作者: 卡森（Don Carson ） 翻译: Duncan Liang
在英国和在深受英国惯用说法影响的国家（比如澳大利亚），“神学”是一个宽广的领域，包括了圣经研究、历史神学、系统神学，还有很多很多。所以“神学的试炼”，就是在“神学”这个广泛标签涵括之下任何一门学科所遇到的试炼。这种惯用说法是值得注意的，因为在美国和在深受美国惯用说法影响的国家（例如加拿大），“神学”是一个较为狭窄的领域，通常指系统神学。因为论述学习圣经的这一章是被收录在一本论述神学试炼的书中，那么很清楚这里使用的是前一种惯用说法：学习圣经的学生 — 一年又一年专注学习旧约圣经或新约圣经的学生 — 面对着各样不同的挑战，需要彻底思考和认识这些挑战。至于“试炼”这个词，我所指的，不仅包括让出色的圣经学习成为刻苦工作的各样因素，也包括那些构成要人犯罪的各样试探的因素。确实存在着种类很不一样的试炼，但也许不像人一开始想的那样，是可以区分得一清二楚，我们下面要看到这点。
In
the United Kingdom and in countries heavily influenced by British usage (such
as Australia), ‘theology’ is a large category that includes biblical studies,
historical theology, systematic theology, and much more. The ‘trials of
theology’ are then the trials encountered in any of the disciplines covered by
the large label ‘theology’. This usage is worth recognizing, for in America and
in countries heavily influenced by American usage (such as Canada), ‘theology’
is a narrower category, usually referring to systematic theology. Because this
chapter on biblical studies is included in a book on the trials of theology,
clearly the former usage prevails here: students in biblical studies – devoting
years to studying the Old Testament or the New Testament – face a variety of
challenges that need to be thought through and understood. As for the word
‘trials’, I take it to include not only the elements that make competence in
biblical studies hard work, but also those elements that constitute temptations
to sin. True, these are trials of rather different kinds, but perhaps not so
distinct as one might first think, as we shall see.
为论述方便的缘故，我要把这些试炼分成不同的领域。
For
convenience, I shall group these trials into various domains.
综合Integration
很多人已经留意到，随着过去两三百年发生的令人惊异的知识增长，真正的“文艺复兴式的思想家” — 那些横贯众多领域都学有建树和全面发展的人 — 是再也找不到了。即使在各个学科之内，情况也是如此。人不能再研究物理学，而是研究以毫微秒为单位衡量半衰期的一种设定夸克的属性。人不再研究生物学，而是用按年计算的时间，全身投入研究在某些具体细胞之内、在分子层面发生反应的微生物学这细分的学科。类似地，在学习圣经的领域，现在学习圣经的人寥寥无几；人而是著书深入详细论述摩西五经圣经批判的一个方面，论述哈该书的神学，论述闪族词源的习语；人专攻符类福音难题的某个方面，研究旧约圣经在希伯来人中间的用法，研究在目前关于保罗新观争论中pistis Christou，“对基督信心”的意义。就如那句老话所说的，我们越来越多研究越来来少的东西。
然而一位圣经神学家要成熟起来，某种形式的综合就是必不可少的。我要提四点：
Many
have observed that with the astonishing multiplication of knowledge that has
taken place during the last two or three centuries, genuine ‘renaissance
thinkers’ – people who are competent and integrative across numerous fields –
can no longer be found. This is true even within disciplines. One no longer
studies physics; rather, one studies the properties of a postulated quark whose
half-life is measured in nanoseconds. One no longer studies biology; rather,
one devotes years in the sub-discipline of microbiology to reactions at the
molecular level within particular cells. Similarly, within biblical studies
there are few who study the Bible; rather, one writes a learned tome on one
facet of pentateuchal criticism, on the theology of Haggai, on cognate Semitic
idioms; one specializes in some facet of the synoptic problem, on the use of
the Old Testament in Hebrews, on the significance of pistis Christou, ‘the
faith of Christ’, in current debates on the new perspective on Paul. As the old
adage puts it, we learn more and more about less and less.
Yet
certain forms of integration are essential if a biblical theologian is to be
mature. I shall mention four:
1. 大多数进入圣经学院和神学院的一年级神学学生，会发现第一位的需要就是带着激情喜悦去读圣经 — 然后经过几个星期之后，跌跌撞撞地与希腊文词法，圣经内容小测验，释经学要求等等的事情相遇。结果他们会形成两种互相排斥的读经之道。一种方法，就是他们运用正在学习在一切批判工具，尝试进行“客观性”学习；另外一种方法就是，他们脱离这种批判性的思想来读圣经，因为他们是在进行“灵修”，只是要神亲自对他们说话，按照看起来和在他们走上神学研究这条苦路之前那样造就的方式对他们说话。人应当抗拒这两极分化的读经方法，看它们是可憎。在你最勤奋的专业学习中，应当尝试去认识神通过这段经文祂自己说了什么，努力用神的心想神所想，在你使用新学会的“工具”更批判性地思想时，带着敬畏喜乐敬拜神。（当然在本文语境中，“批判性”这个词并不是指你“批判”圣经，或者圣经的内容，而是你对于采纳的每一种解释，都要寻求理据和理由。）当你在安静中读圣经，不是为了任何课程作业，而是“灵修”读圣经时，你应当作敏锐观察，仔细，按“批判”这个词最佳的含义，热心学习，发现联系。有时就算你在思想一段经文，或者用它作祷告时，也非要从书架上拿下一两本释经书，确保你是在负责任地理解圣经经文。
The
need for the first is uncovered by most first-year theological students who
arrive at Bible colleges and seminaries with a passionate delight in reading
the Bible – and then after a few weeks stumble into things like Greek
morphology, English-Bible content quizzes, and the demands of hermeneutics.
They can end up with two mutually exclusive ways of reading Scripture. In the
one, they apply all the critical tools they are learning and attempt an
‘objective’ study; in the other, they read the Bible divorced from such
critical thought, for they are having their ‘devotions’ and simply want God to
speak to them personally and in an edifying fashion as he seemed to do before
this wretched course in theological study was undertaken. This polarization of
reading approaches is to be resisted as an abomination. In your most diligent
technical study, you should be trying to understand what God himself has said
through this text, trying to think God’s thoughts after him, worshiping God
with reverence and joy as you deploy your newly learned ‘tools’ to think more
critically. (The word ‘critically’ in this context, of course, does not mean
you ‘criticize’ the Bible or its contents, but that you seek justification and
reasons for every interpretation you adopt.) And when you read the Bible in
quietness, not for any course assignment but ‘devotionally’, you should be
observant, careful, ‘critical’ in the best sense, eager to learn, to see
connections. Sometimes you will be impelled, even while thinking through and
praying over a text, to pull a commentary or two off a shelf to make sure you
are understanding the biblical passage responsibly.
2. 更广泛而言，神学生，要像他们当中许多人渴望要成为的牧师那样，不仅追求博学（因为博学是有资格作教导的一个先决条件），也要追求成为敬虔。必须要把明白经文的意思和遵从它的教导综合起来；把学习圣经对基督的十字架说了什么，和把这应用在自己生活当中综合起来；把领会圣经对比如圣洁和爱的强调，和自己成为圣洁和满有爱心综合起来。这样做的前提，就是在基督徒群体的环境中爱基督；它的必然前提就是关系，某种受苦，在依靠神的护理和恩典方面长进。学习圣经的人，成为希腊文语态原理专家，犹大书和彼得后书之间关系的专家，却失丧了自己的灵魂，这对他们又有何益处呢？你可以成为数字理论或地壳构造方面的专家，你的学科对你的要求不过就是用功和诚实而已。但是与圣经学习联系在一起的学科，带来一种更迫切的要求：你是在学习神的话语，除非你的学习与信心、顺服、敬虔、祷告、与基督形象相符、更爱神和爱承托着祂形象样式的人结合起来，否则你就是在可怕滥用你宣称正在学习的这些经文本身。
More
broadly, theological students, like the ministers many of them aspire to be,
should aim not only to be learned (for being learned is a prerequisite for
being qualified to teach) but also to be godly. There must be an integration of
knowing what texts mean, and following them; of learning what Scripture says
about the cross of Christ, and applying it to one’s own life; of absorbing the
biblical emphases on, say, holiness and love, and becoming holy and loving.
That presupposes love for Christ within the context of the Christian community;
it presupposes relationships, some suffering, growth in reliance on God’s
providence and grace. What shall it profi t biblical scholars to become experts
on Greek aspect theory and on the relationship between Jude and 2 Peter, and
lose their own souls? You can become an expert in number theory or plate
tectonics without your discipline making any demand on you other than hard work
and integrity. But the disciplines bound up with biblical studies bring a
further urgent demand: you are studying the Word of God, and unless your study
is integrated with faith, obedience, godliness, prayer, conformity to Christ,
rising love for God and for his image-bearers, you are horribly abusing the
very texts you claim you are studying.
3. 努力把你目前学习的圣经经文和你对圣经的总体认识综合起来，这至关重要。开始学习神学的学生，在这方面极少有不如此行的：课程作业的多样性禁止他们聚焦得太狭窄。牧师通常会在这个领域会有所亏欠，就是在他们把所有的关注都集中在短篇的书卷，或书信，或者新约圣经，没有学会怎样教导并传讲神全备的旨意。但是最严重犯错的人，经常是那些把自己全副精力投入到圣经的一两部分，或少数几部分，实际上不再阅读圣经其余部分的那些圣经学者。他们没有操练自己，继续贯穿整部正典作准确的解经和神学反思。他们可能在总体上仍保持信仰正统，与此同时却失去了所有联系的能力，不能看到目前的经文是怎样在综合的复杂体系中找到自己的位置，如何推究一路去到福音、去到基督、去到那奔向基督、祂的十字架、复活和升天，并继续去到新天新地的整个救赎历史当中。
It is
essential to work hard at integrating the texts you are currently studying into
your understanding of the Bible as a whole. Only rarely do beginning
theological students fail in this regard: the diversity of the course work
prohibits them from focusing too narrowly. Ministers more commonly fall short
in this area when they focus all their attention on short books, or on the
epistles, or on the New Testament, and fail to learn how to teach and preach
the whole counsel of God. But the worst offenders are frequently the biblical
scholars who devote all their energy to one or two or a handful of parts of the
Bible, and actually stop reading the rest of it. They do not discipline
themselves to continue with accurate exegesis and theological reflection across
the entire canon. They may remain broadly orthodox while losing all capacity to
articulate how the current text ought to find its place in an integrated
complexity that reasons its way to the gospel, to Christ, to the sweep of
redemptive history that rushes toward Christ, his cross, resurrection, and
ascension, and on to the new heaven and the new earth.
4. 智慧绝不会藐视相邻的学科 — 系统神学，历史神学，哲理神学 、不同形式的圣经神学。很明显，这些学科要从对圣经经文仔细和经过研究的解经中学到功课；同样明显的是，任何努力对经文进行解经的人，应当避免这样的想法，就是他们在面对这段经文时，自己是“一片空白”。他们应当仔细衡量之前世代提出的经文解释，学习其他神学家提出的创造性综合研究成果。这意味着至少要花一定时间在历史和系统神学领域进行广泛阅读。人可以引证其它学科（例如文学和文学体裁的作品）。从学习圣经中抽时间出来，专注学习这样的相邻学科，从长远来说要使人受益匪浅。
It is
no part of wisdom to despise adjacent disciplines – systematic theology,
historical theology, philosophical theology, various forms of biblical
theology. Obviously, these disciplines have lessons to learn from careful and
learned exegesis of the sacred text; equally obviously, anyone who wrestles
with the exegesis of a text should avoid thinking that they are a ‘blank slate’
as they approach it. They should carefully weigh interpretations of texts
advanced in earlier ages, and learn from the creative integrations offered by
other theologians. That means spending at least some time reading broadly in the
fields of historical and systematic theology. One could adduce other
disciplines (e.g. works on literature and literary genres). Time taken away
from biblical studies and devoted to such adjacent disciplines will on the long
haul pay huge dividends.
这样，负责任地学习圣经所提出的要求，会成为神学试炼一部分的第一个领域，就是在于综合带来的各样挑战方面。
The
first domain, then, where the demands of responsible biblical studies become
part of the trials of theology, lies in various challenges of integration.
工作Work
在这领域之内潜伏着两极分化的试探。一方面，圣经学习的范围如此广阔，勤奋努力的人可能会受到试探，让自己工作到筋疲力尽的地步。学习圣经语言的人，也需要在某种程度上掌握词源学。特别是希伯来文，同源的语言有很多（乌嘎利特语，古代埃及的语言和其它的楔形文字，古阿卡德语，亚兰文，与巴比伦和波斯帝国相关的语言，等等）。研究新约圣经的人，不仅必须学习希腊文，还要至少学习一些希伯来文和亚兰文（因为新约圣经如此经常引用或指回旧约圣经），如果人希望进行认真的经文批判学研究，则要学习古叙利亚语，拉丁语和哥普特语。如果一个人学习神学是为教牧事奉做准备，对语言的要求则不会如此浩大，但负责教导和传讲圣经的人，应当大大努力对圣经语言有某种掌握。在今天这也应该包括对语言学的入门掌握。
Polar
temptations lurk in this domain. On the one hand, the field of biblical studies
is so large that the diligent and the industrious may be tempted to work
themselves to exhaustion. Those learning the biblical languages will also want
some degree of mastery of the cognates. Especially in the case of Hebrew, there
are a lot of them (Ugaritic, old Egyptian and other cuneiform texts, Akkadian,
Aramaic, languages related to the Babylonian and Persian empires; and so forth).
Those studying the New Testament must learn not only Greek, but at least some
Hebrew and Aramaic (since the New Testament quotes or alludes to the Old so
often), and, if there is any desire to engage in serious textual criticism,
Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. If one’s theological study is in preparation for
pastoral ministry, the language requirements are not so massive, but those who
are responsible to teach and preach the Bible should make a valiant effort to
gain some mastery of the biblical languages. Nowadays that should also include
an introductory grasp of linguistics.
我们对圣经经文作解经时，应当对之前世代解释圣经的人得出的结论有所了解。对解经历史有一定认识，这对学习圣经的学生来说是必须之事，而不仅仅是一种锦上添花。但是善于思考的传道人和教师，需要的不只是解经历史。他们也要避免仅仅作过度精细化的解经（请留意前面关于综合的说明） — 与之相对的另一方面，就意味这我们当负某种责任，学习不同的思想体系，与之展开互动。好的解经当然不只是对希腊文进行文字解析。我们很快会发现，自己在费心思想不同的文学体裁和各样的修辞工具。我还没有开始提那些反映出当代讨论的浩大的第二层次资料来源：我们要钻研这些材料到多深的程度，这取决于我们打算服事的听众。
While
we engage in exegesis of the biblical texts, we should become informed of the
conclusions of earlier generations of interpreters of the Bible. Some knowledge
of the history of interpretation is a necessity for students of biblical
studies, not merely a happy option. But thoughtful preachers and teachers will
want more than the history of interpretation. They will also want to avoid
merely atomistic exegesis (note the comments on integration, above) – and the
alternatives mean we have some responsibility to learn and interact with
systems of thought. Good exegesis is more than parsing Greek, of course. Soon
we find ourselves wrestling with different literary genres and assorted
rhetorical devices. I have not yet mentioned the vast array of secondary
sources that reflect contemporary discussion: how much we want to burrow into
such material will depend on our intended audience.
那么我们当中气质多少带有完美主义的人，面对眼前如此广阔资料蕴藏丰富的领域，于是变成工作狂，这就不是什么难事了。一个真正的工作狂，是不大可能成为一位好配偶、一位敬虔和有智慧的父亲、一位忠心的基督徒的。工作按本质是一件好事，却很容易变成一个偶像。（注1）
If,
then, we are by temperament somewhat perfectionist, it is not difficult, with
such a vast array of data-rich fields before us, to become workaholics. And a
true workaholic is unlikely to be a good spouse, a godly and wise parent, a
faithful Christian. Work, intrinsically a good thing, easily becomes an idol.1
另一方面，说来真是很奇怪，学习圣经可以变成懒惰学生藏身的领域。他们从来不做重要的工作，他们只是得过且过。如果他们成为牧师，可能会花很多时间工作，但这些时间是没有果效的时间，因为他们在闲懒的阅读、无休止看博客、最后一分钟才预备、以及草率的工作习惯中浪费时间。他们不是在生命和教训方面真正有长进（提前4：14-16），而是想好了，他们上神学院学过了神学，现在他们可以看一些别的书了。（一个特别幼稚的人曾对我说过，“我已经学过了，我现在不需要再读这东西了。”）我们绝不可把神学院教育看作是得到一份工作的门票。它是一生学习和思想的开始，在喧闹的侍奉工作中实践出来。大多数的牧师并没有直接在他们之上的人，去检查他们是否有效使用时间，是否诚实利用时间。就这样，可能让人变成工作狂的这些岗位本身，可能成为懒惰或节制力差的人的避风港。
On
the other hand, biblical studies, strange to say, can become a fi eld where
lazy students hide. They never do stellar work, but they get by. If they become
pastors, they may put in long hours, but they will be ineffective hours because
they diddle away their time in lazy reading, endless visits to blogs,
last-minute preparation, and sloppy work habits. Instead of really growing in
life and doctrine [1 Tim 4:14-16], they decide that they studied theology while
at seminary, and now they can read other things. (‘I learned it,’ one
remarkably na?ve man told me; ‘I don’t need to keep reading that stuff now.’) A
seminary education must never be viewed as a ticket to a job. It is the
beginning of a lifetime of study and reflection, worked out in the hurly-burly
of ministry. Most ministers do not have someone immediately over them to check
up on how effectively they have used their time, how honestly they fill their
hours. Thus the very posts that may feed the workaholic may be safe-havens for
the lazy or ill-disciplined.
骄傲Pride
这个领域有许多方面。我要提五点。
This
domain has many facets. I shall mention five.
1.受人敬仰得人认同的愿望，在我们所有人身上都是根深蒂固。一方面敬虔的肯定和鼓励，另一方面要作第一的私欲（像约翰叁书中的丢特腓），这从来就不像我们希望的那样可以清楚区分开来，因我们的动机经常混杂。要得人认同的私欲，会一样攻击神学生、牧师和神学院的教师。
The
desire to be admired and recognized runs deep in all of us. The line between
godly affirmation and encouragement, on the one hand, and the lust to be number
one (like Demetrius in 3 John), on the other hand, is never as sharply
demarcated as we might like, because our motives are frequently mixed. The lust
for recognition can attack theology students, pastors, and seminary teachers
alike.
2.一种特别形式的骄傲，会体现在我们查看经文，写论文或书，预备讲道和讲课时有所发现时的极大欢喜之中。研究其它学科的人，可以像我们享受我们的研究一样，享受他们的工作和发现。当然不同之处在于，微生物学家和研究莎士比亚的学者，不大可能因为在他们的学科内解决了一个难点，就有资格在属灵领域得到高位。他们可能会因着他们的发现狂喜不已，但不大可能会认为，因着这些发现，他们在灵里就高人一等。但这正是我们面对的试探。我们因为掌握了某些文本而欢喜不已，但因为这些文本是圣经的经文，我们就会认为，我们的掌握会给我们带来对神更深入的认识。我们并没有常常认识到，在学习圣经中得到真正长进的标记，与其是我们变成掌握经文的人， 倒不如是我们被经文掌握。
A
peculiar form of pride may be located in our sheer enjoyment of discovery as we
work through texts, write essays or books, and prepare sermons and lectures.
Those who work in other disciplines may enjoy their work and discoveries just
as much as we enjoy ours. The difference, of course, is that microbiologists
and Shakespeare scholars are unlikely to think they are entitled to a high
place in the spiritual sphere because they have unravelled an arcane point
within their disciplines. They may be exhilarated by their discoveries, but
they are unlikely to think that because of these discoveries they are
spiritually superior. But that is the kind of temptation we face. We exult in
mastery of certain texts, but because those texts are the texts of Scripture,
we think our mastery confers on us a more profound knowledge of God. We do not
always recognize that the mark of true growth in the study of Scripture is not
so much that we become masters of the text as that we are mastered by the text.
3.这种因专业圣经知识而生骄傲的一个次级部分，潜伏在那些学术性圣经专家当中，他们认为自己胜任的专业使得他们具备资格，成为比别人强的牧师。我要快快补充一句，许多学术性的圣经教师是有这样的装备的，尤其是因为他们当中为数不少的人，在某段时间自己曾经作过牧师或宣教士。但很多人虽然并不是牧师或宣教士，却认为他们有这方面的装备。他们的短处不一定是在处理人际关系技巧的领域；这反而是与定位有关。圣经学院和神学院的教师几乎完全是面对来学习的学生；牧师面对的是在年龄、学术背景、对学习圣经饥渴程度方面差异性大得多的人群。圣经学院和神学院的教师，即使如果他们在教理认信的学校任教，认识到有责任要对这些标准尽忠，也会无可避免被新观念吸引；牧师即使在对与时并进方面有一些兴趣，好使自己能成为更好的牧师，却知道他们肩负着喂养和保护神群羊的重任，要教导他们在基督里的弟兄姊妹向神尽忠。圣经学院和神学院的教师通常不会大大投身传福音的工作；忠于职守的牧师是不断与不信的人开展互动，非常关注要把失丧的男男女女带到基督那里。如果在圣经学院和神学院的教师这一方面，和牧师这另一方面之间定位的区别维持二三十年时间，他们就有可能在强调点方面变得有强烈的分别。这一切对学术界人士来说变得尤其危险，正是因为他们在圣经经文方面的专业知识，他们有可能看不到自己的危险。毕竟圣经专家时不时会受邀在为牧师举办的会议上发言；相反，除非牧师本身是专家，否则他们不会受到邀请，在学术界人士的专业会议上发言。两方面之间的关系是向圣经专家这一方倾斜，于他们有利。除非他们有牧师的心肠、经历和委身，否则他们一边以为他们有了学术训练，使他们成为更好的牧师，另一边却有可能静悄悄地给他们培训的学生造成不小的伤害。
A
subset of this pride in specialist biblical knowledge lurks behind the academic
biblical specialists who think their sphere of competence qualifies them to be
superior pastors. I hasten to add that many academic Bible teachers are so
equipped, not least because not a few of them have at some point been pastors
and missionaries themselves. But many think they are so equipped even though
they are not. Their shortfall is not necessarily in the realm of people skills;
rather, it has to do with orientation. College and seminary teachers deal
almost exclusively with students who come to learn; pastors deal with a much
wider diversity of ages, academic backgrounds, and degrees of hunger to learn
the Scriptures. College and seminary teachers are inevitably drawn to new
ideas, even while, if they are teaching in confessional schools, they recognize
their responsibility to be faithful to those standards; pastors know they have
a huge responsibility to nurture and protect God’s flock, to teach their
brothers and sisters in Christ to be faithful, even while they have some
interest in keeping abreast of trends so that they can be better pastors.
College and seminary teachers do not usually engage in much evangelism; pastors
who are faithfully doing their job are interacting constantly with unbelievers
and are much concerned to lead lost men and women to Christ. If those
distinctions in orientation between, on the one hand, college and seminary
teachers, and, on the other hand, pastors, are maintained for two or three
decades, they may become acute differences in emphasis. What makes them
especially dangerous to the academics is that, precisely because of their expertise
in the biblical texts, they may not perceive their own dangers. After all,
biblical experts are sometimes asked to speak at conferences for pastors; by
contrast, unless they are specialists themselves, pastors are not invited to
address professional society meetings of academics. The relationship between
the two sides is tilted in favour of the biblical experts. Unless they have the
hearts, the experience, and the commitments of pastors, they can quietly
inflict a fair bit of damage on the people they train, all the while supposing
that even if they are not currently serving as pastors they have the academic
training that would make them superior pastors.
4.很大的骄傲是在我们比较的标准方面。我们开始学习圣经的时候，除了其他一年级学生以外（他们当中一些人成绩不如我们），几乎每一个人都比我们知道得多。很快我们成了三年级的学生，或者研究生，这时有很多人根本达不到我们的标准。最后我们进入一生的侍奉，比如说在地方教会，或者在圣经学院侍奉，我们教导的人，几乎没有一个对圣经的认识能比得上我们。当然有时我们会和其他牧师混在一起，他们当中一些人远比我们伶俐，或者我们参加圣经学者的学术性会议，在会上我们碰上一些思想如此开阔，令人惊奇不已的人，以致我们的局限就显得稍微更明显一些。然而我们大部分的侍奉，是在一种环境中进行，鼓动我们自认为比其他人更了解圣经（这是真的），因此就高人一等（这却不真）。我们忘记了保罗的反问：“使你与人不同的是谁呢？你有什么不是领受的呢？若是领受的，为何自夸，仿佛不是领受的呢？”（林前 4:7）如此经常的是，是小事暴露出我们的真相。因为相比其他人而言，我们成了知识方面的专家（至少在圣经领域），我们开始一举一动变得仿佛资料就是一切，人际关系只不过具有边缘意义。对于那些有这样倾向的人来说，研究和书本比人和教牧中的难题吸引力大得多；确实，因为我们首要学习的书是圣经，我们就有可能真的宣称学习圣经优先，以此为借口，为我们对人冷漠辩护，而稍作反省就会提醒我们，我们至少有一部分是在追求自己的喜好。
A
great deal of pride turns on our standards of comparison. When we begin
biblical studies, almost everyone knows more than we do, save other first-year
students, some of whom do not achieve grades as good as ours. Pretty soon we
are third- year students or research students, and then there are many who
cannot quite match our standards. Eventually we enter into a life of ministry
in, say, the local church or a Bible college, where virtually no one whom we
teach knows as much about the Bible as we do. Occasionally, of course, we mingle
with other pastors, some of whom are far more astute than we are, or we attend
professional meetings of biblical scholars where we come across minds so
amazingly capacious that our limitations become a little clearer. Most of our
ministry, however, is discharged in contexts that encourage us to think of
ourselves as more knowledgeable about the Bible than others (which is true) and
therefore superior (which is not). We forget Paul’s rhetorical questions: ‘What
do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you
boast as though you did not?’ [1 Cor. 4:7]. So often it is the little things
that betray us. Because, relative to others, we become knowledge experts (at
least in the biblical arena), we may begin to act as if data are everything and
relationships are of marginal significance. For those so inclined, study and
books are a lot more attractive than people and pastoral problems; indeed,
because the book that is our chief study is the Bible, we may actually justify
our callousness towards people by claiming the priority of the study of the
Bible, when a little self-examination suggests that at least in part we are
pursuing our preferences.
5.在这“骄傲”的领域，到目前为止我已经提到一些方面，在当中神学家，尤其是研究圣经的神学家，可能会落入各种形式的傲慢之中。但有罪的动机是如此复杂，它们会变得倒转过来，这样的情形也并非不常见。很多神学家，包括学生、牧师和进行学术研究的圣经专家，可能真的会觉得受到他们遇见的“平”信徒威胁，这些“平”信徒在他们各自的行业都有专长，他们是律师、医生、会计师、CEO、各种科学家、富有的商界领袖、熟练的专业人士。神学家知道，在这些人当中，至少有一部分人认为神学家的工作不是“真”工作。人经常认为神学家处理的主题内容是飘渺的；肯定的是，他们的薪水是较低的。为了掩盖我们的不安全感和隐藏的妒忌，这时骄傲会以一种相反的方式爆发出来，让自由轻松的人际交往变得几乎是一件不可能的事，即使与同为信主之人的交往也变得如此。
Under
this ‘Pride’ domain, I have so far mentioned areas in which theologians, not
least in biblical studies, may descend to a variety of forms of arrogance. But
sinful motives are so complex that not infrequently they are inverted. Many
theologians, including students, ministers, and academic biblical experts, may
actually feel threatened by ‘lay’ people they meet, each with their own guild
of competencies: lawyers, doctors, accountants, CEOs, assorted scientists,
wealthy business leaders, skilled professionals. The theologian knows that at
least some of these people do not think that theologians have ‘real’ jobs. The
subject matter is often regarded as ethereal; certainly their salaries are
lower. Masking our insecurities and secret jealousies, pride may then erupt in
an inverted form that makes free and easy human intercourse almost impossible,
even with fellow believers.
这两种骄傲都属于自称为义这更大的范畴。这罪可以一直追溯回到伊甸园，亚当责怪夏娃，夏娃责怪撒但牠自己。我们很难想到我们犯的任何一件罪，是没有包括有一点点的自称为义的。耶稣对一位律法师讲了好撒玛利亚人的故事，这位律法师问了一个问题，因为他“要显明自己有理”（路 10:29）。祂在别处谴责法利赛人，因为祂说“你们是在人面前自称为义的，你们的心，神却知道；因为人所尊贵的，是神看为可憎恶的。”（路16:14-15）法利赛人和税吏之间的分别在于这个事实，就是两人之中只有一个相信自己是义人（路18:9）。换言之，自称为义带着不同的面貌出现。像路加福音第10章的那位律法师，它可能会问一个有一点点傻，肯定在道德方面空泛的问题，这是因为人的局限被揭露，就企图费尽心思爬回高位。像路加福音18章的那位法利赛人，自称为义可能带着不自知的傲慢和高高在上态度祷告。像路加福音16章里的那些人，自称为义可能喜欢得身为人的同胞称赞，过于要得神的称赞。自称为义，这共有的成分，也类似地潜伏在我们正反方向表现出来、如此多骄傲的罪的背后。当然，圣经对自称为义的解决之道，就是我们一定要从我们自己以外得来的义，唯有神才能赐予的义。我们越是屈从于由自称为义煽动起来的各式漩涡，我们的生命就越发见证，我们还没有很好领会什么是唯独以基督耶稣已经代表我们承担的作基础，在神面前完全称义。
That
sin goes back to the Garden, where Adam blames Eve and Eve blames Satan
himself. It is difficult to think of any sin we commit that does not include a
dollop of self-justification. Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan to
a lawyer who asked a question because he ‘wanted to justify himself ’ [Luke
10:29]. Elsewhere he condemns the Pharisees because, he says, ‘You are the ones
who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What
people value highly is detestable in God’s sight’ [Luke 16:14-15]. The
difference between the Pharisee and the tax collector lay in the fact that only
one of the two was confident in his own righteousness [Luke 18:9]. In other
words, self-justification wears many faces. Like the lawyer in Luke 10, it may
ask a slightly stupid and certainly morally vacuous question because one’s
personal limitations have been exposed and one is trying to claw one’s way back
to the top. Like the Pharisee in Luke 18, it may pray with utterly
unself-conscious arrogance and condescension. Like those in Luke 16, it may
prefer the approval of fellow human beings much more than the approval of God.
The common ingredient, self-justification, similarly lurks behind so many of
our sins of pride, inverted or otherwise. And the biblical answer to
self-justification, of course, is the justification we must have from outside
ourselves, the justification only God can give. The more we succumb to the
assorted convolutions fed by self-justification, the more our lives testify
that we have not absorbed very well what it means to stand wholly justified before
God on the sole ground of what Christ Jesus has borne on our behalf.
操纵经文Manipulation of Scripture
我们大家都见过某些相当令人惊奇的荒谬解经，是由心怀好意之人所作，他们不大习惯对任何经文作严谨解读。当然，当圣经学者玩同样游戏时，我们使用的工具是复杂得多。但毫无疑问的是，我们很多人确实在继续玩这种游戏。
All
of us have witnessed some pretty amazingly ridiculous interpretations of
Scripture, undertaken by well-meaning folk who are not much used to disciplined
reading of any texts. When biblical scholars engage in the same game, of
course, our tools are much more sophisticated. But make no mistake: many of us
really do continue to play the game.
压力来自多方面。在右派一边，我们可能希望得出“安全的”解经，加强我们自己所属教理认信群体的成见。毕竟如果我们坚持这一群体长老的立场，就会在这群人内得到影响力和权威。为一个群体传承的所有细节辩护的解经，可能会受到那传承的领袖的认同。在左派一边，要在学术上受人尊敬的压力，可能推动我们，要得出与我们今日正确的学术正统思想一致的解经结论，使我们丝毫不考虑教理认信传承。对一些人来说特别有吸引力的，就是使用新的正在发展的文学“工具”，这些工具向人许诺，可以使人得到教会历史上从前从未有人得到的洞见。当然这两种压力都与我们在具体群体，无论左派或右派中我们自己的身份认同有关。
The
pressures come from many quarters. On the right, we may want to come up with
‘safe’ exegeses that reinforce the biases of our own confessional group. After
all, we will gain in influence and authority within that group if we maintain
the stances of the group’s elders. Interpretations that justify all the details
of one’s heritage are likely to be received with approval by the leaders of
that heritage. On the left, the pressure to be seen to be academically
respectable may push some of us towards exegetical conclusions that are in line
with the kosher academic orthodoxies of our day, divorced from any sense of a
heritage of confessionalism. Especially attractive for some is the deployment
of newly developing literary ‘tools’ that promise insights that no one has ever
had in the history of the church. Both of these pressures, of course, have to
do with our own identities within particular groups, whether of the right or
the left.
对于我们其他更多出自不从国教传统的人来说，在几乎每一件事上都得出独立的结论，这种试探是更加吸引。我们以我们“创造性的”方法和解经夸口，对我们之前两千年的工作很少加以考虑。我们还有其他的人，是如此强烈关注历史效应（Wirkungsgeschichte ），以致我们在任何事情上都绝不做决定：就是说，我们对具体经文或书卷的解经历史如此感兴趣，认真走遍每一条解经小道 ，我们的要点似乎就是认为：解经总是具有极大的多样性，所以让我们对任何一种解经传统都不要太过热衷，让我们极其谨慎，不要说它们当中的一种是正确的，其它相应就是错的。
For
others of us, cut from more nonconformist cloth, the temptation to come up with
independent conclusions on just about everything is more appealing. We glory in
our ‘creative’ approaches and interpretations, maintaining scant regard for two
millennia of work done before us. Still others of us focus so strongly on
Wirkungsgeschichte that we never have to decide anything: that is, we are so
interested in the history of the interpretation of particular passages or
books, carefully sifting every exegetical byroad, that our main point seems to
be that there have always been great diversities of interpretations, so let’s
not get too excited about any one interpretative tradition, and let’s be very
careful not to say that any one of them is right and that others are
correspondingly wrong.
我们需要的是诚实，真正和耐心地“聆听”经文。常常因着极端对立的各样弱点，要做到这点并不容易。
What
is needed is the integrity that genuinely and patiently ‘listens’ to the text.
This is not easy, often because of weaknesses that are polar opposites.
1.一方面，倾向于高度具有原创性的“聪明”解经的人，可能会对之前已有的解经毫不重视。稍微更多学习一点解经历史，这可能对他们会有好处。更重要的是，他们需要记住保罗对提摩太的劝勉：“你从我听的那纯正话语的规模，要用在基督耶稣里的信心和爱心，常常守着。从前所交托你的善道，你要靠着那住在我们里面的圣灵牢牢的守着。”（提后1:13,14）换言之，圣经不是由分散的聪明的一小点一小点组成，可以随意拼凑组合；相反圣经的“纯正话语”存在着一种规模，一种规范模式，人必须要耐心加以梳理开来，有一种规范模式，形成某种网格，把那些要破坏这规范模式的想象创新最不可靠的部分排除在外。毕竟，耶和华见证人拥有的圣经和我们是一样的，而且他们对圣经权威的教义是十分尊崇，虽然他们在圣经中发现的那规模和历史性教理认信的基督教信仰规模很不一样。当然，每一个人都要承认，各样的规模有可能是糟糕的，要通过一段经文接一段经文认真详细地解经，把糟糕的规模排除出去。但我要说的要点是更集中的。我们所有人都认为，我们看得出圣经中思路的规范模式，但是保罗强调，并不是所有的规范模式都是平等的。他要鼓励提摩太采用一种“纯正话语”的特定规模，今天解释圣经的人应当努力遵循同样的路径。
On
the one hand, those who are prone to ‘clever’ interpretations that are highly
creative may nurture very little regard for those that have come before. They
might benefit from learning a bit more about the history of interpretation.
More importantly, they need to bear in mind Paul’s exhortation to Timothy:
‘What you have heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith
and love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you –
guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us’ [2 Tim 1:13-14]. In
other words, the Bible is not made up of discrete clever bits that can
legitimately be slapped together any which way; rather, there is a pattern to
the Bible’s ‘sound teaching’ that must be patiently teased out, a pattern that
then constitutes a sort of grid to screen out the least credible bits of
imaginative innovation that would destroy that pattern. After all, Jehovah’s
Witnesses have the same Bible we do; moreover, they operate with a high
doctrine of Scripture’s authority, even though the pattern they find in the
Scripture is very different from that of historic confessional Christianity. Of
course, everyone concedes that patterns can be bad, and that bad patterns have
to be ruled out by careful and detailed exegesis of text after text. My point,
however, is more focused. All of us think we discern patterns of thought in the
Scripture, but Paul insists that not all patterns are equal. He wants to
encourage Timothy to adopt a particular pattern of ‘sound teaching,’ and
today’s interpreters should endeavour to follow the same course.
2.另一方面，神学家们可能无论是从左或从右，都判断认为他们采用的规范模式是一种纯正的规范模式。然后他们就要找理由去操纵研究的经文，使之切合他们已经采纳的规范模式。就这样，在这些相对立的弱点中第一点中强调的那德行本身 — 就是通过参考一种更大的规范模式，去避免过度精细化和卖弄聪明的解经 — 现在在这第二种弱点之下，就变成了一种罪行 — 就是容许规范模式享有如此大的控制权，经文被操纵，为的是完全相反的原因。我看不到有任何一贯正确的逃生通道，可以逃脱这一双的挑战。不存在着决定性的关键，或释经方面的诀窍，让我们能够在这腹背受敌的险境中行走，却不受丝毫伤害。但是一个思想谦卑的人，从过去学到经验教训，却不被过去捆绑，坚持祷告求圣灵做光照的工作，愿意和其他经验和技巧都更强的人详细探讨问题，愿意受到纠正，有一种热切的盼望，要忠心表明祂所说的话，在一个地方教会的环境中生活，以此把荣耀归给神 — 所有这一切操练和美德，都有助于鼓励学习圣经的人避免不去操纵经文。
On
the other hand, theologians may judge that the pattern they adopt, whether from
the right or the left, is a sound pattern. They will then find reasons to
manipulate the text being studied into the pattern already adopted. Thus the
very virtue advocated under the first of these opposite weaknesses – that is,
avoiding atomistic and clever exegeses by making reference to a larger pattern
– now becomes a vice under this second – viz., allowing the pattern to enjoy
such control, that texts are manipulated for exactly the opposite reason. I do
not see any infallible escape route from this pair of challenges. There is no
decisive key or hermeneutical trick that enables us to walk unscathed between
this Scylla and Charybdis. But a humble mind, learning from the past without
being chained to the past, persistent prayer for the illuminating work of the
Holy Spirit, willingness to talk things over with others of greater experience
and skill, willingness to be corrected, a passionate desire to bring glory to
God by representing what he says faithfully, living within the context of a
local church – all these disciplines and graces contribute towards encouraging
those in biblical studies to avoid manipulation of biblical texts.
优先次序Priorities
学习圣经，进而投身严肃写作这个事奉的人需要注意了，因为从他们必须要作出的一系列选择中，要生出另外一系列的挑战，它们可以分成三点：
Those
in biblical studies who go on to engage in a ministry of serious writing
require some attention, because another array of challenges spring from a
barrage of choices that must be made by them. These can be grouped into three
foci:
1.我要处理什么题目？我要开展什么计划？我要我的计划由与我签出书合约的出版社决定，去做这样或那样的事吗？或者我接受有相当大余地的计划，为的是给我想进行的计划保留一个位置，而我想进行这些计划，是因为我认为它们重要，或者是因为我对它们感兴趣，即使这样做，我不会得到（到目前为止！）出书合约?我学习和写作的时间，哪些部分应当专门用来“回应”我不认同的部分，哪些应当用来写作我认同的论述？我应当选择关于旧约或新约“导论”式的内容，还是写圣经注释或圣经神学？我要怎样安排，去编辑其他人的作品？对于这样的问题，并不存在着统一标准答案。与其说这是关于好的选择和糟糕选择的问题，倒不如说这是关于选择和选择引发出来的各样事情的问题。每一个学者喜欢的引申出来事情，常常是取决于非常个人化的才干。一些学者，如科林·海默 （Colin Hemer），在研究希腊罗马和考古资料来源方面非常卓越，这些有助于使得新约圣经研究更有血有肉，但因着直觉、喜好和培训，他们是不大可能太过于关注比如写标准的圣经注释，或第二圣殿时期犹太教文学作品以及它们对解释新约圣经影响这样的课题。一些学者，比如唐纳德·古德莱（Donald Guthrie），把他们全部的职业生涯都专注在一个领域，他的领域就是新约圣经导论。一些人要一生作研究保罗的学者，或者研究约翰的学者，拒绝写在他们选择专业以外的书籍。极少有人表现出对广阔研究领域的精通。
What
subjects should I tackle? What projects should I take on? Do I want my projects
dictated by publishers who offer me contracts to do this or that? Or do I
accept such assignments with considerable reserve in order to preserve a place
for projects that I want to do because I think they are important or because I
am interested in them, even though I do not (yet!) have a contract for them?
What part of my study and writing time should be devoted to ‘answering’
positions with which I disagree, as opposed to writing positive expositions?
Should I choose something on Old Testament or New Testament ‘introduction,’ as
opposed to commentary or biblical theology? What place should I devote to
editing volumes written by others? There are no ‘one-size-fits-all’ answers to
such questions. It is not so much a matter of good choices and bad choices, as
a matter of choices and entailments. Which entailments an individual scholar
might prefer will often depend on highly individual gifts. Some scholars, such
as Colin Hemer, are utterly superb when it comes to wrestling with Greco- Roman
and archaeological sources that serve to flesh out the New Testament, but by
instinct, preference and training, they are unlikely to focus much attention
on, say, the writing of standard commentaries or on the literature of Second
Temple Judaism and its bearing on New Testament interpretation. Some scholars,
such as Donald Guthrie, devote their entire careers to one domain, in his case
New Testament introduction. Some will be Pauline scholars, or Johannine
scholars, all their lives, and refuse to write outside their chosen
specialisms. Few will demonstrate mastery across a wide spectrum.
2.我最多只能提供一些如何处理这类问题的线索。要是一切事情都平等（很好有这样的！），如果你能写顶级学术和更普及层次上的作品，那么两样都尝试 — 并且不要让后者吞噬了前者。努力不要培养出一种名声，就是对每一个人都作回应，却对你坚持的事情所写甚少；另一方面，如果你能对一种明显极坏的倾向作出一种战略性回应，开展这个计划，这就可能是基督徒作主门徒的基本标志。如果你发展出一种心志，要展开几个大的研究和写作计划 ，就不要让所有那些小小的写作要求和请求拦阻你偏离异象。
At
most it is possible to give a few hints as to how to address these kinds of
questions. All things being equal (as they rarely are!), if you can write
material at the top rank of scholarship and at a more popular level, attempt
both – and do not let the latter devour the former. Try not to develop a reputation
for responding to everyone while writing little that is positive; on the other
hand, when you are in a position to provide a strategic response to an
egregious trend, it may be the mark of elementary Christian discipleship to
take on the project. If you develop a heart for a couple of big research and
writing projects, do not let all the little writing demands and offers deter
you from your vision.
3.我为谁而写？为学者？牧师？读许多书的平信徒？为了不信的人？为了学生？我打算在什么层次上写作？我要花多少时间用在相对篇幅短的作品（不单单指博客文章），这些文章可能流传范围相对较广，但却不会在公众记忆里持续长久；还是写一些大部头的书籍，和博客相比读的人要少得多，但可能在几代人之后仍可供人参考，在最好的情形里，有助于形成整个学科的方向？你可能要花上三年或四年的时间，写一本书，作为《新约研究专题系列》，或《旧约补篇》系列出版，然后发现出版社只印刷和销售了大约一千本，其中大部分是由图书馆购买。另一方面，这本书可能成为几十年其它工作的起源，几代人的圣经注释作者都会加以引用。再一次，没有一种方程式来决定哪种路径是最好。极大部分是取决于恩赐、恩典和呼召。但你的选择要影响你写作时的用语、你的脚注安排、你对术语的使用、你对出版社的选择，你打算多直白直接去造就人，等等。
For
whom am I writing? For scholars? Pastors? The well-read layperson? For
unbelievers? For students? At what level am I trying to pitch my piece? How
much of my time should I devote to relatively ephemeral pieces (not least
blogs) that may achieve comparatively wide circulation but that will not last
long in public memory, over against major books that are read by far fewer
people than are blogs, but which may be consulted for generations and, in the
best cases, help to shape the direction of entire disciplines? It may take you
three or four years to write a book that is published in Society for New
Testament Studies Monograph Series or in Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, and
then you discover that the publishers print and sell only about a thousand
copies, most of which are bought by libraries. On the other hand, that work may
become the seedbed of decades of other work, cited by generations of commentary
writers. Once again there is no formula that will decide what course is best. Much
depends on gift and grace and calling. But your choices will affect your
vocabulary as you write, your footnoting, your use of technical terms, your
choice of publisher, how explicitly and immediately edifying you try to be, and
so forth.
我在写作时如何避免“独行侠”情结 — 这种情结在一方面可能导致灰心绝望；另一方面则可能讽刺性地生出十足的傲慢。我要当作何种选择去驱散这些危险？
How
can I avoid a ‘lone ranger’ complex in my writing – a complex that can lead, on
the one hand, to discouragement and despair; and on the other, ironically, to
unmitigated arrogance? What choices should I be making to ward off these
dangers?
写作本质上是一件孤单的工作 — 或者更准确说，本质上是一种单独的工作，其大部分要由一个人单独完成（不管他是否感觉孤单）。这很容易生出许多感性认识方面的扭曲。例如大多数进行圣经研究的博士生，甚至连他们当中感情最稳定的人，也会在两种极端之间摇摆不定，一个极端，就是认为自己的工作是至少从加尔文以来最重大的神学思索，另一个极端，就是深信如果自己研究的这等垃圾也能得到博士学位，那么学位的价值也就不过如此。显然这两种感性认识是不可能同时成立；通常没有一种能成立。但人应当做什么去抛弃这种摇摆不定？更重要的是，实际的作品，写作本身，怎么可以避免这种“独行侠”症状，获得改善？理想当然就是合作。这不是必然意味着你写某一篇论文或某一本书时找合著的作者。这其实是指你结交朋友、学生和同事，与他们分享你的工作，你分享他们的工作。这可能是以半正式的讨论形式进行（例如C.S. 路易斯身边那称为“墨客会”的朋友圈子）；或者让你带的博士生阅读和批判你的作品，或至少与你的同事就着你采用的方法和论证进行非正式讨论。非常经常的是，特别是当你的写作不在属于你首要专业领域的范围之内时，很好的建议就是在你的书出版之前，请求在这领域比你更专业的朋友阅读和批评你的作品。在这个阶段领受这样的批评，要比别人写书评批判你好得多。务必找一些读者，他们采取的立场与你的相当不一样：你有可能从他们身上学到最多。当然这也意味着你时不时反过来这样帮助你的同事。
Writing
is an essentially lonely business – or, more accurately, it is an essentially
alone business. Much of it has to be done alone (whether or not one feels
lonely). This easily breeds many distortions in perception. Most doctoral
students in biblical studies, for example, even the most emotionally stable of
them, oscillate between thinking that their work is the greatest piece of
theological reflection since at least Calvin, and being convinced that if
doctoral degrees are handed out for rubbish of this order, then the degree
cannot be worth much. Transparently both perceptions cannot simultaneously be
true; usually neither is. But what can be done to damp down these oscillations?
More importantly, how can the actual product, the writing itself, be improved
by avoiding the ‘lone ranger’ syndrome? The ideal, of course, is to work in
collaboration. This does not necessarily mean that you have cowriters for a
particular essay or book. It means, rather, that you develop friends, students,
and colleagues with whom you share your work, and whose work you share. This
may take the form of semi-formal discussion (such as ‘The Inklings’, that
circle of friends around C.S. Lewis); or getting your doctoral students to read
and critique your work; or at very least, having informal discussions with
colleagues about the approaches and arguments you are adopting. Very often, and
especially if you are writing in domains that do not fall within your primary
areas of expertise, you are well advised to ask friends with more expertise
than you enjoy in those areas to read and critique your work before it goes to
press. It is far better to receive such criticism at that point than in
reviews. Be sure to find some readers who will take stances quite different
from yours: they are the ones from whom you are likely to learn the most. This
also means, of course, that you will occasionally help other colleagues
reciprocally.
结束的反思Concluding reflections
浏览这份列举会给学习圣经之人带来试炼的不同领域清单（“试炼”可以是指困难，也可以是指试探），我就很惊奇地发现，它们是如何互相联系的。人会想起加尔文说过的一段话，作为对此问题的矫正：
Scanning
this brief list of domains that generate trials for those engaged in biblical
studies – whether ‘trials’ in the sense of difficulties, or ‘trials’ in the
sense of temptations – I am struck by how interrelated they are. And as an
antidote, one recalls the words of Calvin:
我对屈梭多模以“谦虚”为我们哲学基础的见解，常觉非常满意，但对奥古斯丁的见解则更为满意。奥古斯丁说：“有一个雄辩家被问，雄辩的第一个要诀是什么，他回答案说是表述，又问第二和第三个要决是什么，他仍旧答是表述；所以假如有人问我，基督的第一，第二和第三法则是什么，我将始终以‘谦虚’二字作答。”（注2）
I
have always been exceedingly delighted with the words of Chrysostom, ‘The
foundation of our philosophy is humility;’ and still more with those of
Augustine, ‘As the orator, when asked, What is the first precept in eloquence?
answered, Delivery: What is the second? Delivery: What is the third? Delivery:
so, if you ask me in regard to the precepts of the Christian Religion, I will
answer, first, second, and third, Humility.’2
这样的谦卑要教导我们，神赐我们无法估量的恩待，让我们可以有自由每周花许多小时的时间学习圣经中神满有恩惠的自我启示，学习用神的心想神所想，藉着神亲自默示呼出的话语（不管是如何通过极多各有不同的人类作者为中介）认真和耐心地工作，使我们可以更好认识祂和祂的道路，最重要的是，使我们可以更好认识那成肉身的道。我们越以这特权的极大喜乐为乐，就越不容易在学习圣经的各样试炼中失败，我们就会越多歌唱那些被羔羊救赎之人所唱的新歌；我们就越不容易被要自己作主的私欲引诱，我们就越以作万有的主的那一位为乐。
Such
humility will teach us the inestimable privilege accorded to those of us who
are free to devote many hours each week in studying God’s gracious
self-disclosure in holy Scripture, learning to think God’s thoughts after him,
working carefully and patiently through words breathed out by God himself
(however mediated through highly diverse human writers) that we may better know
him and his ways, and above all that we may better know the Word incarnate. The
more we revel in the sheer joy of this privilege, the less will we succumb to
the trials of biblical studies, and the more will we sing the new song of those
who have been redeemed by the Lamb; the less will we be seduced by the lust for
mastery, and the more will we delight in him who is Master of all.
注1：请看丁凯勒（Timothy Keller）的近作《冒牌的上帝》（ Counterfeit Gods），New York: Dutton, 2009。
注2：加尔文《基督教要义》，卷二，第二章11，翻译引自中国基督教书刊网站译本（见此），稍有改动，译者注。
麦种版本:
聖經研究的考驗（ The Trials of Biblical
Studies）