JURNAL THEOLOGIA ALETHEIA Volume 5 Nomor 9 September 2003

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' hZme W[s.YwI : yn:ysi rB;d>mi WaboYw" : rB'd>MiB; Wnx]Yw: : `rh'h' dg 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]: ), [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]: [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.