Robert H. Dilworth
DOLLY TAI-LAN LO
August 29， 1995
Dear Dolly:
Through the years I have treasured our friendship. I have never wanted to intrude
on your personal space by requiring you to listen， because of that friendship， to the bases and contours of my Christian beliefs . I still think you are entitled to as much privacy as you want.
The last two years have brought me to reconsider my reluctance. You mean a lot to me and I think I should share with you my core beliefs. It is because I care for you as I do that I am telling you this. I will love you no less if you end up coming out at a different place.
As a young man I wondered whether there was any purpose to human life apart from physical existence. I reached the tentative conclusion that there was none. That was certainly not a matter of disappointment or dissatisfaction for me. I was quite comfortable with the "chaos”alternative. Under this view mankind would simply be a short-lived complex chemical interaction of molecules that generate heat from interaction， ompletely real， but without depending on gods to exist or to explain our origins or our destiny. This theory is that you cannot infer the existence of God from the existence of a complex physical universe or even from the existence of human beings who could articulate such questions.
In college I pursued these meandering thoughts by extended study of natural law theories， most tracing their origins to Aristotelian thoughts that inferred the existence of God from a hierarchical relationship between the acorn and the oak， etc. I even wrote a thesis comparing Kant's categorical imperative and natural law approaches to providing meaning and purpose to humans. I think the thesis may still be in Widener Library.
I felt then that many people seem to need meaning and purpose with the same urgency that they require food. If God did not exist He would have to be invented by such people to fill that craving. Not an original thought， but one that I could feel comfortable with and one that was consistent with my wish to have intellectually correct beliefs. I felt a need for meaning and purpose， but I also felt that the need could not be filled by inventing a structured universe that did not exist. Instead， humans would have to fill such needs by manufacturing meaning and purpose and recognizing that that was what they had done， that their meaning and purpose was a human construct rather than a divine one.
I continued in this view until I had been married for 5 or 6 years. Faith and I moved to the
Bay Area in 1971， Faith began to meet with the Church in San Francisco， and I walked our dog a lot while she went to her church meetings. It “worked for her” but it was not real for me. I preferred to construct a moral universe based on a categorical imperative that there are certain necessary imperatives if one is to flatter oneself that there is some important distinction between being human and being merely animal.
At Faith’s repeated urging I would occasionally accompany her to meetings of the church. It was predominantly Chinese in membership， having its recent origins in the church in China before and during the Second World War. The accents sometimes made the words a little hard to follow， but I was generally able to get the drift. I determined that they were honest and fervent in their beliefs， but I also remained committed to my earlier conviction that honesty and fervent belief do not necessarily lead to an understanding of reality.
One evening in 1973 Faith asked me to join her at a church meeting. There was considerable vigorous prayer for my salvation. At first I was somewhat embarrassed by the attention， but in due course it ended. I agreed only to take a fresh look at the whole question of the Christian view of the universe， and decided to read the Bible with an open mind.
I began to read the gospels， beginning with Matthew. I read about one chapter at a time. In due course I came to Mathew 26. This is the part where Peter， having confidently asserted in the evening before Jesus' condemnation that he would never deny Christ， found himself denying three times any acquaintanceship before the cock crowed. Jesus had to told Peter that his bold assertion would not bear up under the pressure of universal condemnation. Somehow when I read the passage I realized for the first time that it was true. That became the point of first beginning for my belief in Christ.
I remain convinced that it is impossible to infer the existence of God from the existence of an apparently well ordered universe. Further， even if one admits of the possible existence of God， you cannot confidently conclude from that fact alone that Jesus is the Christ. The point of first beginning must instead be the belief that Jesus was what He purported to be. I am also certain that you will not be talked into such a belief.
I do not want to talk you into anything， but I would like to encourage you to take advantage of the same opportunity I had to hear the good news (the "gospel"). You will hear the good news again， not as "new" news. You probably heard much or all of this as a child or last year or even yesterday.
I would like to suggest that you read the four gospel books (Matthew， Mark， Luke and John). I was particularly struck by Matthew， but now， so many years later， I do not know why. Perhaps it was just that I started there. It is my great hope that， for you as for me， faith will come by hearing the actual words， without gloss or spin to justify some particular form of behavior or culture.
I have come to believe that man exists to carry out God's purpose; to be the likeness or
image of God. We do not live in a man centered universe， however much we wish we did. I further believe that Jesus was in fact the first born of many brothers and sisters who partake of eternal life. That eternal life is Christ's life that dwells in us as the Spirit. God's purpose is precisely this mingling of His spirit with humans who are His image. As partakers of that eternal life we are freed from the sting of death， if not from the corruption of our flesh. Eternal life is now and forever; it does not start later.
You are a good and decent person. You have fought the good fight every day since I first met you. You have had an unusual period of 18 months to reflect on the meaning of
life in general and your life in particular. You have had a better chance than I to stare at nothingness and death. Life has immediacy for you that I can only imagine from my more comfortable position. But this I do know well， that we are here for an instant and in that instant we have a chance to know and seize the promise of etemal life.
I enclose my copy of the New Testament. Please read it when you can. Just start with
Matthew and read as much as your attention can stand
I pray much for you.
(網路翻譯，僅供參考)
親愛的Dolly：
多年來，我一直珍惜我們的友誼。我從來沒想過闖入因為這種友誼，我要求你傾聽我的基督教信仰的基礎和輪廓，從而侵犯你的個人空間。我仍然認為您有權獲得您想要的盡可能多的隱私。
過去兩年讓我重新考慮了我的不情願。你對我來說意義重大，我想我應該與你分享我的核心信念。正是因為我關心你，所以我才告訴你這些。即使你最終在另一個地方出來，我也不會少愛你。
作為一個年輕人，我想知道除了物質存在之外，人類生命是否還有任何目的。我初步得出的結論是沒有。這對我來說當然不是失望或不滿的問題。我對「混沌」的選擇感到非常滿意。或我們的生命。
在大學裡，我透過對自然法理論的深入研究來追尋這些蜿蜒的思想，其中大多數追溯到亞里斯多德思想，即從橡子和橡樹之間的等級關係推斷上帝的存在等。我甚至寫了一篇論文來比較康德的絕對命令和自然法方法為人類提供意義和目的。 我想這篇論文可能還在威德恩圖書館裡。
當時我覺得許多人似乎需要意義和目標，就像他們需要食物一樣緊迫。如果上帝不存在，祂就必須由這些人發明來滿足這種渴望。這不是一個原創的想法，但卻是一個讓我感到舒服的想法，並且與我擁有理智上正確的信念的願望是一致的。我覺得需要意義和目的，但我也覺得這種需要不能透過發明一個不存在的結構化宇宙來滿足。相反，人類必須透過製造意義和目的來滿足這些需求，並認識到這就是他們所做的，他們的意義和目的是人類的建構而不是神聖的建構。
我一直持這種觀點，直到我結婚五、六年了。1971 年，費絲和我搬到了灣區，費絲開始與舊金山的教會會面，當她去參加教會聚會時，我經常遛狗。這“對她有用”，但對我來說並不真實。我更願意建構一個基於絕對命令的道德世界，即如果一個人想要自以為人類和動物之間存在一些重要的區別，那麼就存在某些必要的命令。
在費絲的再三催促下，我偶爾會陪她參加教會的聚會。它的成員主要是華人，最近起源於第二次世界大戰之前和期間的中國教會。口音有時會讓單字有點難以理解，但我通常都能明白意思。我確定他們的信仰是誠實和熱情的，但我也仍然堅持我先前的信念，即誠實和熱情的信仰並不一定會導致對現實的理解。
1973 年的一個晚上，費絲邀請我和她一起參加教會聚會。人們為我的得救進行了相當熱烈的祈禱。起初我對這種關注感到有些尷尬，但到了適當的時候就結束了。我只同意重新審視基督教宇宙觀的整個問題，並決定以開放的心態閱讀聖經。
我開始閱讀福音書，從馬太福音開始。我一次讀大約一章。在適當的時候，我來到了馬太福音 26 號。在這段時間裡，彼得在耶穌被定罪的前一天晚上自信地斷言他永遠不會否認基督，結果卻發現自己在雞叫之前三次否認了與耶穌的信徒關係。耶穌很鄭重告訴彼得，在普世譴責的壓力下，人們是無法承受住那種壓力的。不知何故，當我讀到這段話時，我第一次意識到這是真的。那成為我信仰基督的起點。
我仍然堅信，不可能從表面上秩序良好的宇宙的存在中推論出上帝的存在。此外，即使一個人承認上帝可能存在，你也不能僅憑這一事實就確信耶穌是基督。首先的起點必須是相信耶穌就是祂所宣稱的。我也確信你不會被說服而產生這樣的信念。
我不想說服你做任何事，但我想鼓勵你利用我聽到好消息（「福音」）的同樣機會。你會再聽到好消息，而不是「新」消息。您可能在小時候、去年甚至昨天就聽說過這些內容的大部分或全部。
我建議你讀四本福音書（馬太福音、馬可福音、路加福音和約翰福音）。馬修給我留下了特別深刻的印象，但多年後的現在，我不知道為什麼。也許我只是從那裡開始的。我非常希望，對你和我來說，信仰將來自於聽到真實的話語，而不是修飾或扭曲來證明某種特定形式的行為或文化的合理性。
我開始相信人的存在是為了實現上帝的目的；成為相似或神的形象。我們並不生活在一個以人為中心的宇宙中，無論我們多麼希望如此。我進一步相信耶穌其實是許多分享永生的兄弟姊妹中的長子。那永遠的生命就是作為那靈住在我們裡面的基督的生命。神的目的正是要將祂的靈與作為祂形象的人調和。作為永生的參與者，我們即使沒有擺脫肉體的敗壞，也擺脫了死亡的毒刺。永生是現在，也是永遠；它不會稍後開始。
你是個善良正派的人。自從我第一次見到你以來，你每天都在為正義而戰。你有 18 個月的不尋常時期來反思
一般的生活，特別是你的生活。你比我有更好的機會凝視虛無和死亡。生活對你來說是即時的，我只能從我更舒適的位置想像。但我確實很清楚，我們在這裡只是一瞬間，在那一瞬間我們有機會知道並抓住永生的承諾。
我附上我的新約聖經副本。請盡可能閱讀。剛開始
盡可能多讀馬太福音
我為你祈禱很多。
留言
張貼留言