2026年4月11日 星期六

Jabez 自學日文50音












最近Jabez 大量觀看日文字母的幼教影片、卡通短片,還會邊看邊唸。我曾隨意指某個字母要他唸給我聽,結果每次都唸對。(我對50音陌生,所以我是透過影片去確認他有沒有唸對)


後來Jabez 進化到拿筆書寫日文字母,就跟當初自學英文一樣。反正他是一個喜歡規則/規律的孩子,我們也不干涉,由他去學(其實是「玩」)。


幾天前,我將一疊廢紙拿給Jabez 塗鴉,他沒有畫畫,而是拿來寫日文字母。今天要清掉塗鴉過的紙張時,我一時興起,拍照叫Gemini 分析一下Jabez 到底寫了什麼,Gemini 的回答如下:(節錄)


紅色部分:​かがに (Ka-ga-ni)

​藍色部分:​たよ (Ta-yo)

​綠色部分(分布較散):​ろぎ (Ro-gi)。


我嚇到了:原來Jabez 在用日文字母拼寫韓國卡通「小巴士Tayo」裡頭的角色----綠色、紅色、藍色巴士的英文名字!(紙上紅色的第一個字母有塗掉,所以紅色巴士的名字是 ga-ni)


「Tayo」是韓國的英語幼教卡通,所以是英語發音,Jabez 能夠精準用日文字母拼寫出來,表示他真的把50音背下來了。


雖然Jabez 最新自學的日文在生活中也許派不上用場,只能自娛娛人,但想到他是中度語言障礙的自閉兒,就不得不讚嘆神創造的奇妙偉大!

---

Recently, Jabez has been watching a lot of educational videos and short cartoons about Japanese kana. He even reads along while watching. Once, I randomly pointed at a character and asked him to read it aloud, and he got it right every time. (Since I’m not familiar with the 50 sounds myself, I had to rely on the videos to confirm whether he was correct.)


Later, Jabez progressed to writing Japanese characters with a pen, just like when he taught himself English before. He’s a child who enjoys patterns and rules, so we don’t interfere—we just let him learn (or rather, “play”).


A few days ago, I gave Jabez a stack of scrap paper for doodling. Instead of drawing, he used it to write Japanese characters. Today, while clearing away the used papers, I got curious and took a photo, then asked Gemini to analyze what he had written. Gemini’s response was as follows (excerpt):


Red section: かがに (Ka-ga-ni)

Blue section: たよ (Ta-yo)

Green section (more scattered): ろぎ (Ro-gi)


I was shocked. It turns out that Jabez was using Japanese characters to spell the names of characters from the Korean cartoon “Tayo the Little Bus”—specifically, the green, red, and blue buses’ English names! (The first red character on the paper was scribbled out, so the red bus’s name is “Gani.”)


“Tayo” is a Korean English-learning cartoon, so the pronunciation is in English. The fact that Jabez could accurately spell it using Japanese kana shows that he has truly memorized the entire kana system.


Although the Japanese he has recently taught himself may not be very practical in daily life and might just serve as a form of self-entertainment, considering that he is an autistic child with moderate language impairment, I can’t help but marvel at the wonder and greatness of God’s creation.

2026年3月27日 星期五

回答一位特兒父親的問題

Q:OO固執行為嚴重可能平常我叫刷牙洗澡他都先第一個,我叫哥刷牙,哥刷好牙,他傷心我問他,他叫哥哥要在刷一次,我刷他也叫我不要刷後叫我他刷完叫我重刷,不然他一直哭一直鬧

***

KK,早上在寶貝班群組看到你po的問題,我有一些想法想跟你分享。


固執(固著)行為是泛自閉光譜的特兒會有的行為,這是孩子的「秩序感」、也是一種「安全感」的來源或外顯形式。而特兒的固著行為常是不理會場合與對象的,所以容易造成困擾。


有鴿子以前,曉能(哥哥)小時候也曾經有個固著行為讓我十分火大。那時他還小,喜歡按電梯,但某次我趕時間先按了電梯,他非常不高興,就在電梯門口哭鬧,我只好讓電梯先下去再讓他按一次,他按了,情緒卻依然不爽:


「我不要你幫我按電梯!」

「可是我已經讓電梯下去,讓你按了啊?」

「我不要,我要『剛剛那時候』自己按電梯...」

「可是『剛剛』不可能重來啊!我都等你、給你按電梯了不是?」

「我不要...我要剛剛那時候按電梯....」


我當時氣得想打他----真是莫名其妙,無理取鬧!


曉能不是特兒,也曾有過不講理的階段;等到有了鴿子之後,「固著行為」就不再是偶發事件,而是家裡的生活日常----一如你遇到的狀況。


困擾是存在的,問題是該怎麼拆解。我的看法是:


1.為固著行為分類

不是從「行為樣態」劃分,而是從「生活影響層面」劃分。前者是學者的研究工作,後者是生活中的理性思考:有哪些固著的影響層面較大(例如干擾別人)、哪些固著的影響層面較小(例如侷限在家裡)?


這個劃分有個好處,影響較小的部份,可以配合、順著特兒的固著習慣,讓他舒服,讓他開心。這就需要受影響的人(比如家人)的遷就與配合。以你提到的狀況為例,我看到很棒的一點:你跟哥哥都配合OO的要求。這就對了!家人嘛,一點點生活遷就不是什麼付不起的代價,如果一點點的遷就配合少甫就能開心,其實投報率挺高的呀!


在我家也是這樣。鴿子是我家的「燈光師」,他一回家,就會把家裡的燈全部打開(客廳、浴室、廚房、臥室,連床頭的條形裝飾燈也一樣 ),而且燈光全都要設定為「黃色」,,這是我無法接受的浪費行為。起初我制止,無效;我改以「你開我關」的方式應對,他就「你關我開」,無限重複下去。最後是全家人妥協,我也不再堅持。鴿子創造了一個充滿溫暖黃光的室內空間,他很滿意。


但你應該會疑惑:如果我們的作為都一樣,為什麼少甫跟鴿子的反應會大不相同?這就涉及了另一個問題:你掌握了孩子的「固著樣態」了嗎?


2.掌握了孩子的固著樣態 

首先要觀察,理解孩子的行為本身包含了哪些細節。以鴿子為例,「全開燈、開黃光」是他的作為,他的秩序感;曉能的電梯事件,則包括了「自己按電梯+時間點」兩個細節,掌握細節(可能包括動作與流程),才會知道該如何適切地回應孩子的固著。鴿子我只要順著他就行,但曉能那件事我就沒辦法了,因為我無法讓時間倒轉。


我從你的描述中觀察,OO「有可能」在他的固著行為(刷牙秩序感)中含有「流程、時間」的元素,一如曉能的電梯事件。若此推測為真,那就是比較麻煩的樣態,因為就算你跟哥哥配合照辦了,因為時間不對,OO無法回到當初心裡設定好的「秩序」,所以就持續哭鬧,讓人束手無策。


於是問題就變成:「該如何處理特兒的情緒」,也就是你會到群組求救的原因。


3.情緒,永遠是最優先的考量

特兒的情緒能穩定,照顧特兒的辛苦就少掉60%,宗勳醫師分享他家承澤的狀況,可以印證這一點。你之所以想知道「該怎麼做」,也是對OO的情緒張力無能為力。


但特兒的情緒問題不單單是「知道該怎麼做」這麼簡單,因為特兒會長大,想法、需求也會改變,這是一個「動態」的過程----不管是OO的行為、還是我們的因應都是。


所以,要時時覺察特兒的情緒反應,找出誘發情緒反應的觸發因子,並建立「資料庫」。一旦情緒張力出現,就可以從資料庫中比對,找出正確的觸發因子;若資料庫中找不到,那就是新的狀況,在將之收入資料庫中。每個特兒都是獨特的,所以別人的經驗只能聽聽,不一定適用在OO身上。


這就是我會多說了曉能的「電梯事件」的原因,因為我已經找不到鴿子有跟少甫類似的情緒失控狀況,但電梯事件的樣態,「似乎」比較類似。這就是建立資料庫的好處:看似是建立「行為樣態資料庫」,其實我們的目標對準的是孩子的「情緒」,唯有穩定了孩子的情緒,我們肩頭的擔子才會真正的輕省下來(在預設特兒永遠需要家人照顧的認知前提之下)。


然而OO目前的問題該怎麼辦?如果你還沒建立夠細緻的資料庫,那麼,現在開始建立它。建立資料庫不代表一勞永逸,因為你總可能遇到當下無解的狀況。去年我們家去高雄聽張學友演唱會,鴿子很配合地陪媽媽進場聽歌(人生成就解鎖),但車子水箱爆了的意外,讓我們如此緊急處置:媽媽先搭火車離開高雄,準備明天上課,我們多停留一些時間,等車修好了再開車回家。結果媽媽趁夜離開這一點鴿子無法接受(這是他「不能落下一個家人」的固著),在高雄捷運車廂裡,我被迫蹲下來無支撐地安撫鴿子也難以轉變他的心情,在公共場所這樣實在有些狼狽,但這時候孩子的情緒優先,就顧不上自己的狼狽了。


我相信你一定用盡心力去愛OO,一如我對鴿子。但是除了可操作的「方法」,你也要倚靠神來給你力量。神會用什麼方法幫助我們你不會知道(例如我在捷運上狼狽之時,讓座給我的居然是另一個大齡特兒----神當下安排的「天使」),但神的憐憫與我們同在,他不會讓我們特兒家長白白受苦的。倚靠神不是遇到困難了才找祂,而是時時在神面前承認自己的軟弱,懇求神的恩典,讓自己在照顧心力「餘額不足」時,隨時可以找神「充值」。


而最最重要的,是求主賜給你屬神的眼光,辨識神在這個孩子身上的計畫,按照神的心意來照顧這個孩子,而不是按著我們的心意。對我家而言,我們漸漸發現,神要我們養出一個「吃快樂長大的小孩」,讓他在愛的環境中長大,不但自己對愛不虞匱乏,還能懂得什麼是愛、把愛分享出去----鴿子可是自閉兒啊!一個自閉兒能懂得愛、情緒穩定、懂得愛人,還有什麼神蹟比這個更偉大呢?就算鴿子追不上別人的學習能力,那又有什麼關係呢?


所以我勉勵你:用神的眼光來看待少甫。你視OO為「問題」,那你就會在他的成長過程中不斷地「發現問題」並「解決問題」;你視OO為「祝福」,那你就會在他的成長過程中時不時地打開神預先放著的「大禮包」,時時有驚喜。同樣是「成長」,你想要選擇哪一個眼光、為孩子安排哪一條成長之路呢?


不知不覺寫了這麼長,希望能幫助到你。你我都是特兒父親,而你比我更辛苦,所以你比我更迫切需要神的安慰與幫助。願神保守你和你的家,讓神隱藏在OO生命中的祝福,有一天能被你看見。

2026年3月15日 星期日

給接待的南非宣教士的回信

 親愛的Lisa:


你信中對我的稱讚,讓我受寵若驚!週一晚上在Stephen 家裡的聚會,我向Craig 說我是小信的人,但他給我很大很深的鼓勵。現在,你的信也大大的鼓勵了我。


送你們離開後,在開車的路上,我和Daphne 一起分享了這段時間被感動、被鼓勵的點點滴滴。「人接待你們就是接待我;接待我就是接待那差我來的。」(馬太福音 10:40)在接待你們之前,這段經文調整了我的眼光,讓我放下第一次接待服事的緊張與焦慮;現在你們離開台灣,這段經文又再度出現在我的心中:因為接待了你們,所以我才能看見神在我家的賜福,以及神對我家的呼召。


你是很美好的女孩子。你真誠、善良、有禮、體貼又細心,我們全家都很喜歡你。10:00pm接Phoebe下班回家時,她在車上說:「我已經開始想念Lisa她們了。」Jabez也是,他洗完澡躺在你睡過的床上,說:「這是『Lisa 的』房間。」我想,你懂的。😊


 若不是神的安排,這一切的美好都不會發生。願神祝福你回到南非後的生活,在學業上、工作上,都有神的保守。


ps: 歡迎妳成為我家的「第六人」😄


 Jorman 

2026年2月15日 星期日

馬年賀歲(戲筆一首)

金山不若雲山媚,

馬縱春風舞亂蹄。

有心龍虎來相會,

錢塘江湧眾潮低。

Jabez的「攻擊」

關島行最後一天,為了不耽誤7:30的航班,我們決定5點起床(台灣時間是凌晨3點),5:30還出租車,再搭出租公司的接駁車到關島機場,給通關保留足夠的時間(關島海關的安檢太嚴格了)。Jabez很配合地跟著起床,不吵不鬧,直到還車時,Jabez 情緒爆走了。


從出租車下行李,Jabez 就開始焦躁不安,我們跟他解釋要歸還車輛,但Jabez 不接受。看著公司員工把車開走(去試車,看看有沒有車損),Jabez 情緒整個炸掉,彷彿沒了車子就無法回台灣。我趕忙抱起Jabez 安撫他,但是無效,Jabez 整個情緒大失控,居然出手打了我好幾下----我的肩部以上,都是他的攻擊範圍。


我有點嚇到,不可置信的看著Jabez,他也正眼看著我,我因此確定:我就是他的攻擊目標。但此時安撫他的焦慮是更迫切的事,於是我帶著笑意輕拍他的背,用肢體語言告訴他:「Daddy 沒事,不用擔心。Daddy惜惜!」後來媽媽出來點破了Jabez情緒爆掉的原因:我們只告訴他「離開旅館,前往機場」,忘記告訴他中間有「還車」這個環節,所以他對離開的車子產生焦慮。我們趕忙跟Jabez解釋清楚,不久接駁車也到了,Jabez才放下焦躁,又變回那個溫順柔和的孩子。


回程中,我反省整個的過程,神給了我以下的領受:


1.Jabez攻擊我不是出於本意。他本是愛我的,但在被情緒制約的情況下,他需要一個情緒的出口,我離他最近,所以就成了攻擊的目標。(事實上如果不攻擊我,那他就會攻擊自己了)


在此時的Jabez身上,我看見我們被罪捆綁時的樣子:明明心裡有愛,卻還是失控出手攻擊了。「這樣看來,我以內心順服神的律,我肉體卻順服罪的律了」(羅馬書7:25),靠己力無法勝過罪,是鐵一般的事實。


2.被攻擊的我雖然驚訝,但沒有發火,反而憐惜Jabez這個孩子困在情緒的風暴中,因為我是他的爸爸。


我逆想:天父看著我們陷溺在罪中,應該也是同樣的心情吧?祂既恨惡罪,卻憐憫犯罪的我們,因為神就是愛。「愛是恆久忍耐,又有恩慈」(哥林多前書13:4),只有愛,才能讓人甘願為對方付出,為對方奉獻。


我感謝神讓我的生命與Jabez緊緊綁在一起,在這份親子關係中,神總是祝福滿滿,讓我在生活的操練中,與主更靠近。

<Jabez’s “Attack”>

On the last day of our trip to Guam, in order not to miss our 7:30 a.m. flight, we decided to wake up at 5:00 a.m. (3:00 a.m. Taiwan time). At 5:30 we returned the rental car, then took the rental company’s shuttle to the airport, allowing sufficient time for security and customs clearance (Guam’s inspections are very strict). Jabez cooperated and woke up with us without fussing. However, when it was time to return the car, his emotions suddenly exploded.


As we unloaded the luggage from the car, Jabez became increasingly anxious. We explained that we needed to return the vehicle, but he could not accept it. When he watched the company staff drive the car away for inspection (to check for any damage), his emotions completely spiraled out of control. It was as if, without the car, we would not be able to return to Taiwan. I quickly picked him up and tried to comfort him, but it did not help. He completely lost control and struck me several times—everything above my shoulders was within his range of attack.


I was startled and looked at him in disbelief. He looked straight back at me. In that moment, I knew for certain: I was his target. Yet calming his anxiety was more urgent than defending myself. So I smiled gently, patted his back, and used body language to reassure him: “Daddy is okay. Don’t worry. Daddy loves you.” Later, his mother identified the cause of his emotional outburst: we had told him we were leaving the hotel and heading to the airport, but we had forgotten to explain that returning the car was part of the process. The sudden departure of the car triggered his anxiety. We quickly clarified everything to him. Soon the shuttle arrived, and Jabez calmed down, returning to his gentle and tender self.


On the flight home, I reflected on the entire incident, and the Lord gave me the following insights:


1. Jabez did not attack me intentionally.

He loves me. But when overwhelmed by emotion, he needed an outlet, and I happened to be the closest one to him, so I became the target. (In fact, had he not struck me, he might have harmed himself.)

In Jabez at that moment, I saw a picture of ourselves when we are bound by sin. Though there is love in our hearts, we still lose control and strike out. As Scripture says:

“So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin” (Romans 7:25).

It is an ironclad truth that we cannot overcome sin by our own strength.


2. Though I was surprised by the attack, I did not become angry. Instead, I felt compassion for Jabez, trapped in the storm of his emotions—because I am his father.

Reflecting further, I wondered: when our Heavenly Father sees us drowning in sin, does He not feel the same? He hates sin, yet He has mercy on us sinners, because God is love.

“Love is patient and kind” (1 Corinthians 13:4).

Only love enables one to willingly give, to sacrifice, and to offer oneself for another.


I thank God for binding my life so closely with Jabez’s. In this parent–child relationship, God continually pours out His blessings, drawing me closer to the Lord through the daily practice of life.

2026年2月5日 星期四

關島行

浮島海天闊,
流雲山水清。
臨風舒散髮,
入幕數明星。
夜市原民味,
沙灘異國情。
陶潛如有意,
遠道亦相迎。

<Journey to Guam> by ChatGPT

Drifting isles spread wide where sea meets sky;
Wandering clouds, clear over hills and streams.

Facing the wind, I loose my unbound hair,
Within the tented night, I count the stars.

Night markets breathe the native earth’s warm scent;
Along the shore, an air of foreign lands.

If Tao Yuanming still harbored such a heart,
Even from afar, this road he’d gladly take.

2026年2月4日 星期三

搭機隨想

飛在天空上
離地面遠了
卻沒有更靠近天國

腳下的雲
遮蔽了海洋與島嶼
遮不住禱告的聲音

一環彩虹,啊
那是挪亞之約
印在浮雲之上

<Thoughts on Flying>

I rose into the heavens,
leaving the earth far below,
yet I was no nearer to the Kingdom of God.

The clouds beneath my feet
veiled the seas and the scattered isles,
but they could not silence the voice of prayer.

Ah, a ring of rainbow—
the covenant of Noah,
sealed upon the drifting clouds.

2026年1月19日 星期一

GT20260120主題:主耶穌是安息日的主

 經文:路加福音13:10-17

10安息日,耶穌在會堂裏教訓人。

11有一個女人被鬼附着,病了十八年,腰彎得一點直不起來。

12耶穌看見,便叫過她來,對她說:「女人,你脫離這病了!」

13於是用兩隻手按着她;她立刻直起腰來,就歸榮耀與神。

14管會堂的因為耶穌在安息日治病,就氣忿忿地對眾人說:「有六日應當做工;那六日之內可以來求醫,在安息日卻不可。」

15主說:「假冒為善的人哪,難道你們各人在安息日不解開槽上的牛、驢,牽去飲嗎?

16況且這女人本是亞伯拉罕的後裔,被撒但捆綁了這十八年,不當在安息日解開她的綁嗎?」

17耶穌說這話,他的敵人都慚愧了;眾人因他所行一切榮耀的事,就都歡喜了。


這段記載分為幾個小節:

1.主耶穌醫治駝背的女人

2.駝背的女人歸榮耀與神

3.管會堂的人的憤怒與指責

4.耶穌的反駁/教導

5.結局:敵人的慚愧與眾人的歡喜


而爭議點/關鍵字是「安息日」。


安息日是摩西律法規定的聖日,什麼工都不可做(出20:8-11),而主耶穌卻選在這一天醫病趕鬼,治好駝背的女人,這是對摩西律法、猶太傳統的直接挑戰與冒犯,所以管會堂的人會憤怒,也就可以理解了。


然而主耶穌卻對管會堂的人定調為「假冒為善」,因為他們在自己高舉的律法面前明顯「雙標」:他們既指責主耶穌的醫治(做工),自己卻在安息日「解開槽上的牛驢牽去飲」(一樣是做工),在邏輯上讓管會堂的人無法回應。


但真正讓人動容的,是主耶穌接著說的話:「況且這女人本是亞伯拉罕的後裔,被撒但捆綁了這十八年,不當在安息日解開她的綁嗎?」 這段話有幾層意義:

1.醫治拯救是出於神的憐憫

2.這女人是亞伯拉罕的後裔,對照管會堂的人對牛驢的慈愛,這女人身份更尊貴,難道不應該/不值得被憐憫相待嗎?

3.女人被撒旦捆綁,被主耶穌醫治,證明了撒旦的權柄在主耶穌之下,這是我們信主得救最重要的保證

4.在安息日施行醫治,展現了主耶穌是「安息日的主」的身份與權柄,讓人得見神的榮耀


我們也不可輕看「敵人的慚愧」這段文字。慚愧代表敵人「知道」自己有錯,且把這份知錯的意念外顯出來了。這很重要,但接下來的更重要:

1.如果連慚愧都沒有,那所有的認錯悔改都是假的

2.如果慚愧了卻硬著心不肯認錯悔改,那就是自絕於神的救恩之外。


This passage can be divided into several sections:

  1. The Lord Jesus heals the woman who was bent over.

  2. The bent-over woman gives glory to God.

  3. The synagogue leader’s anger and accusation.

  4. Jesus’ rebuttal and teaching.

  5. The outcome: the shame of the opponents and the joy of the people.

The point of controversy and the key term here is the “Sabbath.”

The Sabbath is a holy day prescribed by the Mosaic Law, on which no work is to be done (Exodus 20:8–11). Yet the Lord Jesus chose this very day to heal and cast out demons, restoring the bent-over woman. This constituted a direct challenge and offense to the Mosaic Law and Jewish tradition, which explains the synagogue leader’s anger.

However, the Lord Jesus characterized the synagogue leader as a “hypocrite,” because in the very law they exalted, their double standard was evident. While they condemned Jesus for healing (which they regarded as work), they themselves would “untie their ox or donkey from the manger and lead it away to give it water” on the Sabbath (also a form of work). Logically, this left the synagogue leader with no rebuttal.

What is most moving, however, is what the Lord Jesus said next: “And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen long years, be set free from this bondage on the Sabbath day?” This statement carries several layers of meaning:

  1. Healing and salvation arise from God’s mercy.

  2. This woman is a daughter of Abraham. In contrast to the compassion shown to oxen and donkeys by the synagogue leader, her status is far more noble. Should she not—and is she not worthy to—be treated with mercy?

  3. The woman was bound by Satan and was healed by the Lord Jesus, demonstrating that Satan’s authority is subject to the authority of Jesus. This is the most important assurance of our salvation through faith in Him.

  4. Performing healing on the Sabbath reveals the identity and authority of the Lord Jesus as “the Lord of the Sabbath,” allowing people to behold the glory of God.

We must also not overlook the phrase “the shame of the opponents.” Shame indicates that the opponents knew they were in the wrong and that this awareness was outwardly manifested. This is significant, but what follows is even more critical:

  1. If there is not even shame, then all claims of confession and repentance are false.

  2. If one feels shame yet stubbornly refuses to confess and repent, one places oneself outside the saving grace of God.

GT20260120主題:神「延遲時間」的憐憫

經文:路加福音13:6-9

6於是用比喻說:「一個人有一棵無花果樹栽在葡萄園裏。他來到樹前找果子,卻找不着。

7就對管園的說:『看哪,我這三年來到這無花果樹前找果子,竟找不着。把它砍了吧,何必白佔地土呢!』

8管園的說:『主啊,今年且留着,等我周圍掘開土,加上糞;

9以後若結果子便罷,不然再把它砍了。』」


「果子」是種植無花果樹自然、應然的結果與期待,若「不結果子」,則是違背自己生命的本質,對主人無用,且浪費資源(白佔地土)。這象徵了人既受造於神,卻無法活出神內建的本質與期待(結果),結局就是「砍了吧!」


園丁有沒有否定主人的論述?沒有,他只是為這棵無花果樹求情,願意再給無花果樹一個機會(今年且留著),一個可以滿足主人期待的機會(結果)。


但園丁並不是口惠而已,他要為這棵樹鬆土施肥(掘開土、加上糞),給它需要的一切,幫助它生長,好結果子。


園丁的鬆土施肥象徵主耶穌的救恩。若聽任無花果樹在原始條件下生長,這求來的「一年」機會,對這棵樹其實沒有任何意義。主耶穌主動的救恩(園丁的鬆土施肥)讓條件改變了,而這個改變,正是上帝慈愛憐憫的具體作為與展現。


“Fruit” is the natural and expected outcome of cultivating a fig tree. If it “does not bear fruit,” it violates the very essence of its life, is useless to its owner, and wastes resources (occupying the land in vain). This symbolizes the reality that although human beings are created by God, they fail to live out the inherent nature and purpose God has built into them (to bear fruit). The result, therefore, is: “Cut it down!”

Did the gardener refute the owner’s reasoning? No. He simply interceded for the fig tree, asking that it be given another chance (“leave it for this year”), a chance to meet the owner’s expectation (to bear fruit).


Moreover, the gardener was not offering empty words. He committed himself to loosening the soil and applying fertilizer (digging around it and adding manure), providing everything the tree needed to grow and to bear fruit.


The gardener’s loosening of the soil and fertilizing symbolize the salvation of the Lord Jesus. If the fig tree were left to grow under its original conditions, the additional “one year” that was requested would, in fact, be meaningless to the tree. The proactive salvation of the Lord Jesus (the gardener’s loosening and fertilizing) changes the conditions, and this change is precisely the concrete expression and manifestation of God’s loving mercy.

GT20260120主題:人的盲點與神的眼光

經文:馬可福音13:1-5

1正當那時,有人將彼拉多使加利利人的血攙雜在他們祭物中的事告訴耶穌。

2耶穌說:「你們以為這些加利利人比眾加利利人更有罪,所以受這害嗎?

3我告訴你們,不是的!你們若不悔改,都要如此滅亡!

4從前西羅亞樓倒塌了,壓死十八個人;你們以為那些人比一切住在耶路撒冷的人更有罪嗎?

5我告訴你們,不是的!你們若不悔改,都要如此滅亡!」


彼拉多、西羅亞樓倒塌等事件,歷史記載不明。但從主耶穌「你們以為A比B更有罪嗎?(所以受這害)」的總結,可以知道當時的人對這些「受害者」的認知是「因罪而被上帝審判,所以受害」。


但主耶穌的總結點出了一個盲點:人們是在「相互比較」的基礎上去揣測\論斷這些事件,而這樣的論斷也隱含著「活著的B自認為比受害的A更有義,所以沒有遭害」的想法。這是明顯的「倖存者偏誤」。


主耶穌兩度說:「我告訴你們,不是的!你們若不悔改,都要如此滅亡!」這段話強調了幾個重點:


1.否定一般人「A比B有罪(B比A更有義)」的判斷認知

這個否定,反面呈現了神對罪的認知與人不同。從亞當夏娃犯罪之始,人類已經帶的罪的血緣傳遞到世世代代,沒有誰能逃過罪的綑綁。而這罪在於對神的悖逆與偏離,也就是「射不中的」。人們的自以為義,永遠無法取代神的公義。


2.「悔改」的重要性

「救贖」完全是神主動的作為與計畫,因為人無法靠自力處理罪的問題。人唯有認罪悔改,才能領受神的救恩。


3.「若不悔改,就會滅亡」的必然性

因為「罪的工價乃是死」(羅6:23),所以人若不為自己的罪悔改,滅亡是必然的結果----而這與別人是否犯罪、是否受審判無關。


主耶穌此時就像一個先知,忠實地傳達了父神的旨意,也校正了屬人的眼光,不要只看到別人的不幸,而忘了自己其實也是個罪人,需要主耶穌的救恩。


Events such as Pilate’s actions and the collapse of the tower of Siloam are not clearly documented in historical records. However, from the way the Lord Jesus summarizes the situation—“Do you think that A was more sinful than B (and therefore suffered this calamity)?”—we can see that people at the time understood these “victims” as having suffered because they were judged by God for their sins.


Yet Jesus’ conclusion exposes a blind spot: people were speculating about and judging these events on the basis of comparison. Such judgment implicitly assumes that the surviving “B” considers himself more righteous than the afflicted “A,” and therefore believes he escaped disaster. This is a clear example of survivorship bias.


Twice the Lord Jesus declares, “I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish!” This statement highlights several key points:


1.    The rejection of the common assumption that “A is more sinful than B (and B is more righteous than A)”

This rejection reveals, by contrast, that God’s understanding of sin differs from that of humans. From the moment Adam and Eve sinned, sin has been transmitted through humanity from generation to generation, and no one can escape its bondage. Sin fundamentally consists of rebellion against God and deviation from His will—literally “missing the mark.” Human self-righteousness can never replace God’s righteousness.


2.    The importance of repentance

Redemption is entirely God’s initiative and plan, because human beings are incapable of resolving the problem of sin by their own efforts. Only through confession and repentance can one receive God’s salvation.


3.    The inevitability of perishing without repentance

Because “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23), if a person does not repent of his own sin, destruction is an inevitable outcome—regardless of whether others have sinned or suffered judgment.


At this moment, the Lord Jesus acts like a prophet, faithfully proclaiming the will of the Father and correcting a purely human perspective. He redirects attention away from merely observing the misfortunes of others, reminding us that we ourselves are sinners in need of the salvation.

2026年1月13日 星期二

給一個學生的回信:關於信仰基督教

按:某位已畢業的學生(異教徒,但沒有強烈的信仰追求)問我幾個關於認識基督教的事,第一個問題很嚴肅:「在改信基督教的一開始會遇到哪些困難呢?」所以我認真地回覆了她。

改信仰不是容易的事,不然我也不會到43歲才受洗信主。

舉個例子:李登輝前總統原本也不是基督徒,他受的是日本教育,有武士道的信念,年輕時加入過共產黨,渴望革命改變世界,等到進入黨國體制後,才想認識一下基督教的信仰。他怎麼做?讀聖經+拜訪教會。

李前總統是博學之人,他不僅自己研讀聖經,還每週排定時程,一間一間的去拜訪教會,在拜訪教會時,會仔細聆聽牧師的講道。他不是抱著「看看」的心理去的,他在「認識基督教」,在「尋求真理」。最後,他受洗成為長老教會系統的基督徒。

你可以用「想理解基督徒\男友」的角度去接觸基督教,這沒問題,但你自己信與不信,光靠別人的餵養是不夠的。你自己要對真理有「飢渴」,沒有這份內在的動力,基督信仰最終也只會是你書架上的一本書而已。

是的,飢渴。李登輝有,我也有。

先不要談到「改信」這一步,你先「接觸」。接觸的「客觀實體」有二:聖經+教會(不是建築物,是信主的一群人),但聖經也好、教會也好,都要指向同一個「絕對主體」:神(上帝)。你要信基督教,真正的檢驗是「有沒有真心想認識這一位神」。

從我的經驗來說,會遇到的困難有:

1.基督教教義上的「排他性」

這一點是讓我當年打死不肯信主的核心原因,我覺得基督教太霸道,只有自己的才是唯一真理,其他信仰都是假的。但這一點沒有別的解藥,只有自己親自去認識基督教的教義,才會有接受這一點的可能。

當初剛信主時,是印尼的唐崇榮牧師在佈道會上說出的「真理是絕對的,既然絕對,那真理就具有排他性」這一段話打醒了我,讓我更謙卑地去「認識」基督教,而非帶著既有的信仰內容去「檢視」基督教因為我必須要正視一個問題:如果基督教「真的」是真理呢?

2.「價值系統整合」與「價值系統更換」

一般人可能只會在「生活習慣層次」上感到不便,例如吃素吃葷、拿不拿香、拜不拜廟、要不要把寶貴的週日去上教堂...等。

再來是「觀念層次」的衝突,例如眾生平等VS人是萬物之靈;殺生是罪過VS聖經說不帶血的就可以吃;拜神明VS拜偶像;唯一真神VS宗教都是勸人為善...等。

再來是「信仰層次」的對撞。以我為例,接受唯一真神,就必須視所有廟宇的神明為偶像,甚至必須去除(不是去燒廟啦,是要否定諸神具有神的資格);接受原罪論,就必須放棄我過去相信的性善論;相信聖經「神允許肉食」,就必須放膽開葷,不再茹素(我以前教會有一對夫妻也是一貫道改信基督教,但他們仍然保持吃素的習慣)...等。

信基督教以前,我採取的方式是「系統整合」,也就是近乎「雜家」的方式,在各個宗教裡擷取所長,而我的價值核心,是「追求自我品格的提升與完美」,凡有利我品格成長、靈性成長的思想與宗教內容,我都會彙整起來,成為我信仰的價值。而這些都是經過我自己檢驗過的,並不是像一貫道一樣,把一整套宗教內容置入到自己的腦袋裡,所以這個系統整合只適合我自己,不適用於別人。

而這在婚後就遇到了問題。以前,我對「關係」的態度是隨遇而安的,來則聚,分則離,不看重關係的經營(就是比較道家一點),因為很花心力。這種態度對外人是可以的,但對親人就不行,很不幸的是,婚姻就是讓兩人從外人變為情人、再變為親人的過程,當成為親人,就不能不重視關係。所以我的「隨遇而安」,就會成為兩人關係的殺手,我自己覺得沒那麼嚴重,但師母卻深深被此所傷。這時我才理解:系統整合在「關係」中是失效的,我需要的,是「系統更換」。

那為什麼是基督教?因為基督教最顯眼的教義就是「愛」,如果基督教能讓我對愛有更深刻的理解與生命改變,那就是它了。在我漫長的信主過程中,其實就是「價值系統更換」的過程,這是很深層、很內在的領域。如果是為了某些「外在原因」(例如「我的結婚對象一定要是基督徒」)而信主,那麼我必須老實說,當外部因素消失(例如「與基督徒正式成為夫妻」),你就不再需要基督教,也就是說,你不再需要神了。


不知不覺講了太多。簡單彙整幾個重點給你:

1.改信基督教的一開始會遇到哪些困難呢? 

答:如上。

2.怎麼樣會冒犯到基督信仰的人呢? 

答:不在信仰中的人,這一點無解。台灣愛吃豬肉,就常常在這一點冒犯伊斯蘭信徒而不自知。所以去「理解基督教」是唯一解。

3.我不知道要怎麼確定這個宗教是真的、值得相信的

答:你的問題有一個盲點:不是別人告訴你的信仰內容有真有假,你只需要做「確認」的動作;而是你必須「親自進入、親自瞭解」才能去「確定」這個信仰內容是真是假。這就是我在前面會告訴你李前總統這個例子的原因。我如果不走進教會、不讀聖經,不跟教會的屬靈長輩質疑、請益,我也不會成為基督徒----而且我有「再也不會離開的確信」喔!

我知道我的措辭有點深,但仍希望對你有些幫助。

Changing one’s faith is never an easy matter. Otherwise, I would not have waited until the age of forty-three to be baptized and become a believer in Christ.

Let me offer an example. Former President Lee Teng-hui was not originally a Christian. He received a Japanese education and was deeply influenced by the spirit of Bushidō. In his youth, he even joined the Communist Party, longing for revolution and social transformation. It was only after he entered the party-state system that he began to take an interest in Christianity. How did he do so? By reading the Bible and visiting churches.

President Lee was a highly learned man. He did not merely read Scripture on his own; he also deliberately scheduled time each week to visit churches one by one. During these visits, he listened attentively to the sermons preached by pastors. He did not go with a casual or observational mindset. He went with the intention of understanding Christianity and seeking truth. Eventually, he was baptized and became a Christian within the Presbyterian Church tradition.

It is entirely acceptable to approach Christianity from the perspective of “wanting to understand Christians” or even “wanting to understand a Christian boyfriend.” However, whether you ultimately believe or not, relying solely on being spiritually “fed” by others is insufficient. You yourself must have a hunger and thirst for truth. Without this inner drive, the Christian faith will ultimately become nothing more than a book on your shelf.

Yes—hunger and thirst. President Lee had it. I had it as well.

Before speaking of “conversion,” let us first speak of “engagement.” There are two objective means of engagement: the Bible and the church (not the building, but the community of believers). Yet whether it is the Bible or the church, both must point toward the same absolute Subject: God Himself. To believe in Christianity, the true test is whether one sincerely desires to know this God.

From my own experience, the difficulties one encounters include the following:

1. The exclusivity of Christian doctrine

This was the core reason I stubbornly refused to believe for many years. I felt Christianity was too authoritarian—claiming itself as the only truth and dismissing other faiths as false. There is no shortcut to resolving this issue. Only by personally engaging with Christian doctrine can one possibly come to accept this claim.

When I first came to faith, it was a statement made by Pastor Stephen Tong (Tang Chong-rong) at an evangelistic meeting that awakened me: “Truth is absolute. And because it is absolute, truth is necessarily exclusive.” This statement humbled me. It led me to approach Christianity not as something to be examined through the lens of my pre-existing beliefs, but as something I needed to truly understand on its own terms. I had to face an unavoidable question: What if Christianity really is the truth?


2. ‘Integration of value systems’ versus ‘replacement of a value system’

For most people, the initial difficulties may appear at the level of daily practice: vegetarian versus meat-eating, holding incense or not, visiting temples or not, giving up precious Sundays to attend church, and so forth.

Next comes conflict at the conceptual level: equality of all beings versus humanity as the crown of creation; killing as sin versus the biblical permission to eat meat without blood; worshiping deities versus idolatry; belief in the one true God versus the idea that all religions merely teach moral goodness.

Finally, there is collision at the level of faith itself. In my case, accepting the one true God required me to regard all temple deities as idols—not in the sense of destroying temples, but in denying their divine status. Accepting the doctrine of original sin required me to abandon my former belief in the innate goodness of human nature. Accepting the biblical teaching that God permits the consumption of meat required me to cease my vegetarianism. (Even today, there are believers who converted from Yiguandao who remain vegetarian, and I respect that.)

Before becoming a Christian, I practiced what I would call “value system integration”—a syncretistic approach. I drew selectively from different religions, adopting whatever I believed contributed to my moral refinement and spiritual growth. The core of my values was self-cultivation and the pursuit of personal moral perfection. Everything I accepted had been examined and chosen by myself; it was not an uncritical acceptance of a complete religious system. This integrated system worked for me—but only for me. It was not transferable.

After marriage, however, this approach failed. Previously, my attitude toward relationships was one of detachment: if we come together, we come together; if we part, we part. I did not invest deeply in maintaining relationships—it required too much effort. This stance may be acceptable toward outsiders, but not toward family. Unfortunately, marriage is precisely the process by which two people move from strangers, to lovers, and then to family. Once someone becomes family, relationship cannot be treated lightly.

My “detached acceptance” became destructive to the marriage. I did not initially think it was that serious, but my wife was deeply hurt by it. Only then did I realize that system integration fails in the context of intimate relationships. What I needed was not integration, but system replacement.

Why Christianity? Because the most distinctive doctrine of Christianity is love. If Christianity could transform my understanding and practice of love, then this was the faith I needed. My long journey to faith was, in essence, a process of value system replacement—deep, internal, and fundamental.

If one believes for purely external reasons—for example, “my spouse must be a Christian”—then I must say honestly: when that external reason disappears (such as once the marriage is secured), Christianity will no longer be necessary. In other words, God will no longer be necessary.


I have spoken at length. Let me summarize a few key points:

1. What difficulties arise at the beginning of converting to Christianity?

Answer: As described above.

2. How does one offend Christians without intending to?

Answer: This is unavoidable for those outside the faith. In Taiwan, for example, the love of pork often unintentionally offends Muslim believers. The only solution is to truly understand Christianity.

3. I do not know how to determine whether this religion is true and worthy of belief.

Answer: There is a blind spot in this question. Faith is not something where others tell you what is true or false and you merely verify it. You must personally enter into it, personally engage with it, in order to discern whether it is true. This is why I mentioned President Lee’s example earlier. Had I not entered the church, read the Bible, questioned and sought counsel from spiritual elders, I would never have become a Christian—and now I have a deep conviction that I will never leave.

I know my wording is somewhat dense, but I sincerely hope it will be of some help.

2026年1月8日 星期四

GT20260109主題:耶穌關於「世代的人」的比喻

經文:路加福音7:31-34

31 主又說:「這樣,我可用甚麼比這世代的人呢?他們好像甚麼呢? 

32好像孩童坐在街市上,彼此呼叫說:

我們向你們吹笛,

你們不跳舞;

我們向你們舉哀,

你們不啼哭。

33施洗的約翰來,不吃餅,不喝酒你們說他是被鬼附着的。

 34人子來,也吃也喝你們說他是貪食好酒的人,是稅吏和罪人的朋友。

主題:耶穌關於「世代的人」的比喻

真是鮮活的比喻!

每個世代都有這樣的人啊:既不回應別人的喜樂與哀哭(孩童的比喻),又對別人的行為老是找理由去反對與批評(施洗約翰與耶穌自己的遭遇)。前者是對別人的無感與冷漠,後者是極端的自我中心主義。

這樣的生命,是極為剛硬的;這樣的生命,也會嚴重傷害所有的關係。如果讓這樣的人擁有權勢可以決定關係、甚至是建構體制,那一定是只計算個人獲利,不惜將別人當成資源(中國稱之為「人礦」)的恐怖關係與體制,因為在他的世界裡,只有他的意志才是對錯的標準,只有他的樂與悲才是需要在乎的情緒。

而這樣的生命,離神最遠。

Scripture: Luke 7:31–34


31 The Lord said, “To what, then, shall I compare the people of this generation? What are they like?


32 They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling out to one another:


‘We played the flute for you,

and you did not dance;

we sang a dirge,

and you did not weep.’


33 For John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’


34 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.’”


Theme: Jesus’ Parable about “the People of This Generation”


What a vivid parable!


Every generation has such people: those who neither respond to others’ joy nor to their sorrow (the parable of the children), and who constantly find reasons to oppose and criticize others’ actions (as seen in their treatment of John the Baptist and of Jesus himself). The former reflects indifference and emotional numbness toward others; the latter reflects an extreme form of self-centeredness.


Such a life is profoundly hardened. Such a life also seriously damages all relationships. If people like this were to hold power—able to determine relationships or even construct systems—those systems would inevitably calculate only personal gain, treating others merely as resources (in China, this is referred to as “human mines”). This would result in terrifying relationships and structures, because in their world only their own will defines right and wrong, and only their own joy and sorrow are emotions that matter.


Such a life is the farthest from God.

2026年1月7日 星期三

楊腓力婚外情事件之省思

基督教作家楊腓力坦承婚外情八年!宣布退出寫作與公開事工


「總要警醒禱告,免得入了迷惑。你們心靈固然願意,肉體卻軟弱了。」(馬太福音 26:41)


這是知道楊腓力事件後我想起的經文。


楊中生牧師在我初信主時曾告訴我,基督徒只是「蒙恩的罪人」。當年我不甚理解,因為我以為信主後只要靠著學習聖經的道理、遵從主耶穌的教導,我就可以讓自己趨於完美,一如我還是儒家信徒時,相信自己憑著修養品德,就可以成為止於至善的「聖人」。


直到我深受罪疚感所困, 楊中生牧師以上帝「無可理喻的愛」開導我,我才懂得神的慈愛與公義本質,懂得神與人之間那道無法跨越的鴻溝,懂得上帝的聖潔與榮耀,以及自己為何會同時「畏懼光」與「尋求光」----


因為我終於體認到,人與罪的關係是:「它必戀慕你,你卻要制伏它」(創世紀4:7) 


在這樣充滿張力的的關係中,就會呈現這樣一種詭異卻真實的生命景況:


撐開陽傘

和地上罪的陰影

嬉戲(<懺>,2013年舊作)


我想,這應該就是楊腓力這八年來每天在熬受的日子。


至於審判,那是上帝的事。

***

“Watch and pray, that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Matthew 26:41)


This was the passage that came to my mind after learning of the Philip Yancey  incident.


When I first came to faith, Pastor Jonathan Yang once told me that Christians are merely “sinners saved by grace.” At the time, I did not truly understand this, because I believed that after coming to faith, as long as I studied Scripture diligently and followed the teachings of the Lord Jesus, I could gradually perfect myself. This was much like when I was still a Confucian adherent, believing that through moral self-cultivation one could become a “sage” who abides in the highest good.


It was not until I was deeply tormented by guilt that Pastor Jonathan Yang enlightened me with God’s “incomprehensible love.” Only then did I come to understand the nature of God’s mercy and justice; to recognize the unbridgeable chasm between God and humanity; to grasp God’s holiness and glory; and to understand why I could simultaneously “fear the light” and yet “seek the light”—


For I finally came to realize that the relationship between humanity and sin is this:

 

“Sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

(Genesis 4:7)


Within this relationship, so full of tension, there emerges a strange yet profoundly real condition of life:


Opening a parasol

 Playing

 with the shadow of sin on the ground

(“Confession,” an old work from 2013)


I imagine that this is the life Philip Yancey has been forced to endure, day after day, over the past eight years. 


As for judgment—that belongs to God alone.