不可知论的荒谬 the impossibility of agnosticism
作者: Leith Samuel
译者: 赵中辉
“不可知论者”（Agnostic）这个名词是赫胥黎教授（T．H．Huxley）在一八六九年，介绍给现已解体的形而上学会会贝的。后来他写著说，“当我达到理智成熟的时候，我就问我自己，我到底是一个无神论者？或是一个有神论者？或是一个泛神论者；或是一个唯物论者呢？或是一个唯心论者？一个基督徒？或是一个自由思想家？我越研究，越不能回答这个问题，直等到后来我得到一个结论：我什么都不是，我只是个一自由思想家。我们本会大多数的会员都确实知道，他们在某项知识上已有相当的成就，已经解决了生存的问题；而我是毫无所得，而且我确实知道，对生存的问题，尚在五里雾中。……本形而上学会大多数的会员们，不是这佩主义者，就是那个主义者，所以我就发明了一个合适的“不可知主义者”这个名词来代表我自己。我对这个名称是很满意的，因为它正是合用的。”
PROFESSOR T. H. HUXLEY
[1825-1895, grandfather to the more widely-known, Aldous Huxley, 1894-1963,
author of Brave New World and Doors of Perception] introduced the word agnostic
to members of the now defunct Metaphysical Society in 1869. Writing afterwards, he said, When I reached intellectual maturity and
began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, a pantheist, a
materialist, an idealist, a Christian, or a freethinker, I found that the more
I learned and reflected the less sure I was of the answer, until at last I came
to the conclusion that I had no part with any of these denominations except the
last. Most of these good people ... were quite sure that they had attained a
certain `gnosis' -and had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of
existence; while I was quite sure that I had not, and had a pretty strong
conviction that the problem was insoluble...
Most of my colleagues in the Metaphysical Society were --ists of one
sort or another. So I took thought and
invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of agnostic. It came into my head as suggestively
antithetic to the 'gnostic' of church history, who professed to know so much
about the very things of which I was ignorant; and I took the earliest
opportunity of parading it at our Society.
To my great satisfaction, the term was accepted.
最近出版的一本标准字典，把“不可知论者”解说为：“凡否认我们能知道那绝对者，或无限者，或否认我们能证明或不能证明在宇宙物质现象以外的任何事（虽然有这些事）的人。”“不可知谕”就是不可知论者的学说。
AN AGNOSTIC
An up-to-date
edition of a standard dictionary defines an agnostic as "one who denies
that we can know the absolute or infinite, or prove or disprove anything beyond
the material phenomena of the universe, though such may exist." Agnosticism is defined as "the doctrine
of the agnostic."
虽然不可知论在语源学上的由来及其现代用法，往往是不同的；但最低限度，不可知论者可以分为三个不同的类型或团证：（1）漠不关心的不可知谕者，（2）不满的不可知论者，（3）属教条式（或言武断的）不可知论者。可以说前二者的立场是完全合乎理性的，在有逻辑思想的人看来，能暂时予以同意。但论到第三个立场，可就不能这样说了，因为其中有许多事不可能现在就解决的。而且有某些因素，当我们仔细思考时，就不可能叫我们去支持这几个立场。因此，我们就是以这种意义，来说到不可知论的荒谬（不可能性）。
But etymological derivation
and modern usage are not infrequently at variance. Many of us, for example, remember our school
teachers beginning the day with, "Prevent us, 0 Lord, in all our doings. .
."! (prevent [archaic] means
prepare) The word agnostic has also
suffered at the hands of its users. In
the student world many use the adjective of themselves in an absolute or
conditioned sense, yet obviously mean by it several different things. It doesn't require much discernment to
observe at least three distinct categories or groups of agnostics. Of the first two it must be admitted that
they are perfectly rational positions in which a logical mind may find
self-consistency for the time being. But
this cannot be said of the third, which involves a greater inhibition than any
it may resolve pro tempore. Now there
are certain factors which, when they enter into our consciousness, make it
impossible to hold any of these positions any longer. It is in this sense that we speak of
"the impossibility of agnosticism."
一、漠不关心的不可知论者
1. The
Indifferent Agnostic
这一类型的不可知论者是自满自足，甚而目空一切，毫无所知。这种人的态度往往是这样：“我不知道，坦白地说，我根本不在乎。我是世界上最快乐的人，我不喜欢有人来干扰别人的快乐。”如果他不这么客气的话，他就要这样说，“各人自扫门前雪，休管他人瓦上霜。”但是他的这种先人为主的态度，不能解说为他否认本身尚未考查过的事实的存在或确定性。我们所能说的，是他把这些当作毫无关系的事而推搪过去。
This group, the first in our
order of consideration, is characterized by contented, almost defiant,
ignorance. The attitude of a man in this
frame of mind finds expression in such phrases as, "I don't know, and
quite frankly, I couldn't care less. I'm
perfectly happy as I am, and have no time for people who want to interfere with
other people's pleasures." If he
were not so polite, he would add,
flippantly, "Run away and play"; or firmly, "You mind your own
business and I'll mind mine." But
his preoccupation can scarcely be interpreted as a denial of the existence or
validity of facts which he has not personally investigated. All we may say is
that he brushes these aside as being totally irrelevant.
二、不满的不可知论者
2. The
Dissatisfied Agnostic
这种人是浑浑噩噩的，对神是盲目的，而且他越有知识，他就越以为自已知道的不够。
This man is
ignorant, and the more intellectual he is, the more disturbed he is at his
ignorance.
没有其他的学问像这样不可捉摸的。假如他与一位知道有神的人讨论时，他会说，“我不认识神，但我愿意研究……我没有入手的线索。你有吗？加果你有，请你告诉我。我要再试一下。“或许他以前曾遇过或闻及言行不一致，在生活上未能赶得上一些不信神的慈善家的信徒。但无论如何，唯物主义不像从前那样迷惑他。虽然他时时想尽力以救忘却人生之谜这他的确也想获得以下诸问题的答案：“我们为什么活在世界卡？”我们离世将往何处？”
No other branch of knowledge has eluded him like
this. In discussion with one who
professes to know, he says, "I don't know, but I'm willing to investigate
. . . I haven't a clue. Have you? If so, do tell me. I'll try anything once." Of course he has met inconsistent ministers
and other religious people whose lives can't hold a candle to those of some
philanthropic materialists. But,
somehow, materialism doesn't intrigue him as it used to in the day when he
thought he was infallible and omniscient and had "arrived"! While he makes strenuous efforts now and then
to forget life's enigmas, he really wants an answer to such questions as
"Why are we here?" and "Where do we go when we leave here?"
without losing his interest in "How does it work?" and "Can we
take it to pieces and count . . . and observe . . . ?"
同时也有兴趣问：“召然是怎样工作著？”“我们能否将它切成碎片而予以计数……予以观察呢？”祂不甘于为“描述即说明”的谬儿所欺（一个为进化论者一向不肯承认的谬见）。
He is no longer taken in by
the fallacy that description is explanation (a fallacy so often unrecognized in
popular teaching of the theory of evolution).
他过去因为轻易接受这种谬见，所以叫他放弃“有位创始的造物主，在祂创造的宇宙中，可以自由行事”的信念……所以他常在不满不安之中。
His credulous acceptance had
previously led inevitably to his dismissing the very idea of an initiating
Creator, free to interfere in the world He had made.
三 、教条式的不可知论者
3. The Dogmatic
Agnostic
这等人可以说是承继了赫胥黎教授的传家法宝。他说论到神或超自然界，我们是一无所知。在物质世界以外，没有任何事可得而知，或可以证明。他干脆地说，“我不知道。你不知道。无人知道。没有人能认识神”。没有人能说他是“漠不关心的。”祂坚持他的不可知论，有甚於许多基督徒之信基督教。他的外部生活甚或使一些挂名的信徒惭愧无颜。
Here is the man on whom the
mantle of Thomas Huxley has fallen. He
claims that we can know nothing of God or of the supernatural world. Nothing outside the material world can be
known or proved. He says, tersely,
"I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows.
Nobody can know." This man
is not "indifferent." He takes
his agnosticism more seriously than many Christians take Christianity. And his outward life may put that of some
professing Christians to shame.
甩以驳斥“不可知论”的有力理由很多，自然要视其立论而异。先就三理见解而论。
RATIONAL FACTORS
总有一天，那些一点不关心的人，会认真地关心起来。譬如伏尔泰（Voltaire 1694-1778） 会影响多人，在文艺中对于超自然之事，予以嘲讽，但终于在他辞拽的病榻上呼叫说：：哦，神了！拯救我。耶稣基督拯救我。神！怜悯我。耶稣基督怜悯我。”
The factors which make it possible to talk
rationally in terms of the "impossibility" of agnosticism vary,
naturally, with each position. Take the
first. There comes a day when those who
couldn't care less begin to care intensely.
Approaching death makes the most ardent pursuer of pleasure sit up and
think. Voltaire, who has initiated so
many into the art of ridiculing anything allegedly supernatural, cried on his
death bed, "0 God save me. Jesus
Christ save me. God have mercy upon me."
“理性时代”（Age of Reason)。三的作者培恩多马（Thomas Paine 1737-1809)就是另外一个例子。当他病人膏肓的时候，他对服侍他的护士说：“你曾经读过我所写的书没有？”护士说，“我赞过一点”。他说，“那么好不好请你评论一下，我愿意从像你这样的人得到一些正确的回答。”她告诉他当她年轻的时候，有人送给她一本“理性时代”，但是她越念，越觉得在黑暗里摸索，心灵上感到十分苦痛，结果她把这书烧掉了。培恩回答说：“我巴不得所有念这本书的人都这样做，我写这本书实在给撒但效了不少的劳。” 后来护士听到他屡次情绪紧张地说：“主啊，上帝啊；主耶稣啊，可怜我！”他的这种对以前意见的撤回，显然是被他的同事，在他死后给烟没了。
Thomas Paine, author of the
widely circulated Age of Reason, provides another example. During his last illness he was constantly
attended by Mary Roscoe of Greenwich, New York.
He asked her if she had ever read any of his writings. When she said that she had read only a very
little of them, he asked for her candid opinion, adding, "from such a one
as you I expect a correct answer."
She told him that when she was very young his Age of Reason was put into
her hands, but that the more she read in it the more dark and distressed she
felt, and she threw the book into the fire.
"I wish all had done as you," he replied, "for if ever
the devil has had any agency in any work, he has had it in my writing that
book." While caring for his needs,
she repeatedly heard him saying with intense feeling, "0 Lord! Lord
God!" or "Lord Jesus have mercy upon me!" There seems to be good grounds for believing
that written retractions of his previous views
were destroyed by his former
associates after his death1.
关于第二型见解有一种经验上的不可能。凡寻求的人大多会得着，只要他向正确的所在，且用正当的方式寻求。在宗教的事例中，我们有最权威的话，“你们祈求，就给你们…寻找就寻见；叩门就给你们开门。因为凡祈求的就得着，寻找的就寻见；叩门的就给他开门。
There
is an empirical impossibility about the second position. The man who seeks will most surely find, so
long as he looks in the right place and manner.
We don't expect to find our examination results pinned up in the
telephone booth nearest to our house, convenient--or embarrassing--though this
might be! But we should be disappointed
if we did not find them pinned up in the approved place on the advertised day.
（路11：9-1、）我们若不祈求，便不能证明或否认这些名词；而且我们若是祈求祂，我们就必得着。假如我们说自己已祈求过，却徒然无效；这是因我们没有用正当的方式祈求。
In matters of religion we
have the words of the highest authority, "Ask, and it shall be given you;
seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For everyone that asks receives; and he that
seeks finds; and to him that knocks, it shall be opened."2
神没有鼓励我们去为自私的目的求物质上的东西，神已指示我们这正当的方式：“你们寻求我，若专心寻求我，就必寻见。”（耶29：13）
We cannot prove or disprove
these statements without asking and we cannot ask without receiving. If we claim to have asked already in vain, we
cannot have asked aright. God has said,
"Ye shall find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart."3
第三型见解，即“教条式的不可知论者”。对这一见解须子详细检讨。一般说来，这等人对人生的科学看法是满有把握的，他没有给位格的神稍留余地。通常认为科学方法是以感觉作观察的开始。但是要作到这一点，须先有许多假设；诸如：“自我”必须存在；我的感觉必须健全而正常；我所做的观察须与先前观察家们所有的努力有关联；由感觉所获的经历必须与实在相符；宇宙中有其常道与和谐；而且在过去、现在及能观察的将来之间，存在着一种有机性的联合。对于科学家所做的这些假设，没有一个有理性的人会加以反对的。可是也没有科学家能举出绝对可靠或决定性的证据说：“这便是最后的证明。”他所能说的，充其量只是“我的假定或许能给事项提供一个好的说明而已。”科学和哲学都无法绝对地证明任何事项。
The third
position, that of the dogmatic agnostic, needs to be examined more
closely. Generally, this man is well
grounded in a scientific approach to life which he feels leaves little room for
a personal God. The scientific method is commonly regarded as starting
with observation by the senses. But to
reach that point, there have to be many assumptions, for example: I exist; my
senses function normally; they have affinity with those of previous observers;
the sense-data correspond to reality [see my comment below]; and; there is an
inherent constancy or consistency in the universe; and there is an organic
unity between yesterday, today, and the unobserved tomorrow. No reasonable
person objects to the scientist making these assumptions. Yet no scientist can
amass overwhelming or conclusive evidence and say, "That is final
proof." All he can say is, "My
assumptions seem to work and supply a good explanation of phenomena." Neither science nor philosophy can prove
anything absolutely.
如果神学家反对他难以承认的科学定理，他也应该容纳科学家批评神学的论述。我们应该有这种容纳的精神。怀特克爵士（Sir E．Whittaker)在英国广播电台上说：“当我们从纯理智的观点，来比较神存在的辩论与爱因斯坦的相对论的证据时，我可以说神学家已经有这种容纳的精神。”现今许多不可知论者都是忽视证据，他们藐视这种证据为不合科学的与不公正的态度。这种态度只有在基督教教训的亮光中才能明白。不拘人受的教育有多么高深，人的道德如何优美，基督的教训就显出在基督的灵与属血气之人的灵之间，有著一条莫大的鸿沟。（罗1：18-22 ）
SCIENTIFIC
ATTITUDE
Now if the
theologian gives due deference to scientific statements, while protesting
against unjustifiable scientific dogmatism, he is surely entitled to expect
similar respect for assumptions in his realm.
Such respect should not
begrudge. Sir Edmund Whittaker said,
"When, from the purely intellectual point of view, we compare the
arguments for the existence of God with the proofs of Einstein's General Theory
of Relativity, I should say that the theologians have it." But the indictment that could be brought
against many agnostics today is that they are ignoring the evidence and
treating it as beneath their contempt, a grossly unscientific and unfair
attitude. This attitude is understandable
only in the light of Christian teaching, which reveals the great gulf between
the spirit of Christ and the spirit of the natural man, however well educated,
moral, and refined that man may be.4
论到物质界的事物时，我们常易轻信，且极易受骗。同样，一说到属灵的事，常易于无意中流入一种错误的态度。若是加以彻底研究，这种态度是立刻要放弃的。祂这种错误的结果，叫我们武断地说：“我所不知道的根，即等于根本没有这件事。”但合理的态度应是这样：“我不知道这我愿虚心受教于一位能知道的。”正如我们听从一位外科医生王位飞行员在他们各肩的任务一样。有些人每每自傲对事物有理性，但一来到属神的事上，便比众人更缺乏理性了！
When it comes to material
things we are credulous and amazingly gullible.
When it comes to the realm of the spirit many of us unconsciously slip
into an attitude which we should instantly disown if we were to examine it
thoroughly. The result is that we
virtually assert, "My ignorance equals factual impossibility." The reasonable attitude is, "I don't
know, but I'm willing to put myself in the hands of one who does," as we
do with a surgeon or an airplane pilot in their respective spheres. Some of us who pride ourselves on our
rational attitude to things are of all men least rational when it comes to the
things of God!
无知（知识上的缺乏）是可以谅解的：这是因为当代基徒教的宣传工作尚未达到至高水准。基督徒在此新异教文化中，不甘于调查研究，或无勇气为基督教守住立场，这也是可谅解的。惟独有人说对神是不可知的，然而却有许多证据，他们不肯去查考研究，有不少正确的实际经历，他们不肯屈从，这实在是令人百思不得其解的事。
AVAILABLE DATA
Ignorance is understandable.
Contemporary Christian propaganda is not of superlative quality. Unwillingness to investigate, or to face the
music of taking a stand as a Christian in a neo-pagan civilization, is also
understandable. But it is very difficult
to understand men claiming the right to say that God is unknowable while there
are data that they decline to investigate and more than one valid experiment to
which they are afraid to, submit.
有些人主张没有证据；他们说任何证据是不可能的。我并不是说这些人是制压证据，因为我从经验中获，众多数的这等人是真正的无知（真的不知道）。因此，本文的目的之一，就是对这样的人提供一些积极的研究线索。
There are those who maintain
that there are no data; that in the nature of the case it is impossible to have
any data. I would not suggest that many
such are suppressing the evidence, because I know from experience that most, if
not all, are genuinely ignorant. One of
the purposes of this brief inquiry, therefore, is to suggest positive lines of
investigation.
斯宾塞（Herbert Spencer1820-1903）是一位众所周知的“不可知论”钜子。他会发表过一项思想界必须接受的交言。他说，从来没听说飞鸟能飞越天空之外，也从来未听说人能以其有限的心思能透人遮掩无限者心意的幔子。因之，他推断有限者是不能认识无限者的，这就等于说，不可知论是“天经地义”的了。他的这句“名言”是安全无比的。但是他的这种推论是不根据前提的，所以我们必须予以驳斥。他的意思是说，（其实他的这句名言是毫无根据的）无限者也照样不可能透入那个幔子。这就是将“无限者”这个名词变为荒谬了。一个有限的人，尚且能常常发表已见，叫别人知道；而一位无限者却无法表达自己，岂不是无限者的能力反低于有限者了吗？一位能表现自己，且能知道人之困惑及其需要的“无限者”，若仍不能突破那幔子，那岂非祂比必朽的人更为有限了吗？如果一个人知道他自己是神，是那无恨者，且知凡出于他的一言一语，会解决千万入的困惑，会使破裂的人格复整，会使破碎的生命得苏，会给受挫的心灵以光明，且会使失丧的心灵得平安；那么，访问谁还会首于缄默呢？
Herbert Spencer, popularly
regarded as one of the foremost apostles of agnosticism, pronounced a dictum
which any thinking man must accept. He
stated, with all the observation there has ever been to verify his statements,
that no bird has ever been known to fly out of the heavens, and no man has ever
been known to penetrate with his finite mind the veil that hides the mind of
the Infinite. Therefore, he postulated,
the Infinite may not be known by the finite, i.e., agnosticism is secure. His dictum is foolproof. But his deduction is a non sequitur, based on
inadequate data, and we must reject it.
He infers, without any grounds in his dictum, that the Infinite is
equally incapable of penetrating the veil.
This reduces the term, Infinite, to absurdity. An Infinite that is unable to express itself
is less capable than finite mortals who are forever making themselves
heard--especially students! And an
Infinite that is capable of self-expression and is aware of the perplexity and
need of man, yet fails to break through the veil, is less moral than mortal
man. What man would stay in shrouded
silence if he were the Infinite and knew that a word from him would resolve a
thousand human complexes, integrate shattered personalities, mend broken lives,
bring coveted light to baffled minds, and healing peace to disturbed hearts?
但有些人会说‘我们有什么正确的理由去假定神有位格，使我们应当或常能以“祂”而不以“它”称呼之呢？’对付这个异议有不少的答案。例如，我们可以推断，任何存在著的“无限者”，必定是一切有限责体或气体、原子或原素等等之绝对的和主宰性的“第一因”。从无数观察的结果，我们知道，没有“果”多于它相对之“因”的，甚至原子的连续反应与它相偕而来的破坏方亦然。依此类推：我们根据什么理由能做设像“位格”（所以使入异于禽兽的最大匾别）这样一个“果”，是产生于一个没有位格的“因”呢？
HIM OR IT?
But, says someone, what right
have we to assume that the Infinite has personality, that we should, or ever
could, think in terms of Him instead of It? There are various ways of meeting
this objection. For example, it is
possible to infer that any existing Infinite must be the absolute, sovereign
Cause of all finite substances or gases, atoms or constituents. By a myriad observations we know of no effect
greater than its corresponding cause--not even atomic chain reaction with its
accompanying devastation. By analogy,
then, on what rational grounds could we assume that an effect such as
personality (the supreme distinction of mortal man in the animal world) was
produced by a cause which lacked what it somehow managed to produce? Do you say, "Evolution explains that
perfectly, without admitting any need of a Creative Personality"? Inadequate data once more! Evolutionary philosophy has no room for a
personal God, but let us distinguish between philosophy and scientific
fact. The observable facts tell us much
about the processes of development, but are absolutely silent about ultimate
origins. The only scientific facts we
have are neutral, open to the Christian or the materialist interpretation.
你说：“进化论可不藉助于一位‘创造的位格’，即能对此作完全的解释吗？”这又是一个不适当的论据！进化论哲学是不给有位格的神稍留余地的，但是让我们把哲学或科学事实泾渭分清。可观察的事实，固然可以告诉我们许多关于进化的过程、但对于事物最根本的超事实是这样，只有当“无限者”愿意把祂自己启示给人的时候，我们才能以有限的心思认识祂（换言之，祂要不愿意启示祂自己，我们是无法认识祂），这比任何凭理性，或不凭理性所达的结论更为重要。而且我们也当知道，这位“无限者”是有位格的，并非从本体论的（注：Ontological本体论是研究事物的本质实际存在的哲学理论。)与目的论的(注：宇宙谕的一门，论及自然界的万事万物均有其目的。)辩论中推演出来的、乃是由“无限者”启示祂自己为一位格者这件事实而来的，在人格的属性中表现其无限老的程度。有一位真而活的神。祂曾在圣经中发言。祂所说的，就是祂本来的意思，祂所应许的，祂就要实行。
But
far outweighing any conclusions that may or may not be reached by reasoning, is
the fact that with our finite minds we may know of the Infinite only what the
Infinite is pleased to reveal. And we
may know that the Infinite is personal, not from any ontological or
teleological argument, but from the fact that the Infinite has revealed Itself
(Himself) as a person, exercising on an infinite scale the attributes of
personality. There is a living God. He has spoken in the Bible.
祂施怜悯给那些信靠祂的人；抵挡祂的，祂必要审判。祂已经在祂儿子耶稣基督的道成肉身，被钉十架与复活上，高度地启示了祂自己。祂在历史中有所行动。实在说来，历史就是祂的历史，并非人的历史，亦非“痴人说梦”。祂已夫人了（祂原来计划的）时空的连续（Space-Time continuum),甘愿受到限制，等到审判的时候，祂将再度的突入。祂已经来到祂所造的世界，在耶稣基督里成为真人，也就是神而人（god-Man)。
He
means what He says and will do everything that He has promised, both in mercy
to those who will trust Him and in judgment against those who rebel. He has revealed Himself supremely in the
incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of His Son, Jesus Christ. He has acted in history. History is, in fact, His story--not man's nor
the "tale told by an idiot . . ."
He has broken into the space-time continuum which is his own idea,
subject to limitations He has imposed, and He will break in again in judgment. He has come into the world He made. Jesus Christ became true man, the God Man.
祂在时间未被造以前就存在，祂就是神，并不以为与神同等为强夺的，反倒虚已，成了奴仆的样式，顺服至死，且死在十字架上。（腓2：6-8）。“因为我没有该事实的哲学，就拒绝基督臭妙的位格是合理的吗？”
He,
who before time was created, existed essentially in the form of God and did not
count equality with God as something to which He must cling tenaciously, but
took the form of a bondservant and humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto
death-the death of the cross.5 Is it
reasonable to reject the fact of Christ's complex person because I have no
philosophy for the fact?"
十九世纪有一个不可知论者，他的名字叫伯莱劳（Charles Bradlaugh），他屡次说，“我们与耶稣基督并无分争，我们只是反对基督徒。”当耶稣在世上的时候，虽然祂说了些惊人的话，例如祂有赦罪的权柄，又能决定一切人类的命运，但祂的仇敌在祂身上找不什么错处来。为什么他们不能定祂的罪？因为祂没有犯过罪，根本不知道罪，在祂里头没有犯罪的根苗，祂是无罪之人！是世上唯一的无罪者！无怪彼拉多说，“看哪，这‘完’人。”（Beholdthe Man!)死亡与败坏不应当在这无罪之人身上有所要求。祂死是完全出于甘心愿意。死从来没有要求祂，因为祂从来没有犯过罪。祂是神永生之子，宇宙的伟大创造主与支持者，祂是一切有限之事物的“无限之因”。但祂来到世界，并不是向我们夸示祂的权能，祂来不但是在言语上，而且也是在行动上，彰显祂的大爱。祂医治病者，赶逐污鬼。祂使盲者复明，哑子说话，聋子听见。祂甚至叫死人复活。祂的最大工作就是为人舍命，祂有权柄舍去，也有权柄取同（参看罗5：6，8；约10：10-18，19：1-广7；太20：28）。
"Behold the Man"
Charles Bradlaugh, one of the
leading lecturers in agnosticism of the last [19th] century, constantly
reiterated, "We have no quarrel with Jesus Christ, only with
Christians." In His days on earth,
His enemies found no fault in Him, although He made the most stupendous claims
for Himself. He claimed the authority to
forgive sins and to determine the destiny of all mankind. Why were they unable to convict Him of
sin? Because He never sinned in deed or
in thought and in Him there was no sin in embryo. A sinless man! The only sinless man the world has ever
known! No wonder Pontius Pilate said,
"Behold the Man." But surely
death and corruption should have no claims upon the sinless man. Precisely.
They had none. It was for us He
went to death--voluntarily. Death had no
claim upon Him because He did not sin.
He was the Eternal Son, the great Creator and Sustainer of the universe,
the Infinite Cause of all things finite.
But He didn't come into this world to give us a demonstration of power;
He came to show His love in action, as well as in word. He healed the sick. He dealt with psychological and spiritual
disorders that still baffle our experts. He restored sight, speech, and
hearing. He even raised the dead. His crowning work was to lay down His life
and take it up again.6
这些事都发生在帕勒斯丁地。相信这些事的发生并不困难，若叫人租信这些事没有发生过就更加困难。记载这些事的都是很单纯的人，若说他们这一群头脑单纯的人，发明了耶稣这样的惊人品格，又捏造了一些神迹，那简直是旷古未闻！
FAITH IN WHAT?
These things happened in
Palestine. And it requires less faith to
believe that they happened and were recorded by simple men, than to believe
that they never happened but that these same simple men invented the amazing
character of Jesus and attributed imaginary miracles to Him.
假如我们跟英国的哲学家休谟（David Hume）一样去否认神迹的可能性，可也说省了许多调查证据的麻烦，但不能因此就一劳永逸，解决了一切的难题。不去回答，只是制压会发生更多问题的。放弃自己的成见，承认我们所谓的“即定律”乃属暂时的性质，是更近乎科学的态度。人们的心智是有限的，现代人必须承认这一点。
To deny with Hume the
possibility of miracles may save us the trouble of examining the evidence, but
is not by any means a way out of all difficulties. The suppression raises more questions than it
answers. To abandon prejudice and admit
the tentative nature of our so-called fixed laws is a more truly scientific
approach. There are limits to the human
mind and modern man must admit them.
神并非无能者，祂能把自己启示给人。语言的设计者不会不能说话的。神也不是不道德的，祂既知道人的需要，所以就启示了祂自己。祂已照著人需要认识祂的程度而向人说明了自己，祂藉先知的口说出祂一部分的心意。祂经由表显祂形像的基督耶稣——祂的儿子之生活、行为、受死、复活、升天，按人所需要的，尽量表现祂的心意。耶稣说：“人看见了我，就是看见了父。”“弃绝我不领受我话的人，有审判他的：就是我所讲的道，在末日要审判他。惟有我差来的父，已经给我命令，叫我说什么）讲什么。“（参看约14：9，12：48-49）。
"I have
spoken . . "
God is not
incompetent. He can reveal Himself. The designer of speech is not
inarticulate. Ipse locutus est!
He is not immoral. Knowing man's
need, God has revealed Himself. He has
revealed parts of His mind by the mouth of His prophets. He has spoken as much of His mind as man
needs to know through the life and lips, deeds and death, resurrection and
ascension of Jesus Christ, His Son and His express image who said, "He
that hath seen me hath seen the Father," and "He that rejecteth me,
and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have
spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day...For...the Father which sent
me...gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak."7
神在这话中究说明了些什么呢？祂说明了祂对于人类无限的爱。祂说明了祂创造我们是为了祂自己——为了与祂相契。祂要我们寻求祂的旨意，以便与祂面对面地共享永远的交谊。祂说我们的首由，是为要我们选择爱祂并以诚实心彼此相爱，而非仅“表示礼貌”而已。祂说及自由的被滥用，和入迷失了他的正路，以致不能接触到神。祂说及祂对于的恨恶，这些罪就是人的自以为义、反抗神、忘恩负义和骄傲；并说及神对人的爱如此之大，甚至差遣祂的儿子代替罪人的地位——就是代替我的地位——将众人的罪归在她身上，因而使世人都能得到无代价而公义的赦免。
What has God said in thus
speaking? He has spoken of His infinite
love towards mankind--He couldn't care more.
He has explained that He made us for Himself, for fellowship with
Him. He wants us to find out His will,
to do it here on earth, and then enter His visible presence to share unbroken
fellowship with Him.8 God has spoken of
our freedom to choose [psychological volition], given to us that we might
choose to love Him and love one another with real love, not mere
"dutydemonstration." Man has
abused his freedom, lost his way, and thus, lost touch with God. God's words describe, on the one hand, His
hatred of sin, i.e., human selfsufficiency, rebelliousness, ingratitude, and
pride; and, on the other hand, His great love towards the sinner, love that
sent Jesus Christ to take the sinner's place-my place-in the condemnation due
to the transgressor. By His act God's
Son made available a free and righteous pardon for every man who
believes.9 We may catch the echo today
as did Dr. Thomas Bilney, (Father of the English Reformers), in his room in
Trinity Hall, Cambridge, in 1516: "
“耶稣基督降世，为要拯救罪人，这话是可信的，是十分可佩服的，在罪人中我是个罪魁。”（提前1：15）。
神已藉耶稣基督的受死对付了世人的罪。祂已这样告诉了我们。这是基督徒信息的中心。这个门是敞开的，只要我们愿意，我们便可进入，蒙赦免、得洁净而得与神和好。
This is a trustworthy
statement worthy to be accepted by all men, that Christ Jesus came into the
world to save sinners, of whom I am chief."10 Christian data center around the death of
Jesus Christ. In that death God has
dealt with sin.
有些人提出异议：“我们不信神已向人说过话，”“我从未听过祂说话。”但听不到广播，或忘记了打开收音机，都不足以证明没有电波在传播。不去听演讲，不能说演讲未会举行。去听演讲，但自己听不明白，不能证明演讲的人胡说八道！事实上，我们拒绝圣经，丝毫不能从圣经中有所获得，不能说神没有在圣经中说话。为了应付学校考试而读经，和为了听神的话而读经是完全不同的。主要的难题是：听神的话而读经不在乎头脑知识，乃在乎心志。当我们听到神向我们说话的时候，我们必得有愿意作的心志（约7：17）。但是我们总是任意而行，奔走己路。我们不喜欢基督教来干涉我们的一切。不知下觉地我们就证明了圣经在主要的问题上是对的，因为这正是圣经对人的描写，并非是空中的楼阁，现代哲学的进步观念！
Are we willing? "
But I don't believe that God
has spoken," objects someone, "I have never heard Him
speaking." Failure to hear a
broadcast does not prove that there was no transmission. Cutting a lecture is not the same as the
lecture not being given. The fact that
we went to a lecture, but failed to understand it all, is no proof that the
lecturer did not know what he was talking about! And the fact that we have neglected the
Bible, and never extracted much from the small portion we have read, does not
mean that God has not spoken in the Bible.
There is a vast difference between cramming for an exam in a religion
course and reading to hear what God has to say to us. The chief difficulty with the latter lies in
the realm of the will rather than the intellect. We have to be willing to do what God says
when we hear Him speak.11 But we go our
own way so often and we want to continue going our own way. We don't want Christianity to interfere with
our program. Unconsciously we prove the
Bible to be true on a major issue because this is the Bible picture of man--not
the utopian, "progressive" view of recent humanistic philosophy!
有人反对说，“我们不敢把自己完全投靠给一位我们根本不认识的人。”不可知似乎是一个颇有道理的口实。但是我们不必总在浑浑噩噩中。有证据可查，关于耶稣基督的事实，有历史上的明证，关於记载这些事实的文件，有文学上的证据，关于祂门徒的一切事，有心理学上的证据，关不要们自己是什闻样的人，由于和主接触，我们变成何等的人，有经历上的证据。这一切的证据，都是我们应当学习研究的。在上述这些认知神的线索上，一个“门外汉”究应从那一条开始呢？那些线索以后也许有很大的用处和利益，但我们必须从其中最重要的论据人手，就是关于耶稣是谁的道理刀因为只有祂自己是基督徒最好的证据。其他论据都是次一等的，不能满足我们的需要。我们所能知道的是，这位拿撒勒先知，永远是神的儿子有一本简短的记载，是神所默示而由使徒约翰写成的。专为那些不能确认耶稣即是基督，神的儿子，因而不敢信祂的人写的。很多人一读这本记述，便不再存著成见和怀疑了。我（著者自称）的父亲读了这本约翰福音，并且实践了他所读的以后，便从犹太教的怀疑论转到基督教的信仰。其他因同样情形而皈依基督教的人，真是不胜枚学。兹引述约翰福音中那些经句于下：
THE EVIDENCE
"But," we protest, "
we are afraid of
trusting ourselves totally to someone of whom we know so little." Ignorance may seem to be a plausible excuse, but we need not remain in
ignorance. The data are available:
historical evidence for the facts concerning Jesus Christ, literary evidence
concerning the documents containing those facts, psychological evidence
concerning His disciples, and experimental evidence concerning ourselves, as we
are and as we may become through contact with Him--all these are branches of
study open to our most careful investigation.
But which of these lines of approach should the non-specialist take to
begin with? Strangely enough, the answer
is: None of them. They may be extremely
useful and profitable later, but we should start with the most important
evidence of all, that which concerns the identity of Jesus Christ. He is the Christian datum. No second-hand conviction can satisfy us
here. It is possible to know for
ourselves that the prophet of Nazareth was and is the Son of God. A small document, inspired by God, was
produced by the apostle John. It was
written especially for those who are uncertain that Jesus is the Christ, the
Son of God, and therefore are fearful of trusting Him. There are many whose prejudices and
skepticism have been dispelled through reading this document. My father was brought from Jewish skepticism
to Christian faith through reading the Gospel written by John--and acting on
what he read. Countless other examples
could be cited.
多马对祂说，主啊！我们不如道你拄那里去，怎么知道那条路呢？
耶稣说，我就是道路、真理、生命；若不藉着我，没有人能到父那里去。——约十四章五、六节
怀疑派的始祖多马说，“复活！耶稣又活了？见即信，我非看见祂手上的钉痕，并用手探入祂的肋旁，我是不能相信的。”约翰记载当多马遇见复活之主的时候，他立刻双膝跪下，说，“我的主我的神。”（约20：24-31）
One of the earliest skeptics, Thomas Didymus,
said, "Risen! Jesus alive
again? Seeing is believing! Except I see in His hands the print of the
nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into
His side, I will not believe." John records that, confronted with the
risen Christ, Thomas fell at His feet crying, "My Lord and my God."12
使徒约翰预先见到人们会说，“多马当然是相信了，因为他看到了这样的证据（亲眼见了耶稣）！”我们是越想信，疑难越多。
John anticipated that his
readers might say, "It was all very well for Thomas! Of course he would believe, faced with such
evidence! Why is there no such evidence
for us? Trying to believe only intensifies
our doubts."
答覆疑难的就是事实，约翰在此所说的是事实，我们应当对这些事实赤露敞开，因为神藉着这些事实对我们说话。我们要多念圣经的记载，因为这就是永生秘诀之所在。（约3：15-16，5：24，10：28）。拒绝这个秘诀就是拒绝生命。
The answer to doubts is facts, and here, says
John, are the facts. Expose yourself to
them. God speaks through them. Read them, and re-read them, as if your life depended upon them; for,
in the deepest sense of all, it does.
Here lies the secret of eternal life.13
To neglect the secret is to reject the life.
当你念圣经的时候，要特别留心，你并不只是在研究什么其他的主题。“人们所研究的被动的主题，并不是能满足我们内心需要的永活真神。不拘你怎样的怀疑你也能够说，神啊，如果有你这一位神，求你当我念圣经的时候，将关于你的真理显示给我。”有的人说他们念过这约翰福音，但没有得到什么。可是我还没有遇见这样特立独行的人。神把亮光赐给顺服的人，但祂并不用莫不相干的光照来煽动我们的理智。当你坚持读经的时候，如果你甘愿遵行神要是，你就会知道你已置身于真活的位格之前，祂正在显示祂自己是完全可靠的；召唤你转离你以自我为中心的生活，并现代唯物主义的偶像（使徒行传14：：15-16，17：30-31；帖前1：9-10），呼召你信靠祂，并跟随祂到底。祂向我们所要求的是忠心，并非称赞。
But as you read, do keep in mind that you are
not merely studying another subject. A living God who can satisfy the longing of
the human heart is certainly not a merely passive subject of human
investigation. However skeptical you may
be, surely you can say, "0 God, if there is a God, show me the truth about
Yourself as I read." Some may say
that they have read this Gospel and found nothing. I have yet to meet one such person who was
not determined to find nothing. God
gives light to those who will obey it; but He does not pander to our intellect
with flashes of irrelevant illumination.
If you are willing to do God's will, as you persevere in reading, you
will become aware that you are in the presence of a real, living, personality
showing Himself to be utterly trustworthy.
He summons you to turn from self-centered living and the idols of modern
materialism14 and calls you to trust yourself to Him and follow Him to the end. He demands our allegiance, not our
admiration.
许多当代的科学家都走错了道路，他们以为自己是这自然界的主人翁，岂不知由于他们自己本性的骄傲尚未得到控制，不肯在创造自然界的神面前俯首下心，合作奴仆。大科学家凯普尔（Kepler)并不是这样，他说：“我是以神的思想去想到神。”辛普逊爵士（Sir JamesSimpson)说：“我一生最大的发明，就是发现我是一个大罪人，耶稣基督是我伟大的救主。”传来爵士（Sir Ambrose Fleming)说：“我们绝不应当在毫不稳定，时常变迁的科学砂土上建造……乃要建造在神所要不的圣经磐石上”从未向神的真理敞关心怀的，大多数怀疑派的科学家，并不能胜过一个谦卑神前，求神赐亮光而又得到这亮光的人所作的见证。
Many contemporary scientists
have missed the way by thinking that they were meant to be masters of nature
only, while their own nature could lie un-mastered through their neglect to
become servants of God--nature's Creator.
What a contrast to Kepler: "I am thinking God's thoughts after
Him"; to Sir James Simpson: "The greatest discovery I ever made was
that I was a great sinner and Christ a great Savior"; and to Sir Ambrose
Fleming: "We must not build on the sands of an uncertain and everchanging
science...but upon the rock of the inspired Scriptures." The host of skeptical scientists who have
never opened their hearts to God's truth do not outweigh the testimony of one
man who has humbled himself and cried to God for understanding and found the
truth of Jesus Christ.
假如我们坚持神是不可知的，那么我们不是否认有关耶稣基督的史实；就是信这些话虽是真的，却认为耶稣基督是一位荒唐的说谎者。我们势必也会蔑视或诽谤基督徒有史以来世系所表现的见证，这些了大多宁愿受苦至死，也不是认他们所信的是真的。同样今日全世界阶级不同、知识不同、各种学术水准、各门科学的基督徒证明神的应许是信实的种种见证，也都要受到诽谤或被去弃了。（参看约1
Deception
Unlikely
If we still persist that God is unknowable,
then we are obliged either to deny the historicity of the data concerning Jesus
Christ, or, if the records are accepted as true, to label Him as an
unprincipled deceiver. We are also forced to ignore or libel the
testimony of sixty generations of Christians (many of whom have suffered death
rather than deny what they have known to be true), and the testimony of
contemporary Christians--of all nations and classes, all degrees of
intellectual attainment, all levels of university life, and all branches of
science--that God is faithful to His promise.15
我们可以否认有关耶稣基督的事实，继续把无知当作客观的不存在或难了解的证据，并去制压与我们学说（指不可知论）不合的原动力（因素）。但这样一来要想合理化高时又要持守教条式的不可知论，那简直是不可能的。想要推翻基督教信仰的事实根据的任何方法，也要使一切其他历史上的事实失效，而且这种方法的本身也显为不是实在的。
We may deny the facts
concerning Jesus Christ and continue to equate ignorance with objective
non-existence or impalpability of data and suppress factors inconvenient to our
theory. But it is impossible to be rational and at the same time to hold on to
our dogmatic agnosticism. Any method alleged to overthrow the factual basis of
the Christian faith would also invalidate all other historical facts -such a
method can always be turned upon itself to resolve its own principles to
uncertainty.
我们谁可以自由地说人们不认识神，也不欲认识神，且宁愿过着没有神的生活（这是罪的主因）；但不能因此便有足够的理由，说神是不能被人认识的、不可知的。神不可能像一节音乐、一册书、一个公式、一片地段或一种情绪似的被人认识，必须以祂几一永活的位格（Living Person)而认识儿话祂。我们能与祂发生关系。这里所谓“关系“一词在新约已有很清楚的说明。我们必须承认我们的需要，且必须接受耶稣基督作我们的救主，来满足需要。我们必须信赖祂医治今日人类社会失调的诊疗方法，而听从他的医治。一接待了祂，我们就必得着新生命和新经历（约翰福音第三章中所描述的重生神迹）当神借着圣经向我们说话，我们以祈祷和感恩来回答神的时候，对于圣经中的神迹所久存的疑惑，便会开始消失了。
GOD CAN BE KNOWN
We are at liberty to say that
we do not know God and that we do not want to know God, but prefer to live
without Him (which is the essence of sin); however we are not thereby entitled
to say that God cannot be known. God may
be known, not as a piece of music, or a book, a formula, locality, or
sensation, but as a living Person. We
may become related to Him. The terms of
the relationship are clearly stated in the New Testament. We must confess our need and accept Jesus
Christ as the answer to it. We must
admit the truthfulness of His diagnosis of our disorder, which has spread to
all our society, and we must submit to His treatment. Receiving Him, we receive a new life and
experience the miracle of the new birth which is described in John 3. As God speaks to us through the Bible
lingering doubts about miracles begin to vanish and we reply to Him in prayer
and thanksgiving.
如此，我们便经由属灵的死而进入属灵的生；而且我们的地上生活便开始建立成为一个新的生活方式了。
We
pass from spiritual death to spiritual life and earthly life begins to add up
in a new way.
但这不是说在这种关系中，我们就把一切的难题都解了。在这种关系中，我们还有许多不知道的事。例如罪恶的由来，原初创造的确定时间，人类将于何时受审判，在未来的一年之内我们将在何处……这些事都不是我们的理智所能及。可是我们基督徒所声言的确定性，不能叫我们成为“痴人说梦”，以为自己是无所不知的。我们知道我们知识的有限，同样我们也晓得我们的有所不知。凡我们所知道的，不能拦阻我们在未可知的范围内再去探究，但是我们可决不单靠自己的理智去穿透那个幔子，也不因为遇见不可胜过的障碍而灰心失望，我们乃是听从摩西的话。“隐秘的事、是属耶和华我们神的，惟有明显的事，是永远属我们和我们子孙的……”（申29：29）。我们如今所知道的有限，到那时就全知道，如同主知道我们一样。（林前13：12）
But this is not to say that
in such a relationship we have "all the answers." One of the characteristics of a man in this
relationship is that he is most anxious to impress upon us that he is not
therefore a know-it-all. There are a
number of questions on which he is profoundly agnostic. The origin of evil, the exact moment of the
first creative fiat, the date of the coming judgment of all men, his own
whereabouts in twelve months time...on such questions as these he is as
agnostic as he is concerning the opinion his eternal examiners will make of his
yet unwritten final papers. His avowed
certainty does not land him into a fool's paradise of pretended
omniscience. He is aware of the
limitations of his knowledge and is equally aware of his ignorance. What he knows does not paralyze his capacity
for research in the realm of the unknown, but he is not relying on the unaided
intellect to pierce the veil; nor is he bitterly disappointed when he comes up
against an insurmountable barrier and has to echo the cry of Moses, "The
secret things belong to the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed
belong unto us and to our children forever..."16 Now we know in part, but a day is coming in
which we shall know fully, even as we are fully known.17
在本文著者于哥拉斯高大学讲完了以上这段信息之后，该校校长海灵敦爵士（Sir H．Hetherington）发表了以下颇有意义的话：
After listening to an address
embodying much of the material found in this booklet, Sir Hector Hetherington,
Principal of Glasgow University, made the following significant remarks:
“有些问题”简直是不可能守中立的。这些问题与人生存有极其重要的关系。考查证据虽然是对的，但要确实匆道，我们自己必要接近这证据，这也是同样对的。我们若不确实知道“关于人生与命运的这些基本问题，我们若不确实知道是站在那里，我们就不能过一个完满的生活。因此我们自己必得决定，而且你自已也必得决定。”（参看约书亚记24：：15；同时，我们所决志的，也必须让别人知道，耶稣说：“凡在人面前认我的，我在我天止的父面前也必认他；在人面前不认我的，我在我天上的父面前也必不认他。”（太10：32-33）
There are issues on which it
is impossible to be neutral. These issues strike right down to the roots of
man's existence. And while it is right
that we should examine the evidence, and make sure that we have all the
evidence, it is equally right that we ourselves should be accessible to the
evidence.
We cannot live a full life
without knowing exactly where we stand regarding these fundamental issues of
life and destiny. And therefore we must
decide ourselves, and you must decide yourselves.18 And what we decide, we must
make known. "Whosoever therefore
shall confess me before men," says Jesus Christ, "him will I confess
also before my Father which is in heaven.
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my
Father which is in heaven."19
1 Memoirs of Stephen Grellet,
Seebohm, Ed. 3rd Edition (1870), pp. 74-75.
2 Luke 11:9,10.
3 Jeremiah 29:13.
4 Romans 1:18-22.
5 Philippians 2:6-8.
6 Romans 5:6-8; John
10:10-18, 19:1-37; Matthew 20:28.
7 John 14:9, 12:48, 49.
8 The antithesis of Hoyle's
"eternity of frustration."
9 See Frank Colquhoun, The
Meaning of the Cross, (London, Inter-Varsity Fellowship) and H. E Guilleband,
Why the Cross? (Chicago, Inter-Varsity Press).
10 1 Timothy 1:15.
11 John 7:17.
12 John 20:24-31
13 John 3:15, 16, 5:24,
10:28.
14 Acts 14:15, 16, 17:30, 31;
I Thessalonians 1:9, 10.
15 John 1:12, 6:37;
Revelation 3:20.
16 Deuteronomy 29:29.
17 I Corinthians 13:12.
18 Joshua 24:15; John
3:36.
19 Matthew 10:32, 33.
什么是不可知论？
