作者: R.C. Sproul 譯者: Maria Marta
「罪之罪惡」（The Sinfulness of Sin）聽起來象一句空洞的冗詞贅句，不會對正在討論的主題添加任何信息。然而，談論罪之罪惡的必需性，已由一直在削弱罪本身含意的文化甚至教會強加給我們。如今，罪是以「犯錯誤」或「做出錯誤選擇」這樣的詞句來傳達。如果我在考試或拼寫測驗時犯錯誤，那是說我漏寫某個單詞。犯錯誤是一回事。但我為了取得好成績，偷看鄰座的試卷，照抄他的答案，這又是另一回事。在這個案例中，我的錯誤已上升到違反道德的層面。雖然罪可能是由於懶於準備而犯下的錯，但作弊行為使情況變得更嚴重。稱罪為「做出糟糕的選擇」是正確的，但它也是一種委婉的說法，緩和了這種行動的嚴重性。犯罪的決定確實是一個糟糕的決定，我重申，這不仅是一個錯誤。 它是違反道德的行為。
在我寫的《十字架的真相》（暫譯）（The Truth of the Cross）這本書中，我用了一整章的篇幅討論罪之罪惡這個概念。我用一件在我收到《巴特利特名言金句》(Bartlett's Familiar Quotations) 的最新版本時發生的趣事，作為這章書的開始。雖然我很高興收到這一期免費期刊，但我很困惑為什麽有人將它寄給我。當我翻看包括摘自康德（Immanuel Kant）、亞裏士多德（Aristotle）、托馬斯阿奎那（Thomas Aquinas），以及其他人的名言語錄時，我無比驚訝地發現一句出自我的作品的語錄。我的說話被收集在學識淵博的學者的名言金句當中，著實讓我驚詫。是什麽說話讓我感到困惑，值得列入這樣一本選集當中？ 答案在我寫的一份簡單的聲明中找到：「罪是宇宙性的叛逆」。我這句話的意思是指，即使受造物對造物主犯下最輕微的罪，也是對造物主的聖潔、榮耀、公義的侵犯。所有的罪，不論看來是多麽的微不足道，都是背叛擁有至高主權，統治和掌管我們的造物主的行為，這是叛逆宇宙君王的行為。
宇宙性的叛逆是描述罪的概念特性的一種方式，但當我們查看聖經描述罪的方式時，我們看到三個突出的重要層面。首先，罪是一種債務；第二，罪是一種敵意的表達；第三，罪被描述為罪行。首先，我們這些罪人被聖經描述為不能償還債務的負債人。從這個意義上說，我們不是在談論財政虧欠，而是道德虧欠。上帝有至高的權力對祂的受造物施加義務。當我們不能遵守這些義務時，我們便成了虧欠上帝的負債人。這種債務代表履行道德義務的失敗。
第二個突出的層面是聖經用一種敵意的表達來描述罪。在這方面，罪不僅僅在違背上帝律法的外部行動的範圍內。相反，它代表著一種內在動機，一種由敵意驅動的動機，人天生對統管宇宙的上帝懷有敵意。在教會或在這世上很少會討論聖經所描述的人類的墮落，其中包括我們天生與上帝為敵的控告。我們對上帝心懷敵意，甚至不想在思想上擁有祂，這種態度是對上帝命令我們遵行祂的旨意這一事實的敵意之一。正是因為敵意的概念，因此新約經常用和好一詞來描述我們的救贖。和好的必要條件之一，是至少雙方之間必須先存在著某種敵意。這種敵意是我們的中保，耶穌基督的救贖工作的前提，但耶穌基督克服了這種敵意維度。
第三突出的層面是聖經使用違反法律一詞來談論罪。西敏小要理問答第十四問是「罪是什麼？」回答：「凡不遵守或違背神的律法的，都是罪。」這裏我們看到罪以被動違背和主動違背兩方面來描述。我們說主動地犯罪（sins of commission）和輕視忽略的罪（sins of omission）。當我們不做上帝要求我們做的，我們知道這是違背祂的旨意。我們不但犯有「不做上帝要求我們做的」之罪，而且我們也積極做上帝所禁止的。因此，罪是違背上帝的律法。
當人們以嚴重的方式違反人的法律，我們說他們的行動不僅僅是輕罪，而且在最後的分析中，是罪行。同樣地，我們背叛和逾越上帝的律法的行動不會被上帝視為純粹的不法行為；相反，它們是重罪。它們的影響是惡劣的。如果我們在生活中認真看待罪的現實，我們就會看到我們對聖潔的上帝和祂的國度犯下的罪行。我們的罪行不是美德; 而是罪惡，根據定義，任何違背聖潔上帝的過犯都是邪惡的。直到我們認識上帝是誰，我們才能真正了解我們的罪的嚴重性。因為我們生活在罪人當中，人類行為的標準是由我們周遭的文化模式決定的，所以我們對我們的過犯的嚴重性無動於衷。我們的確是安逸無慮。但是，當上帝使我們清楚了解祂的性情時，我們就能衡量我們的行動，不是以關於人類的相對詞彙來衡量，而是以關於上帝、祂的性情、祂的律法的絕對詞彙來衡量，如此我們便開始意識到我們的背叛的極惡劣特性。
直到我們認真對待上帝，我們才會認真對待罪惡。但倘若我們承認上帝公義的性情，我們就會像年老的聖徒，在上帝的面前，用手遮住嘴巴，在塵土和爐灰中懊悔。
本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌2016年二月號 。
Sin
Is Cosmic Treason
FROM R.C. Sproul
“The sinfulness of sin” sounds like a vacuous
redundancy that adds no information to the subject under discussion. However,
the necessity of speaking of the sinfulness of sin has been thrust upon us by a
culture and even a church that has diminished the significance of sin itself.
Sin is communicated in our day in terms of making mistakes or of making poor
choices. When I take an examination or a spelling test,if I make a mistake, I
miss a particular word. It is one thing to make a mistake. It is another to
look at my neighbor’s paper and copy his answers in order to make a good grade.
In this case, my mistake has risen to the level of a moral transgression. Though
sin may be involved in making mistakes as a result of slothfulness in
preparation, nevertheless, the act of cheating takes the exercise to a more
serious level. Calling sin “making poor choices” is true, but it is also a
euphemism that can discount the severity of the action. The decision to sin is
indeed a poor one, but once again, it is more than a mistake. It is an act
ofmoral transgression.
In my book The Truth of the Cross I spend an entire
chapter discussing this notion of the sinfulness of sin. I begin that chapter
by using the anecdote of my utter incredulity when I received a recent edition
of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations. Though I was happy to receive this free
issue, I was puzzled as to why anyone would send it to me. As I leafed through
the pages of quotations that included statements from Immanuel Kant, Aristotle,
Thomas Aquinas, and others, to my complete astonishment I came upon a quotation
from me. That I was quoted in such a learned collection definitely surprised
me. I was puzzled by what I could have said that merited inclusion in such an
anthology, and the answer was found in a simple statement attributed to me:
“Sin is cosmic treason.” What I meant by that statement was that even the
slightest sin that a creature commits against his Creator does violence to the
Creator’s holiness, His glory, and His righteousness. Every sin, no matter how
seemingly insignificant, is an act of rebellion against the sovereign God who
reigns and rules over us and as such is an act of treason against the cosmic
King.
Cosmic treason is one way to characterize the notion
of sin, but when we look at the ways in which the Scriptures describe sin, we
see three that stand out in importance. First, sin is a debt; second, it is an
expression of enmity; third, it is depicted as a crime. In the first instance,
we who are sinners are described by Scripture as debtors who cannot pay their
debts. In this sense, we are talking not about financial indebtedness but a
moral indebtedness. God has the sovereign right to impose obligations upon His
creatures. When we fail to keep these obligations, we are debtors to our Lord.
This debt represents a failure to keep a moral obligation.
The second way in which sin is described biblically is
as an expression of enmity. In this regard, sin is not restricted merely to an
external action that transgresses a divine law. Rather, it represents an
internal motive, a motive that is driven by an inherent hostility toward the
God of the universe. It is rarely discussed in the church or in the world that
the biblical description of human fallenness includes an indictment that we are
by nature enemies of God. In our enmity toward Him, we do not want to have Him
even in our thinking, and this attitude is one of hostility toward the very fact
that God commands us to obey His will. It is because of this concept of enmity
that the New Testament so often describes our redemption in terms of
reconciliation. One of the necessary conditions for reconciliation is that
there must be some previous enmity between at least two parties. This enmity is
what is presupposed by the redeeming work of our Mediator, Jesus Christ, who
overcomes this dimension of enmity.
The third way in which the Bible speaks of sin is in
terms of transgression of law. The Westminster Shorter Catechism answers the
fourteenth question, “What is sin?” by the response, “Sin is any want of
conformity to, or transgression of, the law of God.” Here we see sin described
both in terms of passive and active disobedience. We speak of sins of
commission and sins of omission. When we fail to do what God requires, we see
this lack of conformity to His will. But not only are we guilty of failing to
do what God requires, we also actively do what God prohibits. Thus, sin is a
transgression against the law of God.
When people violate the laws of men in a serious way,
we speak of their actions not merely as misdemeanors but, in the final
analysis, as crimes. In the same regard, our actions of rebellion and
transgression of the law of God are not seen by Him as mere misdemeanors;
rather, they are felonious. They are criminal in their impact. If we take the
reality of sin seriously in our lives, we see that we commit crimes against a
holy God and against His kingdom. Our crimes are not virtues; they are vices,
and any transgression of a holy God is vicious by definition. It is not until
we understand who God is that we gain any real understanding of the seriousness
of our sin. Because we live in the midst of sinful people where the standards
of human behavior are set by the patterns of the culture around us, we are not
moved by the seriousness of our transgressions. We are indeed at ease in Zion.
But when God’s character is made clear to us and we are able to measure our
actions not in relative terms with respect to other humans but in absolute
terms with respect to God, His character, and His law, then we begin to be
awakened to the egregious character of our rebellion.
Not until we take God seriously will we ever take sin
seriously. But if we acknowledge the righteous character of God, then we, like
the saints of old, will cover our mouths with our hands and repent in dust and
ashes before Him.
This post was originally published in Tabletalk
magazine.