
107
Famous scholars adopting this approach included Clement, Origen,
Augustine, and Luther.
108
R.C. Trench, Notes on the Parables of our Lord, London: Macmillan, 1870,
p. 37.
109
J. Jülicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, Vol. 1, Tübingen, Mohr, 21899. This
was further developed in the classic by J. Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus,
London: SCM, 21963.
90
story or a moralising story.110 More recently, much energy has
been expended, especially in North America, on reading the
parables as narratives devoid of their contexts which the Gospel
give.111 This approach has had a great impact on the interpretation
of the parable of the Good Samaritan and recent work on it often
ignores the parabolic frame because it is regarded as inauthentic
and a creation of Luke.
As a parable that has inspired much social concern and
scholarly work, it is eminently worthy of a closer study. This essay
parts company with mainstream scholarship in significant ways
and attempts to understand the meaning of this parable in its
original context. It will argue that the parabolic frame is authentic
and originally joined to the parable. It will also argue that the
framework for understanding its meaning is provided by the
context as found in Luke which touches upon the Shema‗ and what
it means to confess it authentically. The Shema‗ may be regarded
as Israel‘s creed and it comprises the following texts: Deut 6.4-9;
11.13-21; and Num 15.37-41. During the time of Jesus, pious Jews
recited it twice: once at sunrise and once at sunset: a practice
derived from interpreting Deuteronomy 6.7 which also probably
signifies that the whole of a person‘s work and walk is to be
governed by the Shema‗. Rabbi Aqiba, a famous rabbi of the early
part of the second century, was said to be have been reciting the
words of the Shema‗ when he died a martyr‘s death (b.Sifra 89b).
If the Shema‗ has such an important status in Israel, understanding
the parable with reference to it becomes necessary. However, in
treating this topic, linkage of the Shema‗ to the important concept
of covenant will also be made.
110
See the recent work of A.J. Hultgren, The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary,
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000, pp. 92-101. Even as astute a work as C.L.
Blomberg‘s which treats seriously the frame of the parable comes close to such a
moralising interpretation. See his, Interpreting the Parables: Leicester: Apollos,
1990, p. 233
111
Cf. B.B. Scott, Hear then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of
Jesus, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989.
91
Authenticity of the parabolic frame
This is one of the very few parables which are printed in red
in the Five Gospels of the Jesus Seminar in America and so its
authenticity is not questioned.112 Much of the scholarship on this
parable, instead, has focussed on the question of form, i.e., whether
it is an example story or a comparative mashal.113 While it
certainly will help the task of interpretation if the form could be
determined, we have also to bear in mind the following. First, such
classification of forms is ours, and not that of first century Jews.
Secondly, Birger Gerhardsson warns us, after many years of study
on the parables, that the extant parables were formulated without
deliberate categorisation.114 In other words, forms did not seem to
be the main consideration for the progenitor, those transmitting the
traditions or the Gospel writer. Consequently, to use our
reconstructed forms as the dominant consideration in arriving at the
meaning of the parable will amount to making a big anachronistic
mistake.
As it was mentioned earlier, it is the frame of the parable of
the Good Samaritan that has drawn much scepticism. The usual
arguments used to support the assertion that this frame is Lukan are
the following. First, Luke tends to generalise the parables and this
parable has been generalised into an example story and so, its
original context has been lost. Secondly, the subject matter of the
frame sounds suspiciously like the discussion of Jesus and another
112
See R. Funk et al., The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of
Jesus, New York: Macmillan, 1993, pp. 323-4. The Jesus Seminar uses the
following colour codes to indicate the degree of reliability: red = virtually
certain; pink = probably reliable; grey = unreliable; black = largely fictive (see,
The Five Gospels, pp. 36-7).
113
E.g. J.D. Crossan, ‗Parable and Example in the Teaching of Jesus‘, Semeia 1
(1974), pp. 63-104; and B. Witherington III, Jesus the Sage: The Pilgrimage of
Wisdom, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994, pp. 192-3.
114
B. Gerhardsson, ‗If we do not cut the parables out of their frames‘, NTS 37
(1991), pp. 323-4.
92
lawyer in Mark 12.28-31||Matt 22.34-40.115 Calling the parable an
example story116 certainly helps to bolster these two arguments as
it generalises the applicability of the parable. Nevertheless, there
are good grounds for assuming that the frame of the parable is
authentic and has always been joined with the parable.
First of all, the arguments usually cited cannot stand up to
scrutiny. Indeed, the argument that Luke tends to generalise is a
generalisation in itself. Why should it be thought that if Luke
generalised the parable of the persistent widow in Luke 18, he was
certainly doing the same with the parable of the Good Samaritan?
Furthermore, the perceived similarities between Mark 12.28-31 and
Luke 10.25-37 have been overdone. It must be pointed out first of
all that the alleged parallel does not contain a parable and for the
objection to stand, it must be presupposed that Luke first found the
parable without a frame and used the alleged parallel as the basis
for the composition of the frame. Postulating that Luke expunged
an original frame and replaced it by that which required
composition from an alleged parallel stretches belief. Moreover, in
the former passage, the answer citing the love command as the
greatest was given by Jesus; in the latter, the lawyer provided that
answer as the one means to eternal life. Again, in the former
passage no debate was envisaged and the lawyer‘s answer was
commended by Jesus; the same cannot be said for the latter
passage.117 There are just too many discrepancies between the two
periscopes for the hypothesis to be cogent. Indeed, it seems to me
that for Jesus to have engaged himself in discussion on the great
commands on different occasions and with different thrusts should
be regarded as the best explanation of the phenomenon we now
have.118
115
Witherington, Jesus the Sage, p. 193. Cf. J. Nolland, Luke 9:21 – 18:34, Vol.
35B, WBC, Dallas: Word, 1993, p. 580.
116
E.g, Jülicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, p. 114; R. Bultmann, The History of
the Synoptic Tradition, Oxford: Blackwell, 21968, p. 178.
117
Cf. C.A. Evans, Mark 8.27 – 16.20, WBC 34B, Nashville: Nelson, 2001, p.
262.
118
Cf. T.W. Manson , The sayings of Jesus: as recorded in the Gospels
according to St. Matthew and St. Luke, London: SCM Press, 1950, pp. 259-60.
93
Secondly, if Gerhardsson is right, free-floating parables are
not found in the Jesus traditions, with the possible exception of the
parable of the rich man and Lazarus.119 In other words, the
evidence provided by the Synoptic Gospels points in the direction
of contextually-anchored parables. The settings provided by the
evangelists are to be taken seriously as they are the earliest
witnesses to what the parables could have meant.120 These settings
provide moorings in an otherwise tumultuous hermeneutical sea.
The belief that many parables are ‗naked narratives with
indeterminate messages‘121 therefore depends on considerations not
found in the Gospels, but arises, most probably, from the agendas
of certain schools of interpretation.122 Indeed, Gerhardsson insists
that the parables were given to illuminate aspects of Jesus‘
kingdom message.123
Thirdly, the frame and the parable cohere well structurally, at
least in terms of rabbinic teaching methods. Blomberg argues that
they conform to the rabbinic method known as yelammedenu
rabbenu (i.e., ‗let our master teach us‘) and this has a four-part
structure:124
(1) Question on a scriptural text (vv. 25-7);
(2) A second text given to illuminate (v. 28);
(3) The exposition (in this case, the parable); and
(4) The final remarks (v. 37).125
119
Gerhardsson, ‗Parables out of their frames‘, pp. 325-6.
Ibid.,p. 322.
121
Ibid., p. 333.
122
This may be the desire to give the parables autonomy, treating them as naked
texts and divorcing them from the particularity of history, especially that of
Jesus of Nazareth. This fits in well with the postmodern agenda and the antiestablishment agenda too.
123
Gerhardsson, ‗Parables out of their frames‘, p. 329.
124
Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, p. 231.
125
On the possibility of Jesus‘ using rabbinic methods, see B. Gerhardsson,
Memory and Manuscript, Uppsala: Gleerup, 1961; R. Riesenfeld, The Gospel
Tradition, Oxford: Blackwell, 1970; R. Riesner, Jesus als Lehrer, Tübingen:
Mohr, 1981; and most recently, S. Byrskog, Jesus the Only Teacher: Didactic
120
94
Even if we regard the hypothesis that the yelammendenu
rabbenu method forms the template for composition as being too
fanciful, the point that the frame coheres well with the parable still
stands. The parable is framed by questions on the identity of the
neighbour (vv. 29, 36). The objection that there is a discrepancy
between the lawyer‘s second question (i.e., who is my neighbour?)
and Jesus‘ answer in query form (i.e., who has been a neighbour?)
misses the profound subtlety of the message, which we hope to
demonstrate later.
Fourthly, there is a very high degree of historical plausibility to
the frame.126 The frame has the command to love the neighbour as its
focus and we do know that the love command is one key aspect of
the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, whether this is to be directed to
one’s enemies or otherwise.127 Moreover, the question asked by the
lawyer coheres well with the first century Jewish context. It is about
‘inheriting eternal life’ and this means not our modern popular
understanding of going to heaven when one dies but the thoroughly
Jewish concept of the inheritance of the age to come. The life of the
age to come is the vindicated and resurrected life which will be lived
before Yahweh and last forever (cf. Dan 12.1-3; Ps. Sol. 3.11-12; BJ
3.374; Apion 2.218;).128 Furthermore, the lawyer’s seeking to be
justified () need not be construed as an attempt to
Authority and Transmission in Ancient Israel, Ancient Judaism and the
Matthean Community, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1994.
126
This is now known as the criterion of historical plausibility and some
prominent scholars who defend some version of it are J. Jeremias, The Theology
of the New Testament I: The Proclamation of Jesus, London: SCM, 1971; G.
Theissen and D. Winter, The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of
Criteria, Lousiville: Westminster John Knox, 2002; and Wright, Jesus and the
Victory of God, Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996.
127
On the love command, see J. Piper, Love Your Enemies, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1979. Cf. R. Neudecker, ‗―And You Shall Love
Your Neighbour as Yourself — I am the Lord‖ (Lev 19,18) in Jewish
Interpretation‘, Bib 73 (1992), pp. 512-14.
128
Cf. E. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ
(175 B.C.-A.D. 135), Vol. 2, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979, p. 495.
95
contradict Jesus and defend himself129 but a genuine desire to be
counted amongst those who would be justified, i.e., accepted by
Yahweh as belonging to the people who would inherit the age to
come. Viewed from a covenantal angle, being justified means being
accounted as a true member of the covenant.130 Thus, the lawyer’s
two questions are linked up with the notion of the eschatological
coming of the kingdom of God. Historically speaking, such questions
may be regarded as prompted by and dovetailing with the key theme
of Jesus’ preaching. More importantly, the lawyer’s two questions
arose from the presupposition that the Shema‘131 is the key confession
of Israel in which her covenantal status is summed up. In the Shema‘
the primary belief and the primary praxis of Israel are given and
adherence to this marks her out as the special people of Yahweh (cf.
Wisd. Sol. 11-15; Sib. Or. 3.8-45; AJ 5.1, 27, 112; Philo, Decal. 65).132
These horizons of meaning were thoroughly first century Jewish
concerns. It is highly plausible that such questions were debated then.
The scenario just painted fits in better with the life-setting of Jesus’
ministry than that of the early church.
Finally, in the light of the preceding discussion, it would be
highly peculiar that the frame as we have it is a Lukan invention for
introducing the parable. As it is pointed out by Marshall, the parable
must have been occasioned by a question or an event, the subject
matter of which would be the love command, especially the love for
the neighbour.133 If this is the case, and since such a setting has a
certain amount of specificity to it, a legitimate question may be asked
about how such a frame could have been lost if that which is found in
129
So J.A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke, Vol. 2, New York:
Doubleday, 1985, p. 886.
130
Keesmaat utilises a similar idea in her ‗Strange Neighbours and Risky Care
(Matthew 18.21-35; Luke 14.7-14; Luke 10.25-37), in R. Longenecker (ed.), The
Challenge of Jesus‘ Parables, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000, pp. 276-7, which
is also found in Wright, Victory of God, pp. 305-7.
131
Comprising Deut 6.4-9; 11.13-21; Num 15.37-41. See rabbinic discussions in
m.Ber 1.1 – 3.5; m.Shab. 8.3.
132
Cf. J.D.G. Dunn, The Partings of the Ways Between Christianity and Judaism
and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity, London: SCM, 1991,
pp. 19-21.
133
I.H. Marshall, The Gospel of Luke, Exeter: Paternoster, 1978, pp. 445-6.
96
Luke is not it. The Lukan setting fits this eminently. It seems to me
that the rationale for denying its authenticity lay elsewhere. Once we
do not buy into the scholarly categorisation of the parable as an
example story,134 we are on the high road of making sense of the
meaning of this parable in its original context. There are then no
good grounds for denying authenticity to the frame but very strong
reasons for treating it as originally joined to the parable. Indeed, it is
the severance of the parabolic frame from the parable itself which
vitiates many popular and scholarly interpretations found today and
denudes the parable of its important message.
The Covenantal Horizon of the Shema‘
If the frame belonged originally to the parable, what should not
be missed is the covenantal horizon of the discussion between Jesus
and the lawyer. In much of popular Christianity, the connection
between the Old and the New Testaments is not an item of interest
or concern but if we treat seriously the fact that Christianity arose
from the matrix of Judaism, seeking to interpret the parable from the
covenantal angle becomes a necessary task.
The pericope begins with a question that is thoroughly Jewish
(v. 25). How may one obtain and be assured of eternal life, i.e., the
life of the age to come? The reply of Jesus draws the questioner back
to the Torah, the charter of the covenant (v. 26). Life is certainly the
gift of being in covenantal relationship with Yahweh (Lev 18.5; Deut
30.15-19) but the Torah defines what it means to be in that
relationship. So, if there is one way to gain the life of the age to come,
this would be found in the Torah, and thus, the Jesus’ question takes
this form: ‘What has been written in the Torah?’
The answer given by the lawyer connects the whole discussion
to the Shema‘ in that the great commandment, cited by the lawyer,
was originally given in the context of confessing Yahweh as the only
true God (Deut 6.4-5). In using the words of the Shema‘ the lawyer
supported what many Jews were saying in different situations and this
134
Cf. Nolland, Luke 9:21 – 18:34, p. 591; Wright, Victory of God, p. 306.
97
is that the Shema‘ has attained a status of something like a creed and
is thought to sum up the Torah.135 Thus, the Ten Commandments
were not cited when they could have been, since devout Jews recited
both the Shema‘ (AJ 4.212; Epistle of Aristeas 106; Philo, Spec. Leg.
4.141; b.Ber 47b) and the Ten Commandments daily (m.Tamid 5.1),
because the Shema‘ was thought to sum up the whole of the Torah.
Having the status of a creed, the Shema‘ also sums up what it means
to be a Jew or a member of the community which is in relationship
with Yahweh.136 But this relationship is also defined by the concept of
the covenant. In the Lukan passage, the primary praxis of the Shema‘,
i.e., to love Yahweh, is connected with the love for one’s
neighbour.137 That the two may be linked in Jewish theology is not
surprising since the neighbour is understood as a member of the
covenant community (cf. T.Iss 5.2; 7.6; T.Dan 5.3; Philo, Decal. 10910; Sifra Lev 19.18).138 Loving him would then strengthen the
community further and thereby ensuring that the community lived on
and the covenant remained intact.
135
Cf. E.E. Urbach, ‗Self-Isolation or Self-Affirmation in Judaism in the First
Three Centuries‘, in E.P. Sanders (ed.), Jewish and Christian Self-Definition,
Vol. 2, London: SCM, 1981, p. 273. For rabbinic preoccupation with the
interpretation of Shema, see B. Gerhardsson, The Testing of God‘s Son (Matt
4.1-11 and parr.), Uppsala: Gleerup, 1966, pp. 71-6; and his recent ‗The Shema‗
in Early Christianity‘, in F. van Segbroeck et al (eds.), The Four Gospels, Vol. 1,
Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1992, pp. 276-8. The Nash Papyrus (1st or 2nd
century BCE) is indicative of this; on the same sheet the Shema is found with the
Decalogue. See W.F. Albright, ‗A Biblical Fragment from the Maccabean Age:
The Nash Papyrus‘, JBL 56 (1937), pp. 145-76.
136
Interestingly in b.Sukkah 42a, we are told that once boys could speak, they
would be taught the first line of the Shema‗ (Deut 6.4).
137
Cf. the tradition in Mark 12.28-34. Insightful comments on how the Shema‗
is linked up with the two commands which in turn sum up the Decalogue are
found in D.C. Allison, ‗Mark 12.28-31 and the Decalogue‘, in C.A. Evans and
W.R. Stegner (eds.), The Gospels and the Scriptures of Israel, Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1994, pp. 270-8. Cf. also E. Nielsen, The Ten
Commandments in New Perspective, London: SCM, 1968.
138
The context of Lev 19.18 presupposes this and  should most probably be
interpreted as a fellow Israelite. This concept is appropriated and further
illuminated in y.Ned. 9.4. Cf. J. Milgrom, Leviticus17-22, Anchor Bible, New
York: Doubleday, 2000, pp. 1654-6. Sir 12.1-7 and 1QS 1.9-10 give evidence
that love cannot be extended to enemies or sinners.
98
Viewed from such a vantage point, it may be argued that the
sum duty of what covenantal responsibilities entailed may be found
essentially in the Shema‘. Properly understanding the Shema‘ and
properly undertaking its primary praxis will lead one to inherit the life
of the age to come. As the commandments are linked to Israel’s basic
creed, they become the identity markers for Israel, to demarcate her
as the people in covenant relation to Yahweh.
The upshot of all this is that the lawyer knows his scriptures
and theology very well. The reply of Jesus confirms this (v. 28) and
the lawyer will gain the life of the age to come if he authentically
performed what he has just enunciated. As it was mentioned earlier,
the second question of the lawyer about who one’s neighbour was (v.
29) might be interpreted as a genuine attempt on the lawyer’s part to
be faithful to Israel’s creed. Who is the neighbour in question in order
that he might be loved so that the life of the age to come is obtained?
It was this second question which prompted the telling of the parable
but the first question must also be kept in view.
Richard Bauckham has suggested in an erudite and wellargued article that the parable was told to resolve potential
conflicts in the injunctions of Torah in order to highlight that the
love command should take precedence over purity laws. 139 Jesus‘
interpretation of Torah would then become the real focus of the
parable. That, in my opinion, is only partially correct.
If the whole parable wishes to establish a halakhic point, we
should expect it to make very clear the victim‘s death and not
describing his condition with the ambiguous  (v. 30). This
word occurs only once in the NT and the evidence from other
Greek literature is not clear: it could refer either to someone who is
about to die or someone who appears dead but upon closer
inspection actually is not.140 Contracting impurity which
139
R.J. Bauckham, ‗The Scrupulous Priest and the Good Samaritan: Jesus‘
Parabolic Interpretation of the Law of Moses, NTS 44 (1998), pp. 475-89.
140
Cf. Hultgren, Parables of Jesus, p. 96; Nolland, Luke 9:21 – 18:34, p. 593.
See also the philological discussion in T. Kazen, Jesus and Purity Halakhah:
99
disqualifies one for priestly duty can happen only if the victim
were dead, i.e., a corpse (Lev 21.1-2; Ezek 44.25-7). Of course, in
the imaginary world of the parable, the presumption that the victim
was dead may be posited of the priest but the point is that, for
Jesus, the whole discussion appears to revolve around a different
issue and certainly not a halakhic one. Appealing to rabbinic
discussions on the ‗corpse of obligation‘ () will not do as it
serves actually to destroy the case.141 The  is the neglected
corpse which has not been buried for one reason or another.
Anyone who finds it has the obligation to bury it. According to the
Mishnah, even the high priest and the Nazarite — Israel‘s two most
consecrated men — are obligated to bury it even if it means
contracting ritual impurity.142 Thus, there would be no halakhic
debate envisaged by the parable, if by that we mean the debate
whether one should be allowed to contract ritual purity in order to
show compassion to the dead person by burying him. Dead or
alive, the priest cannot plead ritual impurity as an excuse for not
helping!
Secondly, the word  is used to describe the
direction of travel for both the priest and the victim. This means
that the priest was also leaving Jerusalem for Jericho.143 There is
ample historical evidence to show that many priests lived in
Jericho during the time of Jesus.144 Now, if the priest is heading in
that direction it could only mean that he is going home after his
duties at the Temple in Jerusalem. Consequently, ritual impurity
would not be a great concern as he would only be unclean till the
evening if he went to the rescue of what turned out to be a corpse
Was Jesus Indifferent to Impurity?, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2002, pp.
191-3.
141
Bauckham is aware of such a concept but does not see it as destroying his
case. See his ‗Scrupulous Priest‘, pp. 481-4.
142
m.Naz 7.1; cf. 6.5
143
Jerusalem is about 2,700 feet above sea level while Jericho is about 820 feet
below. Consequently, to move from Jerusalem to Jericho, one‘s journey may be
described as going down.
144
Cf. J. Schwartz, ‗On Priests and Jericho in the Second Temple Period‘, JQR
79 (1988), pp. 23-48.
100
(Lev 22.3-7)145. Hence, in depicting the priest in the way Jesus did,
the priest comes across as somewhat reprehensible. We do not
know in which direction the Levite is portrayed as travelling but in
the last analysis this does not really matter as the Levitical law on
not contracting ritual impurity by touching a corpse applied to
priests and not Levites. The upshot of all this is that the manner the
parable is being set out does not suggest that a halakhic point is
being discussed.
Thirdly, it would make more sense for Jesus to speak of a
different Jewish priest helping the waylaid man if he was interested
in establishing the halakhic point that the love command takes
precedence over cultic duties.146 Why is there a reference to a
Samaritan instead? One would have expected an ordinary Israelite
to be mentioned since the typical categories for referring to
different types of people in Israel are priest, Levite and Israelite.147
Instead, we have a Samaritan being mentioned to complete the
triad. Bauckham‘s answer is that he is mentioned for shock value148
and to bolster the point that the love command takes precedence
over purity laws because the one key difference between the
religion of the Jews and that of the Samaritans was the Temple and
its cult.149 The Jews worshipped at Jerusalem while for the
Samaritans, it was Mt Gerizim. Furthermore, the Jews regarded the
Samaritans as unclean (cf. John 4.9). We agree with Bauckham that
the cultic horizon is to be kept in view but we also want to argue
that the interpretation should go further by understanding it in
covenantal terms because the question which prompted this parable
145
Bauckham is aware of this objection and his reply to it smacks of special
pleading: ‗The priest is required to avoid corpse impurity at all times,
irrespective of whether he is due to minister in the temple.‘ See his ‗Scrupulous
Priest‘, p. 479. Such a statement is inaccurate in the light of the traditions on the
corpse of obligation ().
146
Bauckham is aware of this objection but he judges such a way of telling the
parable to be ‗tediously obvious‘, see his ‗Scrupulous Priest‘, p. 485.
147
See 2 Chron 35.2-3, 18; Ezra 10.5; Neh 11.3, 20. Cf. m.Git 5.8.
148
Samaritans were regarded as enemies and put in the same category as the
Philistines and Edomites (Sir 50.25-6).
149
Bauckham, ‗Scrupulous Priest‘, pp. 486-7.
101
connects the obtaining of the life of the age to come with
performance of the primary praxis of the Shema‗. Moreover the
cultic difference between the two groups of people functioned not
as an end in itself but in relation to a more important question. This
surely has to do with the identity of the true people of Yahweh, a
key covenantal concern.
The Meaning from the Angle of the Shema‘
We start by taking the cue from Dominic Crossan that the
focal point of the parable is not on the good deed itself but the
goodness of the Samaritan150 but we shall situate it in the context
provided by the frame as attested in Luke, i.e., the discussion of the
true confession of the Shema‗. If all Jesus wanted to do was to be
provocative, a Gentile would be a better choice to complete the
triad. But this was not the case because Jesus was not teaching that
by simply loving one another, a person would gain the life of the
age to come.151 That, in the terms of the covenant, is a heresy.
Instead, the love for the neighbour must be understood in a
covenantal context in which the one true God is confessed as
Yahweh. This is something that a Samaritan confesses even if he
disagrees with the Jew over many points of law, especially those
which are connected with the cult. The Samaritan in the parable is
also a believer in the Shema‗. However, in contrast to the priest and
the Levite, his actions demonstrate that he has understood the
essence of adherence to the Shema‗. Indeed, the ‗action‘ of the
parable seems to slow down and much space is given to the
description of the deeds of compassion of the Samaritan. There is
then a stark contrast between the neglect of the priest and Levite —
Jews — and the compassionate deeds of the Samaritan. This is
done for good rhetorical effect and consequently, there is no need
to allegorise the parable. Thus, the provocative point of the parable
is that it is the Samaritan, the one whom Jewish polemics often
regarded as being outside the covenant (Sir 50.25-6; b.Sanh 57a;
150
151
Crossan, ‗Parable and Example‘, p. 75 (emphasis his).
Pace Hultgren, Parables of Jesus, p. 98.
102
Gen. Rab. 81.3 [on Gen 35.4]),152 who ends up being the true
confessor of the Shema‗ through his loving the person in need. The
key representatives of Israel‘s religion and cult — priest and Levite
— have failed to do that.
Jesus‘ parable thus answers the lawyer‘s questions in many
ways. First, the true confession of the Shema‗ is to be demonstrated
effectively through the love of neighbour and such true confession
leads one to the life of the age to come (both Jesus and the lawyer
agreed over this point). The giving of the parable is meant to define
the identity of the neighbour and what loving a neighbour means.
Second, Jesus‘ question at the end of the pericope is designed to
elicit the answer from the lawyer that the neighbour in the parable
is the Samaritan. This actually answers the lawyer‘s question of
who his neighbour was which was asked in order that he might
love that person to fulfil the primary praxis of the Shema‗. Jesus
asked in effect, ‗Who has been a neighbour to the person in need‘.
The answer that should be given was, ‗That neighbour was the
Samaritan‘ but that was a name the lawyer could not bring himself
to utter. And so he said, ‗The one who had mercy on him‘ which
actually was a correct answer in some respects but was fraught
with an unwillingness to articulate the despised name. This
demonstrates how entrenched his negative view of the Samaritans
was.
It must be reiterated that, according to the parable, the
Samaritan is neighbour because he believes in the Shema‗ and
practises its primary praxis by following the love command. Being
a true confessor of the Shema‗, he belongs to the covenant
community. If our analysis is on target, there is some form of
repristination going on in Jesus‘ teaching. Using the cue provided
by the lawyer, Jesus harked back to the situation at the founding of
152
For such indications, see J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An
Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions during the New Testament
Period, Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969, pp. 352-8; C.A. Evans, ‗Samaritans‘, in
C.A. Evans and S.E. Porter (eds.), Dictionary of New Testament Backgrounds,
Downers Grove and Leicester: IVP, 2000, pp. 1059-60.
103
the nation — a situation which the Shema‗ presupposes — in
which the Samaritan and the Jewish split was irrelevant. But Jesus
did not stop there. He went on to exhort the lawyer to do likewise
and this leads to our third point.
Jesus words, ‗Go and do likewise‘, meant for the lawyer that
he was to follow the Samaritan‘s example in order to answer his
own questions. When the lawyer‘s two questions are taken into
consideration, it must mean that the Samaritan has demonstrated
what it means to confess the Shema‗ and love the neighbour as
himself. But we have also argued that the parable seeks to elicit the
answer that the Samaritan is the neighbour. Is there a discrepancy
here and what is the logic that is at work? There is no discrepancy
here because the Samaritan loved his neighbour by being a
neighbour to the one in need.153 When one perceives oneself as a
neighbour to the other, the other will ipso facto become one‘s
neighbour. If this is on target, the neighbour is now not defined by
a fellow Israelite or even by one who belongs to the covenant
community but any person, especially when he is in need. The love
between people in covenant with God should extend outwards
beyond the community. If our surmises are correct, we have here a
direct linkage to Jesus‘ and the early church‘s teaching on the preeminence of love and their openness to the outsider.154
It needs to be reiterated that the really provocative point is
discerned by juxtaposing Jesus‘ parable with the lawyer‘s first
question. Who will inherit the life of the age to come? Who will be
accounted a member of Yahweh‘s people when the kingdom of
God arrives? In other words, who will be justified? It is the
Samaritan of the parable because he confesses the Shema‗ and
practises love for the neighbour! If this is so, it would call into
question the status of Jews who do not follow the praxis of the
Shema‗. So, when the kingdom finally comes, who might the
153
Notice that who this person is not indicated. He is simply  (v. 30).
For a very good discussion which argues that what tied Jesus with Paul was
their openness to the outsider, see, A.J.M. Wedderburn, ‗Paul and Jesus:
Similarity and Continuity‘, NTS 34 (1988), pp. 161-80.
154
104
beneficiaries be is the provocative question. No doubt many
queries about covenantal status may be raised here regarding Jesus‘
exposition of the Shema‗. But what should not be missed is that,
according to this parable, the children of the Shema‗ or the
members of the covenant transcend race and cult.155 To name the
Samaritan as the faithful son of the covenant amounts to
challenging the received understanding on who the true members
of the covenant community are. One can hardly find in the Jewish
literature of the second temple period a parallel to Jesus‘
deployment of the Shema‗ for such a purpose. Indeed, while there
is evidence for the concept of a Jewish remnant within Israel, there
is none for that which says that the Samaritans form part of the true
community of Yahweh. This amounts to nothing less than a
redefinition of the covenant community, at least, from the
standpoint of Jesus‘ contemporaries. Who then belongs to the
family of Yahweh if Jewish descent does not guarantee that?
We can therefore see many lines of convergence between this
parable and many other traditions relating to Jesus of Nazareth.
There are pericopes which speak of the displacement of many in
Israel in favour of people who were not regarded as belonging to it
when the eschaton comes. Here, we may think of passages such as
Matthew 8.11-12||Luke 13.28-30 and Luke 4.24-7. Although some
NT scholars regard these as being composed in the post-Easter
period156 such a thesis is not cogent in the light of our
interpretation of the Parable of the Good Samaritan.
155
Viewing the parable as dealing with the connection between a true confession
of the Shema and a community‘s boundaries (i.e., monotheism and election) is
scarcely done in the history of scholarship. The most recent contribution, which
gives what is typical, that is, ‗an exemplary behaviour story‘, is made by
Hultgren, Parables of Jesus, pp. 93-101. But see Wright, Victory of God, pp.
305-7, which in many ways is similar to what is argued here.
156
The typical arguments are found in Funk and Hoover (eds.), Five Gospels, pp.
348, 280. On the difficulties connected with the interpretation of the former
passage, see D.C. Allison and W.D. Davies, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew II, Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1991, pp. 27-9. For the latter, see J.A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to
Luke, Vol. 1, New York: Doubleday, 1981, p. 526; for a more confident
assessment see Marshall, Gospel of Luke, p. 180. See, on the theme of judgment
105
In the narrative setting of Luke, the parable may be construed
as continuing the theme enunciated in 10.21: what the wise and the
learned failed to see, the ‗children‘ saw, i.e., the significance of
Jesus‘ ministry as that which truly reveals the Father. The parable
of the Good Samaritan fits hand in glove with this thrust in that
those who saw and practised the real meaning of the creed of Israel
might not be the wise and learned (cf. the priest and the Levite) but
children (cf. the Samaritan). Thus the theme of the ‗unexpected
members of the covenant‘ runs through both of them. Indeed, the
pericope which follows, i.e., the story of Martha and Mary,
continues such a thrust. Mary chose to sit at the feet of Jesus and
by so doing has chosen the better thing. This runs counter to Jewish
customs which dictate that the better place for a woman to be in is
the kitchen.157
Conclusions
The parable does not offer us an allegory of the fall of man
nor does it give us a moral story on how we are to be good
neighbours, as important as this may be for Christian ethics. Nor
was it told to establish a halakhic point. Instead, there is actually
more that is at stake in the telling of the parable for the questions
which prompted it have to do with the identity of the true people of
Yahweh or those who would inherit the life of the age to come.
To summarise the main points of our proposal: the parable
gives the identity of the people who would inherit the life of the
age to come. These are the people who confess the Shema‗ and
show it by practising its primary praxis: that of love for Yahweh
and love for the neighbour. What this means has now been
redefined by Jesus. In this redefinition, the neighbour is not
in the Jesus traditions, the recent work of S. Bryan, Jesus and Israel‘s Traditions
of Judgment and Restoration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
157
Many commentators find it hard to string these pericopes together and this is
not surprising as Luke does not offer us clear hints.
106
exclusively a member of the covenant community. Instead, he is
everyman because to love the other as neighbour one must begin
with understanding that one is a neighbour to the other. In this
regard, the love of the covenant community reaches out to those
who are outside. The true confessors of the Shema‗ are not to be
defined by ethnicity or cult. Instead, they demonstrate that they are
the true people of Yahweh through love. It is important to
remember also that the Shema‗ connects the Christian Church with
the religion of the OT, and thereby preventing any form of
Marcionism from rearing its ugly head. Of course, the parable does
not fully explain how the work of Jesus of Nazareth is linked up
with the Shema‗ and the covenant. To do this, other passages must
be studied, especially that of the Last Supper. But that will be a
task for another occasion.
This modest offering is given in profound respect for the
contribution of Dr. Peterus Pamudji to Christian education and the
Christian witness in Indonesia. Confessing the Shema‗ and bearing
witness to the love of Yahweh as demonstrated in Jesus of
Nazareth are challenges of the greatest magnitude in a strife-torn
place such as Indonesia. But this is something he does so well, and
with the hallmarks of love for Yahweh and love for the neighbour,
including those outside the Christian community. In this regard,
trust and obey may be the phrase that sums up accurately his
ministry. Soli Deo gloria!
107
Ringkasan:
The Shema‘ And The Parable
of The Good Samaritan
erumpamaan ―Orang Samaria yang Baik Hati‖ ini sering
dipahami secara alegoris atau moral. Pemahaman ini
melahirkan paling tidak tiga cara memahaminya: pertama,
perumpamaan ini menceritakan kejatuhan Adam atau manusia dan
penebusan mereka melalui Kristus yang dalam hal ini digambarkan
oleh orang Samaria. Kedua, pemahaman bahwa perumpamaan ini
adalah sebuah cerita yang menjadi contoh atau kisah yang
membawa pesan moral. Dalam beberapa tahun terakhir ini,
beberapa ahli dari Amerika memandang perumpamaan tersebut
secara narative dan melepaskan konteks yang diberikan di dalam
Injil, karena konteks tersebut dipandang tidak asli.
P
Artikel ini ditulis dengan tujuan untuk menujukkan bahwa konteks
perumpamaan tersebut adalah asli dan berusaha memahami
perumpamaan ini dalam konteks aslinya. Artikel ini juga ingin
menunjukkan bahwa kerangka pemahaman makna perumpamaan
ini telah diberikan dari konteksnya dalam Injil Lukas dan konteks
tersebut berkaitan dengan Shema‗ yang dipandang sebagai
pengakuan iman orang Israel yang bersumber pada Ulangan 6:4-9;
11:13-21 dan Bilangan 15:37-41. Orang-orang Yahudi yang saleh
pada jaman Yesus biasanya akan mengucapkan shema‗ tersebut
dua kali sehari: pada saat matahari terbit dan terbenam. Mengingat
begitu pentingnya shema‗ bagi bangsa Israel, maka adalah sangat
penting memahami perumpamaan tersebut dalam kaitannya dengan
shema‗, bahkan dalam kaitannya dengan konsep perjanjian
(covenant).
Otentisitas konteks dari perumpamaan ini
Dalam bagian pertama artikel ini, penulis berusaha
membuktikan melalui ke lima argumentasinya bahwa konteks
108
perumpamaan tersebut dalam Injil Lukas adalah asli. Pertama,
penulis menunjukkan bahwa argumentasi yang mengatakan Lukas
seringkali membuat generalisasi dan adanya kemiripan diskusi
Yesus tentang hukum kasih dalam Markus 12:28-31 dan Lukas
10:25-37 menurut penulis bukan alasan yang kuat untuk menolak
keaslian konteks perumpamaan ini. Karena alasan generalisasi itu
sendiri tidak bisa dipakai untuk menggeneralisasi bahwa semua
perumpamaan Lukas demikian dan kemiripan dengan diskusi
Yesus di Injil lain juga bukanlah alasan untuk menolak keaslian
konteks Lukas mengingat Yesus bisa saja berdiskusi tentang
shema‗ lebih dari satu kali. Kedua, pendapat Gerhardson yang
mengatakan bahwa konteks yang diberikan oleh penulis-penulis
Injil haruslah kita pandang dengan serius karena mereka adalah
saksi mata awal berkaian dengan makna dari perumpamaan
tersebut. Ketiga, kerangka dan isi perumpamaan tersebut boleh
dikatakan koheren dengan metode pengajaran para rabi yang
dikenal dengan yelammedenu rabbenu. Keempat, pertanyaan dari
ahli Taurat yang melatarbelakangi perumpamaan ini boleh
dikatakan sesuai dengan konteks pemahaman dan konsep orang
Yahudi tentang kehidupan kekal, Kerajaan Allah yang akan datang
dan dengan shema‗ yang merupakan pengakuan kunci yang
menyimpulkan status perjanjian mereka (covenantal status).
Demikian juga shema‗ adalah keyakinan dan praktek penting yang
menandai Israel sebagai umat Allah yang khusus. Kelima,
sebagaimana diungkapkan oleh Marshall, perumpamaan ini
tentunya dilatarbelakangi oleh suatu alasan atau peristiwa dan hal
itu tentulah hukum kasih dan secara khusus perintah untuk
mengasihi sesama. Hal ini nampak jelas dalam konteks Lukas,
sehingga tidak ada alasan untuk meragukan konteks asli Lukas.
Horison Perjanjian dari Shema‘
Mengingat hubungan antara Perjanjian Lama dan Perjanjian
Baru dan fakta bahwa Kekristenan muncul dari rahim agama
Yahudi, maka sangatlah perlu untuk memahami perumpamaan ini
dari sudut perjanjian.
109
Perikop ini didahului oleh pertanyaan yang jelas berlatar
belakang keyahudian, yaitu bagaimana seseorang dapat mewarisi
hidup yang kekal. Jawaban Yesus membawa penanya tersebut
kepada Taurat yang boleh dikatakan menjadi dasar atau pedoman
perjanjian tersebut (ay 25-26). Kehidupan ini adalah anugrah yang
diberikan dalam kaitan perjanjian dengan Allah (Im 18:5; Ul
30:15-19) dan Taurat menjelaskan apa yang dimaksud dengan
hidup dalam hubungan seperti itu. Karena itu, kalau ada jalan
untuk memperoleh keselamatan, maka jalan itu harus ditemukan
dalam Taurat dan hal itulah yang menjadi alasan Yesus bertanya
"Apa yang tertulis dalam hukum Taurat?‖ (Luk 10:26).
Jawaban ahli Taurat tersebut berkaitan dengan shema‗ yang
bagi orang Yahudi berfungsi sebagai kredo dan yang merupakan
intisari hukum Taurat. Sebagai kredo, shema‗ juga menyimpulkan
apa artinya bagi seorang Yahudi atau anggota komunitas yang
memiliki relasi dengan Allah dan hubungan tersebut juga
dijelaskan oleh konsep perjanjian. Dalam Injil Lukas, salah satu
wujud nyata dari shema‗ adalah mengasihi Allah yang berkaitan
erat dengan mengasihi sesama. Hal ini tidaklah bertentangan
karena dalam theologia Yahudi sesama juga dipahami sebagai
anggota komunitas perjanjian.
Dengan memahami shema‗ daru sudut yang tepat dan dengan
melaksanakan tuntutan utamanya akan membawa seseorang untuk
mewarisi hidup yang kekal. Sebagaimana perintah-perintah
tersebut berkaitan erat dengan kredo Israel, maka kredo tersebut
adalah tanda yang menjadi identitas Israel yang akan menunjukkan
mereka sebagai umat perjanjian dalam hubungan dengan Allah.
Hal ini yang kemudian membawa pada pertanyaan siapakah
sesamaku manusia yang kemudian menjadi alasan diberikannya
perumpamaan ini.
110
Makna Perumpamaan ini dari sudut shema‘
Yesus dalam perumpamaan ini tidak sekedar mengajarkan
bahwa mengasihi sesama akan membawa seseorang dapat memiliki
kehidupan kekal. Tetapi ―mengasihi sesama‖ tersebut harus
dipahami dari konteks perjanjian dimana Allah yang esa dan benar
diakui sebagai Yahwe. Orang Samaria dalam konteks ini adalah
seorang yang percaya dalam shema‗, hanya saja, sebagai kontras
dari Imam dan orang Lewi, tindakannya mendemonstrasikan
bahwa ia memahami esensi kesetiaan dan ketaatannya kepada
shema‗ tersebut.
Perumpamaan Yesus ini memberikan jawaban bagi ahli
Taurat tersebut: pertama, pengakuan yang benar akan shema‗
harus didemonstrasikan secara efektif melalui mengasihi sesama
dan pengakuan yang benar tersebut akan membawa seseorang
mewarisi hidup yang kekal. Pemberian perumpamaan ini adalah
untuk mengidentifikasi siapakah sesama tersebut dan makna dari
mengasihi sesama. Kedua, pertanyaan Yesus diakhir perikop
tersebut dirancang untuk mendapatkan jawaban bahwa sesama
yang dimaksudkan tersebut adalah orang Samaria. Sekalipun
demikian, ahli Taurat tersebut menjawab bahwa sesama yang
dimaksudkan adalah orang yang telah menunjukkan belas kasihan
kepada orang yang dirampok tersebut. Ahli Taurat tersebut
menghindari penyebutan orang Samaria karena pandangan yang
begitu negatif tentang orang Samaria (Yoh 4:9).
Dari pemahaman ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa orang Samaria
tersebut telah menjadi sesama bagi orang yang membutuhkan.
Dengan demikian, saat seseorang menyadari bahwa ia adalah
sesama bagi orang lain, maka orang lain tersebut juga akan menjadi
sesama bagi dia. Hal ini berarti bahwa sesama tidaklah berarti
sesama orang Israel atau mereka yang menjadi anggota komunitas
tersebut. Sesama adalah setiap orang, secara khusus orang-orang
yang saat itu membutuhkan kita. Karena itu, kasih antara umat
yang adalah dalam perjanjian dengan Allah, haruslah menjangkau
keluar, bahkan keluar dari komunitas mereka.
111
Kesimpulan
Perumpamaan ini tidaklah memberikan alegori tentang
kejatuhan manusia atau kisah dengan pesan moral yang mendorong
kita untuk menjadi sesama yang baik bagi orang lain, sekalipun hal
itu juga penting dalam etika Kristen. Perumpamaan ini diberikan
untuk menunjukkan identitas sejati dari umat Allah atau mereka
yang akan mewarisi hidup yang kekal.
Untuk menyimpulkan poin-poin utama dari perumpamaan
ini: perumpamaan ini diberikan sebagai identitas dari orang-orang
yang akan mewarisi hidup yang kekal. Mereka adalah orang yang
mengakui shema‗ dan menyatakannya dengan mempraktekkannya:
yaitu mengasihi Allah dan mengasihi sesama. Hal ini kemudian
didefinisikan ulang oleh Yesus bahwa sesama bukanlah secara
ekslusif sesama anggota komunitas. Tetapi setiap orang, karena
untuk mengasihi orang lain sebagai sesama, maka ia harus
memahami terlebih dulu bahwa ia adalah sesama bagi orang lain.
Dalam pemahaman ini, kasih dari komunitas umat perjanjian akan
menjangkau orang luar.
Pengaku-pengaku shema‗ yang benar tidaklah dibatasi oleh
kesukuan
atau
agama,
tetapi
mereka
adalah
yang
mendemonstrasikan diri sebagai umat Allah yang benar melalui
kasih. Dari sini kita juga melihat bahwa shema‗ telah
menghubungkan Gereja Kristen dengan agama Perjanjian Lama.
Memang perumpamaan ini tidak menjelaskan secara rinci tentang
hubungan antara pelayanan Yesus dari Nasaret dengan shema‗ dan
covenant. Untuk melihat hal itu, kita perlu juga mempelajari
―Perjamuan Akhir‖ (the Last Supper) yang tentunya adalah sebuah
studi tersendiri.
Artikel ini adalah sumbangsih kecil yang diberikan sebagai
penghargaan atas kontribusi Dr. Peterus Pamudji kepada
pendidikan Kristen dan kesaksian Kristen di Indonesia. Pengakuan
terhadap shema‗ dan menjadi saksi dalam mengasihi Allah
sebagaimana didemostrasikan oleh Yesus dari Nasaret adalah
112
tantangan yang sangat besar dalam negara seperti Indonesia.
Sekalipun demikian, ia telah melakukannya dengan baik dan telah
menyatakannya melalui kasih kepada Allah dan kasih kepada
sesama yang menjangkau mereka yang ada di luar komunitas
Kristen. Dalam hal ini, Trust and Obey dapatlah menjadi ungkapan
yang akurat untuk menyimpulkan pelayanannya. Soli Deo Gloria.
Kornelius A. Setiawan
113
Tragedy & Triumph in the Theater of God:
A Reformed View of the Relationship of Faith,
Obedience and the Image of God
Thomas Harvey
A
fter the world had been created, man was placed in it as in a
theater, that he, beholding above him and beneath the
wonderful works of God, might reverently adore their Author.
Secondly, that all things were ordained for the use of man, that he,
being under deeper obligation, might devote and dedicate himself
entirely to obedience towards God. Thirdly, that he was endued
with understanding and reason, that being distinguished from brute
animals he might meditate on a better life, and might even tend
directly towards God, whose image he bore engraved on his own
person. Afterwards followed the fall of Adam, whereby he alienated
himself from God; whence it came to pass that he was deprived of
all rectitude. Thus Moses represents man as devoid of all good,
blinded in understanding, perverse in heart, vitiated in every part,
and under sentence of eternal death; but he soon adds the history
of his restorations where Christ shines forth with the benefit of
redemption. From this point he not only relates continuously the
singular Providence of God in governing and preserving the
Church, but also commends to us the true worship of God;
John Calvin. Commentary on Genesis158
Any good story contains at least three parts. First, you
need characters whose traits and natural capability will shape
and be tested in the unfolding events. Next there must be
shared or disputed ends for which the key characters contend.
Finally you need an enticing plot where obstacles, conflicts,
158
Commentary on Genesis
114
competition and frustration must be overcome. Yet whether
such obstacles result in tragedy or triumph, a great story goes
beyond telling an interesting tale to disclose the true lineaments
of the soul.
For Calvin, the theater that unveiled man‘s soul moral and
spiritual essence was creation. Unlike mere matter or lesser beings
determined by physical law, instinct and appetite, the human race
were ―endued with understanding, for these… (God) teaches with
articulate language, so that they may obey him intelligently and
with consent.‖159 ―Beholding above… and beneath the wonderful
works of God…‖ with rightful obedience and humble
contemplation of their creator they come to ―reverently adore their
Author.‖ 160 Here lies man‘s glory; as God draws ―nearer to us,
and we to Him, so He will have His image known in us and his
truth shining forth in us all the more.‖161
To ―tend directly towards God, whose image he bore
engraved on his own person,‖ man must trust and obey. 162 Trust
allows him to drink from the font of grace and life nurturing his
friendship, collaboration, and love of God. Obedience lies at the
heart of that trust. As the journeyman must obey the master if he is
to learn his craft, so man must obey the Master Craftsman if he is
to grow into his likeness. Thus, for Calvin, there was nothing
slavish or arbitrary in trust and obedience, rather it was the
necessary key to a liberty founded upon the grace of God.
To trust and obey meant that man‘s ―special duty… (be) to
give ear to the Word.‖163 Trust in, submission to, and reverence for
God‘s Word allows the image of God to take shape within man.
Trust and obedience ―raise our thoughts to God… to ponder his
nature, and (take note) how completely perfect are his
159
Comm. on Ps. 147:19
Ibid.
161
Comm. on Acts 17:27
162
Comm. on Genesis.
163
Institute I. 6. 2;
160
115
righteousness, wisdom and power—the straightedge to which we
must be shaped.‖164
Such knowledge, Calvin argued, could never be gained ―if
we look merely to ourselves and not also to the Lord, who is the
sole standard.‖165 Whereas, the Catholicism of Calvin‘s day taught
that man unaided by revelation could grasp his condition and
vestiges of the knowledge of God, Calvin argued that the man‘s
separation from God fundamentally ruined his ability to grasp his
true condition or to know God. Apart from God‘s Word, man‘s
pursuit of natural revelation was futile for he pursues an ―empty
image‖ devoid of the necessary content that comes only from God.
To man nature could only appear void of it true meaning for he
lacked the touchstone of God‘s Word that deciphers the true
essence of creation. The fault was not with nature, but with fallen
man whose ongoing distrust and disobedience had irreparably
distorted and confused his comprehension. That distortion flowed
directly from man‘s disobedience. Humankind was intended to
embody the image of God through obedience and trust in God‘s
command. Had man attended to God‘s Word, he would have been
able to ―boldly resort to Him and call upon him and seek succor at
his hand.‖166 In turn, God‘s Word would have allowed humankind
to transcend mere biological existence and gain celestial life
wherein the true image of God would have perfectly reflected its
creator.
Accordingly, the image of God was something to be realized
through dynamic interaction with God. Though the image of God
relied upon man‘s biological/psychological capacity, it was only to
be realized through man‘s trusting and obedient relationship with
God. Hence, the image of God in Calvin‘s view was attained
gradually and relationally. To be like God was to be in a relation
of love with God.
164
Institute I. 1. 2.
Ibid.
166
Ibid.
165
116
This perspective on the image of God departs from Roman
Catholic views. Catholicism has generally viewed the image of
God as matter of static natural capacity that is neither sufficient for
salvation, nor irreparably damaged or lost in the fall. Even before
the fall, grace had to be added to the image of God if man was ever
to become fully spiritual. Thus, in this view, what was lost in the
fall was not the image of God, but simply the spiritual grace of
salvation. This caused man to lose his equilibrium, which led him
to pursue his carnal appetites as opposed to God, yet the image of
God remained unblemished. Thus, in the Catholic view, grace was
a necessary condiment to the image of God and distinct from it in
man‘s pursuit of his spiritual telos. Before the fall, this was
possible without atonement, but after the fall the grace of salvation
required the sacraments of the Church to dispense forgiveness as
well as to restore the grace needed to pursue sanctification.
Accordingly, the rite of Baptism expiated original sin, confirmation
dispensed the Holy Spirit to guide man back towards spiritual
perfection, penance took care of any sins along the way, and
purgatory completed the process of sanctification/salvation. At
each stage of the process a dispensation of grace was required for
salvation, but this did not alter the image of God which remained
the baseline of human capability to know God.
Calvin rejected the idea that the image of God had been
preserved from the taint of man‘s fall. Grace was not a spiritual
condiment added to the image of God, but lay at its integral core.
Without God‘s active grace and continuous presence, humankind
as well as all of creation would wither and die. The honor and
nobility of humankind lay in their recognition, honor and adoration
of God. Only through man active embrace of God‘s word in trust
and obedience would allow for his person to reflect God‘s glory.
Such knowledge through the Word of God required the
communion of His Spirit with man. Without the Word of God,
man‘s knowledge of himself and of God could never be known.
117
The logical upshot is that the knowledge of God is not
simply that he exists, but a fecund relational knowledge that
nourished man‘s existence.
Now, the knowledge of God, as I understand it, is that by
which we not only conceive that there is a God but also grasp
what befits us and is proper to his glory, in fine, what is our
advantage to know of him. Indeed we shall not say that,
properly speaking, God is known where there is no religion
or piety. Here I do not yet touch upon the sort of knowledge
with which men, in themselves lost and accursed, apprehend
God the Redeemer in Christ the Mediator; but I speak only of
the primal and simple knowledge to which the very order of
nature would have led us if Adam had remained upright.167
Accordingly, God‘s Word placed man under an obligation.
―For how can the thought of God penetrate your mind without your
realizing immediately that, since you are his handiwork you have
been made over and bound to his command by right of creation,
that you owe your life to him? …the pious mind does not dream up
for itself any god it pleases but contemplates the one and only true
God… furthermore the mind always exercises the utmost diligence
and care not to wander astray or rashly and boldly go beyond his
will. It thus recognizes God because it knows that he governs all
things; and trusts that he is the guide and protector, therefore
giving itself over completely to trust in him.‖168 Only when man
grasps his place within God‘s order can he be directed toward an
ever-deepening and sanctifying engagement with the living God.
Through trust and obedience to God‘s Word, man sees the true
order and purpose of creation, whereas, apart from God‘s Word,
man‘s knowledge of creation is necessarily incomplete and
distorted.
Given Calvin‘s interest and role in both civil and religious
life in Geneva, it is not surprising that he did not confine this
emphasis on trust and obedience to mere personal order and private
167
168
Institute I. 2. 1.
Ibid.
118
virtue. Obedience to the Word concerned society and Calvin
strove align reason, political will, and human desire with the Word
of God. Indeed, reforming Geneva was as critical a task to Calvin
as reforming the church.
I declared that a Church could not hold together unless a
settled government should be agreed on, such as is prescribed
to us in the Word of God, and such as in use in the ancient
Church. I requested that they would appoint certain of their
number who might confer with us on the subject. Six were
then appointed.169
This required discipline and obedience, for as Calvin argued
―no society, indeed no house with even a moderate family, can be
kept in a healthy condition without discipline.‖170 Calvin was
involved in all aspects of life in Geneva. Some of the social
experiments he attempted failed and others have been decried as
heavy-handed and puritanical. Certainly, he did attempt to impose
his biblical rigor on all citizens regardless of their acquiescence.
Nonetheless his ardor to engage and apply God‘s Word to practical
civil matters have influenced Reformed thought ever since.
He succeeded in getting regulation hours and conditions of
labour; restriction of the task imposed upon women and
children; control of inflationary prices of bread, meat and
wine; the right to organize for unskilled, non-guild labour;
public investment in business enterprise to relieve
unemployment; subsidization of the work of the diaconate
from public funds; adoption of orphans as wards of the city;
and the like. What he fought for and did not get is nowhere
recorded. But so strenuously did he thrust the pulpit into
169
J. A. Wiley, The History of Protestantism, Vol. 2, (Available [Online]:
<http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/History.Protestant.v2.b14.html#C
HAPTER%2014>), [23 April 2000].
170
Ronald S. Wallace, Calvin, Geneva, and the Reformation: A Study of Calvin
as Social Reformer, Churchman, Pastor and Theologian, Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1990, p. 31.
119
politics, economics and social affairs that Eugene Choisy
speaks of Calvin's "theocracy', and Emile Doumergue and
Ernest Troeltsch of his "Christian Socialism'." 171
Thus, for Calvin, trust and obedience to God required active
engagement with the practical issues of individual, familial, social
and political life. Thus, Reform was not a mere matter of proper
ordering of the soul, but to establish the proper order of society and
civil affairs according to the Word to the Glory of God.172
Reformed faith has ever since seen trust and obedience as more
than personal virtues but civic virtues as man has been called by
God to engage his society as well as to preserve and protect
creation.
This is in stark contrast to modern naturalism that would
uphold human passivity before the precedent order of autonomous
nature. Pantheistic naturalism eschews any ―domination‖ of nature
even as a Reformed view encourages man‘s fruitful engagement
and even authority over nature. Whereas naturalism holds that
nature moves according to its own order, a Reformed perspective
argues that nature cannot be understood apart from man‘s proper
stewardship and engagement with in light of God‘s command to
subdue it. Thus, it would be a dereliction of God‘s divine command
for man to leave nature to itself. More than a mere cog in the
biosphere, man must do more than seek quietude, submission and
submersion into natural order. Rather humankind is commanded
by God to preserve and perfect nature through his interaction with
it and to this command he is accountable as God‘s steward over
creation.
The wisdom of this perspective can be seen in light of the
middle path it provides between a rapacious unrestrained
171
Farris, Allan. John Calvin: Social Revolutionary. Available [Online]:
<http://www.presbyterian.ca/documents/socialaction/append1.htm> [23 April
2000].
172
This is neatly summed up by Clark Pinnock in Flame of Love:A Theology of
the Holy Spirit. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1996.) p. 45
120
consumption of creation‘s natural resources and an enfeebled
passivity that places man under nature. The conflict between these
two positions has been enjoined politically and environmentally in
the United States over the last three decades. During the Reagan
Administration, Secretary of the Interior James Watt argued for
unrestrained consumption of America‘s natural resources. His
opposition to conservation groups in the US was based on the view
that preservation of the environment was pointless in light of Jesus‘
imminent return. On the other hand, Watt‘s chief opponent was the
powerful Sierra club whose philosophy of environmentalism is
based on the view that nature is better left alone with a minimum of
human intervention. This philosophy has led the Sierra Club to
successfully oppose efforts to reduce the threat of catastrophic
forest fire. Rather than allow for a careful management of the
forest by selective harvesting of timber and clearing of brush, the
Sierra Club has argued that the forests should be left alone in order
to let nature take its own course. The direct result of this naturalist
passivity has been catastrophic forest fires raged out of control and
destroyed huge swathes of America‘s precious forests.
Between these warring camps, a Reformed perspective of
trust and obedience lends itself to a wise reconciliation of
protection, conservation and appropriate stewardship of creation‘s
resources necessary for our survival. It recognizes that both
unchecked consumption and destruction of the earth‘s limited
resources as well as naïve naturalist passivity that would not
intervene to perfect nature are both at odds with the will of God.
As the ―theater‖ of God within which we move and have our being,
careful engagement in and preservation of earth through thoughtful
and creative action in communion with God represents to proper
order of man‘s relationship to creation.
The Reformed emphasis on trust and obedience also finds
itself at odds with the modern fusion of liberty and autonomy.
Beginning with the Enlightenment there has been a growing
emphasis in the West towards greater individualism. Emphasis on
human autonomy has led many to reject the Reformed view that
121
true liberty is only gained through trust in God and obedience to
his gracious command. No one summed up the Enlightenment
position as well as Immanuel Kant who wrote:
No generation should be bound by creeds and dogmas. It is
an offence against human nature whose destiny lies in
progress. … Mankind is in the process of coming of age,
refusing to take external authorities and judging everything
by its own understanding.173
For Kant and the philosophers who have tread in his path, the
Reformed emphasis on trust and obedience was slavish, opposed to
true liberty and produced only ignorance based on irrational
superstition. For Kant enlightenment and liberty would only come
when creeds and dogmas were cast aside and intellectual autonomy
was gained. What was required was not trust and obedience but
doubt and pure reason.
Calvin, however, would have looked on Kant as a fool.
Doubt and autonomy was what led to human misery and bondage
in the first place. The reason for this was clear in Calvin‘s mind.
Autonomous reason deceives man by it appeals to his pride. This in
turn, led to his foolish distrust in God and tempted him to disobey.
This autonomy did not lead to knowledge but to ignorance. In the
first place, man‘s pride cut him off from God‘s revelatory Word:
the source of that knowledge by which he was to proceed towards
liberty. Secondly, man‘s disobedience caused him to lose grip of
the necessary ―bridle to control all passions: the thought that
nothing is better than to practice righteousness by obeying God‘s
commandments.‖174
In this manner, man‘s pride, doubt and
autonomy resulted not in enlightenment and liberty but ignorance
and subjugation. Thus, for Calvin, subservience to God, through
obedience to His Word is the sure spring of human liberty for it
allows man to appropriate all that has been made available
173
Immanuel Kant as quoted in Colin Brown‘s Philosophy & the Christian
Faith. (Downer‘s Grove, IL: IVP, 1968) p 91.
174
Institute II.1.4.
122
according to God‘s his gracious order and to properly order his
appetites to accord with the knowledge of God. In this manner the
sovereignty of God leads to the liberty of man.
Nonetheless, as important as trust and obedience are, from a
Reformed perspective they do not represent ends in themselves but
nurture the more important virtue of gratitude. For Calvin, trust
and obedience were the vestibule that must be passed through to
reach the sanctuary of adoration. Only in gratitude does man
properly finds his rightful place before a holy God. Perfected in
proper worship, man comes to true knowledge of himself and God.
In worship God draws man to himself and he comes to enter into
the life of God. Here and here alone does man fully glorify God
and realize the true image of God in Calvin‘s estimation.
Such a life is possible only through God‘s continual presence
and action and man‘s active response. In worship, God confronts
man in majesty and splendor. Man‘s proper response can only be in
adoration and contemplation of God‘s majesty. Here man‘s in his
natural capacity combined with this humble worship reflect the
image of God. Apart from such an active response of trust,
obedience, gratitude and love, man loses the image of God and
slouches into a carnal being led here and there by his tyrannical
appetites. Thus the drama of divine or carnal existence hinges on
the choice of man to embrace or rebuff God. Adam‘s rejection of
God‘s Word was the great tragedy of human existence, yet in its
own paradoxical way, set the stage for Jesus Christ and the triumph
of God.
The Fall
We throw heaven and earth into confusion by our sins. For
were we in right order as to our obedience to God, doubtless
all the elements would be conformable and we should thus
observe in the world an angelic harmony… 175
Reformed faith‘s insistence upon the continuing insidious
and ubiquitous nature of sin has proved one of its most
175
Comm. On Jer. 5:25.
123
controversial and embattled positions. Critics charge that insistence
upon man‘s ongoing rebellion and depravity of humankind is too
pessimistic and unworthy of human dignity. For Calvin, however,
failure to grasp the depth of man‘s fall intensifies human misery for
without knowledge of his true condition he cannot avail himself of
the grace and salvation available through Jesus Christ. For Calvin,
only by the Word of God can man come to understand his fallen
condition as well as his need of grace. On the other hand, should
man receive Jesus Christ, the incarnate Word, reform of both
church and society may commence to counteract the more baneful
consequences of man‘s rebellion against God.
A careful examination of Calvin‘s work reveals that respect
for the nobility of humankind and appreciation of man‘s unique
character and vocation are critical to Calvin‘s reasoning. Calvin
appreciated that unless one understood man‘s former the lofty
stature and vocation, one could never understand human decline
nor the nature of salvation in Jesus Christ. If humankind had
slouched in ingratitude, distrust, and rebellion, how much more had
Jesus Christ restored man‘s true image through trust in and
obedience to God.
If the image of God was dynamic and directed towards
fulfillment, active and continuous had been humankind‘s the
precipitous descent. For Calvin, the man‘s fall was more than a
past event but represented a continuous state of rebellion in man.
Calvin‘s dynamic understanding of the image of God meant that
human disobedience continued to distort the image of God in every
aspect. The defilement of sin affected all rationality, judgment,
intelligence, relationships, and civil affairs. If ability to express the
image of God required communion with God, then fallen man‘s
knowledge of himself as well as of God was impaired and
disoriented by separation from God.
To better understand this disorientation we have to consider
man‘s relationship to the Holy Spirit. For Calvin, man‘s soul was
the seat of the personality. Whereas the rest of creation moves
124
unconsciously to God‘s will, the human self was endowed with the
capacity to respond willingly to God‘s Spirit or to harden the soul
against the will of God. Though, for Calvin, resistance to God
cannot thwart God‘s ultimate Sovereignty, yet in the existential
present man in his consciously resist the will of God.
In this sense, man‘s personality (mind or self) is like a
captain on the bridge of a ship who will set the course of his ship in
light of the influences that affect him. If the person trusts and obeys
the Spirit of God he begins to reflect God‘s glory. If, however, the
person rejects the Spirit and pursues his own ends his will becomes
subordinated to the ―desires of the flesh.‖ Carnal he grows
increasingly oriented downward and inward and dominated by selfindulgence. Rather than becoming spiritual, he grows increasingly
bestial. This is why the apostle Paul would argue that the Spirit
and the desires of the flesh are fundamentally at odds. It is not that
the flesh is evil, but evil is the result when the appetites of the flesh
dominate man‘s will to the point that the carnal effaces the
spiritual.
Whereas Catholicism views the sin of concupiscence as a
tendency within man with the loss of grace, for Calvin carnality
continues to distort the fundamental image of God. Rebellion and
alienation from God are now part and parcel of man‘s sinful nature.
At odds with God‘s Spirit, man is now bereft of the orientation
needed to proceed towards spiritual perfection. More than mere
disbelief, man‘s carnal orientation perverts the vestige of his
spiritual nature in idolatry as man bends the knee to created things
rather than the creator. This only deepens enmity between God and
man. Trust and obedience become impossible if man fears the
approach of a just God. Judgment now separates man from the very
communion necessary to receive the Word of God. Man‘s feeble
attempts now to appease God‘s wrath fall short for having rejected
God, man is alienated from the needed guidance of the God‘s
Spirit. Without the Spirit, his baser instincts lead him to death and
judgment.
125
Bent inward, man‘s spiritual deformity affects all other
aspects of existence. Man‘s natural intelligence, judgment and
reason become distorted by evil. It is not that all vestiges of man‘s
capability to know, reason, and love have been wiped out, but what
remains is insufficient to lead him back to the knowledge he
requires if he is to glorify God. For Calvin, this is why man‘s is
unable to grasp natural revelation. Before the fall, the Word in
nature as symbol was available to man‘s perception. Even as raw
silver lacks the value of the fashioned coin, so nature apart from
the Word is no value to man. ―For why are the shapeless and the
coined silver not of the same value, seeing they are the same
metal? Just because the former has nothing but its own nature,
whereas the latter impressed with the public stamp, becomes
money and receives a new value. And shall the Lord not be able to
stamp His creatures with His Word, that things which were
formerly base elements may become sacraments?… The ancient
sacraments had the same end in view as our own, viz., to direct and
almost lead us by the hand to Christ, or rather, were like images to
represent Him and hold Him forth to our knowledge.‖176
Separated from communion with God, man lacks the Word or
‗stamp‘ to garner any profitable knowledge of God. Thus, Calvin
argues ―we profit little in the contemplation of the universal nature
if we do not behold with the eyes of faith that spiritual glory of
which an image is presented to us in the world.‖177
In regard to the limits and nature of human knowledge,
Calvin‘s view departed from the traditional Catholic position.
Catholicism held that via reason alone man might gain selfknowledge and even a rudimentary knowledge of God‘s nature.
Though grace remained necessary for salvation, pure reason alone
could fathom the cosmos, attain virtue and govern wisely without
appeal to God‘s Word. Natural revelation and natural law were
equally accessible to saint and pagan alike in matters philosophical,
moral and political. Though God‘s word might supplement natural
revelation in mundane matters, primarily it addressed salvation and
176
177
Institute 4.14.18.
Comm. On Ps. 104:4.
126
grace and the cardinal virtues of faith, hope and charity that were
necessary to proceed towards sanctification.
In this manner, special revelation like grace was something
added to man‘s basic nature and ability. In contrast, Calvin and the
Reformers insisted that man‘s fall had distorted man‘s capacity to
know. They didn‘t deny man‘s capacity to reason and even to
attain rudimentary truth as to the nature of the cosmos and human
existence. Nonetheless, at every point that knowledge was to some
degree distorted and incomplete. Without the Word of God, human
knowledge fails to see the necessary connections between creator
and creation, man‘s role within creation, or the deadly nature of
sin. Hence man‘s tendency to misuse knowledge toward
destructive ends. To Calvin and the Reformers, it would not have
been surprising that the very capability of humankind to master
nuclear fission has led to building of deadly atomic weapons or
genetic science to forward racist eugenics. Only God‘s Word gives
man an appreciation of his humble condition that leads to a
prudential ordering and use of knowledge. Thus, when addressing
secular or spiritual matters, God‘s Word provides the knowledge
necessary to appreciate human limitation and depravity in order to
establish proper safeguards for the common good; to use
knowledge in ways that alleviate suffering rather than simply
extend it.
The implications of Reformed versus Catholic views in this
regard can be seen in the political development of kingdoms and
nations inhabited by Protestant majorities. The view that no one
could escape the effects of sin provided wisdom to those who
questioned the divine right of Kings. Healthy appreciation of the
nature and extent of human depravity led to the establishment of
constitutional governments with significant checks and balances to
prevent granting any one person or party unlimited power.
Thus, from a Reformed perspective, the fall of man apart was
an unmitigated tragedy. Though made to reflect the image of God,
man‘s glory had become his shame. Instead of trust and obedience
127
leading to man‘s spiritual union with God, distrust and
disobedience had marred the creature and had made him an object
of wrath and shame. Were this the end of the story, man‘s fall and
degradation would offer no glimmer of hope. Nonetheless, Calvin
always held man‘s fall and redemption tightly together. The abyss
of human depravity only highlights the majesty and glory of God
and particularly in his redemption of humankind. One simply
cannot be understood without the other, thus from the fall of man
we also must turn to God‘s redemption in Jesus Christ if we are to
fully grasp how God has turned tragedy into triumph.
Redemption in Christ:
Now it was of the greatest importance for us that he who was
to be our mediator be both true God and true man… The
situation would surely have been hopeless had the very
majesty of God not descended to us, since it was not in our
power to ascend to him. Hence it was necessary for the Son
of God to become for us ―Immanuel, that is, God with us‖
and in such a way that his divinity and our human nature
might by mutual connection grow together. 178
In the act of creation, God imaged himself in man. In Calvin‘s
words, ―man was created therefore in the image of God and in him
the Creator was pleased to behold as in a mirror His own glory."179
Thus, Calvin argued, the image of God was in fact Christ, the Son
of God, from the beginning. ―Christ was even then the image of
God and accordingly whatever excellence was engraven on Adam
had its origin in this, that by means of the only begotten Son he
approximated to the glory of his Maker… to this degree of honour
he was exalted by thekindness of the only begotten Son.‖180
The reflexive nature of the first and second Adam is
important to Calvin‘s understanding of redemption. By nature
relational, Adam could only come to knowledge of himself through
another. In the biblical narrative, this began with the original
178
Institute 2.12.1
Institute 2.12.6
180
ibid.
179
128
couple: man and woman. Calvin plays upon this relationship
between man and woman to explain the relationship of Christ to
Man in redemption. So in Eve, Adam ―obtained a faithful
associate of life, for he now saw himself who before had been
imperfect rendered complete in his wife. An in this we see a true
resemblance of our union with the Son of God. For he became
weak that we might have the members of His body endued with
strength.‖181 Thus, the holy and sacred bond that was between
Adam and Eve foreshadowed the sacred bond between the believer
and Christ for here was one like himself through whom man could
approach God.
The importance of this bond in redemption lies in its power
to reorder humankind in accord with the true image of God. Even
as the order and image of humankind was perverted in Adam‘s fall,
in Christ that order and image is restored under the sovereignty of
God. In Christ, the Son‘s trust, obedience and love of the Father
makes available to man true knowledge of himself and makes
available the rectitude that was lost in the fall. ―God sends his
Word to us in order to be joined to us that we may be united to
Him, so that He requires nothing but obedience that we may be his
children and He show Himself to be our Father… Seeing that we
have God‘s Word, we have a record of the fact that He desires to
be one with us, and to do the duty of a father, and to maintain us all
in prosperity—if we bury not His grace, nor withhold the thing that
is due on our part.‖182 In our union with Christ, Christ‘s order and
reconciliation becomes our own.
Union with Christ is doubly effective. First our unity with
Christ allows his trust and obedience to supersede our
disobedience; ―our Lord came forth as true man and took the
person and the name of Adam in order to take Adam‘s place in
obeying the Father, to present our flesh as the price of satisfaction
to God‘s righteous judgment, and in the same flesh to pay the
181
182
Comm. On Gen. 2:21
Serm. On Deut. 5:28
129
penalty that we had deserved.‖183 Thus, Christ‘s obedience
expiates our disobedience. Secondly as the divine Son of God he
embodies in his person the true image of God. In all he does,
Christ reflects God‘s Glory. Thus, in Christ, those who have placed
their faith in Christ now reflect the true image of God through
Christ their head. This twofold redemption founded upon union
with Christ is then established through the life and ministry of
Jesus.
Redemption and the Offices of Christ:
As the anointed prophet, Christ is ―herald and witness of the
Father‘s grace. And that not in the common way—for he is
distinguished from other teachers with a similar office.‖184 For
Calvin, Christ‘s divine office as the true prophet makes him the
source and summation of the Word of God to man. Christ, as the
Incarnate Word, both exposes man‘s sin and rebellion even as it
reveals the grace and redemption now available in Christ. God‘s
Word in Christ reveals the image of God without distortion.
Moreover, Christ as the incarnate Word becomes the touchstone
for an orderly understanding of the true nature of the cosmos and
of the true nature of man. Thus, for Calvin, ―outside Christ there is
nothing worth knowing.‖185 This is not because knowledge outside
Christ is not valid knowledge, but that only through Christ can man
receive ―the whole immensity of heavenly benefits.‖186 The key to
Calvin‘s distinction between the knowledge available through
Christ as Prophet and knowledge apart from Christ involves
wisdom. ―The prophetic dignity in Christ leads us to know that in
the sum of doctrine as he has given it to us all parts of perfect
wisdom are contained.‖187 In this sense, Christ as Prophet ties
together and sums up all knowledge that would make man wise.
183
Institute 2.12.3
Institute 2.15.2
185
ibid.
186
ibid.
187
ibid.
184
130
The knowledge of Christ as King provides comfort and hope
for those who trust in him. In Paul‘s statement ―Then… he (Christ)
will deliver the Kingdom to his Father,‖ (1 Cor. 15:2) Calvin
discerns a two stage process to the establishment of God‘s
sovereignty and man‘s obedience. The first stage comes with
Christ‘s sovereign rule over the church after his ascension. This
sovereignty is ―spiritual‖ in the sense that its full power and
influence will only be realized at the end of the age. With Christ‘s
return, the distinct sovereignty of Christ over the church will then
be extended to all creation as all things are brought under
subjection to God.
Prior to Christ‘s return, the church orders its life and ministry
according to Christ the King. Christ‘s Kingdom is not ―of this
world‖ in that it is not ―earthly or carnal and hence subject to
corruption, but spiritual, it lifts us up even to eternal life.‖ 188
Though spiritual, the impact of Christ‘s Kingdom upon the faithful
in their everyday existence is profound. It‘s benefits are the trust
and hope in God it provides even in the worst of circumstance.
Thus it is that we may patiently pass through this life with its
misery, hunger, cold, contempt, reproaches, and other
troubles—content with this one thing: that our King will
never leave us destitute, but will provide for our needs until
our warfare ended, we are called to triumph. Such is the
nature of his rule, that he shares with us all that he has
received from the Father. Now he arms and equips us with
his power, adorns us with his beauty and magnificence,
enriches us with his wealth. These benefits then give us the
most fruitful occasion to glory, and also provide us with
confidence to struggle fearlessly against the devil, sin, and
death. Finally, clothed with his righteousness, we can
valiantly rise above all the world‘s reproaches: and just as he
himself freely lavishes his gifts upon us, so may we, in
return, bring forth fruit to his glory.189
188
189
Institute 2.15.4.
ibid.
131
Recognition of Christ‘s sovereignty during this intermediate
period extends the the gracious attributes of Christ to the believer.
Thus, in the midst of difficulty, Christ‘s grace, power, beauty, and
magnificence become manifest in the believer as they take on the
character of their sovereign. United with Christ, they show forth
the ―fruit to his glory‖ both now and in the expectation of the ―full
fruit of this grace in the age to come.‖190 In this manner, Christ the
King serves as both the source and goal of man‘s glory. Further, as
the fulfillment of the Davidic kingship, Christ is both ruler and
pastor of his people. As ruler, Christ establishes the order of the
church and reestablishing God‘s peaceable kingdom amongst his
people. As Pastor, he protects his flock in their current weakness.
In both he restores God‘s rightful rule over his people and
engenders the trust and obedience required for man to once again
approach God in the true image of God: Jesus Christ himself.
Christ as Priest reconciles God to man and man to God. This
reconciliation brought about by Christ‘s sacrificial death
overcomes man‘s defilement and separation from God. As we
have previously noted, man‘s distrust and disobedience separated
man from God‘s Word. Apart from Christ, according to Calvin,
―our prayers have no access to God unless Christ, as our High
priest, having washed away our sins sanctifies us and obtains for us
that grace from which the uncleanness of our transgressions and
vices debars us.‖191 Christ, however, through his death on the
cross, his resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the Father
becomes humankind‘s ―everlasting intercessor.‖192 ―Through his
pleading we obtain favor. Hence arises not only trust in prayer, but
also peace for godly consciences, while they safely lean upon
God‘s fatherly mercy and are surely persuaded that whatever has
been consecrated through the Mediator is pleasing to God.‖193
190
Institute 2.15.3
Institute 2.15.6.
192
ibid.
193
ibid.
191
132
United to Christ in faith, man now can approach God in trust and
peace because of the mercy and intercession of Christ.
Thus, as Prophet, Priest and King, Christ has overcome the
tragedy of the first Adam and reopened the path to trust, obedience,
gratitude and glorification. In each of these offices, Christ as
God‘s Word represents God to man: His judgment, His
sovereignty, and his redemption. As man, Christ represents
redeemed humanity before the Father as the obedient Son who
establishes God‘s sovereignty in trust and obedience by taking on
the penalty that was due sinful humankind in order that God and
man might once again dwell together in peace.
Regeneration by the Spirit:
Calvin held creation, the fall, God‘s Word and redemption all
in view so as to appreciate the full grace and glory of God revealed
in Christ. Without appreciation of creation and the fall, the full
measure of salvation could never be fully appreciated. Without an
appreciation of the role trust and obedience were to play in the
perfection of man, one cannot appreciate the horrible consequences
of man‘s distrust and disobedience of God.
Without an
appreciation of the Word of God in Creation, once cannot fully
grasp the manner in which Christ‘s rectitude and mediation
restored the Word of God to humankind.
Because in Calvin‘s view the image of God is not a natural
property of the soul, but an active response and reflection of the
holiness and righteousness of God, even with Christ‘s incarnation,
sacrificial death, resurrection and ascension, there remained the
matter of the full restoration of fallen humankind to their original
destiny prior to the Fall. Though salvation had been made
available in Jesus Christ, man‘s former distortion remained.
Without the Spirit of God, man remained carnal and subject to
disorder, despair and death. Thus, the influence of God‘s Spirit
must be restored if man is to attend to the God‘s Word in trust and
obedience.
133
To overcome man‘s alienation from God, man‘s conscious
self needed to be ―regenerated‖ that he might respond to God‘s
Word. Spiritual regeneration was required. Thus Calvin:
Regeneration is like another creation, and if we compare it
with the first creation it far surpasses it. For it is much better
for us to be made children of God, and reformed after His
image within us, than to be created mortal: for we are born
children of wrath, corrupt and degenerate (Eph. 2:3), since all
integrity was lost when God‘s image was removed. We see,
then, the nature of our first creation. But when God
refashions us, we are not only born sons of Adam, but we are
brothers of angels and members of Christ, and this our second
life consists in rectitude, justice and the light of true
intelligence.194
In regeneration there is ―new creation.‖ ―New creation‖ in
Christ fulfills all that original creation intended, but goes beyond.
Whereas man before the fall had the capacity to become a true son
of God this filial relationship remained potential not actuality. In
regeneration by the Holy Spirit, man‘s filial relationship with God
is no longer potential but reality. Union with Christ by the Holy
Spirit makes us ―brothers of angels and members of Christ‖.
Accordingly the Spirit and the Word guide and transform the
believer to conform the inner man to reflect Christ. Rather than an
external possibility, through regeneration the image of God is now
an internal reality. Thus, according to Calvin, ―the likeness must
be within, in himself. It must be something which is not external to
him, but is properly the internal good of the soul.‖195
At the same time, however, even though it is an ―internal
good of the soul‖, this new ―likeness‖ remains pure gift. According
to Calvin, the true image of God is always a reflection in Man of
the glory of God and not intrinsic to man‘s nature; glory is grace
194
195
Comm. On Ezek. 18:32.
Institute I 15. 4.
134
not nature. Because it does not exist intrinsically in the nature of
man, but is reflected by it, the glory of God is only something that
can be communicated by the Spirit.
This newly created capacity to reflect the glory of God,
Calvin viewed as man‘s ―spirit‖. ―Whatever in man is created
anew in the image of God is called spirit. ‗that which is born of the
flesh is flesh; that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.‘‖196 This
allowed Calvin to distinguish between spirit and soul, which was
necessary in light of Calvin‘s insistence that the image of God is in
no way a natural possession, but a spiritual gift wrought through
communion between man and God in trust and obedience. Hence,
it is a new creation not merely the extension or even restoration of
man‘s previous capacity. Rather it is conformity to God by ―grace
and virtue of the Spirit.‖197
Conformity to the likeness of God now happens by the Spirit
through the Word. As we noted earlier, in the Fall man cut himself
off from the Spirit thus making the flesh the governing disposition
of his soul. In regeneration, the Spirit now resides within man and
radically alters man‘s disposition. Where before he was cut off
from the Word of God, now by the power of the Spirit man can
once again respond in trust and obedience to God and proceed
towards God. This new disposition opens man to the Word of God
in order to respond to it.
For Calvin this change takes place before the individual is
even conscious of it. Because man is dead in sin, unless the Spirit
renews the soul, man could never respond to the love and call of
Jesus Christ. Nonetheless, this inner transformation works in
tandem with the Word that comes to man externally in the
Preaching of the Word. Even as man hears the external Word of
God, the internal work of the Spirit allows him to hear, to be
enlightened, and to respond. This results in the conscious turning
from sin and subsequent repentance and conversion. Nonetheless,
196
197
The Eternal Predestination of God. (Eng. Tra. By H. Cole), p. 101.
Institute 1.15.5
135
it is impossible at any point to neatly distinguish that which is pure
gift from that which is conscious response on man‘s part.
Accordingly faith is necessarily evidential of the work of the Holy
Spirit. Without the Spirit, man could never respond to God being
dead in sin. Instead, faith is the fruit of the Holy Spirit‘s inner work
and not our work by which we receive the Holy Spirit. This leaves
man with only one proper response to God‘s wonderful work of
salvation: gratitude. For both the object of our faith, Jesus Christ,
and the ability to receive him by faith through regeneration by the
Holy Spirit are entirely gracious.
Nonetheless, conversion is not the end of the story in the life
of the believer but its beginning. Regeneration and conversion
begin the process of the return to God, but they are not its focus.
Rather, the concern of Calvin, and Reformed faith ever since, has
been to highlight the majesty and the praise of God. Unlike
Augustine who sought to find God in the recesses of his soul,
Calvin believed such myopic introspection the characteristic of
man‘s selfish indulgence. The work of the Spirit and the Word was
to direct the vision of the believer to contemplate the wonder and
majesty of God. Indeed, Reformed faith was to counteract anxious,
self-centered concern with personal salvation. as the quiet
confidence that has marked Reformed faith through the centuries as
a calm harbor amidst the turbulent sea of life.
Trust, Obedience and the Christian Life:
Thus, the story of new creation in Christ by the power of the
Holy Spirit directs us from the tragedy that was the fate of man to
the wonderful triumph that has been achieved and be fully realized
with the full establishment of God‘s Kingdom. Calvin‘s emphasis
on God‘s restoration of trust and obedience through Christ and the
power of the Holy Spirit has tremendous implications in terms of
the Christian life and the establishment of the church.
136
Holiness:
…that all things were ordained for the use of man, that he, being
under deeper obligation, might devote and dedicate himself
entirely to obedience towards God.
If nothing less, the above should amplify the crucial role
trust and obedience play in a life that would glorify God. Too
often misunderstood, Calvin‘s stress on God‘s Sovereignty and
predestination was not an abdication of holiness but its necessary
foundation. Emphasis on grace was not a way of getting around
obedience, but the action of God‘ to conform us to his will. Only as
man lifts his gaze up to Christ does man finds his proper
orientation and place before God. In turn, as we focus on Christ
and his sovereignty we find comfort and rest for our souls. What
Calvin saw in his day and we need to recognize in our own is that
holiness and trust in God‘s sovereignty are flip sides of the same
coin. Trust and obedience in the Word of God flows from a life
resting in God‘s ultimate sovereignty and it is out of that rest and
trust that we glorify God by reflecting his holiness.
Engaging the Mind by Applying the Word
…that he was endued with understanding and reason, that
being distinguished from brute animals he might meditate on a
better life, and might even tend directly towards God, whose image
he bore engraved on his own person.
Calvin‘s Reforming work emphasized the importance of the
Word of God to true reason and wisdom. Unlike Catholicism,
Lutheranism, and even Anabaptism, Calvinism has been uneasy
with any dichotomy that would too sharply partition rationality into
sacred and secular realms. It is no surprise that it was Karl Barth
and Reinhold Niebuhr, two Reformed theologians who shattered
the naïve secularism of Protestant Liberalism by appeal to the
command of God and the truth of God. Their powerful influence
both in the church and society derived largely from their showing
the relevance of revelation to the modern age. Like them, we must
137
see that trust and obedience are not the enemies of true knowledge,
but their necessary foundation. In our post-modern era, though
often beset by a vicious relativism, there has been a new openness
amongst even secular philosophers to the rationality of religious
description and symbolism. Accordingly, we should engage men‘s
minds as to the necessary relationship of reason, revelation and
wisdom.
As Calvin realized such wisdom should be applied to civil
life. A common misconception is that continual emphasis on the
majesty and sovereignty of God leads to an escapist and
otherworldly perspective: indifferent to the needs of the world. In
fact the Reformed emphasis on trust and obedience has historically
had the opposite effect. As Karl Barth has argued:
God has ordained and chosen (men) into his temporal and
eternal service, and, consequently into everlasting life. The
notion of service should not be missing. In the New
Testament, they did not come to the Church merely so that
they might be saved and happy, but that they might have the
signal privilege of serving the Lord. 198
Rather than an irresponsible otherworldliness, Calvin‘s
emphasis on trust and obedience led to a critical engagement in
society that transformed Western civilization. The Reformed
Christianity has historically viewed social responsibility as a divine
task. Emphasis on divine election in Reformed thought has not in
the main resulted in an indifferent quietude, but recognition of our
election by God to fulfill his purposes on earth. As Michael
Walzer has noted:
It was the Calvinists who first switched the emphasis of
political thought from the prince to the saint… and then
constructed a theoretical justification for independent
political action. What Calvinists said of the saint, other men
198
Karl Barth as quoted in John H. Leith‘s Introduction to the Reformed
Tradition, Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox Press, 1981, p. 72
138
would later say of the citizen: the same sense of civic virtue,
of discipline and duty, lies behind the two names… The
saints saw themselves as divine instruments and theirs was
the politics of wreckers, architects, and builders—hard at
work upon the political world… They treated every obstacle
as another example of the devil‘s resourcefulness and they
summoned all their energy, imagination, and craft to
overcome it.
Adoration:
After the world had been created, man was placed in it as in a
theater, that he, beholding above him and beneath the wonderful
works of God, might reverently adore their Author…
Professor B.Z. Phillips once commented on a book of essays
by various celebrated individuals entitled The God I want… that he
could not imagine a sillier exercise: ―it is not the God I want, but
the God you are damn well going to get‖199 Phillips‘s sentiments
resonate deeply with our sound Reformed conviction that all
human beings are accountable at every moment to the living God.
Only by lifting our gaze to our Lord and God brings focus and
depth to life. As we have noted, our life and destiny are rooted in
the design and will of God. Trust and obedience should be the
reflex of all who would pursue their chief end: ―to glorify God and
enjoy him forever.‖
This should affect our worship. Too often worship in the
church is obsessed with the ―unholy trinity‖ of ―me, myself, and I.‖
It was man‘s disobedience that led to this tragic myopia. Bent in on
himself, man could no longer attend to the Word of God wherein
lay his glory and salvation. How much more, then, should the
focus of our worship be on the majesty and wonder of God. The
order of Reformed worship has reflected that emphasis for the last
400 years and it should be maintained. True worship begins with
adoration of God. Like Isaiah the prophet in the presence of God,
199
as quoted in Colin Gunton‘s ―Proteus and Procrustes‖ in Speaking the
Christian God. Ed. Alvin F. Kimel Jr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992, p 91.
139
we ought to be struck by our own unworthiness, confess our sins
and receive God‘s pardon. Cleansed and healed, we can then hear
the Word and be enlightened by the Spirit. The Word sealed in our
hearts by the Spirit allows us then to respond in trust and
obedience. Finally, reflecting His glory, we are sent into the world
to honor God and serve our fellow men that they too might come to
trust and obey the Living and Sovereign God revealed in Jesus
Christ.
140
Ringkasan:
Tragedi dan Kemenangan Dalam Teater Allah:
Pandangan Reform Tentang Hubungan antara Iman,
ketaatan dan Gambar Allah.
K
etika Tuhan Allah menciptakan dunia ini, ditempatkan di
dalamnya seperti sebuah teater/pertunjukan. Disana Tuhan
Allah menempatkan manusia jauh lebih tinggi dari segala ciptaan
dengan memberikan manusia itu tugas yang begitu luar biasa,
dengan tujuan agar pada akhirnya manusia itu memuliakan Allah
sang pencipta. Dan teater/ pertunjukan yang membuka selubung
esensi jiwa, moral dan spiritual manusia adalah penciptaan.
Manusia diciptakan begitu sempurna karena mereka
diciptakan menurut gambar dan rupa Allah. Gambar dan rupa
Allah di dalam diri manusia itu harus senantiasa dijaga. Ada dua
hal penting yang perlu bagi manusia untuk menjaga agar gambar
dan rupa Allah itu tetap ada pada dirinya yaitu dengan percaya dan
taat (trust dan obey). Untuk percaya dan taat berarti manusia itu
mempunyai kewajiban khusus yaitu memperhatikan firman Allah.
Percaya adalah berkaitan dengan penyerahan dan penghormatan
sepenuhnya kepada Allah dan firman-Nya dengan demikian
gambar dan rupa Allah memperoleh wujud/bentuk dalam diri
manusia. Itulah sebabnya Calvin berpendapat bahwa manusia yang
ingin terus menampakkan gambar dan rupa Allah haruslah nyata
dalam ketaatan dan kebersandarannya yang penuh pada perintah
Allah, serta dinamika interaksi antara manusia dan Allah.
Dengan demikian bagi teologi Reform trust and obey
menjadi unsur penting karena percaya dan taat kepada firman dan
perintah Allah haruslah terefleksi dalam kehidupan sehari-hari.
Bagi Calvin percaya dan taat pada Allah menuntut keterlibatan
yang aktif dan nyata di dalam isu-isu praktis dari individu, kelurga,
dan kehidupan sosial politik, yang pada akhirnya mencapai
puncaknya yaitu untuk menumbuhkembangkan rasa ucapan syukur
141
yang dalam dari setiap orang percaya, karena Calvin percaya
bahwa tujuan akhir dari semuanya itu adalah pada pengagungan
terhadap Allah.
Kejatuhan Manusia
Kejatuhan manusia kedalam dosa adalah sebuah tragedi.
Calvin berpendapat bahwa kalau kita gagal melihat betapa
dalamnya kejatuhan manusia kedalam dosa, dan kesengsaraan
manusia karenanya, maka kita adalah orang yang malang. Karena
tanpa menyadari betapa menderitanya manusia itu karena dosa kita
tidak dapat memperoleh keselamatan yang ada di dalam Yesus
Kristus. Hanya melalui Firman Tuhan manusia bisa mengerti dan
menyadari bahwa dirinya orang berdosa yang membutuhkan
keselamatan. Bagi Calvin kejatuhan manusia ke dalam dosa bukan
hanya sekedar peristiwa masa lampau, tetapi mewakili keadaan
pemberontakan manusia yang terus menerus.
Karena itu dalam perspektif teologi Reform, kejatuhan
manusia itu tidaklah mengurangi tragedi dosa. Tetapi percaya dan
taat menjadikan manusia itu memiliki persekutuan rohani dengan
Allah, sebaliknya ketidakpercayaan dan ketidaktaatan telah
membuat manusia menjadi objek dari kemurkaan dan rasa malu
yang luar biasa.
Penebusan dalam Kristus
Natura dari Adam yang pertama dan Adam yang kedua
adalah sangat penting bagi pengertian Calvin tentang penebusan.
Dan gambaran tentang ikatan yang mendalam antara Adam dan
Hawa dan analogi tentang relasi antara Kristus dan Jemaatnya.
Karena itu persekutuan dengan Kristus bagi Calvin memiliki
fungsi ganda yaitu: pertama, persekutuan dengan Kristus
membiarkan kepercayaan dan ketaatan kita untuk menggantikan
ketidaktaatan kita. Kedua, sebagai anak Allah yang ilahi Yesus
memiliki gambar dan rupa Allah, karena mereka yang ada didalam
142
Kristus memiliki gambar Allah yang sempurna. Untuk itu semua,
Yesus melakukan penebusan
Penebusan dan Jabatan Kristus
Dalam kapasitasnya sebagai penebus, Kristus mempunyai
tiga jabatan penting, yaitu: sebagai nabi, raja dan imam. Sebagai
nabi, Yesus menyuarakan suara anugerah Allah kepada umat
manusia yaitu anugerah pengampunan yang ada di dalam dia.
Sebagai raja, Yesus menyediakan penghiburan dan pengharapan
bagi mereka yang percaya kepadanya. Disamping itu Yesus
memiliki kekuasaan sebagaimana yang dianugerahkan oleh Bapa
kepada-Nya. Sebagai imam, Yesus mendamaikan manusia kepada
Allah dan Allah kepada manusia. Dalam karya rekonsiliasi inilah
yang menjadikan Yesus sebagai korban bagi kejahatan dan dosa
umat manusia.
Percaya, Taat dan Kehidupan Kristen
Kisah tentang penciptaan yang baru lewat kuasa Roh Kudus
menggiring kita dari sebuah tregedi yang menjadi kutuk bagi umat
manusia kepada kemenangan yang luar biasa yang kita capai dalam
Kristus, dan yang akan terealisasikan pada saat kerajaan Allah
didirikan. Calvin menekankan pada restorasi dari ―percaya‖ dan
―taat‖ melalui Yesus Kristus dan kuasa Roh Kudus yang memiliki
implikasi yang luar biasa didalam kehidupan orang percaya dan
gereja.
Alfius Areng Mutak
143
An Anatomy of Belief and Faith:
A Theological and Pastoral Reflection
Joseph Tong
G
enerally speaking, belief and faith were understood as
identical. Literally speaking, belief is more or less considered
as more subjective and personal, whereas faith is considered as
slanting toward more objective and confessionally public.
Nevertheless, in the context of religious studies, both are used
interchangeably indicating a special state of mind within a person
and his conviction or position as he is confronted with something
inexplicable. The two are dealt differently only whenever some
special aspect was emphasized.
The word faith has gone through many changes of meaning
throughout human history. Religiously speaking, faith surely is the
knowledge of the mind and heart that indicate a total or ultimate
concern of human soul and mind as a state or final ground for
man‘s behavior. Differs from belief, faith is not solely personal,
nor it is a personal decision or claim, as if it has nothing to do with
others. In fact, in Christian theology, both belief and faith cannot
be personal, nor are they the result of personal thought, emotion, or
volition; instead, they spring out of God and God‘s revelation. That
is why we said, though belief is the result of one‘s thought,
position, or religious experience of personal commitment, it cannot
be something solely personal. Faith is a response, or response state
when one contemplates God and God‘s creation. Simply speaking,
the positive indication of such a response is called faith, the
negative is called disbelieve, or the evil unbelief.
The matter becomes quite complicate in theological
discussion as we reflect and analyze the issue theologically. This is
due to the fact that belief and faith do not only concern with one‘s
stands, religion, and commitment, it is in fact the sum total of one‘s
144
thought, behavior, and existence, even the surety and certainty of
one‘s existence. This is why the author of Hebrews gives the
puzzling but cogent statement, that ‖ Faith is being sure of what we
hope for and certain of what we do not see!‖ (Hebrews 11:1)
This paper intends to work within a philosophical framework
in order to present a positive anatomic reflection, in the context of
theological discourse with pastoral concern, on the issue of belief
and faith. The main purpose is to explicate the detailed elements of
faith, their natures, meanings, consequences, and effects. It is the
writer‘s hope that we may have a better understanding of the Truth
that was entrusted to us within pastoral context that we might hold
on to the faith we have and be more fruitful and truthful in the
church, and in the society as well.
A Clarification on The Understanding of
The Elements of Faith
Biblically speaking, God is the only source of faith, and his
Word is the foundation of faith. Without God and the Word of
God, there can never be faith, nor do we need faith. As God and his
Word are, so faith shall be. Faith always evolves as the Spirit of
God acts and human being concurredly responded. Plainly
speaking, faith cannot come from man, or initiated by man, nor can
it be completed by man. As Paul once states, ―Faith comes from
hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of
Christ…‖ ― For from Him and through Him and to him are all
things ― (Romans 10:17; 11:36). It is God who first gave us his
Word, and the Spirit who moved in a specific mode of operation to
make us turn to God from idols to serve the living and true God. (I
Thess. 1:9)
Therefore, theologically speaking, faith is purely a gift of
God. It is God, in his mercy, gives his word to us by way of
revelation, incarnation, inspiration and inscripturation, and
proclamation, to bring us to hear his word and to respond to his
calling toward repentance and remission of sin.
145
Nevertheless, from human perspective, faith is actually man‘s
proper attitude and response toward God‘s presence in the
presentation of his Word. Traditionally, Christian theology, based
on the Bible, describes such a response in three modes, namely,
intellectual faith (noticia), mind or sensual faith (assensus), and
willing faith (fiducia), to indicate the intellectual, emotional, and
volitional elements of faith and their effects on human existence,
respectively. These result from the operation of the Holy Spirit
through the Word and the presentation of the Word and its
proclamation to open man‘s hearts and renew their mind in order
that they may know God and his revelation. As such, man began to
know the foolishness, vanity, stubbornness, and darkness of his
former states. Under God‘s illumination, our mind begins to
realize and sense the contrition of our sinful lives, and willingly
and cheerfully consents to the admonition of the Spirit, as we are
cut to the heart and turn to God (cf. Acts 2:37). At last, we can
happily trust in God and his Word, and unconditionally accept his
judgment, to receive his merciful grace toward the regeneration to
enter into the Kingdom of his beloved Son (Col.1: 13)
In fact, intellectual faith and sensual faith both are the state of
mind in the intellectual and emotional realm. They are called
intellectual knowledge and sensual knowledge, respectively. They
are temporal faith, as they are both limited to physical and
existential or experiential matters. Due to the fact that temporal
faith submit itself to factual and physical evidences, it is
susceptible to change and dissipates in time and space.
Undoubtedly intellectual faith and mind or sensual faith have
factual certainty; nevertheless they are temporal and therefore
undurable. This is exactly the reason why most traditional church
has much difficulty accepting the Charismatic movement and its
operation in the church.
As far as faith is concerned, intellectual knowledge and
sensual knowledge need volitional decision and commitment to
complete its course. Both need the planting of the Word to build
toward their fulfillment to be called true faith.
146
In theology, volitional commitment is called fiducia, or trust.
Trusting faith is a total different kind of faith. The trusting faith is
not only concerned with volition, choice, decision, commitment
and action. Trusting faith is in fact judged by the object of faith to
which trust is aimed. It is the trusted one, not the trusting one, who
determines the certainty, the meaning, and the value of that trust. In
other words, in trusting faith, the focus is not only on the decision
and the action of the trust itself; instead, it should be on what one
trusts and whom one trusts. In Christian doctrine, Christians have
two objects of their trust, namely, the Truth or the Word of God
and God himself. The former is called prepositional or doctrinal
faith, whereas the latter is called relational or lively faith, the truth
content and the life content of the faith. Simply speaking, it means
knowing what you believe and whom you believe in; and willing to
die for your faith, as well as willing to live for it (or him) as
situation so demanded. Though the faithful ones fear no death; yet
they prefer to live for their faith.
It was reported, when the former Soviet Union disintegrated,
many high ranking officer comrades committed suicides. The
reason, among others, is that they believe in Communism that there
are something worth dying for, but nothing to live for. While
deaths do witness to something one believes, but when one
discovers that life does not proclaim the truth, what good is it to
live on? As far as the Truth is concerned, when one committed
himself to an untrue ideology, there may be many reasons worth
dying for it, because death irreversibly concludes all things, but
there is no single reason to live for it, as to live on is too long a
wasteful wait.
Christian faith does stand out differently. It has the Truth as
its prepositional faith; it also has the living Christ, the Savior, as its
relational and life base for its faith. In such a context, trusting
faiths make a believer not only willing to die for what he believes
in, but make him also able to live on what he believes in. Because
He lives, so shall we live, and shall we serve cheerfully (John
14:19, 12:24-26). Having this trusting faith, we can exclaim as Paul
once did, ―For me, to live is Christ . . .‖ and ―the life I live in the
147
body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave
himself for me.‖ (Phil.1: 21; Cal. 2:20)
The Essence of Faith --- The Word of God
Philosophical analysis yields the fact that anything that shares
eternal meaning or eternal values must have direct relation with the
Truth. Man cannot live without faith. This is due to the fact that
God has burden eternity on men (Ecclesiastes 3:10). The eternal
soul becomes an endless drive, pushing man to pursue what is
lasting and eternal--- the Truth. We all know that the
phenomenological manifestations of truth in physical world are
concrete facts.
We also certainly know that the concrete
manifestations of the truth (facts) is not necessary the Truth itself.
Nevertheless, we still endlessly seek the facts, as if truth is the sum
total of facts. This is absurd, yet we are still willingly and
continuously suffering so much even on such a vain pursuit.
Taking Kantian postulative structure framework of understanding,
such a continuous pursuit clearly indicates that we are certain that
the truth does exist. We even willing dedicating ourselves to it
unending pursuit and cheerfully submit ourselves under it.
In Christian view, the truth does not only rests in the eternal
God per se; it also rests in the revelation this God has given to man.
This is the reason for us to say that the essence of faith is not in the
facts, or the beliefs, nor in the trust we have on such facts, but in
the revealed Word of God. As the Word comes from the Eternal
God, the Word is his witness. The Word has become flesh in Christ
and lived among us. It is proclaimed and preserved by the church
Christ has redeemed. For this reason, theology takes the Church as
guardian of Faith, as one who has the deposit of faith, where the
Bible states that the church is the Pillar and the foundation of the
Truth. (I Tim. 3:15)
One who is in the Church will not only has faith of the gospel
(fides evangelica) to become a child of God, he will be well
nourished in the Word of God and increase in faith and being
fulfilled. Therefore, true faith is not only initiated by the Word, it
148
also needs to be planted in the fertile soil: the Church. True faith
needs to be preserved and cared for in loving fellowship of the
people of God. In this context, the Holy Spirit will sanctify us and
purify our faith with his Word to make us fruitful. The is the main
thrust of pastoral theology.
The Meaning and the Effect of Faith
Speaking from theological standpoint, faith means total
commitment and trust in the Truth and having life union with the
One True God---- an ontological return to the Creator. This return
should not be understood in a pantheistic or panentheistic structure
mindset of returning to the origin, as in contemplative parareligious exercises, a return to the deity within. Nor should it be
understood as being able to attained the Word in order to be as god,
or to become god. Instead, it is an essential return to God in
Christian salvific context. The correct understanding of
Christianity is that Christ was the Word became flesh in order for
us to become man, not to become god. As we return to God, we
become children of God. Our faith in Christ generates the certainty
and assurance within us in the following manners in the
understanding of reality:
The Certainty In the Understanding of the Goodness of God
and the Perfect Nature of Man and His Salvation
The problem of evil in philosophy can only be explained in
the context of Christian faith, where faith provides the correct
reading and interpretation of the reality as a whole. Without faith
and belief in the Word of God, there will never be meaning for any
existence. Our faith in Christ assured us the certainty of goodness,
whereas evil is vain. In Christianity, evil has no real existence. In
fact, evil is not the negation of goodness, but the absence or
privation of good. The creation and the act of a perfect God are
always good. Such good is the foundation of all-good. Therefore,
in faith, what we have and what we experienced are good and
149
perfect. Such perfection becomes complete and becomes the
subject of praise in the salvation of Jesus Christ for his redeemed
children.
It is true that lives in this world are full of hardship,
sufferings, and tragedy. Nevertheless, for the faithful, life is full of
grace and desirable features. As light becomes brighter in darkness,
good becomes sweeter amongst bitterness, so is our life more
meaningful in hardship, sadness, and sufferings. To those who
have faith, all things work together for the good of those who love
God, those who were called of God. (Romans 8:28) It is in the faith
we see the beauty of God‘s creation, providence, and redemption.
The assurance of the true meaning and true value in faith
In social psychology and economics, value always follows
the price in such a way that value may be created by price.
Meaning then follows. Therefore, as long one dares to call the
price, even though there may not be market for a time being, yet if
he can hold long enough, coupling with proper propaganda and
promotion, others will certainly accept the value in its price, or by
the price they paid. I such manner, the price determines the market,
and further, the value was established as the price is paid. Man
even will have thought of the proper meaning to go along with it.
Though the reality is not that simple, nevertheless. this is exactly
how the value structure of the modern thought at work in present
days. Most people are not interested in seeking meaning and value
any more. This is the main. cause of present moral decay: A pure
description of a man without faith.
Theologically speaking, in fact, it is the meaning that
determines the value. The essence of the meaning is not found in
the reading and the interpretation of reality, but in the relation and
the union between that meaning and the truth of reality as a whole.
The Truth is the foundation of all meanings. In fact our problem is
not that we deny the reality that there is truth, but in assuming the
fact that truth needs to be understood to be real and meaningful.
This is exactly the reason most people deem the reading and the
interpretation of reality as reality and truth, believing that without
150
reading and interpretation, facts, reality and truth have no meaning
and therefore no value.
Such an assumption asserts that truth is purely a passive
existence. This is a wrong assumption. As reading and
interpretation must starts with some stands and assume certain
grounds, without which no communication is possible. Therefore,
it can be noted that truth is not passive. Instead it must be active.
One who reads, comprehends, and interprets, must take the role of
a supporting actor. The prime actor, in this regard, is the Truth
itself or the Truth giver. Faith is an agent in such a process.
In theology, we consider faith is that which faculty God
graciously granted in the heart of man, making him capable of
making proper response when truth is presented. It opens the mind
of man to accept God‘s revelation and to submit to the truth as
presented. In faith, we know the truth, assert the meaning, affirm
the value, and compete our existence. Simply speaking, true faith
brings us to a clear understanding of meaning, sense the value, and
enjoy our existence. Without faith meaning escapes, value waivers,
and existence is filled with anxiety and tension. This answers the
question why the faithless always lives in vain and groins without
hope.
The Certainty of the Enjoyment of Existence in the Faith
In creation, existence is an ontological necessity. As such, it tends
to become tasteless and meaningless, making us helpless.
Philosophical speaking, other than God who is self-existence, all
others are subject to limitations. Therefore, unless there is faith,
nothing is enjoyable. Existence without faith yields helplessness
and brings hopelessness, frustration and boredom. Faith brings us
to tasty enjoyment of life. This is exactly why Paul can say; I live
by faith in the Son of God.
For Christians, as we believe in Christ and partakes in the
nature of God, we surely experience the greatness and the goodness
of God, and God himself as well, in our existence. Augustine once
151
said, God gave all things for us to use (uti) so we can enjoy (frui)
God. Within such an understanding, even we have to go through
the trials of Job, we may still rejoice in sufferings, as he did,
claiming that: the Lord gives, the Lord also can take away. Praise
is his name (Job 1:21). Therefore, even he slain me, I will still
trust in him. Faith brings us to taste his grace, and he himself.
Making us not only find favor in the presence God, but also delight
in the Lord himself. (Hebrews 11:6; Romans 5:11).
The Apex of Belief and Faith in Operation
For common people, faith is an instrument to obtain or affirm
God‘s gift. This is true only in light of religious understanding of
faith. Theological speaking, faith is not an instrument; it is a state
of the heart and soul as total trust and commitment to God instead.
The word fiducia in theology bears many deep meanings.
Sometimes it is call fiducia cordis as the heart and core of faith. In
the course of its usage throughout history of the Church, it
apparently looses its intend and meaning along the way,. The
Church has gradually moved away from its emphasis on the
trusting aspect as demanded by the object we trust, to the specific
trusting aspects of the one who trusts. Moving away from
theocentric emphasis to anthropocentric emphasis, from theology
to anthropology.
For human being, the manifestation of belief and faith is an
action and virtuous behavior, commonly known as justification
before man and being praised by others. As God does not care for
the appearance, God has no need to base his justification on man‘s
good behavioral performance. Therefore, though faith is always
backed up by good behavior, yet faith in itself is a good deed
before God, not before man. This is why Faith sometime is called a
good act per se (cf. Luke 12:8). Faith is an act toward God and
before God. This is why God justifies man on account of his faith
not his behavior. In plain words, as faith is trusting in God, trust is
152
a total submission to God, as Paul states that we may believe on
him, and also suffer for Him. (Phil.1: 29)
The rest of this paper will dedicate itself to the explication of
faith in the sense of fiducia, which Christian theology further
explicates its meaning in terms of apprehensive faith, apprehensio
fiducialis; core faith or believing heart, fiducia cordis, and the
virtue of faith, or act of faith, actus fidei.
Apprehensive Aspects of Faith
What we meant by apprehensive faith is the result of the
gracious act and operation of the Holy Spirit, making man capable
to observe and apprehend the gift, the work, and the perfect will of
God in his deed. In other words, in apprehensive faith, man‘s mind
is captured by the word of God. As such, he will then be
completely absorbed in the knowledge and submission to God and
his revealed word, and willingly accept his judgment and mercy.
Like Abraham, he believes what God has promised, and God
counted this as his righteousness. This is the foundation for
Christian faith, the prime challenge and trial Christians are facing
now a day. The Psalmist once said, if the foundation was
destroyed, what could a righteous man do? (Psalm 11:2). This is
exactly where the ills of modern Church and modern theology are
generated. Lately, many efforts are dedicated to the discussion and
reconstruction of Christian theology, disregard to the fact that we
doubt our foundation of faith and replacing God with the names of
others (Psalm 16:4). This is an apparent sign of the lack of
apprehensive faith. Such an endeavor is deemed to fail, because
the seed of decay is implanted at the time it begins the
reconstruction.
True faith apprehends God‘s presence and God‘s greatness
everywhere and anywhere. Such an apprehension will bring us to
the experience of the youthful Joseph who once said, How can I do
such a great sin against the Lord! Even when no one is around!
153
Core Faith or Believing Heart
The word cordis fiducia bears two meanings: 1) as an
indication that the seat of faith is in the heart of man, and 2) that
the core of faith is that when the heart is indispensably united with
faith toward the truth. The former points to the fact that faith goes
beyond intellectual thought, having its seat at the core of human
existence: his soul. Cordis fiducia determines the religiosity of man
and his relation to his God. The latter points to the fact that the soul
has love, attentive, appreciative, and attached to God and his word.
Literal speaking, love and appreciation are somewhat
different. Love tends to be more real whereas appreciation inclines
to the concrete. Both are indications of a condition of true feeling
and work together as one expresses his attitude towards the object
of his believe and love. True faith expresses itself both in the heart
and in the mouth. The heart and the mouth concurred in believing
and confessing that Christ is the Lord (Romans 10:9-10). True faith
goes even beyond that, it will never be shameful of the Gospel of
Jesus Christ. (Roman 1:16; Mark 8:38-39)
In the context of pastoral concern, faith bears some kind of
mystique and miraculous aspect. It brings the one who believes to
be in a state of being siege, that he cannot withhold his confession
in public, nor can he resist the drive to proclaim Christ‘s name and
to magnify Him. In fact, he is so proud of being belonging to his
Lord.
From age to age, we have seen that though believing in Jesus
is spiritual and personal, but so far as faith is concerned, once one
professes his faith toward Christ, he will not hesitate to proclaim it
in public even at the cost of loosing his head. For others, a believer
does not have to be so offensive. Some even thought believers can
believe and pray silently or privately. But for true believers, their
faith becomes an unquenching fire burning within them that they
have no choice but to take action. Like Mary of Bethany, they will
break the bottle of the ointment of true Nard to anoint the Lord‘s
154
feet, risking others offensive critics and persecution as well. This is
an expression of appreciation at its best. True faith can cannot be
concealed. It will eventually turns to become fearful drive, which
moves the mountain and split the sea. It is a burning fire and
unceasing drops of water that puncher the thick limestone. All this
is just for the sake of faith, a heartfelt belief.
The virtue or act of faith
As was discussed elsewhere in this paper, true faith does not
need deeds to prove itself. True faith is indeed already a deed in
itself before God and acceptable to God. Theology refers this as the
virtue of faith, or act of faith. Following Paul, traditional Church
takes faith, hope, and love as the three basic pillars of Christian
virtue. The virtue of faith, is commonly understood as the most
conspicuous among the three that it attains most notice and praise
beyond others. Nevertheless, ontologically speaking, faith is
actually a clear self- consciousness of divine presence that
demands a total submission and commitment to God and his word.
The following depicts detailed account of the act faith as a moral
virtue:
Faith in commitment
Commitment is a natural voluntary act of a person as he is
convinced by certain truth. This brings us to some questions in
theology, so far faith and commitment is concerned, whether faith
is the result of personal subjective ability, habius fidei, or is it the
result of God‘s graciously gift, enabling him to totally commit
himself in presence of God? When faith is divine initiation, then
what man does is only practicing his God given privilege once he
confronts divine revelation. Man has no choice other than just
properly respond to God‘s calling. Speaking in light of the
Reformed persuasion, the commitment of faith is not of human
efforts, instead, it is a gift of God. And as such, the virtue of faith is
the work of God in itself. Man virtually has none contribution at
all. Thus man has no merit to claim. It is God who dwells in man.
Like how a log is carried away by Torrance of floods, men are
seized by God and God‘s love. Therefore, I commitment, we shall
155
stay calm likes a weaning child, totally rested in the bosom of the
mother. This is the sign of true faith that brings nothing other than
thankfulness and praise within us. One who has faith will never
boast, he will rather commit himself in a mode of total
commitment and boasts only in Christ and him crucified. (I Cor.
2:1-5)
Faith in submission and obedience
Faith and obedience are inseparable, they are both correct
concrete expressions of believing in Christ. Theologically
speaking, the opposite of faith is nor disbelief, not is it doubt, bur
pride and insubmission. The falls of Adam and Eve, and all other
Biblical figures all point to the fact that they are too proud and too
insubmissive. The Bible states that pride precedes destruction. The
first step of faith is denying and surrendering self in order to follow
the Lord. Obedience in faith involves the following:
Knowledge of God. Knowing the sovereignty of God and his
honor. We owe our existence to him, how can we question God or
having doubt on him and his Word? The Psalmist once said, I was
silent; I would not open my mouth, for you are the one who has
done this (Psalm 39:9). As we hear the Lord of the vineyard states,
―Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money
(Matt 20::15)? What can we do but to respond by saying that ― I
am the Lord‘s servant, do as you wish on me? When the Son of
God came to this world, he even emptied himself, and made
himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in
human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he
humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a
cross! (Phil 2:6-8). He even learned obedience through sufferings
(Hebrews 5:8). If we have ever known God, why can‘t we bow
down and be totally submissive to the Master!
The knowledge of self. In reality, we are often much occupied
in making comparison with others. In doing this, we are entrapped
in the ignorance of ourselves and our stands and our positions as
well. In fact, most people are dissatisfied with their entitlement.
156
This a result that we are ignorant of the fact from whom his whole
family in heaven and on earth derives its name (Ephesus 3: 15). To
Peter, who was preoccupied with the future fate of John, Jesus
answered, What is that to do with you, you must follow me. (John
21:22).
In fact God has assigned our portion and our cup; he has
made our lot secure. The boundary lines have fallen for me in
pleasant places; surely we have a delightful inheritance (Psalm
16:6-8). Therefore, let us be still and know that He is God (Psalm
46:10). Let us listen to his word to Daniel, ―As for you, go your
way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you
will rise to receive your allotted inheritance (Dan. 12:13). Be
submissive to His plan and his dealing. Do your best to obey him,
because He is your inheritance and the portion of your cup (Psalm
16:5). If you have faith, acknowledge and be satisfied with your
position---- a sign of having a true knowledge of self.
The Knowledge of the authority. Fear of people in power is a
common practice among man. Therefore, authority and power
eventually becomes the seat where one tenders his obedience. This
kind of fear is the result of not knowing the real authority. A true
obedience surrenders to authority yet knows no fear. It is a fruit of
the true faith instead. Within such a structure, love eventually will
evolves.
We believe and obey Christ not because we fear him, but
because we were caught in the mighty Torrance of God‘s love, and
we love him. In this context, obedience and submission are no
longer a matter of intellectual and sensational understanding, but a
drive of the soul toward fulfillment. Therefore, we make it our goal
to please Him (II Cor. 5:9). Though we have not seen him, we love
him; and even though we do not see him now, we believe in him
and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for we are
receiving the goal of our faith, the salvation of our souls (I Peter
1.8-9). Clarification of our understanding on authority will always
generate a lasting obedient heart within us.
157
Faith and following Jesus
What Christ wants of his disciples is to deny themselves, to
carry their cross and to follow Him. One who believes in the Lord,
shall follow the Lord. This is the demand of faith. John, the
beloved disciple of Christ has defined those who follow Christ as
those who obey his word, where God's love is truly made complete
in them….. For whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus
did (I John 2:5-6).
The final words of Christ to his disciples sounds alike, in
which he says, ―I have set you an example that you should do as I
have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his
master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now
that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them
(John 13:15-17). Following Christ is one of the most important
characteristics of being a Christian. As faith is founded in the word
of God, so it shall result in making us love the Lord and model
Christ. The documents and literatures of the Medieval saints
indicates the they all have their legacy in the practicing of the
imitation of Christ. They follow the Lord. constantly and
consistently Examining our life today, we shall be put to shame,
because though we claim that we know Christ, proclaim Christ, yet
in terms of submitting and surrendering ourselves to him, to follow
him, and to model after him, we are still too far away from God‘s
expectation.
Concluding Remarks
Simplicity of faith is an apparent paradox in reality. It is
simple in a way that after the fall, no one can have faith. We have
fallen into the trap of believing things, which is unbelievable, and
doubting things, which is true and believable. This is the reason
historian and philosopher, Will Durant once said: ―Religions come
and go, yet superstitions stay forever.‖ In the course of human
history, superstition seems always-preceded true
religion.
158
Therefore the best treatment for falsehood and superstition is not
power, politics, ideology, theory, or monetary gains. Not even
religion and religious beliefs, but true faith—I The faith that
grounded in the Word of God and the proper understanding of God
and his revelation. God once said to Jeremiah: ―Let the prophet
who has a dream tell his dream, but let the one who has my word
speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?" declares
the LORD. "Is not my word like fire," declares the LORD, "and
like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?‖(Jer 23:28-29) The
word of God is the only armor to deal with superstition and
falsehood beliefs. Let us build ourselves up in our most holy faith
and pray in the Holy Spirit. Keep ourselves in God's love as we
wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring us to eternal
life (Jude 20). As we have fought the good fight, have finished the
race, and have kept the faith. (II Tim 47-:8), let us keep believing
and cheerfully obeying Him. Be submissive, to be a man of faith
who has God‘s praise.
165
Ringkasan:
An Anatomy of Belief and Faith:
A Theological and Pastoral Reflection
ada umumnya orang mengganggap ―percaya‖ dan ―iman‖
sebagai dua kata yang identik. Sebenarnya secara harafiah
―percaya‖ itu dapat dikatakan bersifat subyektif dan pribadi,
sedangkan ―iman‖ itu lebih bersifat obyektif dan secara publik
bersifat konfesional (pengakuan).
P
Iman bukan semata-mata hasil pemikiran pribadi, emosi
ataupun kehendak manusia. Menurut theologi Kristen ―iman‖ itu
memancar dari Allah dan wahyu-Nya. Sebab itu kita katakan
bahwa meskipun percaya itu adalah hasil pemikiran, pandangan
dan pengalaman keagamaan seseorang, ia tidak dapat disebut
sebagai bersifat pribadi saja. Iman adalah suatu respon ketika
seseorang merenungkan tentang Tuhan dan ciptaan-ciptaan-Nya.
Iman merupakan penyimpulan dan rekapitulasi dari seluruh
pemikiran, kelakuan, keberadaan dan eksistensi, bahkan kepastian
dari eksistensi seseorang. Karangan ini bermaksud menganalisa
persoalan diatas di dalam bingkai filsafat untuk memaparkan
secara positif refleksi anatomi isue tentang percaya dan iman di
dalam konteks perbincangan theologis secara pastoral.
Penjelasan Tentang Elemen-elemen Iman
Secara Alkitabiah, Allah itu adalah sumber iman dan FirmanNya adalah dasar dari iman. Tanpa Allah dan Firman-Nya, tak
akan ada iman dan kita tak perlu iman. Iman berasal dari kasih
karunia Allah. Secara theologis iman itu adalah pemberian Allah.
Oleh rahmat pengasihan-Nya, Tuhan Allah telah memberikan
Firman-Nya melalui wahyu, Inkarnasi, inspirasi dan inskripturasi
(tulisan/Alkitab) dan proklamasi Injil, untuk menolong kita
mendengar firman-Nya dan meresponi panggilan-Nya agar kita
bertobat dan beroleh pengampunan dosa. Namun dari sisi
165
166
perspektif manusia, iman itu adalah sikap yang tepat dan respon
manusia terhadap kehadiran Allah melalui pemberitaan FirmanNya.
Esensi Iman – Firman Allah
Analisa Filosofi menunjukkan bahwa yang bermakna dan
bernilai kekal itu pasti mempunyai hubungan langsung dengan
kebenaran. Kebenaran tidak hanya ada pada Allah yang kekal itu,
tetapi juga pada wahyu yang diberikan Allah kepada manusia.
Sebab itu kita dapat berkata bahwa esensi iman itu ada pada
Firman yang diwahyukan Allah. Firman yang diwahyukan adalah
Yesus Kristus yang berinkarnasi dan Fimran yang tertulis yang Ia
berikan kepada umat-Nya.
Makna dan Efek Iman
Iman berarti komitmen penuh dan mempercayai kebenaran,
mempercayakan diri kepada Kebenaran serta bersekutu di dalam
hidup dari Allah yang Esa dan Benar. Ini berarti bahwa kita
berpaling kepada Allah di dalam konteks anugerah keselamatan di
dalam Yesus Kristus. Dengan berpaling kepada Allah melalui iman
kita menjadi anak-anak Allah. Dengan iman kita mengerti bahwa:
A. Allah itu baik, betapa sempurna natur manusia dan
keselamatan-Nya
B. Di dalam iman ada nilai dan makna hidup yang benar
C. Ada kenikmatan esistensi di dalam iman.
Puncak Percaya dan Iman Secara Operatif
Iman adalah keadaan hati dan jiwa sebagai pemercayaan diri
secara total dan komitmen kepada Allah. Secara manusia,
manifestasi dari iman itu adalah tindakan dan kelakuan yang saleh,
yang dapat dikatakan sebagai yang dibenarkan orang dan terpuji.
Tetapi yang benar ialah bahwa meskipun iman itu didukung oleh
kelakuan baik, tetapi lebih dari itu, iman itu sendiri adalah suatu
perbuatan baik dihadapan Allah, bukan dihadapan manusia. Iman
167
adalah suatu tindakan tehadap Allah dan dihadapan Allah. Dalam
kata lain, Iman itu mempercayakan diri kepada Allah dan
mempercayaan diri berarti ketaatan penuh kepada Allah.
Iman itu adalah hasil dari tindakan yang penuh kasih karunia
dari Roh Kudus yang menyebabkan kita dapat melihat dan
memahami karunia, karya dan kehendak Allah di dalam perbuatanperbuatan-Nya.
Iman itu terletak di hati (batin) manusia yang paling dalam.
Iman melampaui pengetahuan intelektual, dan iman itu
menghasilkan kasih, perhatian, apesiasi kepada Allah dan FirmanNya.
Secara ontologi iman itu adalah kesadaran penuh akan
kehadiran Allah yang menuntut penyerahan dan komitmen penuh
kepada Allah dan firman-Nya. Iman harus selalu membawa
komitmen, penyerahan diri dan ketaatan, serta tindakan mengikut
Tuhan Yesus.
Penutup
Maka di dalam menghadapi kepalsuan dan ketahyulan,
penyelesaiannya bukan dengan kekuasaan, politik, ideologi, teori
atau uang bahkan bukan agama dan kepercayaan agama, tetapi
dengan iman yang benar yang berdasarkan pada Firman Allah dan
pemahaman yang benar dari Allah dan wahyu-Nya. Mari kita
membangun diri kita di atas dasar iman yang paling suci dan selalu
berdoa dalam Roh Kudus dan mari kita memelihara diri kita
demikian dalam kasih Allah sambil menantikan rahmat Tuhan kita,
Yesus Kristus, untuk hidup yang kekal.
Peterus Pamudji
168
Tinjauan Buku
Judul buku
Sub Judul
Pengarang
Penerbit
Tahun Terbit
:
:
:
:
:
Berkenan Kepada Allah
Kehidupan Rohani Seorang Pelayan Tuhan
Oswald Chambers
Gospel Press, Batam
2001
Tinjauan:
―Trust‖ and ―Obey‖, menyerahkan diri dan taat, adalah dua
kata yang tak dapat dipisahkan dalam kehidupan seseorang yang
mengikut Yesus. Penyangkalan diri dan memikul salib adalah katakata lain dari dua istilah itu. Mereka bagaikan dua sisi dari satu
keping mata uang logam yang tidak dapat dipisahkan. ―Trust‖,
suatu penyerahan diri yang melekat di dalamnya penyangkalan
diri; ―obey‖, suatu ketaatan yang nampak pada kehidupan orang
percaya yang memikul salib. Inilah yang merupakan gambaran dari
apa yang diungkapkan oleh Paulus kepada Timotius di dalam
kehidupan murid yang melayani Tuhannya: ―Usahakanlah supaya
engkau layak di hadapan Allah sebagai seorang pekerja yang tidak
perlu malu‖ (2 Timotius 2:15), ayat yang menyatakan tuntutan
besar terhadap seorang pelayan Allah. Dan Oswald Chambers,
melalui bukunya ini, membantu kita memenuhi tuntutan Allah itu.
Buku ini memberikan kita kesempatan untuk mengikuti
kuliah ―sermon class‖ dari Oswald Chambers di London pada The
Bible Training College (Sekolah Pelatihan Alkitab) tahun 19111915. Lebih dari sekedar pelajaran cara-cara mempersiapkan dan
menyampaikan khotbah, apa yang disampaikan olehnya merupakan
gambaran isi hati Chambers berkaitan dengan makna menjadi
seorang pelayan Tuhan. ―Kehidupan rohani seorang pelayan adalah
―Allah nyata dalam daging‖, katanya. Ia melandasi pelayanan kita
sebagai orang Kristen pada ―tidak lain dari kasih yang berkuasa
dan meresap kepada Pribadi Yesus Kristus.‖
169
Satu catatan penting yang pernah dikemukakan oleh Oswald
Chambers: ―bahwa pelayan Allah harus terlebih dahulu mengalami
beberapa hal, sebelum dia diperbolehkan mempelajari kebenaran
ini.‖ Jadi, seorang pelayan Tuhan dituntut untuk rela menjalankan
disiplin hidupnya, yang akan membawa dia masuk ke dalam jalur
yang ditetapkan Allah baginya. Dalam buku ini, terdapat banyak
dorongan terhadap keteguhan rohani juga mentalitas yang benar,
dan terhadap disiplin intelektual, juga terhadap kesehatan rohani.
Pelayan Allah adalah suatu kesatuan, dalam roh, jiwa, dan tubuh
dan perlu dituntun oleh anugerah Allah, juga oleh pilihan dan
pengabdian pribadi, untuk seutuhnya bekerja dengan harmonis.
Kepintaran manusia dapat menjadi suatu jerat yang besar, dan
kesalehan yang nampak dari luar saja tidaklah cukup. Orang yang
menjadi pelayan Allah, yang diperlengkapi untuk setiap pekerjaan
baik, harus menerima disiplin rohani dalam hal teguran, koreksi,
dan latihan kebenaran yang disampaikan Alkitab, juga disiplin
mental yaitu pengertian yang tepat, yang dituntut oleh Alkitab.
Perkataan ini, dengan mengesankan, menuntun kita menapaki jalan
menuju kehidupan sebagai pelayan-pelayan Yesus Kristus.
Pelayan-pelayan yang ―trust and obey‖, dengan keteguhan rohani
maupun mental, untuk menjalankan tugas pelayanan yang
dipercayakan kepada kita.
Buku ini dibagi menjadi dua bagian besar: pertama,
―Berkenan kepada Allah‖ berkaitan dengan prinsip-prinsip dasar
kehidupan orang-orang percaya yang mau mengikut dan melayani
Yesus. Prinsip-prinsip dasar dari ―trust and obey‖. Bagian kedua
adalah ―Menghadapi kenyataan‖ yang menggambarkan kehidupan
nyata seorang murid dengan segala pergumulan dan tantangannya
dalam mewujudkan ―trust and obey‖ itu dalam kehidupan seharihari. Dengan dibagi menjadi 30 sub judul dari dua bagian besar itu,
buku ini dapat menjadi bahan renungan kita selama satu bulan
setiap harinya. Dengan pertolongan Tuhan, kita bisa menggali
harta-harta tak ternilai melalui perenungan baik itu pribadi maupun
kelompok-kelompok yang ada.
Terlepas dari sekedar bahan-bahan untuk kuliah, buku ini
menyajikan nasehat dan dukungan yang tak ternilai harganya, yang
170
terambil dari kekayaan Alkitab. Satu hal penting yang perlu kita
perhatikan, mengutip dari David Lambert yang menulis prakata
untuk buku ini, ―Jangan membaca buku ini, jika Anda tidak
bersungguh-sungguh, tetapi jika Anda serius, maka Anda akan
menemukan hikmat dan pengertian dalam setiap halamannya.‖
Hok Liong
171
PENULIS ARTIKEL
MELANI GUNAWAN mendapatkan gelar M.A. in Biblical
Studies dari Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson-MS.
U.S.A, pada tahun 1999. Beliau mengajar di Institut
Theologia Aletheia Lawang dalam bidang Biblika.
PETERUS PAMUDJI mendapatkan gelar Ph.D. dalam bidang
Historical Theology dari Drew University, U.S.A., pada
tahun 1985. Sejak 1985-2003 beliau menjadi rektor di Institut
Theologia Aletheia, Lawang - Jatim, dan mengajar dalam
bidang Dogmatika.
KORNELIUS A. SETIAWAN mendapatkan gelar D.Th. dari
Trinity Theological College, Singapore, pada tahun 2003.
Merupakan salah seorang dosen tetap di Institut Theologia
Aletheia, Lawang-Jatim, beliau mengajar dalam bidang
Perjanjian Baru, mulai tahun akademik 2003/2004 beliau
menjabat sebagai Rektor di Institut Theologia - Aletheia
Lawang
SIA KOK SIN mendapatkan gelar M.Th. dalam bidang Perjanjian
Lama dari Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids – MI,
U.S.A., pada tahun 1994. Merupakan salah seorang dosen
tetap di Institut Theologia Aletheia, Lawang – Jatim, beliau
mengajar dalam bidang Perjanjian Lama.
LUDER G. WHITLOCK, JR. adalah alumnus dari University of
Florida, Westminster Theological Seminary dan Vanderbilt
University. Saat ini beliau menjabat sebagai Presiden dari
Excelsis, Florida dan the International Schools of Theology
for Campus Crusade. Menjadi Rektor di RTS, USA pada
tahun 1978-2001. Selain itu beliau juga aktif dalam menulis
berbagai buku dan artikel.
172
JAMES ALLAN DE JONG mendapatkan gelar D.Th. dari Free
University of Amsterdam pada tahun 1970. Beliau menjadi
rektor Calvin Theological Seminary, USA pada tahun 19822001. Saat ini beliau adalah Professor dalam bidang
Historical Theology di Calvin Theological Seminary, USA.
dan pensiun pada tanggal 31 Juli 2003, selain itu juga beliau
aktif di dalam menulis berbagai buku dan artikel.
TAN KIM HUAT mendapatkan gelar Ph.D. dari Universitas
London, Inggris. Beliau adalah Cen Su Lan Professor of
New Testament yang mengajar di Trinity Theological
College, Singapore dan saat ini menjabat sebagai Dean of
Post Graduates Studies.
THOMAS ALAN HARVEY mendapatkan gelar Ph.D. dari Duke
University, USA. Saat ini beliau adalah dosen di Trinity
Theological College yang mengajar bidang Theologi dan
Etika.
JOSEPH TONG mendapatkan gelar Ph.D. dari University of
Southern California, USA. Beliau adalah Professor of
Philosophical and Systematic Theology di International
Theological Seminary, USA dan Bandung Theological
Seminary, Bandung.
173
PENULIS RINGKASAN
AGUNG GUNAWAN mendapatkan gelar M.Th. dari Calvin
Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids-MI pada tahun
2001.Saat ini beliau melayani sebagai dosen tetap di Institut
Theologia Aletheia, Lawang – Jatim, dan mengajar dalam
bidang praktika dan konseling.
ALFIUS ARENG MUTAK mendapatkan gelar M.Th. dari Asean
Center for Theological Studies and Mission, Seoul – Korea
Selatan. Sekarang beliau mengajar dalam bidang Pendidikan
Kristen di Institut Theologia Aletheia, Lawang – Jatim.
KORNELIUS A. SETIAWAN mendapatkan gelar D.Th. dari
Trinity Theological College, Singapore, pada tahun 2003.
Merupakan salah seorang dosen tetap di Institut Theologia
Aletheia, Lawang-Jatim, beliau mengajar dalam bidang
Perjanjian Baru, mulai tahun akademik 2003/2004 beliau
menjabat sebagai Rektor di Institut Theologia - Aletheia
Lawang
SIA KOK SIN mendapat gelar M.Th. dalam bidang Perjanjian
Lama dari Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids – MI,
U.S.A., pada tahun 1994. Merupakan salah seorang dosen
tetap di Institut Theologia Aletheia, Lawang – Jatim, beliau
mengajar dalam bidang Perjanjian Lama.
PETERUS PAMUDJI mendapatkan gelar Ph.D. dalam bidang
Historical Theology dari Drew University, U.S.A., pada
tahun 1985. Sejak 1985-2003 beliau menjadi rektor di Institut
Theologia Aletheia, Lawang - Jatim, dan mengajar dalam
bidang Dogmatika.
174
PENULIS TINJAUAN BUKU
Hok Liong mendapat gelar S.Th. dari Institut Theologia Aletheia,
Lawang, pada tahun 1999. Saat ini menjabat Gembala Sidang
di GKT Nazareth Surabaya. Beliau juga sebagai asisten dosen
di Institut Theologia Aletheia Lawang yang mengajar dalam
bidang Perjanjian Lama.