------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ardmore：新民兄弟對基要主義和新福音主義怎麼看待？最近一直在思考這些問題，感到很苦惱。尤其是社會責任方面，改革宗的觀點是不是處在他們兩者之間？

誠之：改革宗比較多屬於無千禧年和後千禧年(千禧年結束後基督再臨)，這一派認為這個“千禧年”是象徵的或不知道什麼時候開始，總之是千禧年後基督再臨。但是因為福音廣傳，社會文化會有一定程度的改善。所以比較注重社會參與，教育普及等等。

基要主義比較多前千禧年派 (包括歷史的和時代論的)，逼迫會愈來愈厲害，社會愈來愈敗壞，然後福音要傳遍後基督才再來，與死而復活的聖徒在地上統治1000年 (literally)。

因此，相對而言，不必注重社會參與，改善文化 (因為地和其中所有的都要過去，只能基督再來才會更新)。

如果你看Abraham Kuyper在荷蘭自由大學的例子，你就能明白為什麼要文化參與。

他的觀念是：“基督是人類生活每一寸地土的王”。
"There is not an inch in the entire domain of our human life of which Christ, who is sovereign of all, does not proclaim: It's mine!"

這也是延續自宗教改革和清教徒的精神(路德和加爾文都很強調信徒要自己能讀經，因此需要普及教育)。文化使命和福音使命的分家其實是比較近代的事。當初改教家和清教徒是沒有這種割裂的。

xinmin: On the social or cultural mandate of the gospel.

Christianity emerged from a fringe movement led by Jesus and his apostles in a tumultuous world characterized by the pluralistic Greco Roman culture and the monotheistic faith of Judaism. In this light, early Christians were greatly marginalized and castigated as the outcasts or outlaws. The Roman emperors and society were no friend of Christians, until Constantine in early 4th century. Social mandate of the gospel was not something in the mind of every Christian then.

The cultural or social mandate (gospel is meant also to transform culture and society, not just for individual salvation) debate dates back to the early church fathers in the second to third centuries. Some argued that Christians were to have nothing to do with the pagan culture. Thus we have the famous line of Tertullian of Carthage: What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? (Implied answer: nothing!) Others (such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen) studied carefully and taught Christians the Greek philosophy and developed informed strategies for Christian apologetics in the pagan society.

The social mandate took on greater urgency, now that the entire Roman empire was Christianized after Constantine. But the Church got its hands dirty and feet stuck deep in the muddy water of power struggle with emperors and local lords and in behavior mortification and controls in the wider society. The Church tried to reform the society through the church institution and sacred sacraments (Baptism, Eucharist, penance, etc) with actionable threats of church disciplines (from denial of sacrament to excommunication, interdict and inquisition). But the City of God did not seem to be an earthly reality, at least not to St. Augustine of Hippo.

Then came the pre-reformation pioneers and reformers. They stood up against the church corruption in doctrine and faith practice. By taking away the corrupted power of institutional church and placing the salvation to each individual persons, the reformers championed a different style of social transformation. The reformers certainly had a tremendous social impact that we still felt today in all denominations of protestanism.

Fast forward our time, we had liberalism in the last two to three centuries. Part of the liberal theology's emphasis was the works of faith and social involvement by Christians. Fundamentalism was a radical counterrevolution to the liberalism movement. They took both the biblical faith and the social issues seriously by taking a highly antagonistic and combative position to every ill of society. Evangelicalism is somewhere in the middle. The radical movements also begot its own less extreme offsprings. Slanted to the liberal side are Neoorthodoxy and liberation theology. Toward the conservation side is neoevangelism.

Personally, I take the cultural mandate as a corollary of the gospel. God seems to save one people at a time, even though occasionally in mission history also through a whole people group movement (but first through one or few individuals). God is more interested in winning a faith community of new humanity, the bride for his son Jesus Christ. Jesus taught in the parable of Kingdom of God that the wheat and tare will grow together until the harvest in the end time. The society will somehow be impacted by the presence and witness of Christians. We Christians are the light of the world. A community of believers is like a city on the hill. It cannot be hidden. In the dark hours of our society, it is the community of faith that shines and gives people hope and light. I would call this approach the Jesus approach, or apostolic approach. All later movements are a revision and partial correction.

ardmore: 有人說，我們只傳耶穌基督和他的十字架沒有其他使命可以傳的，我們不想把天國建在地上。該怎麼看這個問題。另外一直在尋找福音使命和文化使命的準確定義，一直找不到。

Yuehanmiao: 同樣，有強烈文化使命的基督徒，比如，華人基督徒，看到我們文化中很多抵擋神的勢力，正是這些抵擋神的勢力敗壞着中國人的身心靈，所以，想更新中華文化，這麼辦呢？沒頭沒腦介紹一下外國的‘先進經驗’管事兒嗎？根本不管事兒！抵擋神的東西才容易被人快快接受，因為特實惠，為什麼短短十幾年的時間裡，有６００到２，０００萬中國年輕婦女會以性工作者的方式賺錢養生呢？！這就是一個最明顯的例子！很多女
博士生感嘆，白天愁論文，晚上愁嫁人，這是何苦呢！

想更新文化必須要改變人心，改變人的世界觀，如何實現？　

只有‘傳耶穌基督和他的十字架’，信耶穌的這些人:
生命有改變
世界觀改變
必然影響周圍的人
改變的人多了
成了風氣
習慣變了
文化變了

文化使命才能實現　
------------------------------------------------------------------------------