Matius 9:9-13: WHO THE SINNER IS?

Ringkasan Khotbah : 24 April 2005

Who the Sinner is?

oleh: Pdt. Sutjipto Subeno, M.Div.

Nats: Mat. 9:9-13

Pendahuluan
Hari ini kita kembali menajamkan tentang separasi yang berasal dari kata kudus atau kadosh (bahasa Ibrani) yaitu pemisahan antara orang yang berada di dalam Kristus dengan orang yang berada di luar Kristus. Hati-hati jangan tertipu dengan segala sesuatu yang kelihatan secara fenomena yang kelihatan saleh dan beragama tetapi sesungguhnya dia bukanlah seorang pengikut Tuhan sejati. Bagaimanakah seharusnya sikap seorang pengikut Tuhan sejati? Matius memberikan kesaksian tentang perubahan drastis yang terjadi dalam hidupnya, yakni dari seorang pemungut cukai menjadi pengikut Kristus. Matius tidak menulis dengan panjang lebar (Mat. 9:9). Matius adalah seorang Yahudi tetapi ia lebih memilih menjadi pemungut cukai, dicap sebagai seorang pengkhianat dan dikucilkan oleh bangsanya, semua itu ia lakukan karena satu alasan, yaitu uang. Orang rela melakukan apapun demi untuk uang bahkan ada orang yang mau berlaku seperti binatang. Orang lupa kalau dirinya dicipta menurut gambar dan rupa Allah yang begitu mulia dan harus mempertahankan harkat.
Matius merasakan hidupnya kosong dan ternyata uangnya yang banyak itu tidak dapat menolongnya. Di tengah kondisi yang desperate itu Tuhan Yesus datang dan berkata, “Ikutlah Aku“. Tanpa berpikir panjang lagi Matius langsung meninggalkan pekerjaannya dan mengikut Tuhan Yesus. Pertanyaannya sekarang adalah apakah Matius rugi dan menyesal setelah mengikut Kristus? Jawabnya: tidak, Matius sangat bersyukur atas anugerah Tuhan. Bandingkanlah dengan sikap yang ditunjukkan oleh orang Farisi dan ahli Taurat, mereka menganggap dirinya yang paling benar karena telah mentaati lebih dari 600 peraturan. Tuhan Yesus tidak suka dan menegur sikap mereka yang munafik. Matius menyadari bahwa di luar sana masih banyak orang yang hidup bergelimang dalam dosa karena itu ia mengundang semua pemungut cukai dalam pestanya dimana Tuhan Yesus yang menjadi tuan rumahnya. Matius ingin supaya orang-orang berdosa ini bertemu dengan Tuhan Yesus dan mendapat keselamatan seperti yang ia alami.
I. Perbedaan Posisi
Orang Farisi berkata kepada murid-murid Yesus, “Mengapa gurumu makan bersama dengan pemungut cukai dan orang-orang berdosa?“ Dengan kata lain mereka hendak mengatakan bahwa Yesus, seorang Rabbi Yahudi maka tidak seharusnya Ia bersama pemungut cukai dan orang berdosa tetapi Dia seharusnya ada bersama dengan orang Farisi dan ahli Taurat. Yang menjadi pertanyaan adalah apa yang mendasari atau yang menjadi pola pikir mereka sehingga berpikir kalau Yesus salah posisi? Sesungguhnya yang salah posisi bukan Tuhan Yesus tetapi orang Farisi dan ahli Taurat. Tuduhan mereka terhadap Tuhan Yesus membuktikan mereka tidak mengenal dirinya sendiri sebab dimana kita berada itu menunjukkan seberapa jauh kita “tahu diri“. Ciri-ciri orang yang tahu diri, yaitu: 1) kenal diri, 2) tahu dimana posisi, 3) tahu apa ia kerjakan sebagai eksistensi manusia. Ketika pertama kali manusia jatuh ke dalam dosa, Allah juga menanyakan keberadaan posisi: “Dimanakah engkau?“ (Kej. 3:9).
Secara fenomena orang Farisi kelihatan baik tapi sesungguhnya mereka sangat licik, mereka ingin menguasai Yesus. Hati-hati, di dunia modern ini banyak orang yang kelihatan baik tetapi di balik kebaikan itu sebenarnya ada motivasi buruk. Inilah sifat manusia berdosa. Memang siapakah manusia sehingga berani mempersalahkan Tuhan? Tuhan Yesus tahu dimana seharusnya Ia berada, yakni berada di tengah-tengah orang berdosa yang tahu diri kalau dirinya adalah orang berdosa dan memerlukan penyelesaian; bukan orang sehat yang memerlukan tabib, tetapi orang sakit. Orang Farisi tidak beda dengan pemungut cukai yakni sama-sama orang berdosa maka seharusnya mereka juga berada di posisi yang sama seperti pemungut cukai. Seandainya orang Farisi menyadari dirinya orang berdosa dan mau bertobat maka ia pasti ada di posisi yang sama seperti pemungut cukai. Orang Farisi telah membuat garis pemisah, mereka ingin Tuhan Yesus ada di posisi mereka tetapi mereka tidak mau Tuhan Yesus memimpin hidup mereka. Garis pemisah ini tidak pernah mempertemukan keduanya; kemungkinan yang terjadi adalah salah satu harus pindah, Tuhan Yesus bergabung dengan orang Farisi atau orang Farisi yang harus bergabung dengan Tuhan Yesus. Dimanakah positioning kita? Kalau kita merasa diri hebat, saleh, dan tidak berdosa maka sadar dan bertobatlah justru pada saat itu kita adalah orang yang paling berdosa dan seharusnya kita berada di posisi para pemungut cukai. Di tengah dunia ini banyak orang yang berdosa yang berpikir kalau Tuhan Yesus yang harus ada bersama mereka, Tuhan Yesus yang harus tunduk dan taat padanya. Salah! Tuhan Yesus menegur dengan keras karena Dia ingin menyadarkan manusia supaya kembali pada posisi yang tepat karena selama ini manusia tidak sadar kalau telah salah posisi, kita telah mengalami keterkiliran posisi. Kalau kita masih mengeraskan hati dan tidak mau pindah ke posisi pemungut cukai, berarti kita adalah orang yang tidak tahu diri, kita tidak mengenal siapa diri kita yang sesungguhnya.
Celakanya, manusia mencoba menyelesaikan semua persoalan manusia melalui pendekatan psikologi yang baru muncul di abad ke-20 yang merupakan hasil humanisme modern. Padahal dari keempat mazhab besar, yaitu: 1) psikoanalisa, 2) behaviorism, 3) humanism, 4) mystical, tidak ada satu pun mazhab yang memahami: pertama, manusia dicipta menurut gambar dan rupa Allah, manusia tidak kenal siapa dirinya tapi berteori tentang diri sendiri dan memakai istilah psikologi; kedua, manusia adalah manusia berdosa, orang tidak mau mengakui dirinya berdosa tetapi orang lebih suka mengatakan dosa itu sebagai akibat kegagalan dari masa lalu maka tidaklah heran kalau manusia sukar kembali pada Tuhan. Dan celakanya, hari ini seluruh kurikulum sekolah dibasiskan pada psikologi. Inilah yang disebut sebagai keterkiliran posisi, kita tidak tahu posisi diri kita dimana karena itu hendaklah kita sadar bahwa kita adalah orang berdosa dan seharusnya dimurka Tuhan namun Tuhan masih berbelas kasihan pada kita, Dia mau mengembalikan kita pada posisi yang benar, yaitu di posisi Kristus. Akan tetapi keputusan ada ditangan kita, dimanakah kita memposisikan diri? Sebab Tuhan tidak dapat mengerjakan semua ini pada orang yang memang mau memisahkan diri dari Kristus.

II. Perbedaan Konsep Dosa
Orang Farisi membenci Tuhan Yesus karena Tuhan Yesus makan bersama-sama dengan pemungut cukai dan orang berdosa. Perhatikan kata “berdosa“, sinners disini berarti orang Farisi ini menuduh pemungut cukai dan orang lain yang duduk bersama Kristus sebagai orang berdosa. Kristus tahu apa yang ada dalam pikiran orang Farisi maka Tuhan Yesus berkata: “Jadi, pergilah dan pelajarilah arti firman ini: Yang Kukehendaki ialah belas kasihan bukan persembahan, karena Aku datang bukan untuk memanggil orang benar melainkan orang berdosa (sinners).“ Orang Farisi dan Tuhan Yesus memakai kata yang dipakai sama, yakni sinners tetapi definisinya berbeda. Orang Farisi memakai kata “berdosa“ sifatnya eksklusif, yaitu hanya untuk orang-orang yang duduk bersama Kristus saja dan dirinya bukanlah termasuk dalam golongan orang berdosa. Tuhan Yesus justru menggunakan kata “berdosa“ yang sifatnya insklusif, yakni semua manusia berdosa tidak terkecuali orang Farisi.
Konsep orang Farisi tentang dosa adalah hubungan di dalam relasi horisontal maka mereka pikir kalau mereka tidak melakukan perbuatan yang merugikan orang lain berarti mereka tidak berdosa begitu juga kalau mereka tidak melanggar peraturan yang ada tertulis berarti mereka tidak berdosa. Bukankah konsep dosa orang Farisi ini sampai sekarang juga sama? Dunia mengajarkan kalau kita tidak melanggar peraturan maka secara pasif orang tidak berdosa, berarti kalau saya tidak membunuh, tidak mencuri, tidak berzinah, tidak bersaksi dusta, tidak mengingini milik orang lain dan menghormati orang tua berarti saya adalah orang baik. Orang yang merasa diri baik justru membuktikan kalau dia bukanlah orang baik sebab ia membandingkan diri dengan orang lain yang lebih jelek darinya. Tidak ada orang baik yang mengaku dirinya baik, orang baik selalu mengasumsikan diri kurang baik. Orang Farisi merasa dirinya baik, hal ini dapat kita lihat pada sikap dan isi doa mereka; mereka berdoa di tempat dimana banyak orang bisa melihat dan cara mereka berdoa adalah membandingkan diri dengan orang lain yang lebih jelek, seperti pemungut cukai misalnya. Alkitab mencatat ada seorang anak muda yang kaya mendatangi Yesus, ia merasa diri baik karena telah melakukan semua hukum Taurat. Benarkah demikian? Ketika Tuhan Yesus menyuruh dia untuk menjual seluruh hartanya dan mengikut Dia, anak muda ini langsung pergi. Hal ini membuktikan kalau sesungguhnya ia tidak mengasihi Tuhan, ia tidak melakukan semua hukum Taurat, ia hanya melakukan hukum Taurat yang sifatnya horisontal, yakni hukeum ke enam sampai hukum ke sepuluh saja. Kalau seandainya hari itu Tuhan Yesus hanya meminta 10% dari seluruh hartanya pastilah anak muda ini bersedia melakukannya. Bahkan kalau Tuhan meminta 50% dari hartanya maka demi untuk mendapatkan Sorga, ia pasti akan rela menjual hartanya namun Tuhan tahu sifat manusia yang humanis materialis ini karena itu Tuhan menyuruhnya untuk menjual seluruh hartanya, Tuhan ingin mereka taat. Ukuran dosa bukanlah urusan berbuat baik menurut standar manusia. Tidak!
Tuhan Yesus menghubungkan konsep dosa secara vertikal; dosa terkait dengan melakukan kehendak Tuhan, dosa terkait dengan ketaatan kepada Tuhan. Dosa kalau kita melawan Tuhan, kita tahu kita seharusnya taat pada apa yang menjadi kehendak-Nya tetapi kita tidak melakukan dan mengabaikan-Nya maka kita sudah berdosa. Tuhan ingin supaya kita memberitakan Injil, melayani dan hidup menjadi kesaksian indah bagi dunia tapi kita mengabaikannya maka kita sudah berdosa. Tuhan Yesus menegaskan bukan orang yang berseru: Tuhan, Tuhan yang akan masuk dalam Kerajaan Sorga tetapi mereka yang melakukan kehendak Bapaku yang di Sorga, dialah yang akan masuk dalam Kerajaan Sorga. Di hadapan Tuhan manusia sama, yaitu sama-sama berdosa, we are sinners maka jangan seorangpun menyombongkan diri dan merasa diri baik. Kalau kita memahami konsep dosa seperti yang Kristus mengerti maka kita berada di pihak Kristus tapi kalau kita mengerti dosa sama seperti orang Farisi maka kita terpisah dari Kristus. Dosa di dalam konsep Kekristenan jauh lebih dalam dari yang dunia mengerti. Biarlah kita peka akan kehendak Tuhan dengan demikian kita tidak berbuat dosa dan segala sesuatu yang kita kerjakan sesuai dengan kehendak Tuhan.

III. Perbedaan Arah Pandang
Pada umumnya, orang ketika memperhatikan segala sesuatu, arah pandangnya selalu dari dirinya dan dikenakan kepada Allah. Manusia bukanlah pusat yang menjadi titik sudut proyeksi dari gambar diri kita sendiri karena itu pemilihan perspektif tidak boleh dari sudut manusia kepada Allah dan sekelilingnya. Kita harusnya melihat dari arah pandang Tuhan, bagaimana segala sesuatunya kita mengerti dari arah yang tepat, sehingga cara kita mengimplikasi tepat sesuai dengan kehendak-Nya. Orang Farisi memandang dari sudut pandangnya sendiri, yakni ia merasa dirinya sudah saleh karena telah melakukan semua peraturan dan ritual agama tetapi perhatikan apa yang dikatakan Tuhan Yesus: Yang Kukehendaki ialah belas kasihan bukan persembahan. Sebagai contoh, seorang anak kecil melihat pekerjaan kakaknya yang begitu banyak maka ia ingin membantu meringankan pekerjaan kakaknya tersebut. Tanpa sepengetahuan kakaknya ia mengerjakan pekerjaan tersebut dan sungguh di luar dugaan sang kakak, apa yang dilakukan adiknya justru tidak membantunya malah mengacaukannya. Terkadang, kita pun sama seperti anak kecil ini, kita merasa berjasa pada Tuhan karena telah melayani dan memberikan persembahan. Tidak! Memang siapakah kita merasa sudah menolong Tuhan? Kita justru seringkali melawan Tuhan, apa yang Tuhan ingin kita kerjakan justru tidak kita lakukan dan sebaliknya kita justru melakukan pekerjaan yang dibenci Tuhan. Biarlah kita peka akan kehendak Tuhan dengan demikian kita melihat pekerjaan Tuhan bukan dari sudut pandang kita.
Kita seharusnya bertanya pada Tuhan terlebih dahulu, kita bergumul apakah segala sesuatu yang kita kerjakan sudah sesuai dengan kehendak-Nya? Biarlah kita mengevaluasi diri kita masing-masing, jangan-jangan di dalam pelayanan kita justru telah berdosa maka segeralah minta ampunan pada-Nya. Mungkin Tuhan justru ingin kita melakukan pekerjaan yang memang tidak kita suka. Hendaklah kita peka akan pimpinan dan kehendak Tuhan dengan demikian kita tidak berdosa. Ini merupakan dua arah yang berbeda, total separated. Dan kalau sudah jelas dengan pimpinan Tuhan dan kehendak Tuhan maka kita harus mengerjakannya dan jangan takut sebab Tuhan pasti tidak akan membiarkan kita berjalan sendiri. Ingat, bukan berarti orang yang melayani maka ia tidak berdosa. Tidak! Orang Farisi telah membuktikan justru di dalam kesalehannya, ia telah berbuat dosa. Paulus di dalam semangatnya melayani “tuhan“, dia telah menganiaya Kristus. Biarlah kita bertobat dan kembali kepada Tuhan dengan demikian hidup kita diarahkan oleh Firman, kita peka akan kehendak Tuhan dan seluruh paradigma, prinsip dan direction kita diubahkan dengan demikian kita semakin serupa Kristus. Amin.

(Ringkasan khotbah ini belum diperiksa oleh pengkhotbah)

Sumber:

http://www.grii-andhika.org/ringkasan_kotbah/2005/20050424.htm

Roma 6:5-11: IMPLIKASI PERBEDAAN ESENSIAL-3: Kehidupan yang Mati Vs Kematian yang Hidup-2

Seri Eksposisi Surat Roma :
Manusia Lama Vs Manusia Baru-5


Implikasi Perbedaan Esensial-3 :
Kehidupan yang Mati Vs Kematian yang Hidup-2

oleh: Denny Teguh Sutandio


Nats : Roma 6:5-11.

Setelah mempelajari tentang implikasi perbedaan manusia pertama dan kedua poin kedua yaitu kehidupan yang mati vs kematian yang hidup di pasal 6 ayat 1 s/d 4, kita akan meneruskan prinsip ini mulai ayat 5 sampai dengan ayat 11.

Apa arti dibaptiskan di dalam kematian-Nya dan memperoleh hidup baru di dalam kebangkitan-Nya ? Di ayat 5, Paulus menjelaskannya, “Sebab jika kita telah menjadi satu dengan apa yang sama dengan kematian-Nya, kita juga akan menjadi satu dengan apa yang sama dengan kebangkitan-Nya.” Ayat ini diterjemahkan dalam King James Version, “For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:” Kata planted together dalam ayat ini berarti ditanamkan bersama atau united to (dipersatukan kepada). Dengan kata lain, dibaptiskan di dalam kematian-Nya berarti dipersatukan dalam kematian-Nya. Matthew Henry di dalam tafsirannya Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible memaparkan, “Planting is in order to life and fruitfulness: we are planted in the vineyard in a likeness to Christ, which likeness we should evidence in sanctification.” (=penanaman adalah agar supaya hidup dan berbuah : kita ditanam di dalam kebun anggur di dalam keserupaan dengan Kristus, yang keserupannya itu kita harus buktikan di dalam pengudusan.) Di sini, Matthew Henry mengaitkan konsep ditanam dengan tujuan ditanam yaitu agar hidup dan berbuah. Ditanam di dalam apa ? Paulus menjelaskan bahwa kita yang termasuk umat pilihan-Nya ditanam di dalam kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya. Ditanam di dalam kematian-Nya berarti kita ikut mati bersama Kristus. Dengan kata lain, karena Kristus sudah mati bagi kita, hendaklah kita pun harus mematikan seluruh dosa kita. Dosa-dosa itu termasuk di dalam perbuatan daging yang tercantum di dalam Galatia 5:19-21, yang meliputi, “percabulan, kecemaran, hawa nafsu, penyembahan berhala, sihir, perseteruan, perselisihan, iri hati, amarah, kepentingan diri sendiri, percideraan, roh pemecah, kedengkian, kemabukan, pesta pora dan sebagainya.” Kelimabelas tindakan kedagingan ini (di dalam King James Version ada 17 tindakan) adalah tindakan-tindakan yang tidak diperkenan Allah. Selanjutnya, kita juga ditanam di dalam kebangkitan-Nya, artinya kita bukan hanya tidak berlaku hal-hal kedagingan saja, tetapi juga kita harus berinisiatif melakukan hal-hal yang memuliakan Allah.

Apa arti ditanam/menjadi satu di dalam kematian-Nya ? Pada ayat 6-7, Paulus menjelaskan lebih dalam, “Karena kita tahu, bahwa manusia lama kita telah turut disalibkan, supaya tubuh dosa kita hilang kuasanya, agar jangan kita menghambakan diri lagi kepada dosa. Sebab siapa yang telah mati, ia telah bebas dari dosa.” Pernyataan “Karena kita tahu,” menunjukkan bahwa jemaat Roma sebenarnya sudah mendengar pengajaran ini, sehingga Paulus perlu mengulanginya lagi untuk mengingatkan jemaat Roma (dan tentu juga kita) dengan mengaitkannya dengan kematian kita terhadap dosa. Sebagai manusia baru, kita harus mematikan manusia lama kita. Kata “lama” pada manusia lama dalam bahasa Inggris adalah old diterjemahkan dari bahasa Yunani palaios berarti antik/kuno. Kata antik mengingatkan kita akan barang-barang antik yang sudah usang, demikian pula manusia lama seharusnya berarti manusia yang sudah usang yang harus diperbaharui total. Definisi inti dari ditanam/menjadi satu di dalam kematian-Nya (atau mematikan manusia lama kita), adalah ikut disalibkan. Disalibkan dalam bahasa Yunani sustauroō berarti ditusuk dengan sesuatu yang tajam. Demikian pula, kita ikut disalibkan berarti kita ikut ditusuk oleh salib Kristus. Ditusuk adalah sesuatu yang menyakitkan. Itulah gambaran kita menyalibkan dosa-dosa kita, yaitu menyakitkan. Ketika kita berani menyalibkan dosa kita, itu mungkin terasa sakit sekali, karena kita berani menekan bahkan mematikan keinginan daging kita yang berdosa, tetapi ada akibat/efek positif (yang terjadi bersamaan) yang Tuhan singkapkan bagi kita, yaitu :
Pertama, tubuh dosa kita kehilangan kuasanya. King James Version (KJV) menerjemahkannya destroyed artinya dihancurkan. Ketika kita berani menyalibkan dosa kita dengan “menusuk”nya (bukan arti harafiah), itu berarti kita sedang menhancurkan tubuh dosa kita. Ini tidak berarti kita menyayat tubuh jasmani kita seperti yang dilakukan oleh para bidat dan pemuja berhala yang mengajarkan askese (bertarak diri). Kata body di dalam KJV diterjemahkan dari bahasa Yunani bisa berarti budak (slave). Hal ini berarti kita berani menekan keinginan daging kita yang melawan Allah. Atau dengan kata lain kita berani tidak lagi menjadi budak dosa. Hal ini lah yang ditegaskan Allah melalui Paulus dengan memperingatkan kita bahwa kita tidak boleh lagi menghambakan diri terhadap dosa (atau “melayani dosa” di dalam terjemahan KJV).
Kedua, kita bebas dari dosa. Kata “bebas dari dosa” dalam KJV diterjemahkan dibebaskan dari dosa. Dalam bahasa Yunani dikaioō, pernyataan ini berarti kita dijadikan benar/adil (just) atau tidak bersalah (innocent). Ketika kita telah mematikan dosa kita, pada saat yang sama, kita telah dijadikan benar/dibebaskan dari dosa. Hati-hati menafsirkan bagian ini. Hal ini tidak berarti setelah kita berbuat baik melawan dosa, baru kita dibenarkan. Itu ajaran Arminian yang melawan prinsip penting Alkitab, yakni kedaulatan Allah. Hal ini berarti kita dapat mematikan dosa karena Kristus telah melakukannya bagi kita, sehingga tidak ada satu inci jasa baik yang manusia lakukan yang menjadi syarat dirinya dibenarkan oleh Allah (karena semua manusia berdosa dan mengurangi kemuliaan Allah—bandingkan Roma 3:23).

Setelah kita mematikan dosa, apa yang harus kita lakukan selanjutnya ? Paulus menjelaskannya di ayat 8, “Jadi jika kita telah mati dengan Kristus, kita percaya, bahwa kita akan hidup juga dengan Dia.” Jika kita telah mati dengan Kristus atau telah mematikan dosa, maka kita beriman juga bahwa kita akan hidup/bertahan bersama dengan Dia. Kata “hidup dengan” (KJV : live with) dalam ayat ini dalam bahasa Yunani bisa berarti co-survive yaitu terus hidup/bertahan. Dengan kata lain, kematian-Nya dan kematian kita terhadap dosa mengakibatkan kita bisa percaya dan memiliki daya tahan hidup di dalam dan bersama Kristus. Berarti kita memiliki hidup yang berkelimpahan di dalam Kristus (Yohanes 10:10b) meskipun kita harus menanggung aniaya dan derita demi nama-Nya. Inilah pengharapan orang Kristen yang termasuk anak-anak Allah, yaitu beriman di dalam kehidupan bersama Kristus selama-lamanya (meskipun tetap harus melewati kematian fisik). Tidak ada pengharapan di dalam agama atau filsafat apapun di sepanjang sejarah dunia yang lebih indah daripada pengharapan yang dijumpai di dalam Kristus, yaitu hidup bersama-sama di dalam Kristus selama-lamanya di Surga. Adalah sangat idiot bagi mereka termasuk banyak “hamba Tuhan”/“pendeta” yang tidak beriman di dalam pengharapan ini (tetapi ber“iman” di dalam pluralisme/social “gospel”). Dari mana kita mendapatkan kepastian hidup ini ?

Kita mendapatkan kepastian ini karena kebangkitan Kristus, seperti dijelaskan Paulus di ayat 9-10, “Karena kita tahu, bahwa Kristus, sesudah Ia bangkit dari antara orang mati, tidak mati lagi: maut tidak berkuasa lagi atas Dia. Sebab kematian-Nya adalah kematian terhadap dosa, satu kali dan untuk selama-lamanya, dan kehidupan-Nya adalah kehidupan bagi Allah.” Kristus yang telah disalibkan, pada hari ketiga, Ia bangkit. Setelah Ia bangkit, Paulus mengungkapkan bahwa Ia tidak mati lagi, mengapa ? Karena maut tidak berkuasa lagi (memerintah) atas Dia. Dengan kata lain, kebangkitan-Nya telah mematikan dan mengalahkan maut. Hal ini juga dijelaskan oleh Rasul Paulus di dalam 1 Korintus 15:56-57, “Sengat maut ialah dosa dan kuasa dosa ialah hukum Taurat. Tetapi syukur kepada Allah, yang telah memberikan kepada kita kemenangan oleh Yesus Kristus, Tuhan kita.” Kemenangan di dalam kebangkitan-Nya menjamin kita juga menang mengalahkan kuasa dosa, iblis dan maut. Lalu, di ayat 10, Paulus mulai mengaitkan konsep kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya dengan periode waktu dan tujuannya, yaitu kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya terjadi hanya satu kali (tidak terulang) dan untuk selama-lamanya, serta bagi Allah. Ini berarti :
Pertama, kematian dan kebangkitan Kristus adalah satu-satunya peristiwa terpenting di sepanjang sejarah yang mutlak tidak boleh diulang oleh pribadi siapapun bahkan di dalam event kapanpun, karena kematian dan kebangkitan Kristus itu unik dan memiliki finalitas yang tak dijumpai di dalam agama apapun (bandingkan Ibrani 9:28). Mengutip pernyataan dari Pdt. Dr. Stephen Tong, semua pendiri agama mati, tetapi Kristus mati dan bangkit, itulah finalitas Kristus yang mutlak. Melawan ini, berarti melawan Allah dan tidak layak disebut Kristen sejati (apalagi disebut anak-anak Tuhan).
Kedua, kematian dan kebangkitan Kristus berlaku untuk selama-lamanya (melampaui ruang dan waktu). Dengan kata lain, sifat kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya adalah kekal, mengapa ? Karena Kristus adalah Allah sekaligus manusia yang melampaui kesementaraan. Ini berarti kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya bukan hanya berlaku bagi orang-orang zaman modern tetapi juga zaman postmodern bahkan sampai selama-lamanya. Tidak ada jangka waktu berlaku di dalam kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya. Puji Tuhan, ketika para pendiri agama dunia meninggal, kematian mereka tak berdampak apapun, tetapi kematian ditambah kebangkitan Kristus sangat berdampak penting bagi hidup umat pilihan Allah, mengapa ? Karena kematian dan kebangkitan-Nya menggenapkan rencana keselamatan Allah bagi kita, sedangkan kematian para pendiri agama hanya kematian manusia berdosa yang tak berdampak apapun (khusus bagi keselamatan manusia).
Ketiga, kematian dan kebangkitan Kristus diperuntukkan bagi Allah. Kristus mati menebus dosa manusia BUKAN bagi setan, karena BUKAN setan yang menjadi obyek hutang dosa manusia, tetapi Allah. Sehingga ketika Kristus menebus dosa kita, Kristus membayarkan hutang dosa kita kepada Allah, karena ketika manusia berdosa, manusia berhutang kepada Allah (=tidak berjalan menurut kehendak dan kedaulatan-Nya). Demikian juga, kebangkitan Kristus adalah kebangkitan/kehidupan bagi Allah, karena Ia telah menang dan selesai menggenapkan rencana keselamatan Allah untuk seterusnya disempurnakan melalui karya Roh Kudus di dalam hati umat pilihan-Nya.
Adalah sangat konyol jika ada “pendeta”/“pemimpin gereja” yang melawan bahkan menghina pengorbanan Kristus dengan menyamakan Kristus dengan para pendiri agama lain. Terhadap bidat ini, kita harus mati-matian menolak mereka dan kembali kepada Kristus serta jangan lupa untuk mendoakan mereka agar mereka bertobat dari kesesatan mereka kepada Alkitab dan Kristus.

Setelah menguraikan dua ayat tentang kematian dan kebangkitan Kristus, Paulus langsung mengimplikasikannya di ayat 11, “Demikianlah hendaknya kamu memandangnya: bahwa kamu telah mati bagi dosa, tetapi kamu hidup bagi Allah dalam Kristus Yesus.” Karena Kristus telah mati dan bangkit bagi Allah, maka kita pun harus mematikan dosa kita dan harus hidup bagi Allah. Apa bedanya kematian Kristus terhadap dosa dan kematian kita terhadap dosa ? Di ayat 10 tadi sudah dijelaskan bahwa kematian Kristus terhadap dosa hanya terjadi sekali (satu kali) untuk selama-lamanya, sedangkan kematian kita berlangsung berkali-kali (artinya di dalam proses) menuju kepada kesempurnaan. Dengan kata lain, kematian Kristus memungkinkan kita berani dengan kuasa-Nya mematikan dosa-dosa kita. Selanjutnya, setelah mematikan dosa, kita harus hidup bagi Allah dalam Kristus Yesus, Tuhan kita. Terjemahan KJV menambahkan kata our Lord setelah Kristus Yesus (sedangkan LAI tidak mencantumkannya). Mengapa kata our Lord begitu signifikan? Karena hidup bagi Kristus bukan hanya beriman di dalam Kristus sebagai Juruselamat dan Penebus dosa saja, tetapi juga beriman di dalam Kristus sebagai Tuhan/Raja yang memerintah hidup kita. Dengan kata lain, hidup bagi Kristus adalah hidup yang men-Tuhan-kan Kristus di dalam kehidupan sehari-hari demi kemuliaan Allah. Bagaimana dengan kita ? Sudahkah kita menyerahkan hidup kita untuk dikuasai sepenuhnya oleh Kristus sebagai Raja, Tuhan dan Pemilik hidup kita ? Itulah tandanya kita manusia baru. Amin. Soli Deo Gloria.

Resensi Buku-45: DOKTRIN YANG SULIT MENGENAI KASIH ALLAH (Rev. Prof. Donald A. Carson, Ph.D.)

...Dapatkan segera...

Buku
THE DIFFICULT DOCTRINE OF THE LOVE OF GOD
(DOKTRIN YANG SULIT MENGENAI KASIH ALLAH)

oleh: Rev. Prof. Donald A. Carson, Ph.D.

Penerbit : Momentum Christian Literature, 2007

Penerjemah : Daniel Setiawan.





Deskripsi singkat dari Denny Teguh Sutandio :
Sepintas lalu, mungkin doktrin mengenai kasih Allah tidaklah sulit, bahkan perdebatan theologia yang muncul di sepanjang sejarah gereja berkenaan dengan Trinitas, Predestinasi, dll. Tetapi benarkah doktrin yang tidak sulit ini benar-benar dipahami oleh orang Kristen ? Bukankah banyak orang Kristen akibat terpaan postmodernisme menawarkan suatu “iman” bahwa seolah-olah Allah itu hanya Mahakasih, selalu mengampuni siapapun yang bersalah ? Lalu, di mana suara keadilan, kemarahan, kesucian Allah di dalam zaman postmodern ini ? Inilah krisis zaman yang dibukakan oleh Dr. Donald A. Carson di dalam Bab 1 buku ini : Mengenai Pendistorsian Terhadap Kasih Allah. Selanjutnya, Dr. Carson mulai memaparkan tesis utamanya di Bab 2 : Allah adalah Kasih, lalu dilanjutkan dengan mengaitkan Kasih Allah dengan Kedaulatan dan Murka Allah di Bab 3 dan 4. Biarlah sebagai orang Kristen, kita mampu mengerti bahwa Allah yang Mahakasih juga adalah Allah yang Berdaulat, Mahakudus, Mahaadil dan Kekal. Memisahkan atribut-atribut Allah ini dan hanya mengerti Allah sebagai Allah yang Mahakasih saja berarti menghina Allah di tempat kudus-Nya.







Profil Rev. DR. DONALD A. CARSON :
Rev. Prof. Donald A. Carson, Ph.D. adalah Profesor Riset bidang Perjanjian Baru di Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Beliau meraih gelar Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) in chemistry dari McGill University; Master of Divinity (M.Div.) dari Central Baptist Seminary di Toronto, dan Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) dalam bidang Perjanjian Baru dari Cambridge University.

The Impact of Feminism--An Interview with World Magazine's Editor, Prof. Marvin Olasky (David Wegener)

The Impact of Feminism:
An Interview with World Magazine's Editor, Marvin Olasky


David Wegener

Marvin Olasky is a Professor of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin, editor of World magazine, and a Senior Fellow of The Acton Institute. He played a key role in the debate over gender-neutral Bible translation and is a strong supporter of CBMW.

JBMW: Tell us your background and how you became a Christian.
I grew up Jewish in Massachusetts, barmitzvahed at 13, atheist at 14. Through my atheism, I moved further and further to the political left, so that I had become a Marxist by the time I graduated from Yale University in 1971. After graduation, I worked for the Boston Globe and also joined the Communist party. Then I went to graduate school at the University of Michigan in 1973.
During all this time I was fairly convinced and content in my atheism and communism, but God, for His own peculiar reasons, decided not to leave me there. In November of 1973, I came to believe in a God of some kind and this led me to resign from the communist party. For my graduate work, I had to have a good reading knowledge of a foreign language. I chose Russian since I had studied it at Yale in order to be able to cozy up to my Soviet Big Brothers. One night, through a strange providence of God, I was reading the New Testament in Russian in my room. I had never read the Bible before and as I did so, I kept saying to myself, "Why this is true, and that's true, and that... " and so forth. God also used my reading of the sermons of John Cotton, Thomas Hooker and Cotton Mather for an Early American Literature course, to draw me to Himself. I was courting and marrying Susan during this time. She was from a very liberal Methodist background and hadn't gone to church for a number of years, but we were both coming to a better understanding of the gospel. After we got married, we moved to San Diego where I had a oneyear teaching contract at San Diego State University. We decided it was time to see what a church was like.
After all this time, the only Christians I knew were the dead ones from 300 years ago whose sermons I had read in graduate school, so we got out the yellow pages, and looked under "Churches". I knew the Baptists were a big denomination and I'd read about baptism in the New Testament. Under Baptists there was Conservative Baptist and, given my political past, I didn't want to have anything to do with liberals. The Conservative Baptist Church of La Mesa was a few blocks from our apartment so that's where we went. We heard sermons every week that were very basic "You must be born again" sermons, but that was actually what we needed.
One day the elderly minister of visitation came over to the apartment and said, "Well, you believe this stuff, don't you?" And I said, "Well, I guess I do." He said, "Well, you should join up." And I said, "Well, I guess I should." And so, right after that we were baptized and joined the church.

Where did you go from there?
After my year at San Diego State, I worked for a group in Long Beach called the Christian Anti-Communism Crusade. It had been big during the 50's but was less significant at this time. I went around the country giving a talk called, "From Judaism to Atheism to Communism to Christ." However, after a few months with that organization I began to be uncomfortable with certain emphases of the group.
During this time, I was studying Romans and reading John Calvin, J.I. Packer, Francis Schaeffer, and Louis Berkhof. This is what helped me develop a Christian view of the world. I left the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade and eventually got a good job working at the Dupont Company in Delaware, writing speeches for the corporate executives.
We moved to Austin in 1983, where I became a professor at the University of Texas in the Journalism Department. We have four children-the first three were born to us and the fourth we adopted-and they are all great blessings to us.
I've been writing a lot of books in the process. One was a history of abortion in America. Another that has gotten more attention is, The Tragedy of American Compassion, which is a history of fighting poverty in America. It was published in 1992, but really caught on in 1995 after Newt Gingrich read it and started talking about it a lot and telling all the congressmen to read it. I took a leave of absence in 1995-96 and spent time in Washington and giving talks on welfare reform around the country. God blessed this work and it all came to fruition in August 1996, when President Clinton, under duress, signed the Welfare Reform bill. It has been an enormous success. The welfare rolls have decreased by about 40-50%, and lots of people have found jobs, realizing God's purpose in their lives.
I have a new book out called, The American Leadership Tradition: Moral Vision from Washington to Clinton. It gives chapter-biographies of 13 American leaders, mostly presidents. There has been more division over this book than just about any other, because it asserts that private actions have public consequences, and shows this historically in the lives of a number of leaders. There was a review in the New York Times and twice the reviewer said that I "lacked a sophisticated public theology."
I gather this means I think the Ten Commandments are commandments, not suggestions. In a way, this is true. I lack a sophisticated public theology. I was baptized in the Conservative Baptist Church of La Mesa, which certainly lacks a sophisticated public theology. When it comes to Bible translations, I lack a sophisticated public theology. I think the Bible is God's Word and you should translate it accurately, and that is unsophisticated. So all through my life I see my "lack of a sophisticated public theology."

Where do you see the influence of feminism in our culture?
In the 1950s, people were moving to the suburbs. You also had the introduction of a number of labor-saving devices in the home. Add to this the fact that the federal government was expanding its social welfare programs. Previously this work had been done by community and church-based organizations, staffed largely by female volunteers. Now it was being done by government-paid professionals and consequently many of these organizations shriveled up and died. One result was a lot of lonely women, removed from their roots, who didn't have a productive way to spend their time.
Betty Friedan wrote The Feminine Mystique out of this context. The average housewife, she said, feels trapped, bored, and unhappy. Her answer was for women to join the work force. This they have done, with dire consequences for society as a whole.
Now many women believe they have to justify staying at home rather than being out in the work place. They have been taught that anyone can raise their kids, so they put them in day care. And you can always find a convenient study to say it's not going to make any difference. We have the expectation that government should make possible any choice we as parents make. Certainly, feminism has led to great sexual irresponsibility. We have aborted 38 million unborn children since Roe v. Wade. Those are victims of feminism. Children have been marginalized. You have to have quality time with children, but you can't plan quality time. Sometimes it comes out of the blue. So the only way to have quality time with children is to have quantity time.
Of course, feminism has led to increased poverty among women. No-fault divorce is one of the early products of feminism, but it's been largely to the advantage of men-just like abortion. Abortion and no-fault divorce have given men the green light to be irresponsible and have impoverished many women.
The time crunch that many women feel is a result of feminism. Women feel very guilty unless they're doing all these things.
From my study of the history of poverty-fighting in America, I found that it was basically women who ran the charitable enterprises. Men were involved, but it was essentially women who had the time to volunteer. They had the opportunity to do that and it was deemed a vitally important social function. And now they don't have the time because so many of them work.
There has also been a loss of community. We see that in neighborhoods, where's no one there during the day. But we also see it in families. I do most of the traveling in our family, but sometimes Susan has to be away. When she's not here there is a certain social glue that's lost. We're more like a pack of wolves. When women are removed from their families for long periods of time the family is weakened. And when families become unglued, the culture becomes unglued.

How has feminism impacted our understanding of compassion?
It has contributed to a change in our understanding of compassion. Compassion is tough, it's not wimpy at all. We used to regard showing compassion for someone as suffering with them, as coming alongside them and working with them. Now we view it as feeling sorry for them. This change in understanding has had tremendously negative results. Showing compassion used to be demonstrated by coming alongside the poor and trying to communicate God's purpose for them, helping them develop a work ethic and realize that God has given us six days in which we are to do our work. Now we sit around and feel each other's pain-and maybe we'll write a check. Showing compassion is actually very hard work.

How has feminism influenced the church?
Feminism has influenced our understanding of compassion. We need to return to the older understanding of that term. It has also impacted our practice of church discipline -or lack of practice, as the case may be.
The whole question of society and the church comes in here. God does not forbid women to be leaders in society, generally speaking, but when that occurs it's usually because of the abdication of men. As in the situation of Deborah and Barak, there's a certain shame attached to it. would vote for a woman for the presidency, in some situations, but again, there's a certain shame attached. Why don't you have a man who's able to step forward? God's Word says very plainly that an elder is to be a man; he is to be the husband of one wife. It's harder when there are women who are CEO's of companies and so forth. Still, it comes down to the question of "Do we trust God and do we believe that He has wisdom that we don't have?"
This leads right into the whole question of the language of the Scriptures. Feminists want to rewrite the Bible so that it won't say that an elder must be the husband of one wife. Right now our English translations clearly say this, but if the feminists have their way, our translations of Scripture won't. So future generations will scratch their heads and say, "Gee, how can anyone be so silly as to believe that only men could be elders?" That's just one of the dangers you encounter once you start rewriting Scripture and misquoting God.

What are some of the issues that evangelical Christians will be facing in the next few decades?
The influence of feminism will continue to be very large. Some of the radical impulses of late 60's-70's feminism have been tamed, but feminism, in its basic liberal form, has become mainstream. I see this in my students. The women expect to go out and work and they regard child-bearing as secondary. They expect to take any leadership position offered to them, whether in society or in the church.
Then there is the whole question of marriage. Is marriage between one man and one woman? The Vermont legislature evidently is poised to approve of so-called homosexual marriages. This will be very hard to fight. If two men may properly be joined in marriage (or two women), where will we stop? Why not two women joined in marriage with one man? Why not foursomes or fivesomes?
I think the whole question of cloning is going to be important. What do we define as human life? How does that continue? Down the road-and this sounds almost like science-fiction-one can even see a certain merger of humans with computers in some way. That's still a long way off but you can see it coming, unless God decides to tear down this Tower of Babel.
People have much easier access to pornography these days. In the 50's and 60's one used to have to go to the bad neighborhoods to gain access to this stuff. Then you had to go to the corner drugstore. Now it's just a few computer keys away; people will find it increasingly difficult to say "no" to pornography. Again, this is all God's grace that we say "no" at all, but it's harder when it becomes so easy to access.
There is also the issue of tolerance. For some, it is our key virtue-except when it comes to tolerating smoking or something like that. Christians are going to be looked upon as intolerant people. I can see a time coming when the free-speech rights of Christians will be removed whenever we exhibit intolerance, such as intolerance towards homosexuality. That's going to be an interesting constitutional question.


Source:
http://www.cbmw.org/Journal/Vol-3-No-4/The-Impact-of-Feminism

My Liberation from Feminism (Carolyn McCulley)

My Liberation From Feminism

Carolyn McCulley

There is a certain response from men that both feminist and Christian women desire to elicit: a masculine benevolence that knows how to live with women in an understanding way, being both considerate and respectful toward those who are co-heirs in the gracious gift of life.
Secular feminists approach this desire stridently, from a position of anger. Christian women are taught to approach it gently, from a position of trust, knowing that God's Word commands men to live up to this desired standard (1 Peter 3:7) and commands women to cultivate a gentle and quiet spirit (v. 4).
In my own generation, it has been quite evident that marginalizing men through anger has had disastrous cultural effects. We have told men that we cannot count on them, and we have given them a plethora of ways to duck responsibility for the relationships they initiate and the children they create. The cultural indices of this failure continue to climb: pornography, child abuse, public murders of estranged wives, fatherless children, and sexually transmitted diseases to name a few.

What is liberating for women about this mess?!
Unforeseen Consequences
Growing up in the rebellious '70s, I did not foresee these consequences. Even as a child, my femininity was a source of confusion for me. The oldest of three daughters, I felt I always had to prove something to the boys - that I could be faster, smarter, and more aggressive than they were. I did not want any limits, and I looked for every opportunity to show my independence. How I gloated and swaggered when Billy Jean King beat Bobby Riggs in a well-publicized "battle of the sexes" tennis match! As a teenager, I was also headstrong and not submitted to my father. I did not respect his decisions, and I sought to wear him down through constant arguing. Though my mother faithfully took my sisters and me to mass each week, I lacked any real personal spiritual compass, and so I pursued whatever philosophies were currently popular.
I reached college filled to the brim with the "wisdom" of Cosmopolitan magazine, but I was to encounter something more insidious than fashion magazines - feminism and the Women’s Studies Department. Class after class promoted perpetual victimhood, disrespect toward all men, an overt embrace of lesbianism, and a broadly directed militant anger. I became a teaching assistant in that department for a semester before graduating with a bachelor’s degree in journalism and a certificate in women’s studies. My twenties were more of the same and then some. I remember when I was 29 that I was so confused and depressed that I entered into therapy to figure out why I was so angry ... and for that matter, why I was still single. (Not that the two could possibly be related, right?!) Obviously, I did not have a very positive outlook on my femininity, and my therapist did not make much headway. However, God graciously intervened just as I turned 30. I took a pleasure trip to South Africa to visit my sister who was living there at the time. I heard the gospel while I was there, and during the last week of my trip, I heard an American pastor, C. J. Mahaney, preach in a church in Cape Town. He was so passionate for Jesus, and so very real! His relationship with Christ appealed to me, so I decided to respond to the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in my life, and I gave my life to Christ. When I returned home, I called Pastor Mahaney’s church to obtain a recommendation for an evangelical church in my town.

The Culture Shock of Christianity
Though I felt God was calling me to this church, I was in for a culture shock! It was like being on another planet - the women and their viewpoints there were completely foreign to me. I remember meeting with my pastor and his wife shortly after I started attending and making a crack about submission. I did not think anyone still believed that part of the Bible! My pastor wisely asked me if I liked to read and then recommended Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood to me - theological reading not typically recommended to a two-month-old convert!
The Lord used that conversation to start retooling my concept of femininity and sexuality, overhauling my lifelong views on abortion, sexual immorality, and even submission. I read God's Word, hungry to find out why my new church friends held views so different from anyone else I knew. From Genesis, I came to understand that God is purposeful in his creation. From the Gospels, I came to understand that God is purposeful in his redemption. I saw he was quite serious about sexual purity before marriage and fidelity within marriage. I was also convicted that abortion was a terribly selfish action to avoid the consequences of sexual sin. Just as importantly, I saw that God had made me female, and that he had specific tasks and roles for women that would glorify him to an unbelieving, yet watching, world. Slowly, I was becoming more concerned with his glory, and not my own.
As I studied the Bible, I also studied the marriages of my new friends eager to see what this Christian concept of benevolent masculine leadership and joyful feminine submission actually looked like in real life. Though not perfect, what I saw was attractive. I saw men who sacrificed their own preferences and pleasures to make sure their wives and children were cultivated spiritually. These were men who took their responsibilities to be servant leaders seriously. They did not see marriage as a trap or children as an impediment to the pursuit of their own leisure and weekend hobbies. Instead, their families were seen as gifts worthy of their hard work.
Likewise, I saw that my married women friends sought to respect and build up their husbands. I was used to a stream of cracks from women about the uselessness and unreliability of men -- but this I did not hear from the mature, married women in my church. Their submission seemed freeing ... dare I say, liberating?! They certainly seemed free from much of the discord, sarcasm, and disappointment I usually encountered in modern marriages.
Slowly I began to note that the teamwork in these marriages mirrored the teamwork in the church. While married men had the responsibility of leading their families, these same men were called to submit to the spiritual leaders God had put over them. In fact, when I was focused on the "limitations" I perceived in a wife’s submission to her husband, I showed that I had failed to understand that submission undergirds the entire concept of Christianity. My greatest role model for submission is my Lord himself whose obedient submission guaranteed my redemption. As Hebrews 5:7 says, "During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission."
Over time, as I grew to know the Lord and his Word better, I realized that the independence I had worked so hard to protect as an unbeliever was a complete charade. As a helpless, finite creature, I was completely dependent on God for my very life and breath. I had not been independent. Rather, I had been stiff-necked. I came to realize that submission simply stripped me of my contentiousness, not my dignity as one created in the very image of God.

Single and Fully Feminine
Once I embraced the sweet fruit of feminine submission, I still had to figure out how to apply it to my every day life. One area in where I have struggled is what femininity should look like for a single woman. Because the Lord made the woman to be a helper, the contours of biblical femininity are usually sculpted through relationships with others - as wife, mother, daughter, sister, aunt. Though I am definitely a daughter, sister, and aunt, I am not (yet) a wife or mother. But I know that God created me female in his own image, and that he has given me this gift of singleness in this season of my life. These are not mutually exclusive concepts, but sometimes I still wrestle with how to express them both to the glory of God.
In late 1998, I moved to take a job as part of a church-planting ministry and to serve in a local church pastored by the pastor I met in South Africa, C.J. Mahaney. A year later, I attended a series of seminars on Titus 2 taught by his wife, Carolyn Mahaney. Through her teaching, I realized that of the seven qualities Paul urges Titus to have older women teach to younger women, only two are explicitly directed at married women and one to mothers. That leaves at least four for all women, married or single. Despite my marital status, I was to be self-controlled, pure, busy at home, and kind. That is a tall order no matter how you look at it, but it does not mean I can ignore the other three qualities. There are implications for single women in the commands to love husbands and children as well as for wives to be subject to their husbands. Based upon this passage, the following are some ways in which God has given me the grace to apply the Titus 2 virtues in my life and genuinely enjoy my femininity as a single woman.

“To love their husbands ...”
Because of all the worldly junk I had imbibed on the topics of feminism and relationships, I initially read a number of books on Christian marriage. I have continued to read widely on Christian marriage, and where appropriate, I have attended seminars. I want to have a biblical view of marriage should the Lord bring that gift. But there is a practical application for my life now. I believe I can serve my married sisters best by shoring up their marriages. In our conversations and with my observations of their lives, I want to be able to help my married friends think biblically about their marriages and to think the best of their husbands. To unbelievers, I want to be prepared to explain the mystery of Christ and the church in the institution of marriage. While the world tells us we have no valid knowledge to share unless we have experienced a particular aspect of life, God’s Word equips us for wise discernment regardless of our experiences - or perhaps, in spite of them! Finally, should God bring the gift of marriage, I want to love my future husband now by developing a biblical perspective on love, marriage, and a wife’s role well before our wedding. I realize that the "wife of noble character" commended in Proverbs 31 brings her husband "good, not harm, ALL the days of her life" -- days before and days after marriage. What I am sowing now in these days of my life is part of God’s design in blessing my husband - not to mention bringing glory to the Lord no matter my marital status.

“To love children ...”
Whether or not we actually give birth, women are called to nurture the new life around us in various ways. Before I became a Christian, I was not very interested in children. I assumed I might have children one day, but I was oblivious to the children around me and did not care to spend any time with them. This is one area where God has made a tremendous change in my life. Over the years, I have had rich relationships with many children. The Lord has also given me evangelism opportunities with children. I have even created an informal Veggie Tales club with about a half dozen young boys in my neighborhood. They would stop by for sodas and videos, and I would share the gospel and pray with them.
Even though I do not have children of my own, I have three nieces and one nephew in whom to invest. It takes planning to be involved in their lives, but it is worth it to cultivate those relationships. Because I have vicariously experienced the thrills and sacrifices of motherhood as I have helped my sisters over the years, I have a window into that aspect of femininity. Just as importantly though, through these times together, I have developed one-on-one friendships with these small relatives of mine that I hope will flourish through the changing seasons of life ahead of us. I want to be a relevant relative of theirs, not a distant aunt. That means declining vacation opportunities with my friends to spend my vacation with my far-away nieces. That means declining social events on weekends to babysit my nearby niece and nephew or taking a day off during summer to plan a special day of adventure with them. But that also means I am the beneficiary of funny voicemail messages, elaborately drawn pictures, special "treasures" wrapped in thick layers of tissue and tape, and excited hugs when I arrive at their front doors. Somehow, it does not seem one bit like sacrifice. Perhaps these things contributed to a recent decision by one of my sisters and her husband to name me as guardian for their two daughters should they die in a mutual accident. Despite my being single, they thought I would rear their girls as close as possible to their values. Words cannot express how much that act of trust encouraged me!

“To be self-controlled ...”
My greatest challenge to self-control as a single woman is in the area of speculation about men and marriage. I do not think I am alone in this. I know I am called to wait and trust, but it is so easy for me to do the opposite - to either attempt to manipulate circumstances in my favor or to complain when others are blessed in courtship or marriage. Over the years, the Lord has done much to kill the sin of self-pity in me regarding deferred hopes for marriage, and one fruit of that is that I now joyfully serve many couples as a wedding planner. But contentment can seem to come and go in my life like waves lapping the shore. Sometimes joy cascades over my soul like waves breaking on the beach. Other times joy seems to seep out of my life like the undertow of receding water. This is not the result of anything other than changing my focus: when the joy seems to be receding, I find myself critically regarding my circumstances rather than beholding the glory of God.
One specific way I do this is by "trying on" men in my mind. Judging from the conversations I have had with many single women, this is a common temptation. We tend to meet godly, attractive single men and immediately head down the path toward marriage, imagining what it would be like to court and wed this man. Having convinced ourselves that this is a possibility, we then read into his every move while hashing and re-hashing each scenario with the "girlfriend network." A good friend of mine calls this "dating in my mind" - a priceless phrase! To exercise self-control in this area as single women is to put reasonable limits on the journaling and girlfriend conversations we have about our romantic interests. Talk has a way of making a desire an expectation, which eventually becomes a demand. In my life, I have found that I head into trouble when I record at length in my journal every interaction I have with a single man or when I am discussing this man with a broad range of friends. For me, self-control is to limit these detailed conversations to my accountability partners and to those over me in the Lord, such as my small group leader and his wife or my pastor and his wife. They know how I am weak, and they prayerfully encourage me to keep my focus where it belongs.

“To be busy at home ...”
This one has been a challenge for me as a single woman since I work outside the home to support myself. I have to be intentional about scheduling time to actually be at home one or two evenings a week. That is hard in my busy church, but this Titus 2 virtue gives me a vision for the priority of it.
Then there are the domestic arts. In my twenties, I lived with piles of dirty clothes and newspapers. My house was the crash pad between outside engagements. I had no vision for domesticity. My family had a nickname for my cooking in this period: Fish wads and pudding lumps. However, after I saw a love for the home arts modeled by the women of the church, I desired to change. I practiced cooking, began hosting dinner parties, started buying home décor, and even picked out my own china pattern. That was actually a big step for me because it was hard to visit china departments without being forced to admit you don’t have a wedding date. Now God has blessed me with my own house, and I am so happy to nest there that I should check for twigs in my hair before I leave for work!
Though single women are not afforded the blessing of being busy with our families at home, we can be busy with kingdom business at home. Our homes provide places where we can pray with others, counsel others, evangelize others, and serve through hospitality. Romans 12:13 clearly says to practice hospitality - and praise God, this command does not differentiate between married and singles! No matter how our households are structured, our homes can be beacons of hope and hospitality in our neighborhoods. Just for this reason, I love to take pictures of those who have been in my home and display them with that Scripture from Romans.

The Freedom of Christ
Paul urged the Galatians to remember that "it is for freedom that Christ has set us free." Prior to my conversion, I saw Christianity as being a burden, a confining religion with many rules and regulations. I was not equipped to see that my own sin was the greatest yoke of slavery. As we have all done since Adam and Eve, I blamed others for the oppression of sin in my life. I thought I needed to be set free from men who belittled women, from jobs that were "stuck" in the "pink ghetto" of women’s work, and from the "burdens" of traditional sexual morals. I could not see that my own self-righteousness, pride, anger, and willfulness caused greater damage to real joy than any perceived curtailment to my freedom.
When Christ ushered in his kingdom, he surprised everyone - including his own disciples - with the "opposite world" that he introduced. Everything was "backward" to the natural thinking of human beings. The greatest among us were servants. Our enemies were to be prayed for and even loved. What makes us unclean comes from inside of us, in our hearts, not from what we put on or in us. To have life everlasting, we must be born again.
It does not make sense on first reading, but the Bible promises us that God’s wisdom is foolishness to a perishing world (1 Corinthians 1:18-21). I am just most grateful that he liberated me from my futile thinking and the bondage of sin, and led me into the way everlasting.


Source:
http://www.cbmw.org/Resources/Articles/My-Liberation-From-Feminism

Confessions of a Recovering Feminist (Courtney Tarter)

Confessions of a Recovering Feminist

Courtney Tarter

September 22, 2007

One of the joys of serving as executive director at CBMW is being able to connect with Christians who come from radically different backgrounds but who are united by an intense love of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Through this blog, we want to introduce you over time to many of these Bible-saturated people who hold a complementarian understanding of God’s design for men and women.
Below you will find an extended post by Courtney Tarter, a dear friend of CBMW. She is a single woman who is wise beyond her years and who deeply lovesthe Savior. (You can find more of her outstanding observations on her blog In View of God’s Mercy)
—David Kotter

When we think of a feminist we can all probably think of a person we know, or know of, who typifies the feminist ideology. There are all types of fixtures of feminism ranging from Presidential candidates to evangelical scholars to college students—and I am one of them. Prior to conversion I was the stereotypical Generation Y feminist—anti-marriage, anti-child rearing, and corporate ladder hopeful. After conversion I sang a slightly different tune, although held onto many of my previous ideals regarding marriage and settling down. I simply masked it with a missions/ministry focus, content to be the single girl on a mission to save a third-world country for Christ. What I did not want, or think I needed, was the idea that my changed life meant changed priorities. It was not that I needed to find a husband or chuck any career aspirations, the problem was that I thought feminism was an outside of the church issue, at least the conservative church that I belonged too. I had no notion that my heart, at its core, was fighting against the authority of God in the Scriptures, and still does have a lot of change left to be done to it.I may have moved out of the militant feminist camp, but I most certainly have been a part of one too many male bashing conversations in a dorm room and coffee shop with my girl friends. What we must understand about feminism is that it did not originate in the wake of the women’s liberation movement of the 1970’s. And the mother of feminism is far older than Ms. Magazine and her friends. Feminism started in a garden in the Middle East thousands of years ago. Feminism is at the very heart of our fallen nature, and manifests itself in many different forms.
Recovering from feminism must first start with an embracing of the Gospel of our Lord, Jesus Christ. Only then will we see the roots severed because we will be clothed in the humility of Christ, who willingly submitted himself to the Father on our behalf. For older women it will mean embracing and modeling femininity, motherhood, and marriage in a Titus 2 way. For younger women it will mean knowing the godly women in our congregations better than we know the celebrities on late night television.Feminist ideology is not simply relegated to the brash Gloria Steinem types, or even the female executive with the corner office. Rather, feminism rises up in ordinary women in our congregations, homes, and in the least obvious place, the mirror. Feminism is in the core of our hearts apart from the saving work of the shed blood of Christ, and not simply because we are militant against male authority, but primarily because we are opposed to the greatest authority of all—our Creator. The feminist is not some abstract “out there” woman. She is staring right at us every morning when we put on our make-up.If we are going to make any headway in the gender discussion, we must first admit that our problem lies much deeper than a woman filling the pulpit on Sunday morning, or stay-at-home dads. Our problem lies in the fact that there is no one righteous and we are all opposed to God—we are all feminists at heart. And we can’t wake up one day and decide to be a Proverbs 31 woman any more than a man can decide to lead like Christ. Instead of seeing our gender differences as mere cultural constructions we must first admit that there was something far greater going on in the Garden than we now realize, and when Creation fell, it was distorted. In creating man and woman differently, God was pointing to the beauty of the Trinitarian relationship, and the relationship between Christ and His Church. The fact that we fight against it reveals our depravity even more.Many times we are so busy looking for the woman with the hyphenated name that we miss the woman who scoffs at a man for opening the door for her. Both of these actions are products of our feminist heart. My “recovery” from feminism is not about learning how to bake pies or a decision to be more feminine (though these are important and helpful things), it is about repentance. Repentance of my desire to be in control and to raise my fist against God’s created order. Only through repentance and faith in Christ am I, or any one for that matter, able to renounce rebellion and submit to the Lordship of Christ. It also means truly believing that God’s Word regarding gender, and everything else for that matter, is true. Recovery for many of us will mean a reversal of the way we approach women in our congregations. It is no wonder why so many young women don’t desire motherhood when what they often hear from older women is to “get your degree first and live your life,” acting as if marriage and children was the final stamp on the end of your life as you know it.
And when I still feel the judgment rising up in me when I see a young woman joyfully choosing marriage and a family over a college degree, I realize that I have a long way to go before this feminist is fully recovered. As I grow in my walk, there is a great hope in the Holy Spirit’s promise to complete the work that Christ began (Phil. 1:6). From the time the first feminist (Eve) came on the scene, until now, we have been in a cosmic battle against the flesh and Satan because he hates the image of Christ and His Church. We await the final consummation of the good work that was started by King Jesus on Calvary. With the curse came the promise. Feminism was, and will finally be, defeated when the Seed crushes the Serpent (Gen. 3:15). And that’s good news for recovering feminists like you and me.



Produced by:
The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood


Source:
http://www.cbmw.org/Blog/Posts/Confessions-of-a-Recovering-Feminist

Get it now!

Book:
Countering the Claims of Evangelical Feminism

by: Prof. Wayne Grudem, Ph.D.

Bab 8: PENUTUP/KESIMPULAN

VIII. Penutup/Kesimpulan
1. Penulis adalah orang Liberal dan buku TAA ini dipenuhi dengan ajaran Liberal!
Kalau kita lihat dalam hal 28 penulis berkata "Kita juga tidak setuju dengan paham liberalisme yang menolak Alkitab sebagai firman Allah". Dari kata-kata ini kelihatannya ia mengaku dirinya bukanlah orang liberal.
Tetapi dalam hal penulis kitab Kejadian dan Yesaya, ia menganut pandangan liberal! Dalam hal penafsiran ia memakai penafsiran dari Rudolf Bultmann yang adalah tokoh liberal yang paling miring! Dalam hal pandangannya tentang Kitab Suci / firman Tuhan ia juga merendahkan otoritas Kitab Suci, dan ini ciri khas golongan liberal. Dalam hal pemberitaan Injil, ia bahkan berkata kita tidak perlu mengkristenkan banyak orang. Ini lagi-lagi adalah pandangan liberal. Jadi semua ini menunjukkan ia adalah orang liberal, bahkan termasuk liberal yang sangat miring!

2. Buku ini merupakan produk campuran berbagai ajaran sesat
Penulis adalah orang yang sangat plin-plan, dan ajarannya merupakan gabungan dari banyak macam ajaran-ajaran sesat seperti Liberalisme, Sabelianisme, Universalisme, Saksi Yehovah, dsb.
Banyaknya ajaran sesat yang berlain-lainan itu, digabungkan dengan sedikit firman Tuhan/ Injil yang benar, menyebabkan dalam buku TAA ini terjadi banyak ketidak-konsekwenan, dimana ajarannya sering bertentangan satu sama lain.

3. Buku ini merupakan sumbangan yang dapat dimanfaatkan oleh setan
Mengingat begitu banyaknya kesesatan yang ada dalam buku TAA ini, maka adalah sesuatu yang memuakkan kalau dalam Kata Sambutan dari Badan Pekerja Majelis Sinode GKI Jatim dalam buku TAA ini (hal 7) dikatakan: "Dengan lega serta syukur kita sambut 'Tuhan, ajarlah aku' sebagai buku pegangan Katekisasi Jemaat GKI Jatim yang sudah kita harapkan ... Bahan yang terdapat dalam Buku Pegangan Katekisasi Jemaat GKI Jatim ini bersifat umum, dengan harapan buku ini dapat pula merupakan sumbangan yang dapat dimanfaatkan oleh gereja-gereja lain di Indonesia".
Buku ini seharusnya disambut orang kristen dengan suatu tangisan dan suatu kesadaran bahwa akhir jaman sudah dekat, terbukti dengan munculnya nabi palsu ini! Buku ini, yang seharusnya diberi judul 'SETAN, AJARLAH AKU', tidak merupakan sumbangan yang dapat dimanfaatkan oleh siapapun juga selain oleh setan dan anak-anaknya!
Dan kalau ada orang yang masih memikirkan bahwa buku ini bisa diperbaiki, maka orang itu perlu memikirkan hal ini: kalau makanan yang baik sudah dicampur dengan racun dan diaduk menjadi satu, bisakah makanan itu diperbaiki untuk kemudian dihidangkan kembali? Jawabnya adalah: bisa, kalau tujuannya memang untuk membunuh orang yang diberi makan!

4. Jangan beli buku ini
Mengingat kesesatan buku / penulis buku TAA ini, saya menghimbau kepada semua orang kristen / hamba Tuhan yang sejati, janganlah membeli buku TAA ini. Kalau sdr mau mempelajari kesesatannya, pinjamlah dari teman yang sudah mempunyai buku ini, atau foto copylah buku tsb, dari pada sdr memperkaya seorang nabi palsu!

5. Kita harus tegas di dalam menghadapi nabi palsu
Hal yang terakhir ingin saya bicarakan adalah: bagaimana seharusnya sikap kita sebagai orang kristen terhadap nabi-nabi palsu (penulis buku ini dan semua 'hamba Tuhan' yang menyetujuinya dan membelanya)?
Banyak orang kristen yang memilih untuk bersikap netral, dan mereka ini biasanya berkata: "Saya tidak ikut / memihak siapa-siapa. Saya ikut Tuhan". Kalau saudara adalah orang yang seperti ini, saya ingin tanyakan: dimana kita pernah melihat dalam Kitab Suci bahwa Tuhan menghendaki sikap netral dalam situasi seperti ini? Tuhan selalu menghendaki anak-anakNya menentang ajaran-ajaran sesat dengan nabi-nabi palsunya! Renungkan ayat-ayat di bawah ini:
* 1 Raj 18:21 : "Lalu Elia mendekati seluruh rakyat itu dan berkata: "Berapa lama lagi kamu berlaku timpang dan bercabang hati? Kalau TUHAN itu Allah, ikutilah Dia, dan kalau Baal, ikutilah dia." Tetapi rakyat itu tidak menjawabnya sepatah katapun."
* Yos 24:14 : "Oleh sebab itu, takutlah akan TUHAN dan beribadahlah kepada-Nya dengan tulus ikhlas dan setia. Jauhkanlah allah yang kepadanya nenek moyangmu telah beribadah di seberang sungai Efrat dan di Mesir, dan beribadahlah kepada TUHAN. Tetapi jika kamu anggap tidak baik untuk beribadah kepada TUHAN, pilihlah pada hari ini kepada siapa kamu akan beribadah; allah yang kepadanya nenek moyangmu beribadah di seberang sungai Efrat, atau allah orang Amori yang negerinya kamu diami ini. Tetapi aku dan seisi rumahku, kami akan beribadah kepada TUHAN!"
* Mat 12:30 : "Siapa tidak bersama Aku, ia melawan Aku dan siapa tidak mengumpulkan bersama Aku, ia mencerai-beraikan."
Semua ayat ini menuntut kita untuk mengambil sikap, dan bukannya bersikap netral! Jadi, bangkitlah dan tentanglah mereka! Tidak sadarkah saudara bahwa kalau saudara membiarkan penyesatan itu berlangsung, lambat atau cepat penyesatan itu akan menyesatkan saudara sendiri beserta keluarga saudara dan banyak orang lain?
Kalau saudara mengambil sikap seperti ini hanya karena 'ingin selamat', maka renungkan kata-kata Tuhan Yesus dalam Mat 16:25 yang berbunyi: "Karena barangsiapa mau menyelamatkan nyawanya, ia akan kehilangan nyawanya; tetapi barangsiapa kehilangan nyawanya karena Aku, ia akan memperolehnya".
Banyak juga orang kristen yang beranggapan bahwa kita harus menghadapi mereka dengan ramah, lemah lembut dsb, dan mereka mengecam orang kristen/ hamba Tuhan yang menyerang para nabi palsu itu dengan keras. Kalau sdr termasuk orang yang mempunyai pandangan demikian, pikirkan dan renungkanlah hal-hal di bawah ini:
a. Dimana dalam Kitab Suci ada nabi atau rasul, atau hamba Tuhan yang sejati yang pernah bersikap ramah / lemah lembut terhadap nabi palsu? Sebagai contoh bacalah bacalah sikap Elia terhadap nabi-nabi Baal dan Asyera dalam 1Raja-raja 18:20-40, atau sikap nabi Mikha dalam 1Raja-raja 22:13-28, atau lihatlah bagaimana sikap Yohanes Pembaptis, Paulus pada ayat-ayat ini :
* Mat 3:7-10 dimana Yohanes Pembaptis berkata kepada banyak orang Farisi dan orang Saduki : "Hai kamu keturunan ular beludak. Siapakah yang mengatakan kepada kamu, bahwa kamu dapat melarikan diri dari murka yang akan datang?Jadi hasilkanlah buah yang sesuai dengan pertobatan. Dan janganlah mengira, bahwa kamu dapat berkata dalam hatimu: Abraham adalah bapa kami! Karena aku berkata kepadamu: Allah dapat menjadikan anak-anak bagi Abraham dari batu-batu ini! Kapak sudah tersedia pada akar pohon dan setiap pohon yang tidak menghasilkan buah yang baik, pasti ditebang dan dibuang ke dalam api."
* Perkataan Paulus dalam Gal 1:6-9 : "Aku heran, bahwa kamu begitu lekas berbalik dari pada Dia, yang oleh kasih karunia Kristus telah memanggil kamu, dan mengikuti suatu injil lain, yang sebenarnya bukan Injil. Hanya ada orang yang mengacaukan kamu dan yang bermaksud untuk memutarbalikkan Injil Kristus. Tetapi sekalipun kami atau seorang malaikat dari sorga yang memberitakan kepada kamu suatu injil yang berbeda dengan Injil yang telah kami beritakan kepadamu, terkutuklah dia. Seperti yang telah kami katakan dahulu, sekarang kukatakan sekali lagi: jikalau ada orang yang memberitakan kepadamu suatu injil, yang berbeda dengan apa yang telah kamu terima, terkutuklah dia.
Tuhan Yesus sendiri juga bersikap sangat keras terhadap nabi-nabi palsu, baca Mat 23:1-36 dimana Dia secara berulang-ulang berkata "Celakalah kamu, hai orang-orang munafik/pemimpin-pemimpin buta". Dia bahkan menggambarkan mereka seperti "kuburan yang dilabur putih, yang sebelah luarnya memang bersih tampaknya, tetapi sebelah dalamnya penuh tulang-belulang dan pelbagai kotoran" (ay 27). Jadi, jika Kristus yang adalah teladan kita bersikap tegas dan keras kepada nabi-nabi palsu itu, apakah kita mau bersikap ramah kepada mereka?
b. Perhatikanlah ayat-ayat Kitab Suci yang menunjukkan bagaimana sikap yang seharusnya menghadapi orang yang sesat, apalagi seorang pengajar sesat / nabi palsu:
w Titus 3:10 - "Seorang bidat yang sudah satu dua kali kaunasihati, hendaklah engkau jauhi".
w 2Yoh 10-11 - "Jikalau seorang datang kepadamu dan ia tidak membawa ajaran ini, janganlah kamu menerima dia di dalam rumahmu dan janganlah memberi salam kepadanya. Sebab barangsiapa memberi salam kepadanya, ia mendapat bagian dalam perbuatannya yang jahat".
- AMIN -




Profil Pdt. Budi Asali :
Pdt. Budi Asali, M.Div. melayani sebagai gembala sidang di Gereja Kristus Rahmani Indonesia (GKRI) Golgotha, Surabaya. Beliau meraih gelar Master of Divinity (M.Div.) dari Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Mississippi, USA pada tahun 1988). Sebelum menyerahkan diri jadi pelayan purna waktu sempat kuliah di ITS Surabaya dari tahun 1973-1977. Pada tahun 1978-1985, beliau pernah melayani di Gereja Eleos Malang dan LRII/GRII sejak 1988-1992.

Sumber : http://www.members.tripod.com/~gkri_exodus/