becoming

From Michael:

I don’t think this is a sign of health. The sheer size of commentaries indicates that commentators are still working with an encyclopeadist’s mentality, accumulating references and knowledge, and trying to provide as comprehensive an account of the field as possible. No article or monograph is left unreferenced; no alternative argument left unconsidered. Each new commentary pleads to be considered the one-stop-shop for all your Ephesians needs – until the next one comes along, and like an upgrade of Windows, makes everything before it redundant.

我或者唔會say it like that, 但那些500頁以上的釋經書真的很難頂（啃）。若然對Jensen這些在牛津的未來神學工作者也如此，你可以想象一個教會的小傳道又如何？教一季主日學，平均看了600頁以上的參考。寫講章，用的時間絕不少過教一堂課。

我不相信「祈禱，講章就會跌落嚟」。這不單浪漫化了經文與讀者的關係，實在是對神的話的一種輕視。神的話是在人類的歷史中向人啟示。抹殺了歷史和背景的研討，我看不見還有甚麼原因我要一定相信某人的「亮光」是必然從神而來，而非自說自話。這是為甚麼「難啃、難啃，也要啃」。

因為我沒有別的選擇。

So, a plea to Biblical Studies boffins: stop and delate all those major commentaries you were working on. They aren’t helping! We don’t want them! Rather: let’s have more wood and fewer trees. Let’s have a disciplined limit on the length of commentaries (if we must have them) – no more than 250 pages please. And, liberated from that task, get on and do something that serves the church.

這樣的「250頁上限」，我卻有很大保留。今時今日，寫一部250頁以下的釋經書是可能的，但過程中就不可能穿插太多關於詮釋背後的討論。這樣的過程是必要的。大膽的說，今天信徒對神的話的問題並非他們不知道某章某節何解。不！他們已經知道（透過不同的途徑，甚或自己的推測）！

真正的問題是為甚麼是這樣解！沒有這部份，釋經書就淨下一堆又一堆的所謂「答案」。

所以，弟兄姊妹，沒辦法—

明知不可為。