我为什么对基督教有持续的兴趣？Why Do I Have a Continuous Interest in Christianity?

Geoffrey Chen

我对耶稣复活这种神迹一直持怀疑的态度，所以我不是一个虔诚的基督徒。可是我为什么对基督教又有持续的兴趣呢？不是我想证明神迹的真实性，也不是为了进入天堂，而是有一个奇怪的现象一直困扰着我。

基督教有漫长的历史，有不同的教派，给不同的人留下了不同的印象。可是从我过去近二十年切身经历来看，我的基督徒朋友非常非常友善，而且他们的个人生活和工作都比较和谐美满。这并不是说非基督徒朋友就不够友善，或者他们的生活和工作就不够和谐和美满，而是两者一对比，差距就非常明显。我可以肯定这不是偶然的，这是基督教信仰在起作用。可是我一直不明白这种信仰为什么会带来这种效果，这是一直困惑我的地方，也是我对基督教拥有持续兴趣的原因。

如果这些基督徒朋友的表现与其他朋友并没有区别，那我肯定不会执着地去研究基督教，因为那些神迹实在是难以接受。

这几天我有一个新的尝试，就是同时阅读圣经新约全书、康德的哲学著作以及老子的道德经。我突然有了一种新的想法，对解开困惑我多年的谜团有了新的思路。

这几本书我当然很早就读过，有的还反复读，但是同时读这几本书这还是第一次。

如果一段时间内持续读一个人的著作，我的思维就会陷入他的氛围当中去，如果同时读截然不同的几个人的著作，那么我就随时会有一种关照和提醒，甚至会蹦出灵感。

我不应该执着于用理性去解释耶稣的神迹，更不应该把耶稣的神迹作为解释基督徒朋友的友善与和谐生活的直接原因。很显然理性这条路是走不通的。基督徒朋友的友善与和谐不是因为神迹，而是因为基督教这种信仰使信徒在一定程度上摆脱了世俗生活的局限和束缚。是这种神性生活与世俗生活之间的距离在起作用，而不是神迹直接起作用。

其实，信仰一种宗教并不是一种知识训练，而是一种生活方式，活着的方式。长期信教的朋友，他们的言行举止，他们的思维方式和行为模式已经具有某种神性。他们的所思所想似乎更符合这个世界更底层的规律吧。

因为相信上帝，所以来自世俗生活的焦虑就大大的减轻了，因为相信上帝，对他人的爱就不需要条件了。爱朋友爱他人不再是一种利益交换，而是一种由内到外的自然而然的行为，爱别人越多自己越快乐。

他们的宗教信仰似乎让他们超越了康德所描述的理性局限，虽然不是直接进入物自体的领域，但在实践生活中，他们获得了一种来自“超越性”维度的塑造或陶冶。这种塑造使他们的思想与行为表现出一种超越经验理性的深度与和谐。正如道德经说，他们的道非常道。

可是接下来还有一个更棘手的问题，没有办法解决。既然有信仰的朋友的神性生活帮助了他们，那为什么这种信仰不设计一些符合理性的神迹呢？当然符合理性的神迹就不能叫神迹了。

也许基督教正是依赖于这些神迹，使得信徒在一定程度上依靠上帝，而不是依靠世俗世界，使生命的重心摆脱世俗的羁绊。就是要通过这种反常识的神迹，提醒信徒不要过深过多的陷入世俗的常识当中。

Why Do I Have a Continuous Interest in Christianity?

I have always been skeptical about the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection, so I am not a devout Christian. Yet why do I still maintain a lasting interest in Christianity? It is not because I want to prove the authenticity of miracles, nor because I want to enter heaven, but rather because of a puzzling phenomenon that has troubled me for years.

Christianity has a long history, with many denominations, leaving different impressions on different people. But in my own experience over nearly twenty years, I have found my Christian friends to be extraordinarily kind, and their personal lives and work to be more harmonious and fulfilling. This does not mean that my non-Christian friends are unkind or that their lives and work lack harmony and fulfillment. But when placed side by side, the difference is striking. I am certain this is not a coincidence—it is the influence of Christian faith at work. And yet I have never understood why this faith produces such effects. That confusion is precisely the reason for my continuing interest in Christianity.

If my Christian friends had shown no difference from others, I would certainly not be so persistent in studying Christianity, because the miracles themselves are too difficult for me to accept.

Recently, I began a new experiment: reading the New Testament, Kant’s philosophical works, and Laozi’s Dao De Jing side by side. Suddenly, I had a new thought, a fresh perspective that might help unravel the puzzle that has troubled me for so long.

Of course, I read these books a long time ago, and some of them I’ve even read many times. But this is the first time I’m reading them all at the same time.

If I keep reading the works of a single author for a period of time, my thinking tends to sink into their atmosphere. But if I read the works of several completely different authors at the same time, I constantly gain a sense of perspective and reminders—and sometimes, sparks of inspiration emerge.

I should not cling to rational explanations of Jesus’ miracles, nor should I treat those miracles as the direct cause of my Christian friends’ kindness and harmony. It is clear that the rational path cannot succeed here. Their kindness and harmony do not come from miracles, but rather from the way Christian faith helps believers transcend, at least to some degree, the limitations and burdens of worldly life. It is this distance between the sacred life and the secular life that has an effect, not the miracles themselves.

In truth, religious faith is not a form of intellectual training but a way of life—a way of being. For friends who have practiced their faith for many years, their words and actions, their modes of thought and patterns of behavior have acquired a certain sacred quality. Their thoughts and conduct seem more aligned with the deeper laws of the world.

Because they believe in God, the anxieties of worldly life are greatly reduced. Because they believe in God, their love for others needs no conditions. Loving friends and others is no longer an exchange of interests but a natural, spontaneous act. The more they love, the happier they themselves become.

Their religious faith seems to enable them to transcend the limits of reason as described by Kant. While this does not mean a direct entry into the realm of the noumenal, in practical life they nonetheless undergo a kind of shaping or cultivation that comes from a “transcendent” dimension. This formation endows their thoughts and actions with a depth and harmony that go beyond empirical reason.

But then comes a more difficult problem, one that seems impossible to solve. If the sacred life of believers benefits them so much, why does their faith not involve miracles that are rationally acceptable? Of course, a miracle that fits rationality would no longer be a miracle.

Perhaps Christianity relies precisely on such miracles, so that believers learn to depend on God rather than the secular world, thus freeing their lives from worldly attachments. These counter-intuitive miracles serve as reminders, urging believers not to sink too deeply into worldly common sense.