微信公众号 CCBible/Bible101/DBible 微博@基督徒百科@Bible101@歌珊地圣经引擎@如鹰展翼而上 QQ群 4619600/226112909/226112998 同步推送#今日真道圣言#
再來基督張大衛之新加坡來鴻
相關信息
翻譯：美國《今日基督教雜誌刊文：http://godwithus.cn/wiki/David_Jang_Second_Coming_Christ_Singapore David Jang Second Coming Christ Singapore 再來基督張大衛之新加坡來鴻
Copyright Information版權信息
This article first published in Christianity Today. Used by permission. Copyright Christianity Today International.
The authors are: Ted Olsen and Ken Smith.
Original English article link: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/september-web-only/david-jang-second-coming-christ-singapore.html . (本文由今日基督教發表。蒙准許使用。版權屬於「今日基督教國際」，作者：泰德·奧爾森(Ted Olsen)和肯·斯密斯(Ken Smith)，英文原文網址 http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/september-web-only/david-jang-second-coming-christ-singapore.html?paging=off )
Permission for Translation 翻譯許可
本站已經獲得CTI將文章翻譯成中文和在互聯網上發布的許可，詳見 http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_622134fd01019t11.html
注意事項
請主內翻譯事工的翻譯同工認領不同段落，並請在翻譯編輯時只編輯您所認領的段落，以免引起整篇編輯衝突，即請點擊『第N頁』右邊的『編輯』鏈接而不是整個頁面最上面的『編輯』鏈接
請務必先編輯該段落，在中文部分先輸入連續兩個橫線-和四個波浪線~，即--~~~~簽名，或者按上面工具條里的「簽名和時間戳」按鈕，並保存，表示您認領了該頁面的翻譯。免得多人翻譯同一頁面導致重複勞動。詳情請加入主內翻譯事工QQ群17191164詢問或者閱讀 入門指南 http://t.cn/z0FbaGN
請注意一定要先把光標放對地方，放在「中文」上下，不要動上面的 「| width=50% |」和下面的 「|}」標記，這些都是Wiki的命令標記，分別表示表格一個單元格開始，和表格的結束。
在這兩個標記中間編輯。
目前翻譯進度
目前翻譯環境已經搭建好，初譯中。如果您看到有什麼地方表達不清楚，可以直接編輯改進或者用方括號譯註說明。也可以使用 Talk:再來基督張大衛之新加坡來鴻 討論頁面來表達您的觀點看法
摘要
|
David Jang's emissaries to Singapore speak for the first time on why they believed he was a new Christ, why they changed their minds, and how his organization operates. Ted Olsen and Ken Smith
|
再來基督爭議：更多領袖發聲 張大衛(David Jang)在新加坡的傳教士首次發聲談及他們為什麼相信他是一位新的基督，他們為什麼有改變想法以及他的組織是如何運作的。 音聯盟（World Evangelical Alliance）的關鍵影響因素。然而，很多人認為他帶領了一個致力於相信他就是「再來基督」的小組。這些指控到底是真是假？ 作者 '泰德·奧爾森(Ted Olsen) 和 肯·斯密斯（Ken Smith） 泰德·奧爾森(Ted Olsen)是今日基督教的主編，新聞和在線記者。肯·斯密斯（Ken Smith）是華盛頓州的獨立記者。
|
第1頁
|
As the Southeast Asia representative for David Jang's organizations—pastor of his churches, proprietor of his businesses, and editor of his Christian news website—Edmond Chua believed that Jang was a new Christ, a messianic figure establishing the kingdom of God on earth. Just after midnight on September 6, 2005, Chua had completed a series of Bible studies, and his teacher, Susan Hu, was leading him through a crucial final lesson. "I think Susan asked me, 'So who is Pastor David?' And I probably said something like, 'He is the Second Coming Christ!' I fully believed it. The [Bible studies] just seemed to point that way. It was very logical and deep. For the first time I felt that I knew the love of God intimately, strange as that may sound, considering who Jang is." Chua told Christianity Today, "I actually thought of him as God and prayed in his name instead of Jesus'. And whenever I typed something about him, I would use the upper case on pronouns." He doesn't believe it anymore—nor does his teacher, Susan. The two married on David Jang's birthday, October 30, 2006—the 14th anniversary of the founding of Jang's movement—along with 69 other couples, Susan said. Like most of the other couples, the Chuas' marriage was arranged by the movement's leaders. "We are a lucky case: We knew each other for very long already," Susan said. "Some couples, the two never met each other before, but were recommended and they accepted with faith and obedience." As Christianity Today reported in August, several former members of Jang's organizations similarly described encouragements to believe that Jang is the Second Coming Christ. But most spoke on condition of anonymity. Now, in exclusive in-depth interviews with Christianity Today, the Chuas are among the first to speak out on the record about their experience in Jang's group, the theology behind their belief that he was the Second Coming Christ, and why they left. Employees of Jang-founded Olivet University counter that the community has no secret teachings that Jang is Christ or the Second Coming. Meanwhile, a National Association of Evangelicals committee is meeting again today in its ongoing inquiry into whether Olivet is theologically compatible with the Southern Baptist Convention's LifeWay Christian Resources. Susan's Story In 2003, Susan was already a university graduate and a Christian. A year earlier, while attending Xiamen University in Fujian, the Chinese mainlander had been baptized by a Korean evangelical group unaffiliated with Jang. While studying one day, she was approached by a couple and invited to a Bible study. "I was baptized but did not know the meaning of baptism, sin, or have a clear understanding of salvation," she said. "I was only a bit scared of the end—Judgment Day—because I wondered what would happen to my grandparents who had never heard the gospel." The Jang-connected Bible study was a revelation. "Wow," she said. "They teach you one by one from beginning of the Bible to the end. I felt the teaching was so clear, unlocking the verses." A month of intensive study later, Susan's teacher, Li Zhihong, introduced the 22-year-old to a key teaching she calls the "New Israel" message. The content, Susan said, was essentially the same as a July 20, 2002, sermon delivered by Jang's chief teaching associate, Borah Lin, at a church retreat in Berkeley, California. (The Chuas provided a transcript of the sermon, as well as other Lin sermons, to CT. Susan said she received the Lin sermon texts in Chinese and English later, when she was a missionary. Similar sermons had once been available as audio recordings on the community's internal websites, the Chuas said, but they did not have copies.)
|
--Michael（留言） 2012年9月14日 (五) 02:20 (CST)- 認領第一頁翻譯
作為張大衛（David Jang）的組織的駐東南亞的代表——他眾教會的牧師、他眾企業的老闆、和他的基督教新聞網站的編輯——埃德蒙·蔡（Edmond Chua）相信張就是一位新的基督，是在地上建立神的王國的彌賽亞式的人物。
|
第2頁
|
The sermon indicates that Jang's church constitutes the 144,000 sealed servants of God of Revelation 7. "This doesn't mean that it will be only these people and the rest will all die," the sermon says. "It is that these will be the ones to bear fruits first and gain salvation first. … They are the ones that establish the kingdom of God here on earth. They are the sample of heaven." Near the end of the sermon, the church's Second Coming teaching comes into focus: We need to stand firm. This is the dream that God has given us. That is why these are the firstfruits. This is the sample. What is this? This is the great body of Christ. This is the second coming of Christ. This is the resurrection of the body of Christ. This is the second coming of the great body of Christ. The great body of Christ being established is the true resurrection of the true coming of the body of Christ. … The one who establishes the Kingdom of God becomes the Christ. The sermon repeatedly compares the first Christ and the second Christ with the two stone tablets of Moses' commandments. Just as God created the first tablets and wrote the Ten Commandments on them, so was the first Christ, Jesus, sent by God. And just as Moses broke the tablets, Jesus' people rejected him and killed him, the sermon says. And just as Moses had to write the second tablets with his own hand, so the second Christ will be man-made. It continues: The stone tablets symbolize Christ. The first Christ, God sent. How about the second Christ? We must make him. On earth, he has to be made. Then God will write on him. God will then acknowledge him. … Peter personally met the Lord. Already, he has met the Lord. Jesus asked him. He asked, "What do people think of me?" Peter said, "Some people say you are a prophet or Jeremiah." Then Jesus asked, "Who do you think I am?" Then Peter confessed. You are the Christ, the son of the living God. Peter has already met him. But [it] is not like the whole community recognizes Jesus as Christ. To some, he is a prophet. Some know him as a prophet or Elijah. But the individual Christ has come. However, the whole community Christ hasn't come yet. The Christ of the community is not revealed yet. After recapping the sermon, Susan's teacher asked her who she thought Jang was. Susan responded as she says many others in the community did. David Jang, she said, was the second Christ. The teaching of the two tablets is repeated in other sermons attributed to Lin, including one sermon completely focused on the tablets. Other former members of Jang's community said they were also taught the theology of the two stone tablets, and that the second Christ would have to be man-made, not divinely sent as Jesus Christ was. Susan says these sermons—known in the community as "Letter and Spirit," "Eschatology," and "Time and Date"—were the key lessons in encouraging members to declare Jang as the Second Coming Christ. Susan says she was told to study them at least seven times before teaching them to others.
|
講道中表示啟示錄第7章那144,000名被密封的神的僕人是由張大衛共同體的教會組成。 「這並不意味著只有這些人得救，其餘的都要死，這是那些將會首先結出果子，首先獲得拯救......他們就是那些建立神的國度在地上，他們是天國的樣本。」 接近講道的尾聲，教會的第二次來臨的教導成為焦點： 「我們要堅定立場。這是上帝給我們的夢。這是為什麼這裡有初熟的果子。這是個示範。這是什麼？這是偉大的基督的身體。這是第二次來的基督。這是基督身體的復活。這是基督身體的再臨。偉大基督身體被建立才是真正基督身體的真正復活。那些建立神的國度的變成了基督。」 講道中反覆將基督和再臨基督跟神藉摩西頒佈誡命的兩塊石板相比。「正如上帝創造了第一塊石板，並寫上十誡，對比第一位基督，上帝派來的耶穌。同樣摩西打破石板，正如耶穌被人拒絕並殺了他。而第二塊石板是摩西用他自己的手親手寫上的，就正如第二位基督是人手所造成的。」它繼續說： 「兩塊石板皆象徵基督。第一位基督，是神差遣的。第二位基督呢？我們必須製造他。在地上，他一定要被製造出來。然後，上帝會在他身上寫字（塑造他）。然後，上帝會承認他。 ...」 「彼得親自遇見主。他已經遇見主了。耶穌問他：『人怎麼看我？』彼得說：『有人說，你是先知，或是耶利米』。然後耶穌說，『你以為我是誰？』那時，彼得做了告白，『你是基督，永生神的兒子』。彼得已經會遇見他了。但不是整個社會承認耶穌是基督。一些人認為他是先知或以利亞。但對個別的人來說基督已經來了。然而，對整個社會來說基督還沒有來到。基督的群體仍未顯露出來。」 講道經過總結後，蘇珊的老師問她認為張是誰。蘇珊的回應如眾多共同體內的人所作的一樣，她說張大衛是第二位基督。 保羅牧師則負責在不同講道中重覆兩塊法板的教導，包括一個完全集中在法板上的講道。其他共同體的前成員說，他們也接觸過兩塊石版，和第二位基督是人造的而非再派耶穌基督來的教導。蘇珊說，這些教導在共同體中被稱為「四靈道」，「終末論」和「時間和時期」，是重要的關鍵教導，他們藉此挑戰成員宣認張為再來的基督。蘇珊說她被告知要先學習七遍才可教導給其他人。 中文翻譯由Kevin Yeung (CGNER) 認領 |
第3頁
|
Like other former members who spoke about the teachings, the Chuas say they did not hear Jang directly teach that he was the Second Coming Christ. But Susan said he came close at a mid-March 2004 event in Hong Kong. "He himself was teaching about 'Time and Date,' but of course all of us had heard about time and date before. He just simply described it on a whiteboard, simply tried to emphasize the time, the numbers in Daniel 12." (Several former members of Jang-affiliated organizations told CT they were taught Daniel's prophecy of 1,260 days, 1,290 days, and 1,335 days referred to the timespan of Jesus' life and ministry and a 42-year gap that Jang would fulfill.) Then, Susan said, "He asked us, 'Do you all understand? 'Everyone said, 'Amen' of course." After that event, Susan said, Jang personally escorted her to Singapore to become his missionary there. It didn't go well, she said. She had little training, often missed the movement's daily morning church services (broadcast via password-protected video streams), and lied to her parents to get money to support her mission. "Inside I felt very guilty and tired," she said. Marriage didn't help much. Even by the time Edmond and Susan legally married, three months after their church wedding, she said, "our relationship was bad because we had changed from leader and follower to husband and wife." They were business partners, too. Together, they ran (and, in theory, owned) The Christian Post's Singapore edition. Susan handled the business side, and Edmond served as editor. When they were told they had to create five articles a day, they became overwhelmed. "I was not able to do mission," she said, "I did not connect with the groups. I did not attend the internet chats." All she could do was work, and she began to withdraw. After the birth of the Chuas' first child in late 2009, Susan withdrew from community gatherings and began reading books that weren't part of the notes she had once faithfully read seven times a day, as mandated. But her outlook changed as well. "I forgot all the pain in the past. I was very joyful with my child." She reconnected with group members from Malaysia, too, and found herself reinvigorated to plunge herself back into her work and ministry. A second child had the opposite effect. "Once again I felt very burdened," she said. "By the beginning of this year, we really felt we could not fit into the culture again." Then Susan Chua had a dream. "I just felt the pain of ex-members come to me," she said about the dream. "The pain is so deep, so heavy. It's like I was in their pain. They were not able to tell others or adapt to the society. … [Jang] sent out many young leaders that are really not mature. Many are really not able to shepherd the young members, so many members were hurt." She awoke angry, thinking of the lost sheep that Jesus said the Good Shepherd would leave 99 other sheep to find. Instead of reconciling with former members, she says, Jang's associates attacked them, sometimes denying that they had ever really been connected. The victims, she said, included Ma Li, a former member and missionary she knew in China. Susan says Jang "treated [Ma] badly" after she testified against the group in Hong Kong in early 2008. (Ma was the only named former member in CT's earlier story. An article appearing in The Christian Post responding to CT's article quoted Ma's ex-husband as saying, "Everything she testified was a lie." Susan says that in fact Ma was part of Jang's community and that her experience accords very well with Ma's statements.)
|
像其他前成員談到的教導，Chuas說，他們沒有直接聽到張教導他是第二次再來的基督。但蘇珊說，他在2004年3月中旬在香港曾接近此教導。 「他自己教導關於『時間和日期』，」當然，在之前我們所有人都聽過時間和日期。 他只是在一個白板上簡單地描述它，只是試圖強調時間，在但以理書12章的數字。「（張的幾個附屬組織前成員告訴CT他們被教導但以理書預言提及的1260天，1290天，和1,335天，指的是張將履行的耶穌的生活、事工和每42年為一期的時間段）。然後，蘇珊說，「他問我們：」你們都明白嗎？ 「當然每個人都會說，'阿門'。」 蘇珊說，該事件發生後，張親自陪同她到新加坡，在那裡成為了他的宣教士。 這件事並不順利，「她說。她幾乎沒有訓練，經常錯過該運動團體的每日早晨教會服事（通過加密的視頻播放），並騙她的父母拿錢去支持她的使命。 「我內心感到非常內疚，累了，」她說。婚姻並沒有太大的幫助。即使是在埃德蒙和蘇珊合法結婚那時候，他們舉行教堂婚禮後的3個月，她說，「我們的關係是不好的，因為我們從領導者和追隨者被變成了丈夫和妻子。」 他們也是商業合作夥伴。他們一起跑基督郵報的新加坡版（理論上講，是他們自營的）。蘇珊處理業務方面，Edmond擔任主編。 當被告知他們必須每一天創作5篇文章時，他們變得不堪重負。 「我是不是能夠完成任務，」她說，「我沒有聯絡團體。我沒有參加互聯網聊天。」她所做的一切都是工作，她開始撤離。 在2009年底，當Chuas的第一個孩子出生後，蘇珊退出共同體聚會，開始讀書但不是她曾經按要求忠實地一天讀七次的部分筆記。但她的前景也改變了。 「我忘了所有過去的痛苦，我和我的孩子很快樂。」她與來自馬來西亞的小組成員也重新聯絡，重新振作後又投入回到她的工作和事工中去。 第二個孩子卻起了相反的效果。 「我再一次感到很沉重，」她說。 「今年年初，我們真的覺得我們無法再融入這共同體文化。」 蔡蘇珊做了一個夢。 「我只是感到了前成員痛苦在我身上，她說到她的夢。 「痛苦是如此之深，如此之重，就好像我在他們的痛苦裡。他們不能告訴別人，或者適應社會...... [張]派遣的許多年輕領導人真的不成熟。許多是真的不能牧養的年輕成員，所以很多成員受到傷害。 她醒過來以後想起丟失的羊就很生氣，因為耶穌說好牧人會撇下九十九隻，而去找那隻失去的羊。 「而不是與前成員和解」，她說，「張的同伴攻擊他們，有時否認他們曾真正連結。她說，包括受害者馬俐，她所知道的在中國的一名前成員和宣教士」。 馬俐2008年年初在香港作證離開她團體，蘇珊說張「對待[馬]是惡劣的」。（馬在CT的早期新聞報道中是唯一實名的前成員。一篇在基督郵報發表回應CT的文章中，引述馬的前夫的話說，「她所作證的一切是騙人的。」蘇珊說，實際上馬曾是張的共同體的一部分，而她的經驗非常符合馬的聲明。）
中文由Isabel.Witz翻譯 |
第4頁
|
"A leader should take the responsibility," Susan said. "You need to literally comfort those who hurt instead of covering up. … My emotional link with David Jang was cut off that night [of the dream]. I used to respect him. His preaching is very good when he talks about Jesus and the Cross. But this is wrong. This is not the spirit of Christ." Edmond's story In 2009, as the Chuas awaited their first child, Edmond (by then known as Pastor Edmond, since he was leading church services as well as editing the Singapore edition of The Christian Post) was tapped to be one of the movement's top leaders. He represented not just Singapore but Southeast Asia on the World General Assembly (WGA) of Jang's Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches (EAPC). Each week, about a dozen representatives of Jang's many businesses, churches, and ministries around the world—International Business Times, Veremedia, Olivet University, and others—met in a restricted chat room with Jang to report their activities and hear his plans. At times, Jang's associates have denied to Christianity Today and other inquirers that there is such a thing as a community led by Jang, or that he exercises any control of various organizations beyond providing inspiration. Transcripts of the WGA chats from 2009 clearly demonstrate otherwise. (CT took steps to verify the authenticity of both the WGA chats and the Borah Lin sermons.) There is little discussion in the chats. In many cases, Jang largely lays out plans varying from wide-reaching reorganizations to indicating what story should be the lead at The Christian Post. In other cases, he chastises workers for not meeting targets. Such targets could be ambitious: One member is instructed to evangelize in Delhi, Bangalore, Kolkata, Mumbai, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Bangladesh—all in less than three months. Throughout the chats, Olivet University (OU) features prominently. The school, founded by Jang in 1992, is currently attempting to purchase the 2,100-acre Glorieta Conference Center in New Mexico from the Southern Baptist Convention's LifeWay Christian Resources. LifeWay has made the deal contingent on a review by the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) to determine theological compatibility between the two organizations. (Olivet President William Wagner told CT that the NAE panel is meeting today and that "the chance of us getting the property has gone down considerably.") In 2009, Jang and WGA members discussed Olivet's financial troubles and the requirement that all students be members of the EAPC. (The conversation is significant in part because Jang does encourage discussion and debate.) "Today's topic is whether we will receive outside students to OU," Jang said (via his translator). "Of course we shouldn't, but when we look at money, we have to receive. … The problem is that when we open up the university, we must designate professors. Then they will make daring remarks. It will not be like now. … When people and professors from the world come in, their meeting will decide all policies. This is very dangerous."
|
「作為一名領導要切實負起責任，」蘇珊說。 「你需要實在地安慰那些受傷害的，而不是掩蓋真相......我與張大衛的情感聯繫在那個晚上被切斷了[經那個夢]。 我尊重他，他的講道非常好，當他談論到耶穌和十字架時。但這錯了，這不是基督的靈。」 愛德蒙的故事 2009年，隨着Chuas等待他們的第一個孩子，愛德蒙（當時被稱為愛德蒙牧師，因為他帶領教會服事，以及擔任新加坡版的基督郵報編輯），是該運動團體的最高領導人之一。他不僅代表新加坡，還有張大衛的福音派基督教長老會(EAPC）的東南亞世界大會（WGA）。 每個星期， 張大衛的許多企業，教會，和在世界各地的事工部門——國際財經時報，百放傳媒，偉仁大學和其他部門的大概十幾個代表 ——在一個加密聊天室向張大衛報道他們的活動，並聽取他的計劃。 有時，張的共事者均對《今日基督教》和其他調查者否認有張領導的共同體這樣一件事，或者說他除了提供事工的靈感，是在多元化組織的任何控制行使權之外。 （CT採取措施，以辨別WGA的交談和博拉林布道這二者的真偽。）交談中很少有討論。在許多情況下，張在很大程度上奠定了廣泛而影響深遠的重組，以指示在基督郵報什麼樣的報道應是領先的。在其他情況下，他斥責沒有完成指標的人員。 這些目標可能是雄心勃勃的：加入不到三個月的一位成員按指示在德里，班加羅爾，加爾各答，孟買，斯里蘭卡，巴基斯坦和孟加拉國傳道。 在整個交談中，偉仁大學（OU）的特點突出。由張成立於1992年的學校，目前正試圖從美南浸信會的LIFEWAY基督教資源中心購買在新墨西哥格洛列塔會議中心的2100英畝地。 LIFEWAY的交易正獲全國福音派協會（NAE）的審查，以確定這兩個組織神學之間的兼容性。 （Olivet主席威廉·瓦格納告訴CT，NAE今天召開專題會議表示，「我們的財產已經大幅下降。」） 2009年，張和WGA成員商討了Olivet的財政困難和要求所有的學生都是EAPC的成員。（對話是意味深長的，部分是因為張鼓勵討論和辯論.。）「今天的話題是，我們是否會接受外校學生到OU，」張說（通過他的翻譯），「當然我們不應該這麼做，但是，當我們看賺錢的方面，我們必須接受......現在的問題是，當我們開放了大學，我們必須指定教授。然後，他們將作出大膽的言論，不會像現在......當人們和世界各地的教授來，他們的會議將決定所有政策，這是非常危險的。
|
第5頁
|
The eventual plan, to create a massive online distance learning program to compete with Liberty University's, never quite materialized (though it was part of Olivet's stated plan in acquiring Bethany University, a recently closed Assemblies of God school in Scotts Valley, California, which it later abandoned before attempting to buy Glorieta). Edmond, meanwhile, pursued both his bachelor's degree and his M.Div. at Olivet (he lived most of the time in Singapore), and spoke at his graduation ceremony in 2011. Edmond and Susan also confirmed what other sources have told CT: Before 2006, it was common for those who had confessed to send a letter of their confession to Jang. CT has independently obtained a document which, although it is not addressed to Jang, otherwise appears to be just such a written confession. (To protect the confidentiality of its source, CT was asked not to quote from the document directly.) The writer, a current employee of a Jang-associated organization, refers to Jang as "Christ" more than a dozen times in this document. The writer also describes being encouraged in this belief by other members, and—like other accounts by former members—indicates that the final confession came after a Bible study leader asked who Jang was. Edmond echoes the language of this document when he says his initial view of Jang was "very primitive. I simply believed that Jang is Christ." He said he believed Jang was God, but acknowledged that this belief went further than the lessons that indicated Jang was Christ. The community's end-times theology, which Edmond said took him years to understand more deeply, now troubles him. But he's also troubled by what he says is the community's teachings that lying can be righteous. Six years ago, Edmond said, he traveled to New York for the Sumer School Mission Training for members of Apostolos Campus Ministry, a college group that Olivet's leaders say has provided most of its students (the organization has since been renamed Apostolos Missions). Near the end of the month-long training, he said, Borah Lin singled out him and two others for private sessions. "During those private sessions, Borah Lin preached to us about the 45-year work of Christ; three of which have already been completed by Jesus, leaving 42 more years of work to be finished by David Jang," he said. "She also compared Jang to Abraham and his followers to Sarah in the account in the Bible where Sarah, to protect Abraham, lied to the Egyptians that he is only her brother, not her husband." In lessons outside the mission training, Edmond said, Bible study teachers pointed to Rahab the prostitute as an example of righteous lying. "They have encouraged lying and deception in cases that they judge to be urgent or critical, especially when people are judged as dealing with the incorrect motive. They take this from the Scripture itself, when Proverbs says 'Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.' They apply this to people who do not understand the great things they are doing for the Lord." Telling the truth, Edmond says he was repeatedly taught, takes too long when time is urgent. Edmond's concerns are shared by other former members who spoke with CT. One said:
|
Edmond還攻讀了偉仁大學（Olivet University）的學士學位和神學碩士學位（他大部分時間居住在新加坡）， 並在2011年的畢業典禮上發言。 Edmond與Susan都證實了《今日基督教》（CT）的其它消息來源所提到的：在2006年前，做出告白的人給張大衛發信，向他表明自己的告白是很尋常的事。CT單獨收到了一份這樣的告白信，雖然沒有寄給張大衛，但很明顯正是這種類型的手寫信件。（為保護信件來源的機密性，信件提供者要求CT不要直接引用信件內容。）這封告白信的作者為張大衛集團的現任成員，在這份信件中，他無數次地稱張大衛為「基督」，而且據他描述，還有其他大衛共同體成員鼓勵他的這種信仰，就如其他前成員所表述的， 最終告白是在某次查經後由授課的引導人詢問聽課人張大衛是誰而做出的。Edmond回應了這封信件中的用詞，他如此表達了張大衛給他的最初印象：「很樸實，我很容易就相信了他就是基督。」他說他相信張大衛就是神，但也承認，他的這種信仰比共同體教導中暗示張是再來的基督更激烈。 Edmond說他花了好幾年時間來更深地理解大衛共同體的末世神學論，但他仍為共同體教導撒謊的正義性而困惑。 六年前，他到紐約參加為使徒校園傳教會成員舉辦的使命培訓夏令營，（ 偉仁大學領導人曾表示使徒校園傳教會已為學院的大多數學生進行了此類培訓，該機構現已改名為使徒事工）。在長達一個月的培訓期快結束的時候，Borah Lin將他和其他兩位成員單獨挑選出來進行了秘密學習。 Edmond回憶說：「在這次秘密學習中，Borah Lin向我們傳授了基督的45年工作，其中，有3年的工作是由耶穌完成的，剩下的42年則需由張大衛來完成，她還把張大衛比作亞伯拉罕，將張大衛的跟隨者比作亞伯拉罕的妻子撒拉，在《聖經》記載中，撒拉為保護亞伯拉罕便向埃及人撒謊說他只是她的哥哥，而不是她的丈夫。」 而在使命培訓之外的課程中，Edmond說《聖經》講師則以妓女喇合為例，說明撒謊的正義性。 「一旦他們認為自己處於緊急的關鍵期，特別是認為成員有錯誤動機的時候，他們就會把這些經文從《聖經》中單獨取出來，如《箴言》中『要照愚昧人的愚妄話回答他，免得他自以為有智慧。』他們就用這種方式對待那些不能理解他們為『主』所做的偉大事業的人。」Edmond說， 他反反覆覆地接受這樣的教導，即便是時間非常緊的情況下，這樣的教導也要花費很長時間。 其他接受CT採訪的前成員也有和Edmond一樣的困惑，其中一個前成員說： 中文由 Esther Ma 認領翻譯 |
第6頁
|
They have a teaching in their Bible studies that Jacob is the one who deserved the blessing, rather than Esau, and that Rebekah and Jacob lying to Isaac was justified. And that's why they are also justified in lying to folks who would challenge their birthright. … If you need to flee to escape from Satan, you can lie to do so. You shouldn't tell the truth to Satan, because he will steal your blessing and kill your faith. The Hong Kong-based Independent Enquiry Committee, which investigated the Jang-affiliated Young Disciples of Jesus movement in 2008, was particularly concerned that the group taught that "righteous lies" are wisdom taught in the Bible. The committee's report said that witnesses from south, east, central, and north China all testified to the belief, and it seemed to be even more widespread than the Second Coming Christ belief. One of the members of the investigating team was Carver Yu, the president of China Graduate School of Theology and one of the plenary speakers at The Lausanne Movement's Cape Town 2010 gathering. He told CT he's convinced that Jang's associates teach community members to lie. "I talked to a leader of the Jang community, a Chinese [member] active in Vancouver about four years ago, and confronted him about the ethics of deception, i.e. telling lies in order to achieve certain purpose for the kingdom," Yu said in an email. "He flatly told me that it was justified by the Bible. This confirms our suspicion." 'We do not have secrets' Olivet University dean Donald Tinder said he'd been very impressed with Edmond Chua when Chua was pursuing his degree. But he found Chua's description of the teachings that David Jang is the Second Coming Christ to be inconsistent. (Edmond sent Tinder and others a version of his story via email.) Tinder sent CT statements from three other participants of the 2006 Summer School Mission Training, each of whom disagreed with aspects of Edmond's account of the meeting. "I was startled to read Mr. Chua's claim about Borah Lin's teaching that Dr. Jang is to complete the work of Christ," said Jonathan Park, who is now program director of Olivet's journalism school. "If Lin truly was secretly teaching that Dr. Jang is Christ and lied (righteously or not) in the public regarding the completeness of Jesus' work on the Cross, then she did a very poor job of it, as I am more convinced that the Cross is a victory after listening to her lectures." The Chuas and other former members did not dispute Park's assertion that Jang and other members of the community, even those who promoted unorthodox eschatology, preached orthodox teachings on soteriology. "Jang is unsurpassed in preaching the theology of the sacrifice and atonement of the Cross," Edmond told CT. "He has successfully taken what many pastors would just say as a one-liner, expositing how God loves us, and paints this relationship between Jesus and his disciples in such a way that would put any movie to shame." The Chuas provided written copies of numerous sermons and lessons delivered by senior members of the community, many of which contain theology that would have been unexceptionable in a Baptist Sunday school classroom. Very few reference teachings like the "two stone tablets" or contain any explicit eschatology. Park also stated that he "never confessed Dr. Jang as Christ. … I do respect Dr. Jang as an effective Christian leader in the same degree I respect Rev. Billy Graham or Rev. Rick Warren, but in no way is Dr. Jang a replacement of Jesus Christ for me."
|
其他接受CT採訪的前成員也有和Edmond一樣的困惑，其中一個前成員說： 他們在查經時教導說雅各是配得祝福的，以掃則不然，利百加和雅各對以撒說謊是合理的。這就是他們之所以覺得對那些挑戰他們的人撒謊具有合理性的原因……如果你想逃離撒旦，你就要如此撒謊，你不應該告訴撒旦真相，因為他將偷去你的祝福，殺死你的信仰。 香港獨立調查委員2008年對張大衛集團附屬機構耶穌青年會（Young Disciples）展開調查， 期間，特別就該團體鼓吹「正義的撒謊」是《聖經》中智慧的教導做了調研。調查委員會所出具的報告顯示，中國南部、東部、中部以及北部的前成員都不約而同地見證了張大衛集團的這一教導， 該教導在張氏集團內的廣泛性遠遠超過張大衛是「再來基督」的信仰。 獨立調查團成員之一，中國神學研究院院長余達心及另一位出席開普敦洛桑大會的發言人告訴《今日基督教》（CT）說他們確信張大衛集團內部鼓勵並教導其所屬成員撒謊。 余院長說：「我與張大衛集團的一名帶領人談過話，他是一名四年前活躍於溫哥華的中國人，在面對有關欺騙的道德性問題， 即靠說謊達到實現神國的某個目的時， 他很坦率地告訴我說這是《聖經》允許的 。」 我們沒有秘密 偉仁大學（Olivet University）學院院長， Donald Tinder說Edmond Chua在攻讀學位時給他留下了深刻的印象，但他發現Chua描述的張大衛是再來的基督的教導有許多不一致的地方（Edmond通過電子郵件給Tinder和其他人發送了他的經歷）。Tinder與其他3名參加2006年夏季使命培訓的成員向CT發表聲明說他們均不同意Edmond對此次聚會的陳述。 「當我打開Chua的郵件，發現他說Borah Lin教導張大衛牧師將要完成基督的工作時，真是非常震驚，」偉仁大學新聞學院計劃主任Jonathan Park說：「如果Lin確實秘密教導張大衛牧師是基督並且就耶穌在十字架上所完成的救贖在公開場合撒謊的話（不管合不合理）， 那她就真是做了件非常不好的事，因為在聽了她的講道後，我更確信十字架是成功的。」 Chua氏夫婦和其他前成員沒有就Park提出的張大衛本人及其集團成員，甚至是那些鼓吹非正統末世論的成員有在耶穌救世神學方面做出過正統教導的言論而進行爭辯。 「在十字架的犧牲和救贖的神學理論上，張大衛的講解是無人能及的，」Edmond在接受CT採訪時說：「他不像其他許多牧師那樣僅僅闡述神是如何地愛我們，而是聲色俱佳地描繪了耶穌與使徒的關係，這足以使任何一部相關題材的電影遜色。 」 Chua氏夫婦還提供了大量張大衛共同體其他高級成員的講道記錄，其內容對於主日學校來說均是無懈可擊的，其中幾乎沒有「兩塊法板」或公開的末世論教導。 Park 也說他「從未告白過張大衛是基督…我確實視他為成就卓越的基督教領袖，對他的尊重和對葛培理牧師或華理克牧師的尊重是一樣的，但對我來說，張大衛絕不可能替代耶穌在我心中的位置。」
|
第7頁
|
Likewise, Sarah Lafleur, now an administrator at Olivet University, wrote, "I think Borah had a reason to teach the lessons she taught, but certainly she could not have been teaching that David Jang is Christ—Jang himself denied this! We do not have a lesson plan 'culminating' with a confession of Dr. Jang as the Second Coming, as some make it out to be. … We do not have secrets, nor is there anything to hide." Not everyone in Jang's community seems to agree that the group has nothing to hide. In one email provided to CT, Johnathan Davis, the chief content officer of IBTimes, declined to participate in a Christian industry association being organized by leaders of other Jang-affiliated publications like The Christian Post, because, he said, "My commission is inherently covert." In another email string from mid-August 2012, Will Anderson, the publisher and CEO of The Christian Post, requested that Edmond delete from the Singapore site any articles by a writer suspected of being a source for CT's August article. Another email announced that "PD [Pastor David] just announced that the use of Facebook and other networking sites is now forbidden for obvious security reasons... Facebook makes it easy for organizations that persecute us to link us all up together including the ministries we work for." That email itself contained the final instruction, "CLEAR THIS MESSAGE AFTER READING." (The command to abandon Facebook seems itself to have been abandoned, since many members and organizations in the community are currently active on the social networking site.) In a different email thread discussing whether to include The Christian Post's history as part of its employee handbook, one senior leader wrote, "I don't think we should include the history in the handbook. The issue is that PD [Pastor David] doesn't want the history in written, audio or video form to fall into a non-members' hands. Once you make a hard copy of something it is set in stone and he still wants some things to remain vague." Jang's associates did not only challenge Edmond Chua's account by email. Edmond says he has found himself threatened with a lawsuit, locked out of his website, and harassed by Jang associates coming to his home late at night. (Members have also harassed his father, who accompanied him to the 2006 New York evangelism training, Edmond said.) Others who have spoken out recently have also faced threats or intimidation. In 2007, an anonymous blogger from Houston who referred to herself as StillStanding posted the story of her year-long involvement with the Jang-affiliated Apostolos Campus Ministries. (CT was able to confirm her identity and verify several details of her account.) On her blog, StillStanding said that in late 2005, she had been reading her Bible on the campus of Rice University when she was approached by a woman named Kookhee Yoo. Kookhee invited her to join in a series of Bible studies at the "mission center," and initially StillStanding said that she found them helpful. But eventually she began to have questions about what she had been taught. She was uncomfortable with the group's strict social hierarchy—"I hated to be called a 'lamb,'" she said on her blog—but especially with the central role that Jang played. "By this time I had already gotten the 'lesson' about Pastor David, that he is second Jesus, Kookhee told me this during a Bible study in the 'mission center.' … I remembered the words of Kookhee when I asked her if she was the only one who believed this about her pastor and she said that everyone did."
|
同樣地，偉仁大學在職行政管理人員Sarah Lafleur寫道：「我想Borah做出這樣的教導總有她的理由，當然，她不可能教導說張大衛是再來的基督——張大衛自己也否認了這點！我們沒有哪一節課是為了讓學員告白張大衛牧師是再來的基督而設計的，儘管有些人這樣認為…我們沒有秘密，也沒有什麼藏起來見不得光的事。」 然而，不是每個張大衛共同體的成員都同意該集團毫無隱藏的說法。在一封提供給CT的電郵中, IB Times（《國際財經時報》）的首席內容官Johnathan Davis拒絕參加張氏其它隸屬刊物如Christian Post（《基督郵報》）組織的基督教行業協會，他說：「我所擔負的使命是內部秘密。」在另一封2012年8月中旬發出的電郵中，Christian Post的首席執行官兼發行人Will Anderson則要求Edmond刪除所有新加坡網站上一名記者的文章，該名記者被懷疑為CT （《今日基督教》）今年8月《再來基督的爭議》一文提供信息。 還有一封電郵宣布：「由於突出的安全隱患，大衛牧師要求大家停止使用Facebook和其他網絡站點…那些擾亂我們的機構很容易將我們全部連接起來，包括我們的各項事工。」這封電郵還自帶了一條最終指示：「在閱讀之後刪除這條信息。」（放棄使用Facebook的命令本身也要被放棄，看來目前已經有許多大衛共同體的機構和成員活躍在社交網站上了。） 在另一份電子郵件線程中，討論的內容為是否將Christian Post（《基督郵報》）的發展史囊括入共同體的員工手冊中。一位高級帶領人寫到：「我認為我們不該把這部分歷史寫入員工手冊，問題的關鍵在於大衛牧師不想讓它的文字、聲音或影像歷史資料落入共同體成員以外的人手中。一旦有人複製了某些內容，這些內容就無法改變，但牧師仍然想使一些事情保持在模糊狀態。」 張大衛集團的成員不僅通過電郵對Edmond Chua的言論叫板，而且還威脅他說要向法院提出起訴，他們不僅關閉了他的網站，還在深夜到其住所進行騷擾。（集團成員還騷擾了他的父親，Edmond的父親曾陪他一起參加了2006年紐約布道培訓。） 最近，其他一些公開說出自己在張大衛集團內部經歷的人也面臨着威脅或恐嚇。2007年，休斯頓一名稱自己為StillStanding的匿名博主發表了她自己一年以來與隸屬於大衛集團的使徒校園傳道會（Apostolos Campus Ministries）之間的糾葛。（CT能確定她的身份，並證實她陳述內容中的多個細節。）StillStanding在她的博客中寫道，2005年下半年，她在萊絲大學裡讀《聖經》的時候，有一位名叫Kookhee Yoo的女人和她套近乎。Kookhee邀她到「使命中心」參加系統的《聖經》學習，StillStanding在一開始的時候覺得他們非常熱心。 但後來，她開始質疑Kookhee的教導，團體內嚴格的等級制度讓她感到不舒服——「我不喜歡被稱作羊羔，」StillStanding在博客上說，但對於張大衛在集團中的核心地位，她談道：「這次，我已經接受了關於大衛牧師的『課程』，他是再來的基督，我在使命中心學習《聖經》時Kookhee這樣告訴我…我記得當時我問她，這是否只是她一個人的信仰，她回答說每個人都如此相信。」 中文由 Esther Ma 認領翻譯 |
第8頁
|
StillStanding removed her blog shortly after it went live. She explained to CT that "a few of the senior members including Tracy Davis and the two missionaries who originally evangelized to me, along with one or two others (I can't remember), flew from San Francisco to Houston and showed up unannounced at my door and threatened me with legal action and intimidation." Similarly, a lawsuit from Christian Today Japan against Yamaya Makoto, a blogger who has repeatedly criticized Jang, is in its fourth year. An independent journalist from Canada, Ann Brocklehurst, as well as two Christian newspapers serving the Korean American community, Christian Today US (no relation to either Christianity Today or to the Jang-affiliated Christian Today newspaper) and News-N-Joy US, have also reported receiving legal threats from Jang's community for publishing critical articles. On August 30, after finding that they could no longer upload articles to The Christian Post - Singapore Edition website (it's hosted on the same servers as the U.S. edition of The Christian Post), the Chuas decided to walk away. "It is with a heavy heart and yet mingled with the peace of the Lord that transcends all understanding that we have decided to bring our involvement in online Christian journalism to a close," they said in an email to friends, business associates, and others. But Edmond said he plans to continue to tell the truth about his experience in Jang's community and what it teaches. Ted Olsen is CT's managing editor, news and online journalism. Ken Smith is an independent journalist based in Washington State.
|
同樣地，日本的《今日基督徒》控告山谷真，一個在四年間不斷指証張氏的博客。 在美國的韓國社區兩家基督教報紙《美國今日基督徒》(跟《今日基督教》及張大衛共同體的《今日基督徒》皆無關)與及美國的《新聞與喜樂》（News N Joy）服事的加拿大的獨立記者Ann Broklehurst，也報稱因他們刊載的評擊張氏的文章而遭到張大衛共同體威脅要以法律控訴。8月30日蔡氏夫婦發現他們無法再上載文章到《基督郵報-新加坡版》(它跟美國版使用同一個服務器)後，他們決定離開。 他們在發給親友及生意夥伴時談到：「這是超乎一切的理解，是既沉重但又夾雜著主的平安，來讓我們決定結束參與線上基督教新聞的生涯。」 但埃德蒙說他打算繼續說出他在張大衛共同體所真正接受到的教導及經歷到的真實境況。 中文翻譯由Kevin Yeung (CGNER) 認領
|