聖經神學是一門科學，也是神學科目TheIdea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline

作者：魏司堅（Geerhardus Vos） 譯者/校對者:唐興/駱鴻銘

http://www.onthewing.org/user/Doc_Biblical%20Theology%20-%20Vos.pdf

http://www.crtsbooks.net/blog/post/2015/06/20/The_Idea_of_Biblical_Theology_as_a_Science_and_as_a_Theological_Discipline.aspx

（標題為譯者所加）

——魏司堅聖經神學教席就職演說

THE IDEA OF BIBLICAL THEOLOGY AS A SCIENCE AND AS A THEOLOGICAL DISCIPLINE（註1）

以下論文是霍志恆（Geerhardus Vos, 1862-1949）於1894年5月8日，在普林斯頓第一長老教會（The First Presbyterian Church of Princeton），擔任普林斯頓神學院（Princeton Theological Seminary）聖經神學教授的就職典禮上所發表的演說。原著由Anson D. F. Randolph & Co. (New York, 1894)刊登，現在可自由複製。The following essay was Vos’ Inaugural address as Professor of Biblical Theology in Princeton Theological Seminary, delivered in the First Presbyterian Church of Princeton on May 8, 1894. It was originally published by Anson D. F. Randolph & Co. (New York, 1894), 40 pp., but is now in the public domain and may be freely copied and distributed.

 校長和董事會成員先生們：

 各位呼召我從事的工作，我義不容辭地接受了，各位也在今天對我做了更正式的介紹。在得出這個結論——也就是我有責任接受你們因為看重我而給我的呼召——之前，我先是深深感到不配，因為我的名字竟然和那些傑出的人士可以沾得上邊，神在這個學校曾藉著這些人使祂得榮耀。當我還是學生時，曾在這些人的門下受業，其中一些人已經睡去；少部分人今天仍然健在。從對已故者的回憶和在健在者的身上，比起認識我將要履行的責任的困難，我更深刻地認識到自己的軟弱。然而，一方面，我和這些人的關係也許會使我此時充滿疑慮，而另一方面，我也不企圖隱瞞，他們也是我受激勵的源頭。考慮到自身的不足，我更高興我的四周圍繞著這些雲彩般的見證人。我深深相信，再也沒有其他的地方和環境，可以讓我在這裡受到過去莊嚴的影響，讓我承受到更純淨、更有力的動力，並得著堅固和激勵。我剛才作的宣誓，其本身就象徵著從過去到未來的延續；我覺得它會在我身上起作用，不僅成為外在的節制，也成為內在約束的力量——這是一種特權，更是一種責任。MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: It is with no little hesitation that I enter upon the work to which you have called me and today more formally introduced me. In reaching the conclusion that it was my duty to accept the call with which you had honored me, I was keenly alive to the incongruity of my name being associated in the remotest manner with the names of those illustrious men through whom God has glorified Himself in this institution. Some of those at whose feet I used to sit while a student here, are fallen asleep; a smaller number remain until now. The memory of the former as well as the presence of the latter make me realize my weakness even more profoundly than the inherent difficulty of the duties I shall have to discharge. While, however, on the one hand, there is something in these associations that might well fill me with misgivings at this moment, I shall not endeavor to conceal that on the other hand they are to me a source of inspiration. In view of my own insufficiency I rejoice all the more in having behind and around me this cloud of witnesses. I am thoroughly convinced that in no other place or environment could the sacred influences of the past be brought to bear upon me with a purer and mightier impulse to strengthen and inspire me than here. The pledge to which I have just subscribed is itself a symbol of this continuity between the past and the future; and I feel that it will act upon me, not merely by outward restraint, but with an inwardly constraining power, being a privilege as well as an obligation.

前言

 聖經神學雖然不是一門新的學科，在這所神學院裡卻屬新的部門；此一事實決定了這場演說的主題。在一般情形下，談論一些特殊的主題，而非談論一般性的原則，可能比較適合，或許各位也會更有興趣。但是，因為聖經神學是神學院新加入的課程，我也受委任要特別照顧和維護它。所以，我認為我的責任就是要向各位介紹此神學科目。並且，至少要概括地描述其特質，和我所期望的教學形態。這是非常必要的，因為各界對此新的神學科目有著相當分歧的看法。有人對其推崇備至，認為她是合乎科學的神學的理想（the ideal of scientific theology），用這種誇張的說法，也嚴肅地反映出其姐妹科目的特質（這些科目年代久遠、存在較早）。其他的人則對此新項目抱持懷疑的態度，甚至公開批判她在神學家庭中的地位。我們當然有義務，要為她和為我們自己，針對此問題建立一個有良好根基和明智的判斷。我期盼以下的談論，在某種程度上會為此問題帶來亮光，使各位能根據事實公正地評斷。Although not a new study, yet Biblical Theology is a new chair, in this Seminary; and this fact has determined the choice of the subject on which I purpose to address you. Under ordinary circumstances, the treatment of some special subject of investigation would have been more appropriate, and perhaps more interesting to you, than a discussion of general principles. But Biblical Theology being a recent arrival in the Seminary curriculum and having been entrusted to my special care and keeping, I consider it my duty to introduce to you this branch of theological science, and to describe, in general terms at least, its nature and the manner in which I hope to teach it. This is all the more necessary because of the wide divergence of opinion in various quarters concerning the standing of this newest accession to the circle of sacred studies. Some have lauded her to the skies as the ideal of scientific theology, in such extravagant terms as to reflect seriously upon the character of her sisters of greater age and longer standing. Others look upon the newcomer with suspicion, or even openly dispute her right to a place in the theological family. We certainly owe it to her and to ourselves to form a well-grounded and intelligent judgment on this question. I hope that what I shall say will in some degree shed light on the points at issue, and enable you to judge impartially and in accordance with the facts of the case.

 聖經神學是科學，也是神學的科目The Idea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline

什麼是神學

要瞭解聖經神學所討論的議題，首先必須對「什麼是神學」有一般性的清晰認識。相較於先有一些先驗的立場（a priori constructions），在許多情況下，詞源學是比較安全可靠的指引，它告訴我們，「神學」就是關於神的知識；這個基本定義完全合乎各類知識的原則。因為只有把神學定義為是關於神的知識時，我們才有權利稱它是一門獨立的科學。科學的形成，並非毫無章法的，而是根據一種客觀的劃分原則而建立的。正如一般的科學會受到研究對象的約束，而且必須容讓自己被現實來塑造；對各種科學進行分類也是這樣，在宇宙整體知識裡不同成員之間的關係，也必須遵循一些偉大的分界線（上帝用這些分界線來標示宇宙的浩瀚領域）。要把某些知識稱為特定的科學，就必須依循上帝對這些特定對象所劃分出來的分界線來區分。當我們論到生物學，是因為上帝的創造已經使生命的現象與那些非有機物質有所區分。現在，從此角度來看，我們必須說：沒有一種科學比「神學」具有更清晰的頭銜。上帝是創造者，祂與所有的受造物之間的區別是絕對的。在宇宙之間，沒有其他的區分有如此浩大的鴻溝。上帝是神學唯一合法的對象（雖然上帝與祂的受造物如此不同）。Every discussion of what is to be understood by Biblical Theology ought to proceed from a clear understanding of what Theology is in general. Etymology, in many cases a safer guide than a priori constructions, tells us that Theology is knowledge concerning God, and this primitive definition is fully supported by encyclopedic principles. Only when making Theology knowledge concerning God do we have the right to call it a separate science. Sciences are not formed at haphazard, but according to an objective principle of division. As in general science is bound by its object and must let itself be shaped by reality; so likewise the classification of sciences, the relation of the various members in the body of universal knowledge, has to follow the great lines by which God has mapped out the immense field of the universe. The title of a certain amount of knowledge to be called a separate science depends on its reference to such a separate and specific object as is marked off by these God-drawn lines of distinction. We speak of a science of Biology, because God has made the phenomena of life distinct from those of inorganic being. Now, from this point of view we must say that no science has a clearer title to separate existence than Theology. Between God as the Creator and all other things as created the distinction is absolute. There is not another such gulf within the universe. God, as distinct from the creature, is the only legitimate object of Theology.

神學的對象

然而，我們將會在下面討論到：不僅神學的對象與其他科學有所不同，神學與其對象之間更保持著一種非常特殊的關係；這種關係在其他地方是找不到嚴格類比的。在所有其他的科學裡，是人跨出第一步靠近客觀的世界，使客觀的世界臣服在他仔細的觀察之下，迫使它伏在其實驗之下。簡言之，是人主動地促使大自然啟示它的真相和法則。在神學裡，這種主體和客體之間的關係被顛倒過來了。這裡，是上帝為了揭示祂的本性，跨出第一步來接近人類，不只如此，祂創造了人類，使他們具備有限的心智，能夠接受祂無限完美的知識。在神學裡，客體（研究對象）絕非是被動的，祂在創造的行動中，首先安排讓主體必須依附自己（客體）；然後，永生上帝才授與主體那種無法靠他自己獲得的知識。因為，「除了上帝的靈，也沒有人知道上帝的事」。因此，嚴格說來，我們應該說，神學的對象不是上帝自己本身，而是上帝所啟示出來的、關於祂自己本身的知識。It will be seen, however, on a moment’s reflection, that Theology is not merely distinguished from the other sciences by its object, but that it also sustains an altogether unique relation to this object, for which no strict analogy can be found elsewhere. In all the other sciences man is the one who of himself takes the first step in approaching the objective world, in subjecting it to his scrutiny, in compelling it to submit to his experiments—in a word, man is the one who proceeds actively to make nature reveal her facts and her laws. In Theology this relation between the subject and object is reversed. Here it is God who takes the first step to approach man for the purpose of disclosing His nature, nay, who creates man in order that He may have a finite mind able to receive the knowledge of His infinite perfections. In Theology the object, far from being passive, by the act of creation first posits the subject over against itself, and then as the living God proceeds to impart to this subject that to which of itself it would have no access. For “the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.” Strictly speaking, therefore, we should say that not God in and for Himself, but God in so far as He has revealed Himself, is the object of Theology.

雖然這個獨特的特質，在抽象和各種情況下可以應用在神學身上，但是當罪進入了人類之後，這個特質就一直被強調出來。在有罪的情況下，人儘管保留了某些關於上帝的知識，卻絕對需要依賴上帝全新的自我啟示，來認識那些純正完全的神聖事物——就是我們所稱的「超自然啟示」（supernatural revelation）。藉著重生和光照被罪弄黑暗的心智，一個新的主體被創造了出來。藉著上帝客觀地自我顯明祂是救贖者，事物的新秩序就出現了。並且，藉著把關於這個事物新秩序的真理，安置在聖經內，人類的心智也能夠從那裡獲得全新的知識；而這知識，不過就是在重生的知覺意識中，對上帝的作為和話語之客觀世界的一種回應。Though applying to Theology in the abstract and under all circumstances, this unique character has been emphasized by the entrance of sin into the human race. In his sinful condition, while retaining some knowledge of God, man for all pure and adequate information in divine things is absolutely dependent on that new self-disclosure of God which we call supernatural revelation. By the new birth and the illumination of the mind darkened through sin, a new subject is created. By the objective self-manifestation of God as the Redeemer, a new order of things is called into being. And by the depositing of the truth concerning this new order of things in the Holy Scriptures, the human mind is enabled to obtain that new knowledge which is but the reflection in the regenerate consciousness of an objective world of divine acts and words.

什麼是釋經神學

既然如此，我們的神學從一開始就屬於上帝超自然運作的一部分——上帝藉著超自然的運作，使祂自己成為我們認識的對象（或譯為客體）。至於要從何處開始神學研究，是我們無法自行選擇的。神學的本質，迫使我們必須要從那些與這門科學的啟示基礎有關的部門開始。我們從一開始就必須具備一個倚靠和接納的心態。讓聖經中神自我啟示的影象，儘可能完全和清晰地反映到我們的心智裡；這乃是每一個神學家首先和最重要的責任。為要遵循此原則，在歷代科學式神學的發展中，一組研究便漸漸與其他的研究脫離，並且自己形成了一個更小的有機體。這是因為這種神學意識對啟示源頭的接納心態，是他們背後共同的觀念，這種觀念也控制著他們。這些研究通常被稱為「解經神學」（Exegetical Theology）。解經神學既非偶然形成，亦非出於神學家明確的協議；而是因為這門學科的內在發展法則（此法則乃是根植於其源頭），所自然形成和發展出來的。This being so, it follows immediately that the beginning of our Theology consists in the appropriation of that supernatural process by which God has made Himself the object of our knowledge. We are not left to our own choice here, as to where we shall begin our theological study. The very nature of Theology requires us to begin with those branches which relate to the revelation-basis of our science. Our attitude from the outset must be a dependent and receptive one. To let the image of God’s self-revelation in the Scriptures mirror itself as fully and clearly as possible in his mind, is the first and most important duty of every theologian. And it is in accordance with this principle that, in the development of scientific theology through the ages, a group of studies have gradually been separated from the rest and begun to form a smaller organism among themselves, inasmuch as the receptive attitude of the theological consciousness toward the source of revelation was the common idea underlying and controlling them. This group is usually designated by the name of Exegetical Theology. Its formation was not a matter of mere accident, nor the result of definite agreement among theologians; the immanent law of the development of the science, as rooted in its origin, has brought it about in a natural manner.

在對這類科學所作的分類中，概括性的名稱很容易獲得一些或多或少不明確的涵義。它們傾向於變成一些制式的說法，用來表明某些研究，從實用的角度或是依照其方法論的原則而言，是屬於同類的。在許多情況下，除了以實用為目的，將某些部門歸類在一起以外，其他的目的，都屬憑空想像。因此，表面看來，雖然許多部門被歸類在「解經神學」系裡面，但與其中心思想，卻僅有遙遠和間接的關係。也有一些從屬和預備性的研究，位於聖經神學的邊緣，鬆散的連於這個有機的中心。然而，如果解經神學要成為不僅僅是一些性質不一的研究的聚合體，只有實用上的合一，我們就必須期待在其發展的最高峰，它必須在表面上體現所有神學主要思想的必要形式的其中一種；並且會在最嚴謹的意義上，自我展現出它是「關於神的知識」。當此事實際上發生時，這個科學就會成為解經神學這個有機組織的中心。In classifications of this kind general terms are apt to acquire more or less indefinite meanings. They tend to become formulas used for the purpose of indicating that certain studies belong together from a practical point of view or according to a methodological principle. In many cases it would be fanciful to seek any other than a practical justification for grouping certain branches together. So it is clear on the surface that much is subsumed under the department of Exegetical Theology, which bears only a very remote and indirect relation to its central idea. There are subservient and preparatory studies lying in the periphery and but loosely connected with the organic center. Nevertheless, if Exegetical Theology is to be more than a conglomerate of heterogeneous studies, having no other than a practical unity, we must expect that at its highest point of development it will appear to embody one of the necessary forms of the essential idea of all Theology, and will unfold itself as knowledge concerning God in the strict sense of the term. The science in which this actually happens will be the heart of the organism of Exegetical Theology.

解經神學是在這個觀點之下來和上帝打交道的——上帝是其自身的啟示者和聖經的作者。它自然地被分為兩部分：一部分要處理聖經如何形成的問題；另一部分，則要處理聖經成形的過程中，上帝如何啟示祂自己。我們更進一步的發現，聖經形成的唯一目的，乃是要把上帝自我啟示的紀錄永久傳達給全人類。相較於啟示本身，聖經的形成是達到其目的的方法。因此，聖經學（bibliology）及其附屬的研究，並非解經神學的中心，而是為要處理啟示的本身，在邏輯上，它是從屬於其他部分的。或者，從人的觀點來說，所有關於聖經來源的研究和調查、正典的集成、原始的文本以及釋經上的研究（聖經內容乃是藉此得到歸納性的確認），其最終的目的，乃是要教導我們上帝自我啟示的內容。這些研究都不是以其本身為目的，其價值的定位以及地位的分配，都出自於那個中心性的研究；它們都朝著這個中心性的研究邁進，也在那裡找到其本身的終極目的。這個中心性的研究，對解經神學的觀念提供了一個最適切、最自然的解釋和說明——它就是「聖經神學」。Exegetical Theology deals with God under the aspect of Revealer of Himself and Author of the Scriptures. It is naturally divided into two parts, of which the one treats of the formation of the Scriptures, the other of the actual revelation of God lying back of this process. We further observe that the formation of the Scriptures serves no other purpose than to perpetuate and transmit the record of God’s self-disclosure to the human race as a whole. Compared with revelation proper, the formation of the Scriptures appears as a means to an end. Bibliology with all its adjuncts, therefore, is not the center of Exegetical Theology, but is logically subordinated to the other division, which treats of revelation proper. Or, formulating it from the human point of view, all our investigations as to the origin of the Scriptures, their collection into a Canon, their original text, as well as the exegetical researches by which the contents of the Biblical writings are inductively ascertained, ultimately serve the one purpose of teaching us what God has revealed concerning Himself. None of these studies find their aim in themselves, but all have their value determined and their place assigned by the one central study to which they are leading up and in which they find their culminating point. This central study that gives most adequate and natural expression to the idea of Exegetical Theology is Biblical Theology.

什麼是聖經神學

如此，總的來說，聖經神學就是解經神學中處理有關上帝啟示的那個部分。它應用了這個部門裡所有先前研究的成果。但我們仍然必須盡力更準確地決定，在什麼意義上來認識此概括的定義。因為這個定義也可以套用在系統神學上，甚至是整個神學，這個定義對它們來說都是真的——它們都是在處理超自然的啟示。聖經神學的特性在於：它是從上帝本身的啟示作為（revealing activity）的角度，來討論啟示的型式和內容。換言之，它是從一個主動的意義上來處理啟示。它把啟示視為上帝的作為，並且試圖（在人能力所及，並且不排除我們有限的觀察的條件下）去理解、追蹤，並描述這個作為。在聖經神學中，啟示的型式和內容被看為是上帝工作的成分和產品。在系統神學中，也有同樣的啟示內容，但不是從上帝工作的許多階段的角度來看這些內容，而是把這些內容視為給人類工作的素材，他們要按照邏輯原則來加以分類和系統化。聖經神學組織和安排這些內容的方法，不外乎上帝在啟示自己的的工作中所賜下的原則。In general, then, Biblical Theology is that part of Exegetical Theology which deals with the revelation of God. It makes use of all the results that have been obtained by all the preceding studies in this department. Still, we must endeavor to determine more precisely in what sense this general definition is to be understood. For it might be said of Systematic Theology, nay of the whole of Theology, with equal truth, that it deals with supernatural revelation. The specific character of Biblical Theology lies in this, that it discusses both the form and contents of revelation from the point of view of the revealing activity of God Himself. In other words, it deals with revelation in the active sense, as an act of God, and tries to understand and trace and describe this act, so far as this is possible to man and does not elude our finite observation. In Biblical Theology both the form and contents of revelation are considered as parts and products of a divine work. In Systematic Theology these same contents of revelation appear, but not under the aspect of the stages of a divine work; rather as the material for a human work of classifying and systematizing according to logical principles. Biblical Theology applies no other method of grouping and arranging these contents than is given in the divine economy of revelation itself.

依循這樣的看法，為了要對聖經神學有一個較確定的觀念，我們必須試著整合上帝啟示作為的一般性特質。此處，如同其他的情況，唯有藉著對結果的期盼，才能思想和描述此科學所具有的有機組織。同樣地，不要根據一個先驗的立場來看待以下的論述。它們只是表明「聖經神學」本身的教導。From this it follows that, in order to obtain a more definite conception of Biblical Theology, we must try to gather the general features of God's revealing work. Here, as in other cases, the organism of a science can be conceived and described only by anticipating its results. The following statements, accordingly, are not to be considered in the light of an a priori construction, but simply formulate what the study of Biblical Theology itself has taught us.

上帝超自然啟示的第一個特質：漸進的

超自然啟示的第一個特質就是：它是在歷史中漸漸進展的。上帝沒有以祂自己在永恆沉靜中無時間性的視野，來向我們傳達真理的知識。祂也沒有用邏輯系統化的抽象命題，把真理授與我們。系統神學就是以這種形式來重新複製啟示的真理的。這簡單的事實表示，從一開始，啟示就不具備此形式。上帝的自我啟示，是一個跨越不同時代、出現在長遠的時間過程中，以一連串啟示性的作為和話語，所進行的工作。這個真理以不斷成長的形式出現，並非靜止的。無怪乎對此事實的解釋，部分必須藉著人有限的理解力來尋求。即使是上帝向我們啟示出來的那一部分知識，也是如此偉大，遠超乎人的能力；如此洪湧的亮光，並非一次性完全的放射，而是一束接著一束，漸漸地照進我們的心智裡。上帝以祂安排的順序，把關於祂自己的知識內容傳授給我們，藉此向我們指出一條道路，使我們可以漸漸領悟並真實地認識祂。這個啟示是為了所有的世代和國家，以及各種不同的階層和人類光景；因此，其本身必須融合並適應各種不同的特質和個性。我們若認識到這一點，事情就更加明朗了。The first feature characteristic of supernatural revelation is its historical progress. God has not communicated to us the knowledge of the truth as it appears in the calm light of eternity to His own timeless vision. He has not given it in the form of abstract propositions logically correlated and systematized. The simple fact that it is the task of Systematic Theology to reproduce revealed truth in such form, shows that it does not possess this form from the beginning. The self-revelation of God is a work covering ages, proceeding in a sequence of revealing words and acts, appearing in a long perspective of time. The truth comes in the form of growing truth, not truth at rest. No doubt the explanation of this fact is partly to be sought in the finiteness of the human understanding. Even that part of the knowledge of God which has been revealed to us is so overwhelmingly great and so far transcends our human capacities, is such a flood of light, that it had, as it were, gradually to be let in upon us, ray after ray, and not the full radiancy at once. By imparting the elements of the knowledge of Himself in a divinely arranged sequence God has pointed out to us the way in which we might gradually grasp and truly know Him. This becomes still more evident, if we remember that this revelation is intended for all ages and nations and classes and conditions of men, and therefore must adapt itself to the most various characters and temperaments by which it is to be assimilated.

然而，我們感到這種解釋，無論本身多麼合理，還是不夠完整，無法使人完全滿意。啟示的歷史特質更深的基礎，不能建立在人類主體的有限性上，而必須從啟示本身的本質探索而得。啟示不是上帝孤立的作為，和祂所有其他的超自然作為沒有關連。啟示是「新創造」（new creation）偉大製作過程的一部分。藉此製作過程，現今的世界（一個有機的組織體）將會從罪的影響下被救贖出來，並且恢復到理想的狀態——就是上帝最初的目的。現在，以客觀、普世性的意義而言，此「新創造」不是藉著單一的作為，一次就完成的事，而是一個本身就具備有機性發展法則的歷史。這樣，在每一點上，「新創造」都與這個世界和人類的自然發展有關，並以其為基礎不斷進行著；因為後者（人類的自然發展）既然是以歷史的模式進行的，所以前者（世界的自然發展）也必須採用同樣的模式。就是因為我們習慣不當地把上帝的啟示，與上帝整個救贖工作全面的背景分開，所以我們才無法認識到啟示之歷史性、漸漸進展的本質。我們把它看作是抽象真理一系列的傳遞，自我形成一體；卻看不出為什麼這個真理應該是一步一步、一點一點地，而不是全部一次傳達給人的。一旦瞭解到啟示在每一點上，都與上帝廣義的救贖行為相互交織並且受其調整，而救贖又與現今世界的自然發展相連，我們就可以完全理解其歷史特性，不再感到驚奇了。We feel, however, that this explanation, however plausible in itself, is but a partial one, and can never completely satisfy. The deeper ground for the historic character of revelation cannot lie in the limitations of the human subject, but must be sought in the nature of revelation itself. Revelation is not an isolated act of God, existing without connection with the other divine acts of supernatural character. It constitutes a part of that great process of the new creation through which the present universe as an organic whole shall be redeemed from the consequences of sin and restored to its ideal state, which it had originally in the intention of God. Now, this new creation, in the objective, universal sense, is not something completed by a single act all at once, but is a history with its own law of organic development. It could not be otherwise, inasmuch as at every point it proceeds on the basis of and in contact with the natural development of this world and of the human race, and, the latter being in the form of history, the former must necessarily assume that form likewise. It is simply owing to our habit of unduly separating revelation from this comprehensive background of the total redeeming work of God, that we fail to appreciate its historic, progressive nature. We conceive of it as a series of communications of abstract truth forming a body by itself, and are at a loss to see why this truth should be parceled out to man little by little and not given in its completeness at once. As soon as we realize that revelation is at almost every point interwoven with and conditioned by the redeeming activity of God in its wider sense, and together with the latter connected with the natural development of the present world, its historic character becomes perfectly intelligible and ceases to cause surprise.

上帝的啟示和救贖的進程

此偉大救贖的過程可以分為兩個階段。首先，上帝施行具有普世性和客觀性的救贖作為，其目的是要製作一個有機組織的中心，以建立萬物的新秩序。在此目的達成後，便開始第二階段的救贖作為；在其中，客觀的救贖被主觀地施行在個人身上。兩個階段都具有超自然的元素，雖然因為前者的客觀特質，使得超自然的現象比在後者看起來較為明顯。整個系列的救贖行動——以道成肉身、中保的代贖、以及聖靈的澆灌為高峰——其外表都帶著神蹟的標誌。雖然在客觀上無法被掌控，但超自然的元素卻存在於第二階段的每個案例當中，個別的靈魂得到了重生。不過，啟示嚴格來說，在兩個階段裡，並不是均等散佈在整個過程的。啟示的歷史僅發生於前面的階段，也就是說，它在歷史的進程中是伴隨著漸漸展開的、神中心和客觀的救贖作為，而一旦中心和客觀的救贖作為被完成時，啟示的進程就走到盡頭，啟示之聲也就止息了。其原因是顯而易見的：上帝的啟示在本質上不是主觀和個人的，而是客觀的、要告訴整個人類的；所以，啟示應該被埋藏在偉大客觀的救贖歷史之中，不再繼續發展，就是理所當然的。事實上我們看到，在以色列人中所完成的救贖工作，當其獨特的外在形式被除去，並延伸至萬國之時，上帝就把祂完整的啟示整個地賜給人類；從此開始，人就可以主觀地研究和應用此完全的啟示。期盼在使徒時代結束以後仍然有啟示，是不合理的；正如認為那時期的救贖事實會無限重複和增長一樣，也是不合理的。In this great redeeming process two stages are to be distinguished. First come those acts of God which have a universal and objective significance, being aimed at the production of an organic center for the new order of things. After this had been accomplished, there follows a second stage during which this objective redemption is subjectively applied to individuals. In both the stages the supernatural element is present, though in the former, owing to its objective character, it appears more distinctly than in the latter. The whole series of redeeming acts, culminating in the incarnation and atoning work of the Mediator and the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, bears the signature of the miraculous on its very face. But the supernatural, though not objectively controllable, is none the less present during the later stage in each case where an individual soul is regenerated. Revelation as such, however, is not co-extensive with this whole process in both its stages. Its history is limited to the former half, that is, it accompanies in its progress the gradual unfolding of the central and objective salvation of God, and no sooner is the latter accomplished than revelation also has run its course and its voice ceases to speak. The reason for this is obvious. The revelation of God being not subjective and individual in its nature, but objective and addressed to the human race as a whole, it is but natural that this revelation should be embedded in the channels of the great objective history of redemption and extend no further than this. In point of fact, we see that, when the finished salvation worked out among Israel is stripped of its particularistic form to extend to all nations, at the same moment the completed oracles of God are given to the human race as a whole to be henceforth subjectively studied and appropriated. It is as unreasonable to expect revelations after the close of the Apostolic age as it would be to think that the great saving facts of that period can be indefinitely increased and repeated.

然而，即使如此，仍不足以完整地說明啟示的歷史特質。我們目前僅看到總的來講，真理的揭示如何在救贖歷史的進程中展開。我們現在必須看到，在許多的情況下啟示與歷史是相同的。除了使用話語之外，上帝也用作為來啟示真理的偉大原則。這方面，不要以為我們想到的只是狹義的先知異象或神蹟。我們特別是指那些偉大、超自然、締造歷史的作為，例如：聖約的百姓從埃及被救贖出來，或是基督的被釘十字架和復活。在這些情況下，歷史的本身構成了啟示的一部分。這些作為中包含了上帝的自我啟示。即使我們不去管它們，它們也會為自己說話。這些啟示作為既然是歷史的一部分，它們之間必然具有歷史性的關係，並且會按照清楚界定之歷史時序法則，一個接著一個地展開。此外，我們觀察到，這個「啟示-作為」的系統，並非以憑空想像和機械式的方法，間插在聖經歷史的大系統中。這兩種系統之間的關係是動態和有機的。上帝奇蹟式的介入（基於其啟示的特性）成為將整個神聖歷史連接在一起的關節和韌帶。上帝救贖的作為標記出歷史的關鍵時代，如此，在這些事件發生之後，就繼續不斷地塑造歷史之發展方向。Even this, however, is not sufficient to show the historic character of revelation in its full extent. Up to this point we have only seen how the disclosure of truth in general follows the course of the history of redemption. We now must add that in not a few cases revelation is identified with history. Besides making use of words, God has also employed acts to reveal great principles of truth. It is not so much the prophetic visions or miracles in the narrower sense that we think of in this connection. We refer more specially to those great, supernatural, history- making acts of which we. have examples in the redemption of the covenant-people from Egypt, or in the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. In these cases the history itself forms a part of revelation. There is a selfdisclosure of God in such acts. They would speak even if left to speak for themselves. Forming part of history, these revealing acts necessarily assume historical relations among themselves, and succeed one another according to a well defined principle of historical sequence. Furthermore, we observe that this system of revelation-acts is not interpolated into the larger system of biblical history after a fanciful and mechanical fashion. The relation between the two systems is vital and organic. These miraculous interferences of God to which we ascribe a revealing character, furnish the great joints and ligaments by which the whole framework of sacred history is held together, and its entire structure determined. God's saving deeds mark the critical epochs of history, and as such, have continued to shape its course for centuries after their occurrence.

當然，我們絕不能忘記，當啟示與上帝救贖的作為重疊時，後者常具有進一步的目的，會延伸到啟示的範圍之外。基督被釘十字架和復活的作為，並非完全是要向人類啟示某些事情，而是為要達成上帝某種確切的目的——要滿足上帝的公義。若是主要或完全從啟示的角度來看待它們，就不正確了。Of course we should never forget that, wherever revelation and the redemptive acts of God coincide, the latter frequently have an ulterior purpose extending beyond the sphere of revelation. The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ were acts not exclusively intended to reveal something to man, but primarily intended to serve some definite purpose in reference to God. In so far as they satisfied the divine justice it would be inaccurate to view them under the aspect of revelation primarily or exclusively.

然而，就連在這種情況下，啟示的元素還是必要的，因為啟示和滿足上帝公義這兩個目的是合而為一的。其次，我們必須記得，上帝啟示的作為與祂用話語來表達真理是不能分開的。話語和作為是永遠相伴隨的，從前面的論述可以看到二者的相互依賴性，使得啟示與把事物的新秩序帶入罪惡的世界之間，產生有機性的關聯。啟示成為此新世界的光（新世界是藉著上帝的話成形的）。光需要現實的存在（reality），現實也需要靠著光才能看到上帝恩典的美麗創造。把康德的用語應用在更高層次的主題上——沒有上帝的作為，話是空洞的；而沒有上帝的話，就看不見上帝的作為。Nevertheless, the revealing element is essential even in their case, the two ends of satisfaction and of revelation being combined into one. And in the second place, we must remember that the revealing acts of God never appear separated from His verbal communications of truth. Word and act always accompany each other, and in their interdependence strikingly illustrate our former statement, to the effect that revelation is organically connected with the introduction of a new order of things into this sinful world. Revelation is the light of this new world which God has called into being. The light needs the reality and the reality needs the light to produce the vision of the beautiful creation of His grace. To apply the Kantian phraseology to a higher subject, without God's acts the words would be empty, without His words the acts would be blind.

上帝超自然啟示的第二個特質：實際的

啟示之歷史特質的第二個基礎，在於其明顯的實際（實用）性。啟示所傳達關於上帝的知識，絕非是純理性的。從開始到末了，此等知識就是要進入實際的生活中，使人在所有實際的事物上行出來。閃族，特別是聖經，對知識的觀念與希臘文化是不同的（後者對知識的認識偏向於理性的觀念）；其觀念凸顯出這種實際的性質。在閃族文化中，認識（to know）的意思，是指藉著最親密的交流和溝通，而對交織在人生中的某件事的事實（reality）和特質具有一種知覺（consciousness）。這樣，藉著超自然方式的傳達，上帝就把關於祂自己的知識，交織在蒙揀選族類的生命歷史中。因此，從一開始，關於上帝的知識就被這種實際（實用）的形態固守著。啟示始終都與以色列的命運息息相關。啟示是從那個國家民族的需要中產生出來的，並且是因著其能力而調整的。上帝的啟示是活生生的歷史事件，塑造了這個國家中每個人的生命，也進入到他們的生命中。我們可以從以色列的聖約清楚看到啟示在這方面的重要性（聖約是上帝以漸進的方式向以色列人啟示祂自己的形式）。上帝並沒有在課堂上，而是在聖約裡啟示祂自己；而聖約作為生命的交流是全面性的，包括了立約人所有的情況和關心的事物。這裡也包括一種知識和知識的傳達，但不只是靠理論的教導，而是藉著一種最實際的方式。A second ground for the historic character of revelation may be found in its eminently practical aspect. The knowledge of God communicated by it is nowhere for a purely intellectual purpose. From beginning to end it is a knowledge intended to enter into the actual life of man, to be worked out by him in all its practical bearings. The Semitic, and in particular the Biblical, conception of knowledge is distinguished from the Greek, more intellectualistic idea, by the prominence of this practical element. To know, in the Semitic sense, is to have the consciousness of the reality and the properties of something interwoven with one's life through the closest intercourse and communion attainable. Now in this manner God has interwoven the supernaturally communicated knowledge of Himself with the historic life of the chosen race, so as to secure for it a practical form from the beginning. Revelation is connected throughout with the fate of Israel. Its disclosures arise from the necessities of that nation, and are adjusted to its capacities. It is such a living historical thing that it has shaped the very life of this nation into the midst of which it descended. The importance of this aspect of revelation has found its clearest expression in the idea of the covenant as the form of God's progressive selfcommunication to Israel. God has not revealed Himself in a school, but in the covenant; and the covenant as a communion of life is all comprehensive, embracing all the conditions and interests of those contracting it. There is a knowledge and an imparting of knowledge here, but in a most practical way and not merely by theoretical instruction.

倘若我們在前面已經正確地描述過啟示的一般特質，現在就可以擴大對聖經神學的定義了：它是解經神學的一部分，是從歷史延續性的角度來處理上帝的啟示。我們現在必須進一步、更具體地探討：上帝選擇在何種特別的歷史中具體展現祂的啟示？歷史發展的觀念無法充分、確定地解釋上帝的真理被漸漸啟示出來的模式，直到把有機的特質加入此啟示的進程，我們才能看到歷史性原則的意義的全貌。If in the foregoing we have correctly described the most general character of revelation, we may enlarge our definition of Biblical Theology by saying that it is that part of Exegetical Theology that deals with the revelation of God in its historic continuity. We must now advance beyond this and inquire more particularly in what specific type of history God has chosen to embody His revelation. The idea of historic development is not sufficiently definite of itself to explain the manner in which divine truth has been progressively revealed. It is not until we ascribe to this progress an organic character that the full significance of the historic principle springs into view.

啟示的內在有機特質

若要維持其神聖和絕對的特質，啟示的真理從一開始就必須是完美的。聖經神學把上帝啟示的真理看為是上帝超自然作為的產物，因此是受其自身的原則所約束，在每一個階段中維持啟示的完整性。然而，當聖經神學也是試圖證明真理是如何更完全和清晰地漸漸展開時，上述的兩個事實便必然只能以這種方式得到調和：藉著假設啟示的推展如同有機的過程（organic process），從完美的胚芽漸漸成長為完美的植物，並接著開花結果。The truth of revelation, if it is to retain its divine and absolute character at all, must be perfect from the beginning. Biblical Theology deals with it as a product of a supernatural divine activity, and is therefore bound by its own principle to maintain the perfection of revealed truth in all its stages. When, nevertheless, Biblical Theology also undertakes to show how the truth has been gradually set forth in greater fullness and clearness, these two facts can be reconciled in no other way than by assuming that the advance in revelation resembles the organic process, through which out of the perfect germ the perfect plant and flower and fruit are successively produced.

雖然經過許多世代，關於上帝的知識一直在增加，這種增加並沒有顯示出任何外在累積的特質，反而是徹底的內在擴張——一種發自內在的有機性展開（an organic unfolding from within）。真理的元素絕非毫無生命、機械式一個一個地增加的，而是從彼此互相生長出來的；每個更豐富、更完全的關於上帝的知識的啟示，都已經有先前的啟示為之做好預備；而後來的啟示，又為接下來的啟示作準備。事實如此，首次所啟示的真理就具有救贖的目的，接下來的啟示也都以此為目的。歷世歷代，從一開始到最後，啟示的真理都與人類當時的需要和突發事件有密切的關聯。雖然各個時期有不同的外在環境，但這些人類需要基本上都是相同的。因此，人類生存所依賴的真理核心，必然是從一開始就存在的，並且接著的每一次增長，都是在漸漸展開那包含在原始胚芽中的啟示真理。伊甸園中的福音是啟示的胚芽，其中孕育著保羅的福音；而亞伯拉罕、摩西、大衛、以賽亞和耶利米的福音，都屬於那個原始救贖信息的擴展，也都指向下一階段的發展，使福音的觀念更進一步地接近完全實現的地步。

Although the knowledge of God has received material increase through the ages, this increase nowhere shows the features of external accretion, but throughout appears as an internal expansion, an organic unfolding from within. The elements of truth, far from being mechanically added one to the other in lifeless succession, are seen to grow out of each other, each richer and fuller disclosure of the knowledge of God having been prepared for by what preceded, and being in its turn preparatory for what follows. That this is actually so, follows from the soteriological purpose which revelation in the first instance is intended to serve. At all times, from the very first to the last, revealed truth has been kept in close contact with the wants and emergencies of the living generation. And these human needs, notwithstanding all variations of outward circumstance, being essentially the same in all periods, it follows that the heart of divine truth, that by which men live, must have been present from the outset, and that each subsequent increase consisted in the unfolding of what was germinally contained in the beginning of revelation.

雖然聖約正式的概念還沒有表明出來，我們從伊甸園的福音裡，已經察覺到聖約關係的主要特質。並且，這些特質重新出現在上帝賜給亞伯拉罕的聖約應許裡，具有更清楚的特性，並且一起生長、具體化，成為正式的聖約。從這時候開始，聖約的擴張性質就被彰顯出來了。亞伯拉罕之約（the covenant of Abraham）包含著西奈山之約（Sinaitic covenant）的應許；西奈山之約又因本身的特質而引發了先知預言；先知預言守護了西奈山之約，使其免於淪為一種固定、不可更改的形態。先知的預言是一種具創造力的話語，在其感召之下，聖約屬靈的、普世性的胚芽就被激活了，然後，從摩西的神治國度（Mosaic theocracy）中，就有機地發展出一個新的、更高層次的事物秩序——即耶利米所講的，也是我們的救主藉著祂的寶血所表明的「新約」。所以，一個時代是從另一個時代中生長出來的，而最新的時代是從最老的生長出來的、完全展開的花朵。

The Gospel of Paradise is such a germ in which the Gospel of Paul is potentially present; and the Gospel of Abraham, of Moses, of David, of Isaiah and Jeremiah, are all expansions of this original message of salvation, each pointing forward to the next stage of growth, and bringing the Gospel idea one step nearer to its full realization. In this Gospel of Paradise we already discern the essential features of a covenant-relation, though the formal notion of a covenant does not attach to it. And in the covenant-promises given to Abraham these very features reappear, assume greater distinctness, and are seen to grow together, to crystallize as it were, into the formal covenant. From this time onward the expansive character of the covenant-idea shows itself. The covenant of Abraham contains the promise of the Sinaitic covenant; the latter again, from its very nature, gives rise to prophecy; and prophecy guards the covenant of Sinai from assuming a fixed, unalterable form, the prophetic word being a creative word under the influence of which the spiritual, universal germs of the covenant are quickened and a new, higher order of things is organically developed from the Mosaic theocracy, that new covenant of which Jeremiah spoke, and which our Savior brought to light by the shedding of His blood. So dispensation grows out of dispensation and the newest is but the fully expanded flower of the oldest.

以基督為中心的新秩序

我們也可以更客觀地建立同樣的原則，但必須考慮到，上帝是如何按照祂起初的目的，更新這個罪惡的世界。更新的方法不是機械式地、一部分一部分地改變，而是在現今世界的有機體裡，創造一個救贖世界的核心，然後有機式地圍繞此核心建造事物的新秩序。因此，從一開始，一切救贖作為的目的，都是為要創造並導入此新的有機原則——基督（除此之外沒有其他目的）。The same principle may also be established more objectively, if we consider the specific manner in which God realizes the renewal of this sinful cosmos in accordance with His original purpose. The renewal is not brought about by mechanically changing one part after the other. God's method is much rather that of creating within the organism of the present world the center of the world of redemption, and then organically building up the new order of things around this center. Hence from the beginning all redeeming acts of God aim at the creation and introduction of this new organic principle, which is none other than Christ.

舊約中所有的救贖事件，都是上帝為要實現此目的的拯救作為，是基督道成肉身和贖罪的偉大序曲。當基督成為新造人類的元首，並且完成祂的贖罪大工之後，世界進一步的更新，就受到祂的能力有機性擴張之影響，前所未有地圍繞此中心不斷地擴展其範圍。在這個意義上，使徒保羅講到基督要「將我們這卑賤的身體改變形狀，和祂自己榮耀的身體相似」是「按著那能叫萬有歸服自己的大能」（腓三21）。那麼，這種超自然的轉變若是以有機的原則進行的，並且，啟示的本身不過是伴隨著此過程的亮光（如前所述），是把上帝的事實（divine reality）反射到知識的範圍裡，我們就無法避免得到一個結論：啟示的本身必須表現出一種類似的有機進展過程。All Old Testament redemption is but the saving activity of God working toward the realization of this goal, the great supernatural prelude to the Incarnation and the Atonement. And Christ having appeared as the head of the new humanity and having accomplished His atoning work, the further renewal of the cosmos is effected through an organic extension of His power in ever widening circles. In this sense the Apostle speaks of the fashioning anew of the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of the glory of Christ, saying that this will happen “according to the working whereby He is able to subject even all things unto Himself” (Phil. 3:21). If, then, this supernatural process of transformation proceeds on organic principles, and if, as we have shown, revelation is but the light accompanying it in its course, the reflection of its divine realities in the sphere of knowledge, we cannot escape from the conclusion that revelation itself must exhibit a similar organic progress.

事實上，我們發現舊約中朝向基督道成肉身的工作，其實際的施作，以及有關基督的啟示知識的推進，在所有地方都維持著相同的步伐。在以彌賽亞為中心，漸漸展開之預言的各個階段，我們救主的人性被描述為：女人的後裔（seed）、亞伯拉罕的後裔、猶大的後裔和大衛的後裔；於每一個漸漸縮小的範圍內，都更清楚地描繪出祂的輪廓。這些除了是上帝在每個情況下藉著祂救贖的大能，針對所創造之新事實（new realities）和新情況來啟示祂的籌算之外，還能是什麼呢？還有，正如在救贖歷史上，有許多關鍵性的階段，上帝偉大的作為密集地發生；同樣，在這些節點上，啟示也相應地加速進行著。啟示在短短數年間的快速成長，也許會超過介於其中的幾個世紀的發展。雖然，根部的發展是緩慢的，並且枝幹和葉子的成長幾乎是不可察覺的，但是，當時候到了，花苞就在某一天中突然出現，而且在我們驚奇的注視下，花朵就在一時之內成形、大放異彩。這些加速進展的啟示時期，發生在亞伯拉罕、摩西、大衛的時代，尤其是在人子的日子裡（the days of the Son of Man）。In point of fact, we find that the actual working of Old Testament redemption toward the coming of Christ in the flesh, and the advance of revealed knowledge concerning Christ, keep equal pace everywhere. The various stages in the gradual concentration of Messianic prophecy, as when the human nature of our Savior is successively designated as the seed of the woman, the seed of Abraham, the seed of Judah, the seed of David, His figure assuming more distinct features at each narrowing of the circle-what are they but disclosures of the divine counsel corresponding in each case to new realities and new conditions created by His redeeming power? And as in the history of redemption there are critical stages in which the great acts of God as it were accumulate, so we find that at such junctures the process of revelation is correspondingly accelerated, and that a few years show, perhaps, more rapid growth and greater expansion than centuries that lie between. For, although the development of the root may be slow and the stem and leaves may grow almost imperceptibly, there comes a time when the bud emerges in a day and the flower expands in an hour to our wondering sight.1 Such epochs of quickened revelation were the times of Abraham, of Moses, of David, and especially the days of the Son of Man.

上帝超自然啟示之最終發展

此外，這個發展過程越接近其最終的目標，越會加速地發展。啟示最豐富的發展、最豐盛的開花結果，就被壓縮在那個時期——不超過人的一生——也就是新約所涵蓋的！的確，在這點上，我們有啟示過程的有機特質最令人驚訝的證明。每一個有機的發展都是為了體現一個觀念而預備的；而一旦此觀念被完全和充足地展現出來，這個有機體就得到完美的印記，不再發展下去了。由於新約時期已經把上帝救贖籌算的客觀和中心性事實，帶來最終的實現，因此新約的啟示帶來完全成熟的上帝的道（the full-grown Word of God），而在這道當中，這個新生的世界（在基督裡完成的世界）將自己映照出來。在這啟示的最後階段中，使徒和先知親眼看到了永恆最深奧的真理。This progress, moreover, increases in rapidity the nearer revelation approaches to its final goal. What rich developments, what wealth of blossoming and fruitage are compressed within the narrow limits of that period--no more than one lifetime--that is covered by the New Testament! In this, indeed, we have the most striking proof of the organic nature of the progress of revelation. Every organic development serves to embody an idea; and as soon as this idea has found full and adequate expression, the organism receives the stamp of perfection and develops no further. Because the New Testament times brought the final realization of the divine counsel of redemption as to its objective and central facts, therefore New Testament revelation brought the full-grown Word of God, in which the new-born world, which is complete in Christ, mirrors itself. In this final stage of revelation the deepest depths of eternity are opened up to the eye of Apostle and Seer.

因此，「在創世以前」這樣的話就經常出現在經文中。在每一個歷史時點上，我們都感覺到最後的幔子被揭開，好像面對著上帝旨意的大奧秘，是許多世代以來都隱藏在上帝的目的之中的。所有的救恩，所有與人類有關的真理，都永恆地奠基於三一神本身。就是這位三一上帝在此啟示自己，祂就是那永恆的事實；無論是伊甸園裡的纖細水流，還是與浩瀚永恆海洋相匯合之新約啟示之寬闊大河，一切的真理都是從上帝發出的。在這事完成之後，不會再有任何更高的啟示了。歷世歷代以來各個啟示的發展脈絡都交集在同一點上。女人的後裔和耶和華的使者，在成了肉身的道中合而為一了。正如基督一次完全地進入榮耀裡，同樣，我們在祂新約啟示裡的加冕榮耀和完全，也不能刪去什麼，或在上面添加什麼。Hence, the frequent recurrence of the expression, “before the foundation of the world.” We feel at every point that the last veil is drawn aside and that we stand face to face with the disclosure of the great mystery that was hidden in the divine purpose through the ages. All salvation, all truth in regard to man, has its eternal foundation in the triune God Himself. It is this triune God who here reveals Himself as the everlasting reality, from whom all truth proceeds, whom all truth reflects, be it the little streamlet of Paradise or the broad river of the New Testament losing itself again in the ocean of eternity. After this nothing higher can come. All the separate lines along which through the ages revelation was carried have converged and met at a single point. The seed of the woman and the Angel of Jehovah are become one in the Incarnate Word. And as Christ is glorified once for all, so from the crowning glory and perfection of His revelation in the New Testament nothing can be taken away; nor can anything be added thereunto.

啟示的多元多樣性

我必須再簡單地說明啟示有機性質的另外一個特點。歷史性的進展，並非是上帝用來揭示其永恆話語全部內容的唯一方法。伴隨著歷史進展，我們親眼見到為著同一目的也有各式各樣的教導。沿著啟示的歷史主幹，我們也看到許多枝條會冒出來，一次經常出現好幾枝，而每一條枝條都為它自己那一部分、以它自己特殊的方法，幫助體現真理完整的觀念。There is one more feature of the organic character of revelation which I must briefly allude to. Historic progress is not the only means used by God to disclose the full contents of His eternal Word. Side by side with it we witness a striking multiformity of teaching employed for the same purpose. All along the historic stem of revelation, branches are seen to shoot forth, frequently more than one at a time, each of which helps to realize the complete idea of the truth for its own part and after its own peculiar manner.

舊約中律法、先知和詩歌的元素，很清楚是不同形式的啟示，而在新約中，我們有相對應的福音書、書信和啟示文學。此外，在這些大分類的範圍內有各種不同的小變化，與其各自獨特的性質有著密切的關聯。以賽亞書與耶利米書不盡相同，約翰福音和保羅書信也一樣。而隨著神聖歷史的進展，這些變異並沒有減緩，反而增加了。這種現象在新約時期勝過舊約。為以色列人的聖約生活歷史打下根基的，是由一位作者——摩西所記錄下來的；新約時代的歷史根據，則被記錄在四卷福音書中。新約其餘的部分，是以書信的形式寫成的，自然充滿著個人的元素。當越來越完全的光照在上帝計劃的實現，並且揭櫫其廣闊的範圍時，也就更有必要從各方面來闡述它，從各角度來觀看它。如此就闡明了保羅所謂的上帝豐富、多樣的智慧。因為上帝選擇以人類作為其啟示的媒介，所以這些媒介也必須是多數的，而且為了共同的目的有不同的調整。因此，個人的色彩和特別形式的表達，不但沒有傷害到真理的完整陳述，反而臣服於其下。The legal, the prophetic, the poetic elements in the Old Testament are clearly distinct types of revelation, and in the New Testament we have something corresponding to these in the Gospels, the Epistles, the Apocalypse. Further, within the limits of these great divisions there are numerous minor variations, closely associated with the peculiarities of individual character. Isaiah and Jeremiah are distinct, and so are John and Paul. And this differentiation rather increases than decreases with the progress of sacred history. It is greater in the New Testament than in the Old. The laying of the historic basis for Israel’s covenant-life has been recorded by one author, Moses; the historic basis of the New Testament dispensation we know from the fourfold version of the Gospels. The remainder of the New Testament writings are in the form of letters, in which naturally the personal element predominates. The more fully the light shone upon the realization of the whole counsel of God and disclosed its wide extent, the more necessary it became to expound it in all its bearings, to view it at different angles, thus to bring out what Paul calls the much-variegated, the manifold, wisdom of God. For, God having chosen to reveal the truth through human instruments, it follows that these instruments must be both numerous and of varied adaptation to the common end. Individual coloring, therefore, and a peculiar manner of representation are not only not detrimental to a full statement of the truth, but directly subservient to it.

上帝啟示的方式，也包括祂按照自己客觀的目的，塑造、雕琢一些個體。更具體來說，我們不要認為好像上帝以為保羅已經是一個「成品」（readymade）。並且，認為使用保羅作為啟示的器皿，必須遷就一個事實——就是保羅辯證和教義的思維，會以辯證和教義的方式把真理反映出來，而損傷了真理。事實是這樣的：真理的內在（除其他方面之外）就具有辯證和教義的一方面。上帝定意要把這方面的真理完全啟示出來，所以從母腹開始，就揀選了保羅，塑造他的個性，使他接受這樣的訓練。這樣，上帝藉著保羅啟示出來的真理，必然就具有他思維中辯證和教義的模式。上帝的目的和人的個人特質，在此並沒有衝突，也沒有互相抵消；因為，保羅身為人，其全部的性格、才華和訓練都是上帝計劃的一部分。人僅僅像玻璃一樣反映上帝的光，玻璃被切割的各個層面，都是為了要向我們傳遞上帝豐富多樣色彩的啟示。God's method of revelation includes the very shaping and chiseling of individualities for His own objective ends. To put it concretely: we must not conceive of it as if God found Paul “readymade,” as it were, and in using Paul as an organ of revelation, had to put up with the fact that the dialectic mind of Paul reflected the truth in a dialectic, dogmatic form to the detriment of the truth. The facts are these: the truth having inherently, besides other aspects, a dialectic and dogmatic side, and God intending to give this side full expression, chose Paul from the womb, molded his character, and gave him such a training that the truth revealed through him necessarily bore the dogmatic and dialectic impress of His mind. The divine objectivity and the human individuality here do not collide, nor exclude each other, because the man Paul, with his whole character, his gifts, and his training, is subsumed under the divine plan. The human is but the glass through which the divine light is reflected, and all the sides and angles into which the glass has been cut serve no other purpose than to distribute to us the truth in all the riches of its prismatic colors.

在某些情形中，啟示這個有機體的生長會密切地依賴這種多樣化的教導。有的時候，同一個真理會以兩種或多種形式同時表現出來，每一種形式都會影響其他的形式，使它們加深並擴大。約翰福音所包含的是與對觀福音同時期的啟示，所以，按照時序，我們可以將其資料分配到馬太、馬可、和路加福音裡。然而，從整體並就其統一性來看，約翰福音對基督的自我啟示，代表一種比其他福音書更豐富、更擴大的教導。不但如此，它也代表一種啟示形態，是把其他福音書的事實和教導作為其預設的立場；並且，從次序的角度而言，它接續在其他的福音之後。以賽亞書和彌迦書也有同樣的關係。這樣，啟示多樣性的本身有助於啟示的進展。甚至在這些沿著特定的脈絡，並且以獨立的方向同時發展的案例中，也有一種奧秘的力量在運作，使得「全身都靠他聯絡得合式，百節各按各職，照著各體的功用彼此相助，便叫身體漸漸增長」。In some cases growth in the organism of revelation is closely dependent on this variety in the type of teaching. There are instances in which two or more forms of the one truth have been brought to light simultaneously, each of which exercised a deepening and enlarging influence upon the others. The Gospel of John contains revelations contemporaneous with those of the Synoptists, so that chronologically we can distribute its material over the pages of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Nevertheless, taken as a whole and in its unity, the Gospel of John represents a fuller and wider self-revelation of Christ than the Synoptists; and not only so, but it also represents a type of revelation which presupposes the facts and teachings of the other Gospels, and is, in point of order, subsequent to them. The same thing might be said of Isaiah in its relation to Micah. So the variety itself contributes to the progress of revelation. Even in these cases of contemporaneous development along distinct lines and in independent directions, there is a mysterious force at work, which makes “the several parts grow out of and into each other with mutual support, so that the whole body is fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplies, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part.”

聖經神學完整的定義

現在也許可以對我們的學科提出一個完整的定義了。以上的論述使我們看到，上帝啟示的工作並沒有抵觸任何的法則，而是按照一個精密的有機原則進行的。每當一組事實與其環境有明顯的區別，並且受到某種有次序的法則所決定時，我們就可以合法地把這些事實當作科學論述的對象。聖經神學的內容與神學的觀念並沒有什麼不同，都是以所啟示出來的上帝知識為基礎的。我們發現，後者甚至直接把前者視為是理所當然的。因此，聖經神學，若正確加以定義，就是：超自然啟示在其歷史中連續和多樣的有機發展進程之展現（the exhibition of the organic progress of supernatural revelation in its historic continuity and multiformity）。We may now perhaps attempt to frame a complete definition of our science. The preceding remarks have shown that the divine work of revelation did not proceed contrary to all law, but after a well-defined organic principle. Wherever there is a group of facts sufficiently distinct from their environment, and determined by some law of orderly sequence, we are justified in making these facts the object of scientific discussion. Far from there being in the conception of Biblical Theology anything at variance with the idea of Theology as based on the revealed knowledge of God, we have found that the latter even directly postulates the former. Biblical Theology, rightly defined, is nothing else than the exhibition of the organic progress of supernatural revelation in its historic continuity and multiformity.

理性主義和進化論哲學的影響

然而，我們必須承認，不是所有冠著聖經神學之名的，都能滿足這個定義的要求。從先前的一個世紀末開始，這個學科最早以不同於教義神學的樣貌出現，直到現在，她仍處於「沒有聖經根據」的魔咒之下，好像是從一顆邪惡之星生出的一樣。理性主義（Rationalism）的幽靈首先把聖經的內容區分為純粹屬於人的、個人性的、地域性的、暫時性的——總而言之，就是被作者主觀意見所制約的——內容，和具有永恆價值的真理。後者，自然就是當時膚淺的理性主義的教導。因此，只能以啟示作為其根據的聖經神學，打從一開始就否認這個基礎；而聖經神學作為一們科學，其工作是要列舉啟示的歷史原則，卻是在一個以缺乏歷史意識而惡名昭彰的教育環境中受到了充分的訓練。因為對這種理性主義的歷史來說，確切而言，是屬於附隨的、相對的、隨意的範圍，而「絕對性」和「普世的合法性」這種形容詞，只能用在純理性（pure reason）的判決上。在這種理性主義的聖經神學中，歷史的原則只是用來抵消或除去啟示的原則。而從那時開始，所有曾經影響神學的哲學傾向，大體上也已失去它們對特別是聖經神學的影響力。我們眼下的目的不需要去追溯此複雜歷史之不同發展脈絡和潮流；而既然它們毫無疑問正快速地融入進化論哲學（Evolutionistic Philosophy）的大潮流中，這就更沒有必要了。進化論哲學，無論它被應用在某些現象上會得到什麼樣的真理，然而作為一種宇宙的普遍性理論，和啟示的基本原則與基督信仰卻是完全對立的。It must be admitted, however, that not everything passing under the name of Biblical Theology satisfies the requirements of this definition. From the end of the preceding century, when our science first appears as distinct from Dogmatic Theology, until now, she has stood under the spell of un-Biblical principles. Her very birth took place under an evil star. It was the spirit of Rationalism which first led to distinguishing in the contents of the Scriptures between what was purely human, individual, local, temporal-in a word, conditioned by the subjectivity of the writers-and what was eternally valid, divine truth. The latter, of course, was identified with the teachings of the shallow Rationalism of that period. Thus, Biblical Theology, which can only rest on the basis of revelation, began with a denial of this basis; and a science, whose task it is to set forth the historic principles of revelation, was trained up in a school notorious for its lack of historic sense. For to this type of Rationalism history, as such, is the realm of the contingent, the relative, the arbitrary, whilst only the deliverances of pure reason possess the predicate of absoluteness and universal validity. In this Biblical Theology of Rationalism, therefore, the historical principle merely served to eliminate or neutralize the revelationprinciple. And since that time all the philosophical tendencies that have influenced Theology in general have also left their impress upon Biblical Theology in particular. It is not necessary for our present purpose to trace the various lines and currents of this complicated history; the less so since there can be no doubt but that they are rapidly merging into the great stream of Evolutionistic Philosophy, which, whatever truth there may be in its application to certain groups of phenomena, yet, as a general theory of the universe, is the most direct antithesis to the fundamental principles of revelation and Christianity.

任何仔細觀察近代歷史的人都不會否認，這種哲學思想（表現並塑造了這個時代的精神）影響了神學的各個領域 。但是聖經神學所受的影響，可能遠勝於其他的部門，這是因為聖經神學的啟示歷史進程原則，似乎呈現出某種類似進化論的觀念，而且似乎為後者的應用提供了絕佳的機會，而不至於偏離聖經真正的內容太遠。當然這種觀念僅是形式上的，而且從實質的觀點來看，歷史哲學（這是聖經本身所勾勒的，也是唯有聖經神學若要合於聖經，有權納入的），和植入於進化論公式中、所謂的聖經事實之間，具有天壤之別。That the influence of this philosophy, as it expresses and in turn molds the spirit of the age, is perceptible in the field of Theology everywhere, no careful observer of recent events will deny. But Biblical Theology is, perhaps, more than any other branch of theological study affected by it, because its principle of historic progress in revelation seems to present certain analogies with the evolutionary scheme, and to offer exceptional opportunities for applying the latter, without departing too far from the real contents of Scripture. This analogy, of course, is merely formal, and from a material point of view there is a world-wide difference between that philosophy of history which the Bible itself outlines, and which alone Biblical Theology, if it wishes to remain Biblical, has a right to adopt, and, on the other hand, the so-called facts of the Bible pressed into the evolutionary formulas.

這種哲學的諸多原理，特別是在兩方面徹底偏離了我們對我們的學科的正確處理原則（這原則是基督信仰的超自然特性和神學的本質所規定的）。首先，進化論盡其可能地要顯示，發展的過程徹頭徹尾是從低層次和不完全的啟示，發展成為高層次和較為完全的形態；從不純的開始，經過一種漸漸被潔淨的過程，達到理想的結果。所以，對認識上帝的知識而言（在聖經的著作中我們發現到這種知識的成長），是從感官的、實體的觀念慢慢演進到道德的和屬靈的觀念，從泛靈論（Animism）和多神論（Polytheism），慢慢進化到單一的敬拜（Monolatry）和獨神論（Monotheism）。但是，若認為這是必然的現象，就等於從聖經神學中除去了啟示的因素。從有神論的角度來思考，啟示作為上帝的作為，絕不會與任何不完全、不純淨或低於絕對真理的任何事情有牽連。然而，許多基督徒都自我蒙蔽此事實，其結果會顯明（其實它已經顯明了）：「超自然的救贖」與「自然的進化」是互相排斥的。因此，甚至現在，那些接受進化論所建構的聖經歷史的人，不但毫無保留地公開棄絕超自然啟示的觀念，也剝去了啟示的客觀特質，以至於削弱了她與自然發展之間的對立。然而，在同樣的程度上，當客觀性被除去後，啟示就失去了其獨特的有神論特質，開始納入更多泛神論進程（Pantheistic process）的特質，也就是改變了啟示的定義。It is especially in two respects that the principles of this philosophy have worked a radical departure from the right treatment of our science as it is prescribed by both the supernatural character of Christianity and the nature of Theology. In the first place, evolution is bent upon showing that the process of development is everywhere from the lower and imperfect to the higher and relatively more perfect forms, from impure beginnings through a gradual purification to some ideal end. So in regard to the knowledge of God, whose growth we observe in the Biblical writings, evolution cannot rest until it shall have traced its gradual advance from sensual, physical conceptions to ethical and spiritual ideas, from Animism and Polytheism to Monolatry and Monotheism. But this of necessity rules out the revelation-factor from Biblical Theology. Revelation as an act of God, theistically conceived of, can in no wise be associated with anything imperfect or impure or below the standard of absolute truth. However much Christian people may blind themselves to the fact, the outcome will show, as it does already show, that the principles of supernatural redemption and natural evolution are mutually exclusive. Hence, even now, those who accept the evolutionary construction of Biblical history, either openly and without reserve renounce the idea of supernatural revelation, or strip it of its objectivity so as to make it less antagonistic to that of natural development. In the same degree, however, that the latter is done, revelation loses its distinctively theistic character and begins to assume more and more the features of a Pantheistic process, that is, it ceases to be revelation in the commonly accepted sense of the term.

其次，進化論哲學把其哲學上的諾斯底主義的麵酵納入神學之中，使其腐壞。有鑑於只有可見的現象界，才能成為我們知識的對象，而非隱藏於現象之後的奧秘事實，加上舊時、傳統意義上的神學假裝是在處理這種形而上的事實（meta-physical realities），如上帝和天堂以及永恆不朽的問題，它進一步的推論就是，神學若不是要被完全廢止，就是要屈從於這樣的一種重建，好叫她能在現象主義者的科學（phenomenalistic sciences）中保留一席之地。進化論是較為一致和更科學的，而神學通常是普遍較受歡迎的；這是因為很難把往日根深蒂固的事情，一筆勾銷掉。因此，神學現在被定義為一種宗教科學，其意義也主要是指宗教的現象學（phenomenology of religion）——把大部分的研究專注於宗教膚淺的外在現象，而核心的問題卻乏人問津。這種原則若應用在聖經神學上，就會把聖經著作中所記錄的宗教發展，而非把上帝超自然啟示的歷史發展，作為我們科學的研究對象。當神學成為研究宗教的科學時，聖經神學也就必須成為研究以色列宗教（雖然是所有宗教中最偉大的宗教）和原始基督教歷史的科學。In the second place, the philosophy of evolution has corrupted Theology by introducing its leaven of metaphysical Agnosticism. Inasmuch as only the phenomenal world can become an object of knowledge to us and not the mysterious reality hidden behind the phenomena, and inasmuch as Theology in the old, traditional sense pretended to deal with such meta-physical realities as God and heaven and immortality, it follows that Theology must either be entirely abolished, or must submit to such a reconstruction as will enable her to retain a place among the phenomenalistic sciences. The former would be the more consistent and scientific, but the latter is usually preferred; because it is difficult at one stroke to set aside a thing so firmly rooted in the past. Theology, therefore, is now defined as the science of religion, and that, too, in the sense chiefly of a phenomenology of religion, in which by far the greater part of the investigation is devoted to the superficial external side of religion and the heart of the matter receives scant treatment. Applied to Biblical Theology, this principle involves that no longer the historic progress of the supernatural revelation of God, but the development of the religion recorded in the Biblical writings, shall become the object of our science. Theology having become the science of religion, Biblical Theology must needs become the history of one, be it the greatest, of all religions, the history of the religion of Israel and of primitive Christianity.

這種邪惡已經深入神學領域到什麼程度，可以從以下事實得出推論：現存的任何一本聖經神學著作，都還沒有討論到「聖經神學的研究對象」這個概念，並且這個概念也沒有在很大程度上，決定著這些書籍的觀點。它甚至還污染到像歐萊爾（Oeher）所著的，在許多方面都很精彩的《舊約神學》。當然，這種主觀化的原則在應用和執行時有多麼徹底，是有各種不同程度的。從梯子上剛開始往下走的人，和已經到達梯子最底部的人之間，有著明顯的差異。How far this evil has penetrated may be inferred from the fact that there is scarcely a book on Biblical Theology in existence in which this conception of the object of our science is not met with, and in which it does not very largely determine the point of view. It has even vitiated so excellent a work in many respects as Oehler's Old Testament Theology. Of course, there are many degrees in the thoroughness with which this subjectivizing principle is carried through and applied. Between those who are just beginning to descend the ladder and those who have reached its lowest step, there is a very appreciable difference.

三種錯誤的啟示觀

首先，有些人會認為，雖然上帝以話語和行動，超自然地啟示了祂自己，然而，除非這種啟示已經與接受這啟示的人的宗教意識混合在一起了，並且影響著他們的宗教意識，否則這種啟示，儘管是純正簡單的，仍然不能成為科學討論的對象；結果，我們必須把聖經裏的宗教假定為聖經神學的對象，並且最多只能期盼能夠從這個作為結果的宗教來做合理的反推，而發現到啟示是造成此宗教的原因。針對這一點，我們的回答是，沒有必要把按照這種思路所建構的聖經神學看作是一門獨立的科學。把以色列宗教當作是一種主觀現象來研究，並研究那些解釋此現象的客觀因素，都屬於聖經歷史系的範圍。此外，我們相信聖經本身已經為我們記錄了神聖歷史之客觀和主觀因素之間的互動，結果是，它們共同的產物從來不曾成為其教導的中心思想，而是從各處吸引我們專注於上帝客觀的自我啟示（the objective self-revelation of God），並且僅僅在次要的地位上，去觀察上帝的神聖活動在百姓的宗教意識裡所產生的主觀反射。First, there are those who think that, though God has supernaturally revealed Himself in words and acts, nevertheless this revelation pure and simple, cannot be for us an object of scientific discussion, except in so far as it has blended with and produced its effect upon the religious consciousness of the people to whom it was given; and that, consequently, we must posit as the object of Biblical Theology the religion of the Bible, and can hope at the utmost to reason back from this religion as the result, to revelation as the cause that has produced it. To this we would answer, that there is no reason to make Biblical Theology, so conceived, a separate science. The investigation of the religion of Israel as a subjective phenomenon, together with the objective factors called in to explain it, belongs nowhere else than in the department of Biblical History. Furthermore, we believe that the Bible itself has recorded for us the interaction of the objective and the subjective factors in sacred history in such a manner that their joint product is nowhere made the central thought of its teaching, but much rather we are invited everywhere to fix our gaze on the objective self-revelation of God, and only in the second place to observe the subjective reflex of this divine activity in the religious consciousness of the people.

其他人對承認超自然的事，採取比較保守的態度。他們把上帝的啟示局限在上帝的行動上，並且認為聖經的所有教義內容都出自於人類對上帝的這些行動的反思。如此就造成了一種妥協，使得啟示的客觀性和聖經教導的主觀發展可以同時得到肯定。這種觀點是不足的，因為它沒有看到上帝的啟示與人類思想交流的一般方式之間的類比性。對按著上帝的形象被造的人而言，話語是表明人類自己的最高等的工具；上帝的自我啟示若完全要藉著使用這個媒介來執行，就會是一件奇怪的事。這種看法也沒有給先知預言留下任何空間。先知預言的話語經常發生在上帝的行動之前。雖然，如同我們已經看到的，上帝救贖計劃的施行控制著啟示的進程，然而，這絕非表示上帝的救贖行動永遠必須發生在前，照亮這些行動的啟示，總是發生在後。許多時候，啟示話語的臨到表示出對將要發生之事的期盼，如同閃電出現在上帝審判的雷聲之前。正如阿摩司令人驚嘆地表明的：「主耶和華若不將奧秘指示祂的僕人眾先知，就一無所行」（摩三7）。Others are more reserved in their recognition of the supernatural. They Would confine the revelation of God to acts, and derive all the doctrinal contents of the Bible from the source of human reflection upon these divine acts. In this manner a compromise is obtained, whereby both the objectivity of revelation and the subjective development of Biblical teaching can be affirmed. This view is unsatisfactory, because it loses sight of the analogy between divine revelation and the ordinary way in which man communicates his thoughts. To man, made in the image of God, speech is the highest instrument of revealing Himself, and it would be strange if God in His selfdisclosure entirely dispensed with the use of this instrument. Nor does this view leave any place for prophecy. The prophetic word is frequently a divine word preceding the divine act. Although, as we have seen, the progress of revelation is clearly conditioned by the actual realization of God's plan of redemption, yet this by no means implies that the saving deeds of God always necessarily go before, and the revelations which cast light on them always follow. In many cases the revealing word comes as an anticipation of the approaching events, as a flash of lightning preceding the thunder of God's judgments. As Amos strikingly expresses it: "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets" (3:7).

然而，聖經神學的學者中有第三群人，把超自然的因素減至更小、甚至完全除去其客觀性。根據這些人的看法，超自然的啟示並不涉及到上帝把祂的思想以任何直接的方式，無論是藉著行動或話語，傳達給人。超自然的啟示是在於上帝的靈藉著一種無意識的過程，攪動人的內心深處，以至於使人在此之後，從內心湧出某些宗教思想和情感。這些既是完全屬人的，也是上帝的啟示，因此只是相對為真的。因為受到黎敕爾學派（Ritschlian）和新康德學派（Neo-Kantian）神學的影響，這種觀念最近又開始流行。他們相信，以色列民族擁有頗具創意的宗教天賦，正如希臘國家被賦予藝術的天賦一樣。雖然這種天賦的產生被歸屬於聖靈的動力，但是，這位聖靈和祂的作為是以這樣的方式被描繪出來的，即它們與人類心智自然發展之間的區分，變成只是一種臆測，對以色列宗教之現象性的解釋並沒有產生任何影響。這一類的作者像「極端反自然主義者」一般，隨性地處理聖經的事實和教導。但是，他們把以進化論的方式處理現象的方法，和聖靈奧秘影響的假設結合在一起，並樂於稱此為啟示。不消說，這種形式的啟示，必然永遠無法得到客觀的證明和驗證。在這種理論裏，所有可以假裝是科學性的，都與超自然觀念缺乏任何關聯，並且所有徘徊在其中、屬於「淡化的超自然主義」的，都缺乏所有科學的特質。The supernatural factor, however, is reduced to still smaller proportions and entirely deprived of its objectivity by a third group of writers on Biblical Theology. According to these, supernatural revelation does not involve the communication of divine thoughts to man in any direct manner either by words or by actions. Revelation consists in this, that the divine Spirit, by an unconscious process, stirs the depths of man's heart so as to cause the springing up therein afterward of certain religious thoughts and feelings, which are as truly human as they are a revelation of God, and are, therefore, only relatively true. It is owing to the influence of the Ritschlian or Neo-Kantian school of Theology that this view has gained new prevalence of late. The people of Israel are held to have possessed a creative religious genius, just as the Greek nation was endowed with a creative genius in the sphere of art. And, although the productions of this genius are ascribed to the impulse of the divine Spirit, yet this Spirit and His working are represented in such a manner that their distinction from the natural processes of the human mind becomes a mere assumption, exercising no influence whatever on the interpretation of the phenomenal side of Israel's religion. Writers of this class deal as freely with the facts and teachings of the Bible as the most extreme anti-supernaturalists. But with their evolutionistic treatment of the phenomena they combine the hypothesis of this mystical influence of the Spirit, which they are pleased to call revelation. It is needless to say that revelation of this kind must remain forever inaccessible to objective proof or verification. Whatever can pretend to be scientific in this theory lacks all rapport with the idea of the Supernatural, and whatever there lingers in it of diluted Supernaturalism lacks all scientific character.

正確的啟示觀

我已經盡力用寥寥數筆勾勒出幾乎完全控制著當代聖經神學研究的一些原則和傾向，因為它們對我來說，似乎是表明在真正以聖經和神學基礎來建構我們的神學的過程中，應該得到特殊強調的重點有哪些。這些要點的第一點是啟示的客觀性。聖經神學必須堅持主張，其研究對象不是人的思想、反思和思辨，而是上帝的聖言。任何想要削弱或將啟示的這個基本理念加以主觀化的想法，就是在打擊神學和超自然基督信仰的核心，不，是打擊基督教一神論的本身。任何一種決心忽略或貶低這個最重要、最核心理念的聖經神學，都是最危險的產品。這是個無可爭議的事實，即啟示的所有現代看法，在承認這個客觀性質上都是有缺失的，這些看法更符合泛神論，而不符合基督教一神論對宇宙提出的理論。如果上帝是世界無意識的背景，那麼，祂的真理和亮光萬一以一種神秘的方式，從人類意識背後的處女地隱約地呈現出來，而祂啟示自己的作為本身，萬一被人所制約、所糾纏、所阻撓，就是完全自然的。另一方面，如果上帝是有意識和有位格的，其推論就是在祂自我揭示的過程中，祂會堅持並維持祂的位格性，以至於會將祂的神聖思想放在我們面前，以一種真正客觀的方式為它們印上神性的印記。透過使啟示成為一種特殊的研究對象，這對象包括啟示的形式和內容，我們可以期待聖經神學以其真正的客觀性，對維護這個重要的觀念作出一些貢獻，進而更鮮明地為它下定義，並保護它，免於和所有異質的觀念相混淆。I have endeavored to sketch with a few strokes those principles and tendencies by which the study of Biblical Theology is almost exclusively controlled at the present time, because they seem to me to indicate the points which ought to receive special emphasis in the construction of our science on a truly Scriptural and theological basis. The first of these is the objective character of revelation. Biblical Theology must insist upon claiming for its object not the thoughts and reflections and speculations of man, but the oracles of God. Whosoever weakens or subjectivizes this fundamental idea of revelation, strikes a blow at the very heart of Theology and Supernatural Christianity, nay, of Theism itself. Every type of Biblical Theology bent upon ignoring or minimizing this supreme, central idea, is a most dangerous product. It is an indisputable fact that all modern views of revelation which are deficient in recognizing its objective character, fit far better into a pantheistic than into a theistic theory of the universe. If God be the unconscious background of the world, it is altogether natural that His truth and light should in a mysterious manner loom up from the unexplorable regions that underlie human consciousness, that in His very act of revealing Himself He should he conditioned and entangled and obstructed by man. If, on the other hand, God be conscious and personal, the inference is that in His self-disclosure He will assert and maintain His personality, so as to place His divine thoughts before us with the stamp of divinity upon them, in a truly objective manner. By making revelation, both as to its form and contents, a special object of study, Biblical Theology may be expected to contribute something toward upholding this important conception in its true objectivity, toward more sharply defining it and guarding it from confusion with all heterogeneous ideas.

第二點必須要強調的是，對聖經神學而言，真理的歷史特性與其啟示的特質絕對不是對立的，而是附屬其下的。聖經真理並非是抽象的，都有其歷史背景；而歷史背景正是上帝為要啟示真理（全部的真理，而且只有真理）所使用的。聖經神學的責任不是首先要找出聖經真理的歷史特徵，以為啟示上帝的真理的絕對特質是次要的，是後來才加上的。啟示作為一個事實必須是最高的因素，歷史的元素必須受啟示所掌控。歷史雖然有各種不同層面，但上帝的話卻是前後一致、沒有矛盾的。聖經神學的學生，不是要在聖經中獵尋其中互相排斥的小系統，或是誇口他發現這些小系統的技巧，作為其高水平學術的標記。前面已經講過，個人在啟示計劃中的地位，可以同等地應用在歷史的各個階段中（真理就是經過這些階段逐漸傳遞的）。上帝為了在歷史中揭示祂的話所成就的整體作為，與祂藉著對個人的塑造和訓練來重現祂的話的特定種類和層面所成就的作為，是相同的。正如從母腹起，祂就認識了耶利米和保羅，祂也同樣認識以色列，並且預備以色列，好完成其使命。這個國家的歷史不是普通的歷史，而是最高意義的神聖歷史，是上帝特別設計的，為要使她成為器皿，承受從上而來的真理。The second point to be emphasized in our treatment of Biblical Theology is that the historical character of the truth is not in any way antithetical to, but throughout subordinated to, its revealed character. Scriptural truth is not absolute, notwithstanding its historic setting; but the historic setting has been employed by God for the very purpose of revealing the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It is not the duty of Biblical Theology to seek first the historic features of the Scriptural ideas, and to think that the absolute character of the truth as revealed of God is something secondary to be added thereunto. The reality of revelation should be the supreme factor by which the historic factor is kept under control. With the greatest variety of historical aspects, there can, nevertheless, be no inconsistencies or contradictions in the Word of God. The student of Biblical Theology is not to hunt for little systems in the Bible that shall be mutually exclusive, or to boast of his skill in detecting such as a mark Of high scholarship. What has been remarked above, in regard to the Place of individuality in the plan of revelation, may be applied with equal justice to the historic phases through which the progressive delivery of the truth has passed. God has done for the historic unfolding of His word as a whole what He has done for the reproduction of its specific types and aspects through the forming and training of individuals. As He knew Jeremiah and Paul from the womb, so He knew Israel and prepared Israel for its task. The history of this nation is not a common history; it is sacred history in the highest sense of having been specially designed by God to become the human receptacle for the truth from above.

第三，聖經神學應該牢牢地根植於聖經整體的真實性之上。啟示本身宣告並且記錄了上帝的拯救作為，但是單憑宣告和記錄，還不足以提供一個完整的救贖歷史，也不足以在事物的新秩序漸漸地成為實際時，產生一種活生生的形象。真正的歷史不僅僅是把事件發生的順序記錄下來就完成了。唯有把未經解釋的事實記錄，放在形成這些事實的原則的亮光下，以及將這些事實整合在一起的內在關係的亮光下，才能把編年史家的作品轉化為歷史。因此，上帝自己沒有以年鑑的形式來詮釋救贖的偉大事實，而是以受默示之聖經所記錄之歷史性的有機體的形態來解釋。上帝的直接啟示，在聖經內容中僅佔最小的部分。這些不過是被編織進真理的衣袍中，散布在各處的鑽石。衣袍的本身如同整本聖經的內容。這整個內容都是上帝的手所預備的。In the third place, Biblical Theology should plant itself squarely upon the truthfulness of the Scriptures as a whole. Revelation proper announces and records the saving deeds of God, but a mere announcement and record is not sufficient to furnish a complete history of redemption, to produce a living image of the new order of things as it is gradually called into existence. No true history can be made by a mere chronicling of events. Only by placing the bare record of the facts in the light of the principles which shape them, and the inner nexus which holds them together, is the work of the chronicler transformed into history. For this reason God has not given us His own interpretation of the great realities of redemption in the form of a chronicle, but in the form of the historical organism of the inspired Scriptures. The direct revelations of God form by far the smaller part of the contents of the Bible. These are but the scattered diamonds woven into the garment of the truth. This garment itself is identical with the Scriptural contents as a whole. And as a whole it has been prepared by the hand of God.

除了記錄下來的直接啟示以外，受聖靈感動的先知和使徒對上帝直接啟示的解釋，也包含在聖經中。最重要的，它包括了按大綱勾勒的有關救贖歷史和啟示的神聖哲學（如果容許我這樣稱呼它的話）。只要心中確認聖經是受聖靈感動的著作，並且以聖經是上帝的話來閱讀（如同聖經神學的學生），就不會容許自己否認此神聖哲學，並且以自己構思的哲學來取代之。我們的神學若要完全合於聖經，不但它所有的資料都必須從聖經取得，而且要接受聖經本身對這些資料之分類與安排的秩序。我不羞於指出，保羅有關舊約經世的歷史有機性的教導，對我而言，其權威性勝過任何一位現代學者對舊約歷史的重新建構，無論他們的學問和辯證的智慧如何地偉大。The Bible contains, besides the simple record of direct revelations, the further interpretation of these immediate disclosures of God by inspired prophets and apostles. Above all, it contains, if I may so call it, a divine philosophy of the history of redemption and of revelation in general outlines. And whosoever is convinced in his heart of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures and reads his Bible as the Word of God, cannot, as a student of Biblical Theology, allow himself to reject this divine philosophy and substitute for it another of his own making. Our Theology will be Biblical in the full sense, only when it not merely derives its material from the Bible, but also accepts at the hands of the Bible the order in which this material is to be grouped and located. I for one am not ashamed to say that the teachings of Paul concerning the historic organism of the Old Testament economy possess for me greater authority than the reconstructions of the same by modern scholars, however great their learning and critical acumen.

聖經神學名稱的誤用

最後，在把我們的科學定名為「聖經神學」的同時，也必須對此名稱的誤用提出抗議。當初是理性主義採用了這個名稱，因此它帶有一點理性主義的味道。這幾乎會無可避免地造成一種印象，好像聖經是這個過程的起點，後來接著有俄立根、奧古斯丁、湯瑪士•阿奎那、路德和加爾文等人的著作。因此，有些人毫不猶豫地就把聖經神學定義為聖經時期的教理學歷史（History of Dogmatics）。對我們而言，這聽起來非常奇怪，也不合邏輯，就好像把空中的星辰和其歷史，與天文學家的工作和歷史相提並論。正如天空包括了天文學家的研究素材，地殼包含了地理學家的研究素材；在這個科學式的意義上，上帝話語的大能創造則為神學提供了研究資料。但是，被造界並不是神學；它有時會無止境地高過神學，那是一個屬靈事實的世界，是所有真正的神學家都受到永生神的靈引導要進入之地。只有當我們把「神學」這個詞最原始和簡單的意思當作是上帝真實的、歷史性的知識，經由啟示傳達並記錄在聖經中，我們才能合法地使用現在普遍接受的名詞，作為我們學科的名稱。Finally, in designating our science as Biblical Theology, we should not fail to enter a protest against the wrong inferences that may be easily drawn from the use of this name. The name retains somewhat of the flavor of the Rationalism which first adopted it. It almost unavoidably creates an impression as if in the Bible we had the beginning of the process that later gave us the works of Origen, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Luther, and Calvin. Hence some do not hesitate to define Biblical Theology as the History of Dogmatics for Biblical times. To us this sounds as strange and illogical as if one should compare the stars of the firmament and their history with the work and history of astronomy. As the heavens contain the material for astronomy and the crust of the earth for geology, so the mighty creation of the Word of God furnishes the material for Theology in this scientific sense, but is no Theology. It is something infinitely higher than Theology, a world of spiritual realities, into which all true theologians are led by the Spirit of the living God. Only if we take the term Theology in its more primitive and simple meaning, as the practical, historic knowledge of God imparted by revelation and deposited in the Bible, can we justify the use of the now commonly accepted name of our science.

至於對上帝所賜予的素材的科學式闡釋，則必須被看為是發生在聖經時期之後的事。它只能是在啟示和聖經的形成已經完成之後才產生的。我們最多只能承認，在新約使徒的教導裡，開始這個過程的第一個記號是可以被察覺到的。即使是使徒的教導，也絕對不能主要按照神學的觀點來看待。它們是先於萬物、受聖靈感動的上帝的話。沒有任何神學家敢像保羅在加拉太書中那樣宣稱自己的工作：「但無論是我們，是天上來的使者，若傳福音給你們，與我們所傳給你們的不同，他就應當被咒詛」（加一8）。（註2）As for the scientific elaboration of this God- given material, this must be held to lie beyond the Biblical period. It could only spring up after revelation and the formation of the Scriptures had been completed. The utmost that can be conceded would be that in the Apostolic teaching of the New Testament the first signs of the beginning of this process are discernible. But even that which the Apostles teach is in no sense primarily to be viewed under the aspect of Theology. It is the inspired Word of God before all other things. No theologian would dare say of his work what Paul said to the Galatians: "But though we or an angel from heaven preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema" (1:8). 2

研究聖經神學的四個益處

我在前面已經向你們描述了聖經神學的本質和功用，作為我們對上帝的科學知識之有機體的一部分。然而，我沒有忘記，你們呼召我教導此科目，主要是為了一個實際的目的，就是要訓練年輕人成為福音的傳道人。因此，我不會忘記我在這方面的工作，除非你們容許我再簡短地指出，以一種更實際的方式努力追求這項研究會得到哪些益處。In the foregoing I have endeavored to describe to you the nature and functions of Biblical Theology as a member in the organism of our scientific knowledge of God. I have not forgotten, however, that you have called me to teach this science for the eminently practical purpose of training young men for the ministry of the Gospel. Consequently, I shall not have acquitted myself of my task on this occasion unless you will permit me to point out briefly what are the advantages to be expected from the pursuit of this study in a more practical way.

首先，聖經神學向上帝話語的學生展示出包含在聖經中的真理的生機組織架構，以及因著啟示而產生的生機性成長。聖經神學向我們顯明，聖經中有一種比人體肌肉、神經和腦部更纖細、更複雜、更精妙的組織；其各個部分以最微妙的方式互相交織和聯繫，每個部分都受到其他部分的影響，其本身是完整的，卻同時依賴著其他部分；與此同時，上帝聖靈活潑真理的統一原則也在它們裡面，也經由它們而跳動著。如此，這樣的應用至少可以告訴學生，聖經展示在他們面前的，不是人的心智偶然構思出來的產物，而完全是上帝自己的作品。聖經中所描繪的真理的有機結構和啟示的有機進程，與超自然主義的關係，和自然界是經過設計的論證，與有神論之間的關係，是完全相同的。兩者的論證過程，正是沿著類似的路徑。如果啟示的歷史實際上就是有生命的歷史，充滿著經過設計的證據（聖經顯明此事），那麼，上帝啟示的作為必定會以全然獨特的方式，來塑造啟示的歷史。First of all, Biblical Theology exhibits to the student of the Word the organic structure of the truth therein contained, and its organic growth as the result of revelation. It shows to him that in the Bible there is an organization finer, more complicated, more exquisite than even the texture of muscles and nerves and brain in the human body; that its various parts are interwoven and correlated in the most subtle manner, each sensitive to the impressions received from all the others, perfect in itself, and yet dependent upon the rest, while in them and through them all throbs as a unifying principle the Spirit of God's living truth. If anything, then, this is adapted to convince the student that what the Bible places before him is not the chance product of the several human minds that have been engaged in its composition, but the workmanship of none other than God Himself. The organic structure of the truth and the organic development of revelation as portrayed in the Bible bear exactly the same relation to Supernaturalism that the argument from design in nature bears to Theism. Both arguments proceed on precisely analogous lines. If the history of revelation actually is the organic history, full of evidences of design, which the Bible makes it out to be, then it must have been shaped in an altogether unique fashion by the revealing activity of God.

第二，聖經神學為現在所流行的破壞性聖經批判觀點，提供了一劑最有效的解藥。這些現代的理論，無論提出多少相反的論證，反倒把聖經的組織結構弄亂了。他們主要的危險，不在於對那些小問題的堅持，和對歷史細節錯誤的考量，而是他們最重要的論述打亂了真理整體的內在組織。我們看到啟示的進程，與聖經中所描述的歷史有最緊密的結合。最新的批判學宣稱：這種聖經的歷史和整個啟示架構所依賴的基礎，多是虛構和不合歷史的。他們認為舊約中所有的歷史著作，按照它們目前的形式看來，都是具有傾向性的著作（tendency-writing）。即使它們收錄了更古老和更可靠的資料（利未記和申命記），都是在被擄之後被添加的，因此抹殺了歷史的事實。基督徒如果瞭解到，這些理論把聖經組織破壞到什麼程度，它們的主要魔咒就會被破解掉了；並且會驚懼地駁斥這種觀點（他們現在對此的看法是容忍和漠不關心）。指出批判學錯誤的唯一方法，就是把它們與聖經自己所構構之啟示的有機性歷史，並列在一起討論。一旦這樣做，每一個人都會看到二者是水火不容的。這就是聖經神學要努力去做的事。聖經神學在面對批判學的攻擊時，並非以消極的方式在每一點上做防禦，這達不到整體上的功效（並且批判的人總是被允許回答說，他們攻擊的僅僅是外在的形式，而不是信仰的核心）；而是以最積極的方式，根據聖經闡述啟示原則究竟牽涉到什麼，以及其牽一髮而動全身的事實。聖經神學的學生可以滿意地認識到，他對聖經問題的處理並非受制於敵人的策略，而且，當他最有效地護衛真理時，他同時也是把上帝知識的聖殿，建造在信仰的正面基礎上。In the second place, Biblical Theology is suited to furnish a most effective antidote to the destructive critical views now prevailing. These modern theories, however much may be asserted to the contrary, disorganize the Scriptures. Their chief danger lies, not in affirmations concerning matters of minor importance, concerning errors in historical details, but in the most radical claims upsetting the inner organization of the whole body of truth. We have seen that the course of revelation is most closely identified with the history described in the Bible. Of this history of the Bible, this framework on which the whole structure of revelation rests, the newest criticism asserts that it is falsified and unhistorical for the greater part. All the historical writings of the Old Testament in their present state are tendency-writings. Even where they embody older and more reliable documents, the Deuteronomic and Levitical paste, applied to them in and after the exile, has obliterated the historic reality. Now, if it were known among believing Christians to what an extent these theories disorganize the Bible, their chief spell would be broken; and many would repudiate with horror what they now tolerate or view with indifference. There is no other way of showing this than by placing over against the critical theories the organic history of revelation, as the Bible itself constructs it. As soon as this is done, everybody will be able to see at a glance that the two are mutually subversive. This very thing Biblical Theology endeavors to do. It thus meets the critical assaults, not in a negative way by defending point after point of the citadel, whereby no total effect is produced and the critics are always permitted to reply that they attack merely the outworks, not the central position of the faith; but in the most positive manner, by setting forth what the principle of revelation involves according to the Bible, and how one part of it stands or falls together with all the others. The student of Biblical Theology has the satisfaction of knowing that his treatment of Biblical matters is not prescribed for him exclusively by the tactics of his enemies, and that, while most effectually defending the truth, he at the same time is building the temple of divine knowledge on the positive foundation of the faith.

第三點，我要指出學習聖經神學所得的果實：古舊的真理被注入清新的新生命，使它生動的歷史和事實被展示出來，就像清晨的露珠滴在初生的葉片那樣。上帝沒有以一套教義系統，而是以一本歷史書，來收錄其啟示的內容，這當然不是沒有意義的；啟示內容的戲劇性趣味和樸實的辯才是無與倫比的。這就是為什麼聖經在各處都能觸摸到人心，向人說話，呼召人，引導人心順服真理。除非上帝話語之歷史意義的寶庫向他打開，沒有人能夠更有效地處理上帝的話。正是這點，才把上帝的真理帶到如此接近我們的地步，使上帝的真理如同我們骨中的骨、肉中的肉，使它人性化，正如在基督裡的最高啟示是藉著道成肉身，而成為最人性化的內容一樣。啟示歷史的特質是豐富和多樣的，這使得聖經在各個時代都會產出新的寶藏，而且是永不枯竭和探索不完的。對上帝啟示的話語充滿謙卑的信心和敬虔心靈的聖經神學，將會使學生在永活真理的寶藏中得著豐盛，使他在最高的意義上，成為一位管家，從他的寶庫裡拿出新舊的東西來。In the third place, I should mention as a desirable fruit of the study of Biblical Theology, the new life and freshness which it gives to the old truth, showing it in all its historic vividness and reality with the dew of the morning of revelation upon its opening leaves. It is certainly not without significance that God has embodied the contents of revelation, not in a dogmatic system, but in a book of history, the parallel to which in dramatic interest and simple eloquence is nowhere to be found. It is this that makes the Scriptures speak and appeal to and touch the hearts and lead the minds of men captive to the truth everywhere. No one will be able to handle the Word of -God more effectually than he to whom the treasure-chambers of its historic meaning have been opened up. It is this that brings the divine truth so near to us, makes it as it were bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, that humanizes it in the same sense that the highest revelation in Christ was rendered most human by the incarnation. To this historical character of revelation we owe the fullness and variety which enable the Scriptures to mete out new treasures to all ages without becoming exhausted or even fully explored. A Biblical Theology imbued with the devout spirit of humble faith in the revealed Word of God, will enrich the student with all this wealth of living truth, making him in the highest sense a householder, bringing forth out of his treasures things new and old.

第四，聖經神學對學習系統神學具有最高的價值和重要性。不可否認，聖經神學常常是孕育在對系統神學多少具有敵意的情懷中。聖經神學的名字本身，常被吹噓為只是要抗議教義神學號稱不合聖經的特性。我在此要特別強調，無論聖經神學的本質和目的都沒有這種暗示。在基督教神學的範圍中，教義神學的地位是無可取代的。所有認為教會所發展和形成的教義沒有聖經基礎的企圖，其本身就超過了神學的藩籬，這等於暗示基督教純粹是一種自然現象，並且教會在過去的十九個世紀以來，都在捕風捉影。在正確的培育下，教義神學與其較為年輕的姐妹一樣，是真正合於聖經的科學，也是一種歸納性的科學。而聖經神學和教義神學一樣，都需要一種建構性的原則來安排其研究的內容。唯一的差別在於，後者的建構原則是系統和邏輯的，而前者則純粹是歷史性的。換言之，系統神學是要建造一個圓圈，而聖經神學是要複製一根線條。Fourthly, Biblical Theology is of the greatest importance and value for the study of Systematic Theology. It were useless to deny that it has been often cultivated in a spirit more or less hostile to the work in which Systematic Theology is engaged. The very name Biblical Theology is frequently vaunted so as to imply a protest against the alleged un-Biblical character of Dogmatics. I desire to state most emphatically here, that there is nothing in the nature and aims of Biblical Theology to justify such an implication. For anything pretending to supplant Dogmatics there is no place in the circle of Christian Theology. All attempts to show that the doctrines developed and formulated by the Church have no real foundation in the Bible, stand themselves without the pale of Theology, inasmuch as they imply that Christianity is a purely natural phenomenon, and that the Church has now for nineteen centuries been chasing her own shadow. Dogmatic Theology is, when rightly cultivated, as truly a Biblical and as truly an inductive science as its younger sister. And the latter needs a constructive principle for arranging her facts as well as the former. The only difference is, that in the one case this constructive principle is systematic and logical, whereas in the other case it is purely historical. In other words, Systematic Theology endeavors to construct a circle, Biblical Theology seeks to reproduce a line.

我用這個比喻的意思，不是說聖經神學完全不是在將事實歸類。我所說的線條，並不是指啟示好像是一種單調的對啟示的獨奏，雖然它可以被看為是一串珍珠項鍊，但它卻不是一根繩子。啟示的線條如同樹幹以年輪的方式生長。每一圈連續的年輪都是從之前的年輪生長出來的。從樹幹中的汁液和活力，生出有枝幹和樹葉以及花奪和果實的樹冠。這就是聖經神學和系統神學之間真實的關係。教義神學如同從聖經神學生出來的樹冠。在這種基督教的精神中，聖經神學絕對會使系統神學在各方面獲益。聖經神學會宣告我們今天常忽略和否認的事實——真實的宗教必須建立在真理的客觀知識的穩固根基上。要使那些目空一切的偽善之言（認為在宗教的事情上，正確的信仰是無關緊要的）止息，最好的方法就是：顯明我們的天父如何以無止境的眷顧，以最完美的方式向我們啟示關於祂自己和我們的救恩的知識。聖經神學也會證明我們信仰的基本教義，並不是建基於對一些孤立的佐證經文的武斷解釋上（正如許多人所樂意相信的）。她不是要全力地證明這些教義，而是要使我們看到這些教義是從啟示的主幹，有機地生長出來的，這遠比證明它們來得有效。I do not mean by the use of this figure, that within Biblical Theology there is no grouping of facts at all. The line of which I speak does not represent a monotonous recital of revelation, and does not resemble a string, even though it be conceived of as a string of pearls. The line of revelation is like the stem of those trees that grow in rings. Each successive ring has grown out of the preceding one. But out of the sap and vigor that is in this stem there springs a crown with branches and leaves and flowers and fruit. Such is the true relation between Biblical and Systematic Theology. Dogmatics is the crown which grows out of all the work that Biblical Theology can accomplish. And taught in this spirit of Christian willingness to serve, our science cannot fail to benefit Systematic Theology in more than one respect. It will proclaim the fact, too often forgotten and denied in our days, that true religion cannot dispense with a solid basis of objective knowledge of the truth. There is no better means of silencing the supercilious cant that right believing is of small importance in the matter of religion, than by showing what infinite care our Father in heaven has taken to reveal unto us, in the utmost perfection, the knowledge of what He is and does for our salvation. Biblical Theology will also demonstrate that the fundamental doctrines of our faith do not rest, as many would fain believe, on an arbitrary exposition of some isolated proof-texts. It will not so much prove these doctrines, as it will do what is far better than proof-make them grow out organically before our eyes from the stem of revelation

最後，聖經神學會對系統神學能繼續活潑有力地接觸到神聖事實的土壤做出貢獻；系統神學必須從這個土壤中吸取其所有的力量和能力，以繼續發展下去，並超過它所已經達成的目標。Finally, it will contribute to keep Systematic Theology in living contact with that soil

of divine realities from which it must draw all its strength and power to develop beyond what it

has already attained.

聖經神學最高的目的

然而，我們不要忘記，所有的神學，包括聖經神學，最高的目的不在於人，或任何服事被造物的事物。神學最佳的實際作用乃是：賦予我們一個新的視野看到祂的榮耀，祂創造萬物是為了要讚美祂奇妙的名。祂是非受造的、永不改變的、永恆的上帝，且住在歷史領域之上。祂是永恆的本體，不是還在進化當中。並且，毫無疑問地，當時間的帕子被除去時，我們就會面對面見到祂，那時，就不必再從歷史的鏡子中來認識祂了。但是，為了我們和我們救恩的緣故，祂俯就於時間的形式，在其中工作、說話，使祂的作為和祂的話語能有份於伴隨著一切有機生長的獨特榮耀。讓我們竭力認識祂是昔在、今在、以後永在的主，好叫教會所唱的讚美詩——這是我們所有的神學都要化成的——不會缺少任何一個音符。Let us not forget, however, that as of all theology, so of Biblical Theology, the highest aim

cannot lie in man, or in anything that serves the creature. Its most excellent practical use is sure this, that it grants us a new vision of the glory of Him who has made all things to the praise of His own wonderful name. As the Uncreated, the Unchangeable, Eternal God, He lives above the sphere of history. He is the Being and never the Becoming One. And, no doubt, when once this veil of time shall be drawn aside, when we shall see face to face, then also the necessity for viewing His knowledge in the glass of history will cease. But since on our behalf and for our salvation He has condescended to work and speak in the form of time, and thus to make His works and His speech partake of that peculiar glory that attaches to all organic growth, let us also seek to know Him as the One that is, that was, and that is to come, in order that no note may be lacking in that psalm of praise to be sung by the Church into which all our Theology must issue.

註：

1 參考伯納德（T. D. Bernard） , 《新約教義的發展進程》（The Progress of Doctrine in the New Testament）, p. 44.

2 有鑒於理性主義對聖經神學這個名字的錯誤理解，以及實際上使用此名詞是為了傳播錯誤的觀點，這個名稱被羅斯間（Nosgen）引用於其著作 Geschichte der Neutestamentlichen Offenbarung中。

This article was made available on the internet via REFORMATION INK (www.markers.com/ink). Refer any correspondence to Shane Rosenthal: ReformationInk at mac.com (connect and write as @mac.com -- when I connect them I get a lot of junk mail).

From: Biblical Studies Ministries International, Inc. (www.bsmi.org). Reformatted, edited and put into pdf byJoanne Kimble. This was originally scanned and edited by Shane Rosenthal for Reformation Ink.