一個偉大的教師能做到簡潔而不扭曲AGreat Teacher Can Simplify without Distortion

作者: R.C. Sproul 譯者: Maria Marta

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/great-teacher-simplify-without-distortion/

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/5vUvs1PvoBJ

在一個學習環境裡，經常要求「儉樸原則」（K-I-S-S） 。這個首字母縮略字是「保持簡潔，傻瓜」（Keep it simple, stupid）的意思。我們似乎是厭惡複雜學問的人。我們想要簡單的答案，我們想迅速獲得簡單的答案。然而，掌握一門學科需要數年辛勤的勞動與學習。但是，一旦老師掌握了他的材料，他如何把這些材料傳遞給他的學生？

在課堂上作某些假設。首先，老師比學生更了解一門學科。在一般情況下，這是一個安全的假設。第二個假設是，教師不能一下子傳授他所掌握的學科。要教導（如拉丁詞根所表明的），我們必須引導學生「走出」無知，進入知識。知識從最簡單到複雜，在不斷增長。

偉大的教師幫助他的學生理解明白。這可能是教學中最重要、最困難的任務。學生經常抱怨，老師的說話對他們來說「難以理解」。這意味著什麽？這意味著學生不明白老師的教導。這可能表示學生懶惰，不願意在脑力上竭盡全力。這也可能意味著老師不明白他所教導的。

就學習而論，我們的教育過程往往是失敗的。其典型表現大致是這樣：一個修大學課程的學生，作了大量的筆記，記住了這些筆記，並取得全A成績。大學畢業後，他讀研究生遵循相同的程序。現在他已是一名教師了，他掌握大量關於自己已通過考核，但卻甚少明白的信息。信息已被轉移了，但從來沒有被愛探索的頭腦處理或消化。現在這位老師走進教室，傳授他的筆記和課本。他很少把時間留給學生發問（他害怕那些可能無法回答的問題）。他將自己受到的教育的這種惡性綜合癥延續到他的學生身上，於是遊戲繼續進行。

一個偉大的教師能夠做到簡潔而不扭曲。這是理解的最高考驗。如果我真的明白某些真理，我應該能夠把這些真理傳遞給其他人。在簡潔與過於簡單化之間，有天壤之别。耶穌是有史以來最偉大的教師，祂用簡單的詞語來教導人。但祂從來不是一個過於簡化其教導的教師。過分簡單化就是對真理的扭曲。偉大的教師能夠簡潔地表達深奧的真理，而不扭曲真理。要做到這一點，需要對真理有更深層次的認識。偉大的教師傳授認識，而不只是信息而已。要做到這一點，教師必須明白他所教導的材料。

本文原刊于Tabletalk雜誌。

A Great Teacher Can Simplify without Distortion

FROM R.C. Sproul

The K-I-S-S principle is frequently requested in a learning environment. The acrostic stands for “Keep it simple, stupid.” It seems we are a people who loathe difficult study. We want easy answers and we want them quickly. Mastery of a subject, however, requires years of diligent labor and study. But once the teacher has mastered his material, how does he transmit it to his students?

Certain assumptions are made in the classroom. The first is that the teacher knows more about the subject than the student. It is, in general, a safe assumption. The second assumption is that the teacher cannot communicate his mastery of the subject all at once. To educate (as the Latin root suggests), we must lead students “out of” ignorance into knowledge. That knowledge moves in increments, from the simple to complex.

The great teacher helps his students gain understanding. This may be the most vital and most difficult task of teaching. Students often complain that the teacher speaks “over-the-heads” of the students. What does this mean? It means that the student does not understand what is being taught. It may indicate that the student is lazy and is unwilling to be stretched intellectually. It could also mean that the teacher doesn’t understand what he is teaching.

Often times our educational process is a failure with respect to learning. The syndrome goes something like this: A student attends college classes, takes copious notes, memorizes the notes, and makes an A in the course. Then he graduates from college and follows the same procedure in graduate school. Now he becomes a teacher and he has a great store of information about which he has been tested yet has little understanding. Information has been transferred but never processed or digested by the inquiring mind. This teacher now goes in the classroom where he gives lectures from his notes and text books. He allows little time for questions (he fears questions he may not be able to answer). He continues the vicious syndrome of his own education with his students and the game goes on.

A great teacher can simplify without distortion. This is the supreme test of understanding. If I truly understand something, I ought to be able to communicate it to others. There is a vast chasm that separates the simple from the simplistic. Jesus, the greatest teacher ever, taught in simple terms. But He was never simplistic. To oversimplify is to distort the truth. The great teacher can express the profound by the simple, without distortion. To do that requires a deep level of understanding. The great teacher imparts understanding, not merely information. To do that the teacher must understand the material being taught.

This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.

 一個有才德的妻子的祝福 TheBlessing of an Excellent Wife

 作者:   Steven Lawson  譯者:   Maria Marta 

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/blessing-excellent-wife/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/CaS2ztuCWHW

很少有其他的影響能及得上妻子的影響------影響丈夫對上帝的心，無論這影響這是正面的，抑或是負面的。妻子要麼鼓勵，要麼妨礙丈夫對上帝忠誠；要麼增加丈夫對上帝的熱心；要麼給丈夫潑冷水。什麼樣的妻子能鼓勵，推動丈夫的靈命成長？箴言卅一章10–31節提供了一個值得丈夫倚靠的妻子的輪廓。這樣的妻子讓丈夫完全信任她，是上帝的真智慧的體現。

「有才德的婦人，誰能得著呢？她的價值遠勝過紅寶石。」（10節）這樣的妻子很難找到。才德（excellent）（hayil）這個詞的意思是「力量、能力、剛勇、尊嚴」。才德婦人是能力很強，品德高尚，並且對上帝和家人強烈委身等所有這些品格的典範。只有上帝能預備這樣有才德的婦人：「房屋與財富是祖宗遺留的產業；唯有明慧的妻子是耶和華所賜的」（箴十九14）。「覓得賢妻的，就是覓得幸福，也是蒙了耶和華的恩寵」（箴十八22）。 這樣有德行的婦人是上帝賜予的無價禮物。

「她丈夫心裏倚靠她，就不會缺少收入」（11節），這有什麼好奇怪的呢？丈夫倚靠她，因為「她一生的年日，只帶給丈夫益處，沒有害處」（12節）。她給他們的婚姻帶來許多長處，每一個獨特的長處都適合補充他的不足。她的恩賜立即成為他的收入，她帶來的許多長處是他倚靠她的因素嗎？

她的服侍

首先，這樣非凡的妻子不知疲倦地服侍他。她不是無所事事閑坐著，而是主動「搜求羊毛和細麻」，然後「樂意親手」紡線，織造（13節）。她「好像一隊商船」（14節），出海尋找最好價格的最優質面料，目的是織造最好的衣服。這種無私的妻子「天還未亮，她就起來」（15節）為她的家人準備食物。她也是一個優秀的管家，監督與她一起在家中服侍的「眾婢女」。

她的成功

其次，這樣有進取心的婦人在許多交易中培養出良好的判斷力。她精明地「選擇了一塊田」，然後「把它買下來」，並在那兒栽種「葡萄園」（16節）。她憑自己的「能力」解決問題（17節），為她的家庭賺取可支配的收入。這些生意交易是「獲利」的（18節），提供了額外的，可與其他人分享的資源。她手拿「卷線竿」和「紡錘」，挑燈夜戰，不辭勞苦，為她的家人制作衣服。

她的犧牲

第三，這樣勤勞的女人赒濟「困苦」和「窮乏」的人（20節）。在「下雪」時，她也能滿足她的家人的需要。她已提前預備好，為家人織造好「朱紅色」的衣服（21節）。她不遺余力，不惜代價，供應她所能提供的最好資源。供應他人之後，這樣勤勞的妻子才「為自己做床毯」，用「細麻和紫色布料」為自己做衣服（22節）。她有能力做昂貴的衣服，是她的勞動蒙上帝恩寵的明顯證據。

她的見識

第四，她的許多美德提高了她丈夫在「城門口」的地位，城門口是本地長老會面的地方（23節）。這樣有才德的妻子憑借著自己的精明見識，「做」，「出售」，「供應」她的貨物。盡管她非常能幹，她非但不與丈夫爭當領導，反而透過她的順從來堅固他的領導地位，而且這是眾人皆知的事。

她的力量

第五，這樣有才德的婦人以內在的「能力」和「威儀」展望未來（第25節）。雖然她預期很多的挑戰，但在上帝的護理看顧之下，她有確實的信心「喜笑」（25節）。她期待上天的供應能滿足她家庭的每一個需要。當人們尋問她的建議時，她說出「智慧」和「仁慈」的說話（26節）。雖然外面很忙，但她不疏忽照顧「她的家庭」（27節）。

她的超卓

第六，她是一個如此優秀的母親，以致她的孩子觀察到她的才德，「稱她是有福的」（28節）。她的丈夫看到她在養育子女中的品格特質，「稱讚她」，他自豪地稱道:「 [她] 比她們更超卓」（29節）。 在他眼裡，沒有人可以堂而皇之地聲稱與她相等。

她的靈性

第七，這樣的婦人的真正偉大之處是她屬靈上的忠誠。她「敬畏上帝」（30節）。「艷麗」和「美容」都只不過是「虛假」和「虛浮」。她真正吸引他的是她對上帝的敬畏。甚至本地在「城門口」的長老亦「稱讚」她的工作（31節），承認她忠誠正直的為人。她的丈夫珍視她的忠誠和勤勞。他是最幸福的人。

她丈夫依靠她，這又有什麼好奇怪的呢？上帝在她的生命中的事實讓她值得丈夫完全信任。根據每一個評價，她是「丈夫的冠冕」（十二4）。只有上帝能預備這樣才德兼備的配偶。

上帝賜給你這樣有才德的妻子？你認為她特別適合你？你認為她提高了你對上帝的事奉效力？ 為這樣的女人，你的心信任的女人，向上帝感恩。

本譯文所引用的經文均出自《聖經新譯本》。

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌。

The Blessing of an Excellent Wife

FROM Steven Lawson

Few influences affect a man’s heart for God more than his wife, for better or for worse. She will either encourage his spiritual devotion to the Lord or she will hinder it. She will either enlarge his passion for God or she will pour cold water on it. What kind of wife encourages her husband’s spiritual growth? Proverbs 31:10–31 provides a profile of the wife who is worthy of her husband’s trust. Such a wife is the embodiment of true wisdom from God, causing the husband to confide in her with complete trust.

“An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels” (v. 10). Such a good wife is hard to find. The word excellent (hayil) can mean “strength, capability, valor, or dignity.” This woman exemplifies each of these qualities, having great competence, noble character, and a strong commitment to God and her family. Only the Lord can provide such an excellent woman: “House and wealth are inherited from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the Lord” (Prov. 19:14). “He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord” (18:22). This virtuous woman is a priceless gift from God.

Is it any wonder that “the heart of her husband trusts in her” (v. 11)? The husband has faith in her because “she does him good and not harm all the days of her life” (v. 12). She brings her many strengths into their marriage, each one uniquely suited to complement his weaknesses. Her gifts immediately become his gains, and she provides much that causes him to trust her?

Her Service

First, this extraordinary wife tirelessly serves him. Not sitting by idly, she actively “seeks wool and flax,” then extends a “willing hand” (v. 13) to spin thread and make material. She is “like a merchant ship” (v. 14), launching out to find the best fabric, at the best price, in order to make the best clothes. This selfless wife “rises while it is yet night” (v. 15) to prepare food for her family. An excellent manager, she oversees “her maidens” as they serve alongside her in the household.

Her Success

Second, this enterprising woman exercises sound judgment in her many dealings. She shrewdly “considers a field,” then buys it. There, she plants a “vineyard” (v. 16). By her “strong” (v. 17) resolve, she earns disposable income for her family. These business dealings are “profitable” (v. 18), providing additional resources to share with others. She labors well into the “night” with her “distaff” and “spindle” (v. 19) to make garments for her family.

Her Sacrifice

Third, this diligent woman gives generously to “the poor” and “the needy” (v. 20). As “the snow” approaches, she also gives to her family. She has planned ahead, making “scarlet” garments (v. 21) for her household. She spares no effort or cost in providing the best she can. After providing for others, this industrious wife makes “bed coverings” and clothes “for herself” with “fine linen and purple” (v. 22). Her ability to give expensive garments is clear evidence of God’s favor upon her labors.

Her Savvy

Fourth, her many virtues enhance her husband’s position in “the gates” (v. 23), where city leaders meet. With keen savvy, this excellent wife “makes,” “sells,” and “delivers” (v. 24) her goods. Despite being very competent, she does not compete with her husband’s leadership, but undergirds it by her humble submission—and everyone knows it.

Her Strength

Fifth, this treasured wife looks to the future with inner “strength” and “dignity” (v. 25). Though she anticipates many challenges, she nevertheless “laughs” (v. 25) with positive confidence in the Lord’s providential care. She is expectant that heaven’s supply will meet her family’s every need. As people seek her counsel, she speaks words of “wisdom” and “kindness” (v. 26) to them. Though busy outside the home, she does not neglect “her household” (v. 27).

Her Supremacy

Sixth, she is such a fine mother that as her children observe her excellence, they “call her blessed” (v. 28). Her husband sees her character traits in parenting and “praises her.” He boasts that among women, “[she] surpass[es] them all” (v. 29). In his eyes, there are none who can legitimately claim to be her equal.

Her Spirituality

Seventh, this woman’s true greatness is her spiritual devotion. She “fears the Lord” (v. 30). “Charm” and “beauty” alone are “deceitful” and “vain.” Her real attraction to him is her reverence for God. Even the city leaders “praise her” in the “gates” (v. 31), recognizing the integrity of her life. Her husband prizes her fidelity and industry. He is the most blessed of men.

Is it any wonder that her husband trusts her? The reality of God in her life makes her worthy of his full confidence. By every estimate, she is “the crown of her husband” (12:4). Only God can provide such an excellent helpmate.

Has the Lord given you such an excellent wife? Do you see how she is specifically suited for you? Do you recognize how she has increased your effectiveness for the Lord? Then give thanks to God for such a woman in whom your heart trusts.

This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.

認識教義與靈命成長

文/李少秋博士

摘錄自《新譯本研讀版聖經》p. 2080環球聖經公會（2013）

https://plus.google.com/u/0/105106813742373627205/posts/CBg14PouoHe

「因信稱義」（justificationby faith）是更正教宗教改革所宣講的核心真理，基督徒生命在這真理中在這真理中開始成長，靈命自始踏上再生的路途、重生的領域。稱義是神的宣告，一方面宣稱人的罪被赦免，免除人在刑罰上的責任；另方面接納及看待人為義人，得到那份屬於遵守律法後的權利。這是基督的義歸算為人的義，因此稱義全是神的恩典，人沒有可誇耀之處。

雙重恩典：「稱義」與「成聖」

教會改革運動的先驅肯定這核心真理。日內瓦改革者加爾文一生致力神學綱領的系統整理，在其精煉的《基督教要義》（Institutes of Christian Religion，主要的五個版本出版於1536,1539,1543,1550及1559年）中，指出因信稱義是基督教的中心樞紐，同時確立了雙重恩典（duplex gratia，twofold grace）的教義，就是借著與基督聯合，得以蒙恩，因著信被聖父稱為義，建立復和的關系（a relation of reconciliation），以致得以蒙恩，被聖靈引領潔凈，堅決的活出成聖的生命（a life of sanctification）。「稱義」與「成聖」遂成為改革神學中既相分又相連的雙重恩典。1

稱義和成聖是神一份而非兩份旨意。稱義是成聖的基礎和前設，成聖是稱義的目的和結果；但這並非是時間的次序，而是基督徒靈命成長的兩個層面，因為它們的源頭是在基督裏。正由於不能一分為二，我們也不能從他領受的稱義和成聖中，分割其相連的關系，正如太陽的熱和光不能分割一般，存著不分割卻可分辨的相連關系。基督徒被稱為義的事實所管理，這正是由於與基督相連，透過這相連，信徒同時得以再生成聖。

基督使人稱義的同時必不會使人成聖，就在被宣告稱義之時，人立刻分享基督的義成為聖潔。那麽，信徒在白白稱義的宣告後須將「義」活出來，這就是成聖的生命，是靈命的成長。於是人可以活出悔改的果子，就是加爾文所說的「向神敬虔，向人慈愛，是整全生命中的聖潔和清純。當人樂意投入神律法的訓示，就越能傾出悔改的表現，活出成聖的生命」。3

踏上靈命成長的路途是一個廣闊的題目，亦是基督徒要達成的目標，加爾文扼要的提出兩點。第一：聖經教導人愛慕公義，神將基督的形象樣式放置在人的面前，訓示人邁向基督徒長成的身量。雖然人無能力達到完美，卻應以完美為追求目標，在今生竭力遂步邁進，在來生得以被基督完全接納。第二：成長之道需要指引規範，較精簡確切的規則見羅馬書第十二章1至2節，總意是要將自己獻呈給神，凡所行的事均要以神的榮耀為念。那麽人要效法基督的自我否定，使能順服聖靈，讓基督在我們裏面治理生命。5自我否定使基督徒生命的主要元素，有向人及向神的導向，是要「脫去」舊人，像哥林多前書第十三章所言不嫉妒，不自誇，不求自己益處等。更要進一步以神所賜的福分及品格服侍人群及教會，要知道我們只是神的仆人使者，一切均是為神而作。

確切的成聖與漸進的成聖

因此，成長之路、聖潔之途是每一個信徒一生要經歷的生命改變；那麽，成聖可以被稱為繼稱義後的第二份福分？斷乎不是，因為成聖可以與稱義同時並行，是一份確切的成聖（definitive sanctification）。保羅在羅馬書第六章毫不含糊的指出，信徒在罪上死了，是決斷的離開，離開罪的轄制領域，是舊人與基督同釘十架，是一次過的決定；罪不再為主，人乃活在恩典之下，與基督同活進入嶄新恩典的覆蓋。正如歌羅西書3章所言：不單脫去舊人的行為，更穿上新人的樣式。過去是在罪上與基督同死，是一次過的選定；今天是恩典下與基督同活，是一生的進程。

所以，靈命成長亦是一份漸進的成聖（progressivesanctification）。人既然仍活在罪惡世界裏，卻決定離開罪的轄制，要與罪惡抗爭到底，這是漫長的地上過程。而這漸進的成聖包含負面及正面的行動。負面是「要治死你們在地上的肢體，就如淫亂、汙穢、邪情、惡欲和貪心」（西：3:5），依靠聖靈不斷將身體的惡行置於死地（羅8:13）；要將邪念惡行毫無保留地繼續治死，使能存活。正面是「穿上了新人。這新人照著他的創造者的形象漸漸更新，能夠充分認識主」（西3:10）。這裏的「穿上新人」與「脫去舊人」是強烈的對比，亦表達出這「脫去穿上」是確切的成聖；而「漸漸更新」是不斷的進程，正是漸進的成聖。不單是外在，更是內在的本質。是不斷的潔凈自己，像主那樣潔凈（約壹3:3）。

脫去舊人，穿上新人

「信耶穌得稱為義，跟基督更新成聖」，是改革神學追求靈命成長的不二法門。為的不是逃避生活的壓力，尋找快樂的路徑；為的是要跟隨基督，回應基督的感動呼召。那麽，我要作什麽？耶穌說:「我實實在在的告訴你們，一粒麥子若不落在地裏死了，仍舊是一粒；如果死了，就結出許多果實來」（約12:24）。要靈命成長，先要步入死亡與基督同死，這是艱苦的成長道理。信徒與教會不再與世界的文化同行，亦不為世俗所吞噬，不願在戰爭、墮胎、同性戀等文化裏妥協，卻要心受靈感在神話語下更新變化。

昔日的門徒在主耶穌被釘死的日子後害怕起來：他們害怕猶太人的除滅，所以把門關得更緊；他們不敢開門，所以沒有向世界宣講耶穌。今日的信徒在主耶穌復活的日子後逃避起來：我們逃避屬靈生命的成長操練，所以不敢脫去舊人；我們沒有穿上新人，所以生命停滯不前。但主耶穌確實為我們舍去生命。

「主為我們舍命，這樣，我們就知道什麽是愛」（約壹3:16）。

註

1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeil, trans. Ford Lewis Battles( Philadelphia: The Westerminster Press, 1960), III. II. I.

2. Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, ed, G.W.Bromiley, T.F. Torrance, trans.G. W. Bromiley (Edinburgh:T. &T. Clark.1975), IV,2,508.

3. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.3.16

4. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.6.5

5. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.7.1

41. 聖靈的洗禮 The Baptism of the Holy Spirit

作者: 史鮑爾 (R.C. Sproul) 譯者: 姚錦榮

摘自《神學入門》《Essential Truths of the Christian Faith》P109 ,更新傳道會出版http://www.crmnj.org/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/105106813742373627205/posts/R5C5ZgsQKMu

「你受過聖靈的洗（靈洗）沒有？」今天的基督徒常被人如此問及，而這問題多半是由靈恩運動的基督徒提出的，他們都是很熱衷於追求聖靈裹經驗的人。

有關聖靈的洗禮之教義，以往主要是局限在五旬節派和神召會中討論，但如今已變成很多信徒都關心的教義。新五旬節派運動幾乎影響到每一個宗派。這種對聖靈同在及其能力的新經驗，往往給教會帶來奮興與靈性的更新。

但因為新五旬節派嘗試著根據人的經驗，重新界定靈洗的教義，因此這教義也在今天引起廣泛的爭辯。

一般來說（但不是經常如此），靈恩運動中的基督徒視靈洗為重生及悔改之後神恩典的第二次作為，他們視這聖靈的作為是給所有基督徒的，但不是所有基督徒都實際得著它。然而即使在靈恩運動本身中，說方言是否真不可缺，或是否應當算作是「洗禮」不可或缺的記號，這一點大家看法也頗為分歧。

五旬節派引用使徒行傳中信徒如何被聖靈充滿和說方言為例，他們顯然在五旬節之前已被聖靈重生了。但由於他們的悔改歸主與靈洗之間有一段時間的差距，因此這些聖經中的榜樣便被他們視為是歷代信徒的典範。

五旬節派看出聖靈的重生和聖靈的洗禮有區別，這點是正確的。重生是指聖靈賜給信徒新的生命--------使死在罪中者活過來；靈洗則是神把事奉的能力賜給衪的子民。

雖然聖靈的重生和聖靈的洗禮是有區別的，但堅持在以後的歷史中，這兩種經歷都必須有時間之隔，則是不對的。從使徒時代以來，基督徒的正常經歷，是在重生時便能獲得聖靈的能力，信徒不必在悔改歸主後，継續尋求聖靈第二次的作為。每個基督徒或多或少都是被聖靈充滿的，這全視乎他要向聖靈順服多少而定。

五旬節派教義的另一個問題，是它對五旬節意義的解釋不完全。五旬節是新約歷史的分水嶺，在舊約聖經中，只有少數被揀選的信徒能從聖靈得著事奉的恩賜（見民11章），但這模式在五旬節時改變了，在五旬節當日，所有在場的信徒（全都是猶太人）都領受了聖靈的洗。同樣地，後來聖靈又澆灌，使撒瑪利亞信徒（徒8章）、哥尼流家中的信徒（徒10章），以及那些住在以弗所跟隨施洗約翰的外邦門徒（徒19章），也全都領受了聖靈的洗禮。

早期信徒都認為撒瑪利亞信徒、敬畏神的人，和跟隨施洗約翰的外邦門徒等，並不是基督徒，因此，靈洗是確認這些人屬於教會的一種方式。因為這些群體中的人，都與五旬節的猶太人經歷了一樣的靈洗，所以不可否認他們也是教會中的一份子。彼得親自經歷過這事，當他看見聖靈降在哥尼流家中那些敬畏神的外邦人身上時，便結論說，這些人無疑地確確實實應成為教會中的一份子。他說：「這些人既受了聖靈，與我們一樣，誰能禁止用水給他們施洗呢？」（徒10：47)

五旬節以後的靈洗事件，應被視為五旬節的延伸，為要讓整個基督的身體得著事奉的恩賜。在新約教會中，並不是每個信徒都說方言，但每個基督徒都會得到聖靈的恩賜，先知約珥的預言此時應驗了（徒2：16-21）。

總結

1. 聖靈的洗禮是聖靈特別的作為，讓每個信徒均能領受事奉的恩賜。

2. 在使徒行傳中，聖靈澆灌在四個群體的人身上（猶太人、撒瑪利亞人、敬畏神的人和外邦人），以此顯明他們的確屬於新約的教會。

3. 五旬節應驗了舊約的預言，就是聖靈會澆灌在所有信徒的身上，而不單是在少數人身上。

思考經文：

珥2：28-29；約7：37-39；徒2：1-11；林前12章；林前14：26-33

41. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit

" Have you received the baptism of the Holy Spirit ? " A person in our day who becomes a Christian will sooner or later be asked this question. The question is frequently posed by charismatic Christians who are enthusiastic about their experiences with the Holy Spirit.

A doctrine that was once largely confined to Pentecosstal and Assembly of God churches has now become of central importance to a vast number of believers. The Neo-Pentecostal movement has reached into nearly every Christian denomination. A sense of excitement and spiritual renewal usually accompanies this fresh discovery of the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit in the church.

Neo-Pentecostalism has sought to define a doctrine of the baptism of the Holy Spirit based on people's experiences. The doctrine has been widely controversial.

Usually, but not always, the charismatic Christian considers the baptism of the Holy Spirit as a second work of grace, distinct from and subsequent to regeneration and conversion. It is a work of the Holy Spirit that is available to all Christians but not appropriated by all. Charismatics are divided among themselves on the issue of whether speaking in tongues is a necessary sign or manifestation of the " baptism"

Pentecostals point to the pattern in the book of Acts where believers ( who obviously had the regenerating work of the Spirit prior to Pentecost) were filled by the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. This biblical pattern, which includes a time gap between conversion and baptism of the Spirit, is then seen as normative for all ages.

Pentecostals are correct in seeing a distinction between regeneration by Holy Spirit and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Regeneration refers to the Holy Spirit giving new life to the believer----------making alive one who was dead in sin. The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to God empowering His people for ministry.

While the distinction between regeneration and the baptism of the Holy Spirit is legitimate, making a time gap between the two normative for all subsequent ages is invalid. The normal pattern since the time of the apostles had been that Christians receive the empowering of the Holy Spirit along with regenration. It is not necessary for believers to seek a specific second work of Spirit baptism following conversion. Every Christin is Spirit -filled to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the amount of yielding to the Spirit.

Another problem with the Pentecostal doctrine is that it has inadequate view of Pentecost. Pentecost marks a watershed moment in New Testament history. In the Old Testament, only a select few believers were endowed by God with gifts for ministry ( see Numbers 11). That pattern changed at Pentecost. At pentecost all the believers present ( all of whom were Jews) received the baptism. Likewise, in subsequent outpourings, the Samaritan converts ( Acts8), the believers at Cornelius' s household ( Acts10 ), and the Gentile disciples of John living in Ephesus (Acts19) all received the baptism of the spirit.

The first believers did not think that the Samaritans, the God-fearers, and the Gentil disciples of John could be Christians. So the baptism of the Holy Spirit served as confirmation of their membership in the church. Since each of tnese group experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the same way that the Jews had at Pentecost, their inclusion in the church could not be denied. Peter himself experienced this firsthand. When Peter saw the Holy Spirit come on the God-fearing Gentiles at cornelius's house, he concluded that there was nothing to keep them from full membership in the church. Peter said: " Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? " ( Acts 10:47).

The subsequent of Holy Spirit baptism beyond the day of Pentecost should be understood as an extension of Pentecost by which the whole body of Chrit not every believer spoke in tongues, but every Christian was gifted by Holy Spirit. The prophecy of Joel was thus fulfilled( Acts 2:16-21).

Summary:

1. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a distinct work in which the Spirit

endows believers with gifts for ministry.

2. In Acts, the Holy Spirit is poured out on four groups (Jews,

Samaritans, God-fearers, and Gentiles), indicating they all are included

in the New Covenant church.

3. Pentecost fulfills the Old Testament prophecy that the Spirit would be

poured out on all believers and not restricted to a few.

Biblical passages for reflection:

Joel 2:28-29

John 7:37-39

Acts 2:1-11

1 Corinthians 12

1 Corinthians 14:26-33

转载自:

https://www.biblegateway.com/devotionals/

https://issuu.com/whitewhitedear/docs/_________________________

加爾文所說的「特殊恩典」

文/張亮

http://www.lightafterdarkness.net/archives/468

https://plus.google.com/u/0/105106813742373627205/posts/jMu5AR98VX6

當我們在進行歷史神學研究時，一個常犯的錯誤，就是將後期的術語，不作時代調整的強行讀入前期的著作中，是前期著作所沒有的，從而產生很多錯誤的理解。比如，改教時期，改教家們對「重生」的理解，與後來十七世紀為了回應「阿民念主義」的挑戰，對「重生」作狹義理解的定義，就很不一樣。以至於改教家們可以毫不羞愧的說：信先於重生（參看比利時信條第24條）。實際上加爾文也是如此。如果你有機會讀讀加爾文的《基督教要義》，以及他的註釋書（特別是約翰福音註釋），你也許會更加糊塗。因為有時候，加爾文是明確表明「重生先於信」，如在要義的第二卷第二章，他如此說：

「所以，當人離棄神的國時，神賞賜人要人盼望永恒救贖的這些屬靈恩賜也同時喪失了 ……直到人藉重生之恩才能重新獲得。在這些恩賜中，有信心、對神的愛、對鄰舍的愛，以及對聖潔和公義的渴慕。」

這裏，他明確說明：信心連同其他的恩賜，都是重生的結果。

然而，另外一些時候，加爾文又說明「信先於重生」。比如在要義的第三卷第十一章，當他談及「雙重恩典」時，指出借著信心與基督聯合，帶給我們的第一個恩典是稱義，第二個則是重生。這又是怎麼回事呢？

簡單來說，這裏涉及到早期的改革宗神學對「重生」的定義。簡單來說，早期的改革宗神學是一種更「聖經式」而非「系統性」的神學，即神學術語力求與聖經豐富的含義對應，而不是追求系統性所要求的更精確更狹義的定義。對於早期改革宗神學而言，「重生」不僅僅是指個人生命的更新或新生命的開始（多3:5)，更是指個人生命的持續更新乃至萬有的復興（太19:28）。比如加爾文在其《要義》中，有時定義「重生」為「靈魂各方面的更新」（第二卷第三章），更多時候則將其定義為「重新恢復神的形象」（第三卷第九章），在後者這個意義上，加爾文幾次強調「重生」是信徒一生的成長和更新，等同於「悔改」和「成聖」。也正是在這後者的意義上，信先於重生。

實際上，因為阿民念主義的出現，在和阿民念主義的辯論中，為了避免歧義，使得改革宗神學家必須將「重生」狹義化，精確化。同時，為了和阿民念主義明確區分開來，自「多特大會」之後，「重生」具有了今天所具有的狹義的定義。

講了這麼多，主要是要提醒大家，在讀一些歷史文獻時，不可以犯「年代錯置」的錯誤。好了，在這個背景下，我們要來談談加爾文是如何看待特殊恩典的。加爾文在《要義》的好幾處地方談到了「特殊恩典」，然而，加爾文所談的「特殊恩典」卻不具有今天所具有的含義。今天，當改革宗神學在談及「特殊恩典」時，它的基本意思是上帝特別賜給自己的選民的救贖性恩典，與上帝賜給所有人的普遍的非救贖性恩典相區別。雖然，加爾文無疑接受並相信這個區別，但他卻沒有在這個意義上使用「特殊恩典」這個術語。相反，加爾文將其使用在「普遍恩典」的領域，用來特指在普遍恩典中，上帝特別賦予某些人（不考慮是信徒還是非信徒）某些特別的恩賜和才能。

比如，在第二卷第二章第十七節，他如此說：

「綜上所述：縱觀全人類，理智是與生俱來的；它使我們與禽獸有別，就如禽獸的知覺使牠們與無生命的受造物有別。雖然某些人生來智障，但這並不會抹去神普遍的仁慈。這反而警戒我們，使我們為仍保有的才能感謝神的慈愛。因若非神的慈愛，人的墮落就將自己的本性毀滅殆盡了。有人很聰明；有人擁有與眾不同的判斷力；也有人擁有某種藝術的天分。這各式各樣的賞賜彰顯神白白的恩惠，免得有人將神慷慨賞賜的才能稱為自己的。為何一個人比另一個人更優秀？難道不是要在人相同的本性上彰顯神特別的恩待，及教導我們，神並不負責賜給人才能嗎？」

需要指出的是，《要義》的中文翻譯都不是很好，錯誤很多，我在北美讀神學時已經注意到這一點，最好還是參考好的英文譯本。這一點在這一段中表現的很明顯，上面我所引用的最後一句，翻譯得有點莫名其妙（什麼叫「神並不負責賜給人才能」？）。另外，將 “Special Grace” 翻譯為「特別的恩待」有可能是為了避免跟現今已經含義固定化的「特殊恩典」區別開來，但加爾文在原文就是說的「特殊恩典」（specialis gratiae）。比如目前公認最好的英文譯本（J. T. McNeill編輯的版本）是如此翻譯這一句的：

“For why is one person more excellent than another? Is it not to display in common nature God’s special grace, which, in passing many by, declares itself bound to none? ”（可以簡單翻譯為：那麼，為何某人比別人更加優秀？這難道不是顯示，上帝在人普遍的本性上的特殊恩典嗎？這特殊的恩典，雖然未臨到許多人，難道就沒有一個人領受嗎？）

編者在這裏特別註明：「Neither common grace nor the special grace here mentioned has any relation to the salvation of its possessor. Special grace is a special endowment of capacity, virtue, or heroism by which a man is fitted to serve the divine purpose in this world, while he himself may remain in the common state of human depravity. 」（簡單翻譯為：這裏所提及的普遍恩典和特殊恩典，都不與其擁有者的救贖有任何關系。特殊恩典是指一種特殊的有關能力、美德、或英雄氣概的賞賜，借此一個人被適合於在這個世界上服務於神聖的目的，雖然他自己可能仍然處於人類敗壞的普遍光景中。）

實際上，加爾文在第二卷第三章更明確說明：

「對這問題最準確和恰當的解釋就是：這些天賦並不是與生俱來的，而是神在某種程度上賜給惡人特殊的恩典。為此，我們在日常的言談中，習慣稱這人為好人，那人為壞人。然而我們毫不懷疑這兩種人和其他人一樣，都生來就有邪惡的本性；這說法只是指出主賜這人特殊的恩典卻沒有賜給那人。」這裏的腳註特別指明：加爾文稱神給某些被遺棄之人能行可稱讚和英勇之事的才能為神特殊的恩典。

改革宗神学VS极端加尔文主义Reformed Theology Vs. Hyper-Calvinism

作者: Michael Horton    译者:  王一

 http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/reformed-theology-vs-hyper-calvinism/

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_656f76480101q2ba.html

今天当基督徒学习什么是改革宗神学（即加尔文主义）时，不得不先学习什么不是改革宗神学。因为贬低改革宗神学的人，常常不按照改革宗神学真实的教导来定义什么是改革宗神学，而是按照他们想当然的逻辑推理来定义。更可悲的是，一些极端加尔文主义者也如此来定义加尔文主义。结果，「加尔文主义」被定义成一种非常极端并且不合乎圣经的意思。改革宗神学所受到的指控，其罪魁祸首是极端加尔文主义思想。因此，在国际性的多特大会（Synod of Dort，1618-1619）上对这一指控给出权威的回应，随后也在威敏斯特信条（Westminster Confession of Faith）以及两份要理问答中再次确认。

上帝是恶的作者吗？

以色列的上帝「作为完全，他所行的无不公平，（他）是诚实无伪的上帝；又公义，又正直」（申三二4）。使徒雅各警告我们说，「人被试探，不可说：『我是被上帝试探』；因为上帝不能被恶试探，他也不试探人」（雅一13）。罪与恶的根源不在上帝和他的创造之工里，而在个人意志和被造物的行为中。

圣经阐述的像道路两侧的两道护栏一样：一方面，上帝「随己意行作万事」（弗一11）；另一方面，上帝没有，也绝对不能行恶。我们一起简单从几处经文来看看这两道护栏。最著名的应该数创世纪四十五章和使徒行传二章。在创世纪四十五章里，约瑟意识到，虽然他兄弟们要把他当奴隶卖掉的想法是恶的，但是上帝的意思则是好的，为了在那场大饥荒中保全许多人的性命（4-8节；参创五十20）。在使徒行传二章23节，我们也看到类似的说法，那些「不法之人」当然要为他们钉死耶稣而受到谴责，但是耶稣乃是「按着上帝的定旨先见被交与人」。我们要做的就是肯定圣经的教导，不越过这界限去幻想、推理。我们从圣经得到的是这两样同时都是对的，但是圣经没有解释为什么。也许威敏斯特信条三章1节对此的陈述最精炼：「上帝从万古以先，以他自己的旨意按着祂最智慧、最圣洁的计划，决定一切将要成的事，没有拦阻，不会改变」——这是第一道护栏——「但上帝这样的决定，绝非罪恶之创始者，也不至于使他因此侵犯受造者的意志，且不至于使『第二因』因而丧失其『自由』与『偶发』(contingence)的性质，反倒得坚立」，这是另一道护栏。比利时信条十三条中也阐述了同样的观点，并且补充道：「他作什么乃超越我们人的理解，在我们所能明白的限度之外，我们不可以好奇心的态度去追问；乃当用最谦虚与最恭敬的心去赞扬上帝公义的判断，这些事都是对我们隐藏的，并以为基督的门徒为满足，只学习那些上帝在他话语中向我们启示的事情，不越过其界限。」

福音是为每个人？

一面说上帝已经决定了谁会得救，一面又坚持把福音的好消息真诚、没有分别的向每一个人宣讲，这样做岂不是很虚假吗？

但是基督岂不是只为选民而死吗？多特信经（Canons of Dort）使用了一段中世纪教会的教科书常见的陈述（即「足够全世界，但只在选民身上有效」），信经宣告基督的死「有无限的价值，足以补偿全世界的罪」（第二项，第3条）。因此，我们「应当毫无区分地向万国万民宣扬公布（福音的应许）……向他们传扬福音」。尽管许多人不回应福音的呼召，不相信基督，但是「这并不在于基督在十字架上所献的祭有任何缺失或不足，乃要完全归罪于他们自己」（《多特信经》第二项，第5-6条）。

是的，这一切对我们来说又是一个奥秘。但是那两道护栏会保护我们滑入玄想（speculation）的深渊。上帝爱世人，藉着福音呼召全世界所有人来就基督，这是外在呼召（outward）；然而上帝对选民的爱乃是带有救赎目的，同样藉着福音，并且藉着圣灵在他们心里发出呼召，这是内在呼召（约六63-64、十3-5、十一、十四-十八、二五-三十；徒十三48；罗八28-30；提后一9）。亚米念主义者和极端加尔文主义者们都忽视了这些重要的经文，他们通过自己的理性「非此即彼」的来解决这个奥秘：要么福音只是给选民，要么福音是白白的邀请。

给每个人的恩典？

上帝是否爱每一个人？还是他的慈爱只不过为了掩饰他的愤怒——好像极端加尔文主义者们所讲的，把那些恶人养肥等待宰杀？

上帝护理的慈爱在圣经中随处可见，特别在诗篇里：「耶和华善待万民，他的慈悲覆庇他一切所造的……你张手，使有生气的都随愿饱足」（诗百四五9、16）。耶稣教导跟从他的人为他们的仇敌祈求正是因为这个原因：「因为他叫日头照好人，也照歹人；降雨给义人，也给不义的人」（太五44）。基督徒应该如此效法上帝的性情。

我们所讨论的这条教义被称为「普遍恩典」（common grace），它有别于「救赎恩典」（saving grace）。有人反对这种用词（有些人甚至反对这个概念），他们坚称恩典没有什么普遍不普遍的：只有一种恩典，即上帝至高主权的、拣选的恩典（sovereign electing grace）。但是，不得不承认，在人类堕落之后，上帝向人类不论什么原因所显出的任何一种良善都理当被视为恩典。再一次，我们又面对两道不应该跨越的护栏：上帝满有恩典的救赎选民，也满有恩典的托住非选民，甚至使他们在这今生兴旺富足。拣选并不是上帝对待这个世界的全部方式，这也是信徒最温馨的安慰之一。

作为基督徒，当我们认识到普遍恩典的存在时，便能够更严肃认真的面对这个世界，我们不单盯着其中的罪恶，也会开始欣赏因上帝的创造和护理而存在的美善。我们再看基督就不单单是赐给选民的救赎恩典的中保，也是赐给受咒诅的世界里的普遍恩典的中保。加尔文反驳那些企图消灭一切不信者的狂热分子，他总结道，当我们贬低不信者身上所显出的真理、良善、优美时，实际上是藐视那位赐下普遍恩典的圣灵（《要义》2.2.15）。

加尔文主义是犯罪许可证？

首先，就像钟马田（Martyn Lloyd-Jones）说的，如果我们从未被指控传讲反律法主（antinomianism，恩典是犯罪许可证），很可能我们从未正确的传讲过福音。保罗早就精准地预料到这个问题，「我们可以仍在罪中，叫恩典显多吗？」。因为他从罗马书三章9节开始论证，最后得出的论点是：「罪在哪里显多，恩典就更显多了」（罗五21）。同时，一些改革宗基督徒，特别是从律法主义背景下解脱出来的信徒，好像把保罗的论证卡在五章21节为止，便总结起来，「上帝喜爱赦免，我喜爱犯罪——完美组合！」

但是被指控反律法主义与真正的反律法主义的区别就在于是否愿意继续跟随保罗的论证到第六章。因为在第六章，保罗通过宣告上帝所成就的工作来正面回应了这个指控。保罗一开始的论证似乎很讨反律主义者的欢心，因为他们极力强调上帝的工作，然后拒绝，至少压制了上帝的命令。可是，保罗所宣告的上帝成就的工作，不仅仅是我们在基督里称义，还有我们受洗归入基督。他的论证基本是这样的：与基督的联合必然促成称义和重生，这也必然导致成圣。保罗在这里说的不是某种要遵守的原则，他不是说基督徒不应该，或者不可以活在罪里。保罗说的是他们不可能活在罪里，这是一个不可能事件。但是很明显，基督徒的确还会犯罪，保罗特别在第七章里提到这一点，但是基督徒是与罪抗争，并不愿意活在罪里。

多特大会的先辈们非常清楚所面对的指控，改革宗教义被指控为「领导人偏离敬虔与信仰；是由肉体与魔鬼所主使的麻醉剂」，并且必然导致「宗教自由派」（libertinism﹝译注：放荡主义﹞），并且「使人得到肉体上的安全，因为他们被劝导说，没有任何事可以阻挡选民的救恩，让他们任意而行」（结论）。但是，这些先辈们既没有放弃称义带来的安慰，也没有妥协基督复活的生命带来的成圣。虽然完全的成圣在今生是不可能的，但今天所谓的「属肉体的基督徒」状态也是不可能的。一个人只能要么在亚当里死，要么在基督里活。同样，有人想靠自己的办法解决这个奥秘：或者我们可以完全摆脱所有已知的罪，好像约翰卫斯理（John Wesley）教导的；或者我们可自安于一种灵性死亡的状态里，好像反律法主义者教导的。尽管这些说法似乎能满足我们的理性，但是这两条路都忽视了圣经清晰的教导，并剥夺了我们享有这丰富救恩的喜乐。

如此，在这一问题上，同样有两道护栏从律法主义和反律法主义的迷雾中浮现出来：称义与成圣既不可混淆，也不能分隔。

此外，好有许多其他的指控，例如改革宗神学常常被视为「理性主义」（rationalistic）的神学，意思是说，这是一个建立在逻辑上的系统，而非基于圣经。但是，我希望各位看到的是，上述各个讨论中极端的双方才真的是理性主义者。改革宗信条的智慧就在于拒绝越过圣经去幻想，坚持传讲上帝全备均衡的旨意，不妄加过分强调某一侧面的内容。改革宗神学所求问的不是逻辑会引导我们去哪里，而是圣经要引导我们去哪里。或许简单的二选一看起来更容易解决圣经里的奥秘，但是这条路十分危险。故此，努力把圣经作为整体来读，沿着护栏保护我们的路继续前行。

Reformed Theology Vs. Hyper-Calvinism

by Michael Horton

Before the average believer today learns what Reformed theology (i.e., Calvinism) actually is, he first usually has to learn what it’s not. Often, detractors define Reformed theology not according to what it actually teaches, but according to where they think its logic naturally leads. Even more tragically, some hyper-Calvinists have followed the same course. Either way, “Calvinism” ends up being defined by extreme positions that it does not in fact hold as scriptural. The charges leveled against Reformed theology, of which hyper-Calvinism is actually guilty, received a definitive response at the international Synod of Dort (1618–1619), along with the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms.

Is God the Author of Sin?

The God of Israel “is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he” (Deut. 32:4–5). In fact, James seems to have real people in mind when he cautions, “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am being tempted by God,’ for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one” (James 1:13). Sin and evil have their origin not in God or creation, but in the personal will and action of creatures.

Scripture sets forth two guardrails here: On one hand, God “works all things after the counsel of his own will” (Eph. 1:15); on the other, God does not — in fact, cannot — do evil. We catch a glimpse of these two guardrails at once in several passages, most notably in Genesis 45 and Acts 2. In the former, Joseph recognizes that while the intention of his brothers in selling him into slavery was evil, God meant it for good, so that many people could be saved during this famine (vv. 4–8). We read in the same breath in Acts 2:23 that “lawless men” are blamed for the crucifixion, and yet Jesus was “delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God….” The challenge is to affirm what Scripture teaches without venturing any further. We know from Scripture that both are true, but not how. Perhaps the most succinct statement of this point is found in the Westminster Confession of Faith (chap. 3.1): “God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass;” — there’s one guardrail — “yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creature; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established,” and with that, the second guardrail. The same point is made in the Belgic Confession of Faith (Article 13), adding that whatever God has left to His own secret judgment is not for us to probe any further.

Is the Gospel for Everyone?

Isn’t it a bit of false advertising to say on one hand that God has already determined who will be saved and on the other hand to insist that the good news of the Gospel be sincerely and indiscriminately proclaimed to everyone?

But didn’t Christ die for the elect alone? The Canons of Dort pick up on a phrase that was often found in the medieval textbooks (“sufficient for the world, efficient for the elect only”) when it affirms that Christ’s death “is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world” (Second Head, Article 3). Therefore, we hold out to the world “the promise of the gospel … to all persons … without distinction ….” Although many do not embrace it, this “is not owing to any defect or insufficiency in the sacrifice offered by Christ upon the cross, but is wholly to be imputed to themselves” (Second Head, Articles 5–6).

Here once again we are faced with mystery — and the two guardrails that keep us from careening off the cliff in speculation. God loves the world and calls everyone in the world to Christ outwardly through the Gospel, and yet God loves the elect with a saving purpose and calls them by His Spirit inwardly through the same Gospel (John 6:63–64; 10:3–5, 11, 14–18, 25–30; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:28–30; 2 Tim. 1:9). Both Arminians and hyper-Calvinists ignore crucial passages of Scripture, resolving the mystery in favor of the either-or: either election or the free offer of the Gospel.

Grace for Everybody?

Does God love everybody, or is His kindness simply a cloak for His wrath — fattening the wicked for the slaughter, as some hyper-Calvinists have argued?

Scripture is full of examples of God’s providential goodness, particularly in the Psalms: “The Lord is good to all, and his mercy is over all that he has made …. You open your hand; you satisfy the desire of every living thing” (Ps. 145:9, 16). Jesus calls upon His followers to pray for their enemies for just this reason: “For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matt. 5:44). Christians are supposed to imitate this divine attitude.

The doctrine we are talking about has come to be called “common grace,” in distinction from “saving grace.” Some have objected to this term (some even to the concept), insisting that there is nothing common about grace: there is only one kind of grace, which is sovereign, electing grace. However, it must be said that whatever kindness God shows to anyone for any reason after the fall, can only be regarded as gracious. Once again, we face two guardrails that we dare not transgress: God acts graciously to save the elect and also to sustain the non-elect and cause them to flourish in this mortal life. While it is among the sweetest consolations for believers, election is not the whole story of God’s dealing with this world.

When we, as Christians, affirm common grace, we take this world seriously in all of its sinfulness as well as in all of its goodness as created and sustained by God. We see Christ as the mediator of saving grace to the elect but also of God’s general blessings to a world that is under the curse. Thus, unbelievers can even enrich the lives of believers. John Calvin pleads against the fanaticism that would forbid all secular influence on Christians, concluding that when we disparage the truth, goodness, and beauty found among unbelievers, we are heaping contempt on the Holy Spirit Himself who bestows such gifts of His common grace (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.2.15).

Is Calvinism a License to Sin?

The first thing we need to say, with Martyn Lloyd-Jones, is that if we are never accused of preaching antinomianism (that is, grace-as-license), we probably have not preached the Gospel correctly. After all, Paul anticipates the question, “Shall we then sin that grace may abound?” precisely because his own argument from 3:9 to this point has pressed it: “Where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more” (5:21). At the same time, some Reformed Christians, especially those liberated from legalistic backgrounds, seem to end Paul’s argument at Romans 5:21, concluding, in effect, “God likes to forgive, I like to sin — the perfect relationship!”

The difference between being accused of antinomianism (literally, anti-law-ism) and being guilty as charged is whether we are willing to follow Paul on into chapter 6. There the apostle answers this charge by an announcement of what God has done! At first, this would seem to favor antinomians, since they place all of the emphasis on what God has done and reject, or at least downplay, the importance of imperatives. Yet in fact, what Paul announces is that God has accomplished not only our justification in Christ, but our baptism into Christ. His argument is basically this: being united to Christ necessarily brings justification and regeneration, which issues in sanctification. He does not say that Christians should not, or must not, live in sin as the principle of their existence, but that they cannot — it is an impossibility. That they do continue to sin is evident enough, especially in chapter 7, but now they struggle against it.

The fathers at Dort recognized the charge that the Reformed doctrine “ leads off the minds of men from all piety and religion; that it is an opiate administered by the flesh and the devil,” and leads inevitably to “libertinism” and “renders men carnally secure, since they are persuaded by it that nothing can hinder the salvation of the elect, let them live as they please” (Conclusion). Yet they would neither surrender the comfort of justification by Christ’s righteousness imputed nor of sanctification by Christ’s resurrection life imparted. Perfection of sanctification in this life is impossible, but just as impossible is a condition known today as the “carnal Christian.” One is either dead in Adam or alive in Christ. Again, some wish to resolve this mystery: either we can be free from all known sin, as John Wesley taught, or we can be in a state of spiritual death, as antinomianism teaches. However satisfying to our reason, such an easy resolution in either direction ignores the clear teaching of Scripture and robs us of the joy of such a full salvation.

So the two guardrails on this point emerge from the fog of legalism and antinomianism: justification and sanctification are not to be confused, but they are also not to be separated.

In addition to these other charges, Reformed theology is often regarded as “rationalistic” — that is, a system built on logic rather than on Scripture. However, I hope we have begun to see that the real rationalists are the extremists on either side of these debates. The wisdom of the Reformed confessions is that they refuse to speculate beyond Scripture and insist on proclaiming the whole counsel of God, not simply the passages that seem to reinforce one-sided emphases. It is not a question of where the logic should lead us but where the Scriptures do lead us. It might be easier to resolve the mystery in simple, either-or solutions, but such a course would certainly not be safer. So let us too strive to read all of the Scriptures together, keeping a sharp lookout for those guardrails!