2017-04-11


全然敗壞的教義反映了改革宗的原罪觀。原罪一詞在流行領域經常被人誤解。有些人以為「原罪」必定是指第一個罪--------我們在自己的生活中以不同的方式覆制最初所犯的那件罪,即亞當和夏娃第一次犯的罪。但這並不是教會歷史上所指的原罪的意思。相反,原罪的教義定義人類因第一個罪而所要承受的後果。

事實上,歷史上每一間擁有信經或認信告白的教會都同意,人類身上發生非常嚴重的事情,起因是第一個罪-------這第一個罪導致原罪。也就是說,由於亞當和夏娃犯罪,整個人類都墮落了,自墮落以來,作為人類,我們的本性受到邪惡力量的影響。大衛在舊約中宣稱,「哦,上帝,我是在罪孽裡生的,在我母親懷胎的時候就有了罪」(詩五十一5)。他不是說他母親生孩子是有罪的,也不是說他一出生就做了壞事。相反,他承認人類墮落的狀態------這種狀態是他父母的經驗的一部分,他自己把這這種狀態帶到這個世界。因此,原罪與人類墮落的本性有關。這個觀念是:不是因為犯罪才成為罪人,而是因為我們是罪人,所以會犯罪。

在改革宗的傳統中,全然敗壞並不是指徹底敗壞。我們經常使用全然作為絕對或完全的同義詞,所以全然墮落的概念使人聯想到一個觀念:每個人都壞到他真正可能壞的地步。你可能會想到如阿道夫希特勒(Adolf Hitler)這樣的歷史惡魔,說這個人身上絕對沒有值得救贖的美德,但我懷疑他對他的母親有一些感情。像希特勒那樣邪惡,我們仍可以從多方面設想,他可能甚至比實際上更邪惡。因此,全然敗壞的觀念並不是指所有人類都壞到真正可能達到的極限。它是指墮落是如此嚴重,以致於它影響了整個人。墮落占領和支配我們的本性,影響了我們的身體;這就是我們會生病,死亡的原因。墮落影響了我們的心、我們的思想,虽然我們仍然有思考能力,但聖經說我們的心思變得昏昧、動搖。人的意志不再處於道德力量的原始狀態。根據新約,現在我們的意志受到捆綁。我們被自己內心的邪惡和欲望束縛。我們的身體、思想、意志、靈魂------甚至全人------都受到罪的勢力的影響。

我喜歡用我喜愛的名稱來代替「全然敗壞」這一詞,它就是徹底敗壞。諷刺的是,徹底一詞源於拉丁文的「根」,即adix,,可以翻譯為根或核心。徹底一詞與滲透到事物的核心有關。它不是指表面的次要或膚淺。改革的觀點是,墮落的影響擴展或滲透到我們生存的核心。就連英語單詞的核心實際上也來自拉丁詞cor,意思是「心」。也就是說,罪來自我們的內心。從聖經的角度來看,這意味著罪來自我們生存的核心或中心。

因此,我們要效法基督模樣的要求,不僅是要作一些小調整或行為修改,而且更是要在內部作全面的更新。我們需要被重生,被重新創造,並藉著聖靈的大能加速進行。藉著聖靈改變核心,心,是一個人能夠脫離這種徹底敗壞狀態的唯一途徑。然而,甚至這種改變也不能立刻戰勝罪。我們期待在天堂上我們的罪得到徹底消除,并進入榮耀的狀態。


在下一篇文章,我們將思考郁金香(TULIP)中考慮U,即即無條件的揀選(unconditional election


TULIP and Reformed Theology: Total Depravity
FROM R.C. Sproul

The doctrine of total depravity reflects the Reformed viewpoint of original sin. That term—original sin—is often misunderstood in the popular arena. Some people assume that the term original sin must refer to the first sin—the original transgression that we’ve all copied in many different ways in our own lives, that is, the first sin of Adam and Eve. But that’s not what original sin has referred to historically in the church. Rather, the doctrine of original sin defines the consequences to the human race because of that first sin.

Virtually every church historically that has a creed or a confession has agreed that something very serious happened to the human race as a result of the first sin—that first sin resulted in original sin. That is, as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, the entire human race fell, and our nature as human beings since the fall has been influenced by the power of evil. As David declared in the Old Testament, “Oh, God, I was born in sin, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps. 51:5). He was not saying that it was sinful for his mother to have borne children; neither was he saying that he had done something evil by being born. Rather, he was acknowledging the human condition of fallenness—that condition that was part of the experience of his parents, a condition that he himself brought into this world. Therefore, original sin has to do with the fallen nature of mankind. The idea is that we are not sinners because we sin, but that we sin because we are sinners.

In the Reformed tradition, total depravity does not mean utter depravity. We often use the term total as a synonym for utter or for completely, so the notion of total depravity conjures up the idea that every human being is as bad as that person could possibly be. You might think of an archfiend of history such as Adolf Hitler and say there was absolutely no redeeming virtue in the man, but I suspect that he had some affection for his mother. As wicked as Hitler was, we can still conceive of ways in which he could have been even more wicked than he actually was. So the idea of totalin total depravity doesn’t mean that all human beings are as wicked as they can possibly be. It means that the fall was so serious that it affects the whole person. The fallenness that captures and grips our human nature affects our bodies; that’s why we become ill and die. It affects our minds and our thinking; we still have the capacity to think, but the Bible says the mind has become darkened and weakened. The will of man is no longer in its pristine state of moral power. The will, according to the New Testament, is now in bondage. We are enslaved to the evil impulses and desires of our hearts. The body, the mind, the will, the spirit—indeed, the whole person—have been infected by the power of sin.

I like to replace the term total depravity with my favorite designation, which is radical corruption. Ironically, the word radical has its roots in the Latin word for “root,” which is radix, and it can be translated root or core. The term radical has to do with something that permeates to the core of a thing. It’s not something that is tangential or superficial, lying on the surface. The Reformed view is that the effects of the fall extend or penetrate to the core of our being. Even the English word core actually comes from the Latin word cor, which means “heart.” That is, our sin is something that comes from our hearts. In biblical terms, that means it’s from the core or very center of our existence.

So what is required for us to be conformed to the image of Christ is not simply some small adjustments or behavioral modifications, but nothing less than renovation from the inside. We need to be regenerated, to be made over again, to be quickened by the power of the Spirit. The only way in which a person can escape this radical situation is by the Holy Spirit’s changing the core, the heart. However, even that change does not instantly vanquish sin. The complete elimination of sin awaits our glorification in heaven.


In the next post, we’ll consider the U in TULIP, unconditional election.
作者: R.C. Sproul   譯者: Maria Marta 

朝聖者乘坐五月花號(Mayflower)在新英格蘭海岸登陸之後幾年,荷蘭爆發了一場爭議,蔓延到整個歐洲,乃至世界各地。這場爭議始於致力加爾文主義教學的荷蘭大學神學院。那裡的一些教授就揀選、預定教義的相關議題開始第二次思考。由於這場神學爭議在全國各地蔓延,所以它擾亂了當日的教會和神學家。最後,召開了一場會議。這些議題在會議中得到處理,某些人的觀點被否決,其中包括叫亞米念的人的觀點。

領導這場反對正統改革宗神學運動的團體被稱為抗辯派(Remonstrants)。他們被稱為抗辯派的原因,是因為他們對他們自己神學遺產內的某些教義表示異議或提出抗議。從根本上來講,有五項教義是爭議的核心。這場爭論的結果,是這五項核心神學議題成為聞名後世的「加爾文主義五要點」。現在它們以首字母合成詞TULIP(郁金香)而為人所知,這合成詞是總結有爭論的五項教義的一種聰明的方法。五要點,如為首字母TULIP(郁金香)合成目的所陳述的那樣:全然敗壞(total depravity)、無條件揀選(unconditional election)、限定的救赎
limited atonement)、不可抗拒的恩典(irresistible grace)、聖徒永蒙保守(perseverance of the saints)。

我提及這一歷史事件的原因是因為,僅僅根據這五項教義來理解改革神學的本質,是一個嚴重的錯誤,改革宗信仰包括其他神學要素和教會的認信告白。然而,這些是改革神學的五個爭議要點,它們是那些被普遍認為有別於特別的認信告白的爭議。在接下來的五篇文章中,我們將花一些時間來查看這些加爾文主義五要點,如在首字母合成詞TULIP(郁金香中)所拼寫的。


TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction
FROM R.C. Sproul

Just a few years before the Pilgrims landed on the shores of New England in the Mayflower, a controversy erupted in the Netherlands and spread throughout Europe and then around the world. It began within the theological faculty of a Dutch institution that was committed to Calvinistic teaching. Some of the professors there began to have second thoughts about issues relating to the doctrines of election and predestination. As this theological controversy spread across the country, it upset the church and theologians of the day. Finally, a synod was convened. Issues were squared away and the views of certain people were rejected, including those of a man by the name of Jacobus Arminius.

The group that led the movement against orthodox Reformed theology was called the Remonstrants. They were called the Remonstrants because they were remonstrating or protesting against certain doctrines within their own theological heritage. There were basically five doctrines that were the core of the controversy. As a result of this debate, these five core theological issues became known in subsequent generations as the “five points of Calvinism.” They are now known through the very popular acrostic TULIP, which is a clever way to sum up the five articles that were in dispute. The five points, as they are stated in order to form the acrostic TULIP, are: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.


I mention this historical event because it would be a serious mistake to understand the essence of Reformed theology simply in light of these five doctrines—the Reformed faith involves many other elements of theological and ecclesiastical confession. However, these are the five controversial points of Reformed theology, and they are the ones that are popularly seen as distinctive to this particular confession. Over the next five posts, we are going to spend some time looking at these five points of Calvinism as they are spelled out in the acrostic TULIP.
作者: Burk Parsons 譯者: Maria Marta

今天許多基督徒有一種普遍但很不幸卻是滑稽可笑的教會歷史觀。他們認為,教會开始於第一世紀,但隨後不久便落入背道之中。真信仰喪失,直到第十六世紀馬丁路德才把它恢復過來。之後,在二十世紀葛培理 (Billy Graham) 開始主辦其布道會之前,根本沒有發生過任何重大事件。很遺憾,由於我們對歷史的無知,我們便成了歷史的笑話。我們往往嚴重缺乏歷史意識。除此之外,我們也不完全知道我們在哪裡,因為我們不知道我們的過去在哪裡。我們可能知道某些歷史人物、事件,但我們常常不了解我們掌管主權的上帝在整個歷史上所做的工作,尤其在那些我們不太熟悉的時期。

今年是第十七年,我們在Tabletalk雜誌製作教會歷史的特定世紀的專題,我們這樣做的目的,是讓二十一世紀的教會能更好地了解,上帝在整個歷史是如和作工和信守祂的應許的。因為基督應許要建造祂的教會,陰間的權柄不能勝過它(太十六18)。每一個世紀都有一個關於耶穌基督信守祂的應許的故事,甚至包括那些相對來說我們還不太了解的世紀。

我們恰當地慶祝馬丁路德、約翰加爾文、和其他改教家的生活和事奉,上帝使用他們來幫助教會回歸從前一次就全交給了聖徒的信仰。然而,宗教改革並沒有隨著第十六世紀的結束而結束。第十五世紀的宗教改革先驅撒下福音的種子,第十六世紀的改教家繼續澆灌、護理。然而在第十七世紀,我們才開始看到宗教改革的教義、虔誠、與實踐的全面成熟。在第十七世紀,成為新教和改革宗的意味著什麽,大部分內容都編纂在今天我們所肯定和認信的信經和信仰告白裡。

羅馬天主教不是一天建造起來的,但它也不是認信、宗教改革、与新教的教會。第十七世紀的忠心信徒(包括男女)延續第十六世紀改教者的工作,将全部教義、所有實踐、一切心意都奪回來,臣服於上帝的話語之下。當我們站在他們的肩膀上,堅定持守他們為基督的教會、國度、榮耀而忠心宣講上帝啟示的真理時,願他們成為我們的榜樣。

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌2017年四月號 

Every Thought Captive
by Burk Parsons

In our day, many Christians have a view of church history that is a popular, but unfortunate, caricature. They believe the church started in the first century, but then soon fell into apostasy. The true faith was lost until Martin Luther recovered it in the sixteenth century. Then, nothing at all significant happened until the twentieth century, when Billy Graham started hosting his evangelistic crusades. Regrettably, we form caricatures of history on account of our ignorance of history. Too often, our historical awareness is sorely lacking. What’s more, we don’t fully know where we are, because we don’t know where we’ve been. We might be aware of certain historical figures and events, but we are often unacquainted with what our sovereign Lord has been doing in all of history, particularly in those periods that are less familiar to us.

This is the seventeenth year that we at Tabletalk are focusing on a specific century of church history, and we do so in order that the church of the twenty-first century would better understand how the Lord has worked throughout history to keep His promises. For Christ has promised to build His church and that the gates of hell will never prevail against it (Matt. 16:18). Every century has a story to tell about Christ’s faithfulness to His promise, even those centuries that are perhaps less well known to us than others.

We rightly celebrate the lives and ministries of Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other Reformers whom the Lord used to help bring the church back to the faith once for all delivered to the saints. Yet the Reformation did not end with the passing of the sixteenth century. The gospel seed planted by the fifteenth-century forerunners of the Reformation was watered and tended by the Reformers in the sixteenth century. However, it is in the seventeenth century that we begin to see the full flowering of Reformed doctrine, piety, and practice. During the seventeenth century, so much of what it means to be Protestant and Reformed was codified in the creeds and confessions that we affirm and confess today.


Rome was not built in a day, and neither was the confessional, Reformed, Protestant church. The faithful men and women of the seventeenth century continued the work of the sixteenth-century Reformers by bringing every doctrine, every practice, and every thought captive to the Word of God. May they serve as a model to us as we stand on their shoulders, holding firmly to the divinely revealed truths they faithfully proclaimed for the sake of Christ’s church, kingdom, and glory.
作者: John Piper    譯者: Maria Marta

人類語言很珍貴。它把我們與動物區分開來。它使我們取得最先進的科學發現和分享最深切的情感。最重要的是,上帝選擇通過人類語言,在聖經中向我們啟示祂自己。在時機成熟時,上帝藉著祂的兒子向我們說話,祂的兒子說人類的語言(來一12)。以同樣的方式,上帝差派祂的靈引導使徒進入所有的真理,好叫他們能用人類語言傳講祂兒子的故事。沒有人類語言所講述的兒子的故事,我們就不認識兒子。因此,人類語言無比寶貴。

但想要獲得上帝的豐盛,人類語言也是有缺點的工具。在哥林多前書第十三章,在今生與基督再來的來世這兩者之間有四個對比。

「愛是永存不息的。先知的講道終必過去,方言終必停止,知識終必消失。因為我們現在所知道的,只是一部分;所講的道也只是一部分;等那完全的來到,這部分的就要過去了。我作孩子的時候,說話像孩子,心思像孩子,想法像孩子,既然長大了,就把孩子的事都丟棄了。我們現在是對著鏡子觀看,模糊不清,到那時就要面對面了。我現在所知道的只是一部分,到那時就完全知道了,好像主完全知道我一樣。現在常存的有信、望、愛這三樣,其中最大的是愛。」(8 13節)  注意今生(現在)和來世(到那時)之間的比較:

現在:我們知道一部分。
到那時:那完全的來到,這部分的就要過去了。(9 10節)

現在:我說話像孩子,心思像孩子,想法像孩子。
到那時:既然長大了,就把孩子的事都丟棄了。(11節)

現在:我們對著鏡子觀看,模糊不清。
到那時:到那時就要面對面了(12節)。

現在:我所知道的只是一部分。
到那時:到那時就完全知道了,好像主完全知道我一樣(12節)。

在這脈胳下,我們能夠明白保羅寫這句話的意思:「我作孩子的時候,說話像孩子,心思像孩子,想法像孩子」, 他的意思是說,與我們來世的說話、心思、想法相比較,我們今生的說話、心思、想法像孩子一般。

當保羅被到樂園裡,他目睹天國的現實,他說他「聽見了難以言喻的話,那是人不可以說的。」(林後十二4)我們的語言不足以傳達上帝的所有偉大之處。

由此推斷我們可以輕視語言,或以藐視、草率的態度來對待它,這實在是一個大錯。如果我們開始將關於上帝的真實聲明貶為廉價的或無益的或錯誤的聲明,這是多麽無知的錯誤。如果我們鄙視命題、從句、短語、單詞,仿佛它們不是生活上無以言表的珍寶和必不可少的工具,我們是多麽的愚蠢。

將可能是愚蠢的主要原因是,上帝選擇差遣祂的兒子進入我們的世界這幼兒園,以嬰兒用語和我們交談。基督成為和我們一起的孩子。耶穌曾有過這樣的時候,並說過:「我作孩子的時候,說話像孩子,心思像孩子,想法像孩子。」這就是道成肉身的意思。上帝屈尊遷就,以嬰兒用語向我們說話。今生,在人類生活的幼兒園,祂與我們一起,期期艾艾地與我們說話。

耶穌以嬰兒用語說話。祂以嬰兒用語對我們講登山寶訓。在約翰福音第十七章,祂以嬰兒用語作大祭司的禱告。祂以嬰兒用語大聲呼號:「我的 神,我的 神,你為甚麼離棄我?」(可十五34)嬰兒用語無比珍貴、真實、榮耀。

還遠不止這些,上帝以嬰兒用語默示整本聖經-----真正的嬰兒用語。嬰兒用語具有絕對的權威和大能。嬰兒用語比蜜甘甜,比金子寶貴。加爾文曾說:「上帝和我們談話象奶媽褓姆慣於以嬰兒用語向小孩子說話一般」(《基督教要義》1.13.1)。上帝的嬰兒用語是多麽珍稀。它不像草必枯乾,花必雕謝,它永遠長存。(賽四十8

來世將有另一種說話、心思、想法。我們將看到在我們今生的嬰兒用語中不能表達的事情。但當上帝差遣祂的兒子進入我們人類的幼兒園,以嬰兒用語說話,為蹣跚學步的幼兒而死時,祂堵住了一些人的嘴,這些人嘲笑孩子口中發出真實與美善之言語的可能性。

當上帝以嬰兒用語默示祂自己那無謬的解釋時,我們怎麽說那些不把「人類語言恩賜是認識上帝的媒介」當回事的孩子們?那些輕視、貶低、利用這恩賜或對孩子操縱這恩賜的人,有禍了。嬰兒用語不是幼兒園的玩具。嬰兒用語是生命的氣息:「我對你們所說的話是靈、是生命」(約六63)。

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 Precious Gift of Baby Talk
FROM John Piper
Human language is precious. It sets us off from the animals. It makes our most sophisticated scientific discoveries and our deepest emotions sharable. Above all, God chose to reveal Himself to us through human language in the Bible. In the fullness of time, He spoke to us by His Son (Heb. 1:1–2), and that Son spoke human language. In like manner, He sent His Spirit to lead His apostles into all truth so that they could tell the story of the Son in human language. Without this story in human language, we would not know the Son. Therefore, human language is immeasurably precious.

But it is also imperfect for capturing the fullness of God. In 1 Corinthians 13, there are four comparisons between this present time and the age to come after Christ returns.

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love (vv. 8–13). Note the comparisons with this age (now) and the age to come (then):

Now: We know in part.
Then: When the perfect comes, the partial will pass away (vv. 9–10).

Now: I spoke and thought and reasoned like a child.
Then: When I became a man, I gave up childish ways (v. 11).

Now: We see in a mirror dimly.
Then: We will see face to face (v. 12).

Now: I know in part.
Then: I will know fully, even as I am fully known (v. 12).

In this context, we can see what Paul means when he writes, “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child.” He is saying that in this age, our human language and thought and reasoning are like baby talk compared to how we will speak, think, and reason in the age to come.

When Paul was caught up into heaven and given glimpses of heavenly realities, he said that he “heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter” (2 Cor. 12:4). Our language is insufficient to carry the greatness of all that God is.

But what a blunder it would be to infer from this that we may despise language or treat it with contempt or carelessness. What a blunder, if we began to belittle true statements about God as cheap or unhelpful or false. What folly it would be if we scorned propositions, clauses, phrases, and words, as though they were not inexpressibly precious and essential to life.

The main reason this would be folly is that God chose to send His Son into our nursery and speak baby talk with us. Jesus Christ became a child with us. There was a time when Jesus Himself would have said, “When I was a child, I spoke like a child and thought like a child and reasoned like a child.” That is what the incarnation means. He accommodated Himself to our baby talk. He stammered with us in the nursery of human life in this age.

Jesus spoke baby talk. The Sermon on the Mount is our baby talk. His High Priestly Prayer in John 17 is baby talk. “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) is baby talk—infinitely precious, true, glorious baby talk.

More than that, God inspired an entire Bible of baby talk. True baby talk. Baby talk with absolute authority and power. Baby talk that is sweeter than honey and more to be desired than gold. John Calvin said that “God, in so speaking, lisps with us as nurses are wont to do with little children” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.1). How precious is the baby talk of God. It is not like grass that withers or flowers that fade; it abides forever (Isa. 40:8).

There will be another language and thought and reasoning in the age to come. And we will see things that could not have been expressed in our present baby talk. But when God sent His Son into our human nursery, talking baby talk and dying for the toddlers, He shut the mouths of those who ridicule the possibilities of truth and beauty in the mouth of babes.

And when God inspired a book with baby talk as the infallible interpretation of Himself, what shall we say of the children who make light of the gift of human language as the medium of knowing God? Woe to those who despise, belittle, exploit, or manipulate this gift to the children of man. It is not a toy in the nursery. It is the breath of life. “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63).


This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.
/綿羊的譯心譯意

 根據我的觀察,大部分譯者都很謙卑,有些譯者簡介上留下MAIL信箱,請讀者賜教,因為我們知道翻譯這件事本身就永遠不可能完美,所以懂得虛心傾聽別人的意見。

翻譯的錯誤有幾種。第一種,真的就是錯,我曾經有一次把星期四譯成星期天,結果被細心的讀者指正,說星期一過了三天應該是星期四,看了原文,真的好想撞牆,不知道自己怎麼了。

第二種,能力不足或是看錯造成的理解錯誤。大部分譯者面對這種錯,都願意虛心接受,這也沒問題。

還有一種,就是讀者以為你錯了。有時候,不同的人對同樣的句子有不同的詮釋,比方說,「ただ、それだけ」這句話,可以譯成「就只是那樣」,但是,譯者認為這句話是一本十幾萬字作品的最後一句話,而且這句話自成一段,當然必須發揮畫龍點睛的作用,而且全書的倒數第二段都在講人類的無力,只能靠祈禱如何如何,所以在經過對原文的咀嚼,把代名詞「それ」所替代的動作「祈禱」翻譯出來,翻譯成「我們只能祈禱」,結果就被說亂譯。這是發生在我身上的事,所以魚腦如我,經過十年,仍然牢牢記住了「ただ、それだけ」這句話。

不同的人,對相同的原文有不同的詮釋,所以即使都是正確的翻譯,也有好壞之分。譯者都願意接納、尊重別人有不同的詮釋,但翻譯不是數學,沒有唯一正解,翻譯也不是只能直譯。在糾錯之前,稍微尊重一下譯者的詮釋,想一想譯者為什麼要這麼譯。

最後,拜託要指責譯者譯錯的人,先去看一下原文,不要「想當然就是譯者錯了」,我還遇過有人認為一本芥川獎得獎作品的情節設計有問題,懷疑是不是譯者的問題,那個幸運譯者又是我。

最後最後的拜託,請在指責譯者譯錯時,附上原文!!即使是「斷章取義」的原文,也總比口說無憑,「憑感覺」認定的錯有點理論基礎。


作者Sinclair Ferguson  譯者駱鴻銘

 一段談話的餘波可能會改變我們之後對其意義的想法。
The aftermath of a conversation can change the way we later think of its significance.

我的友人——一位年輕牧師——在一場在他教會舉行的研討會後和我坐在一塊兒他說道「幫助人治死罪需要哪幾個步驟在我們今晚就寢之前請帶領我走過這些步驟。」我們坐下來,多花了一些時間討論這點,然後我們才去就寢,盼望他也和我一樣,感到被我們的談話所祝福。我至今還在想他問這個問題是以牧師的身份還是為他自己問答——或許兩者都有。My friend a younger minister sat down with me at the end of a conference in his church and said: “Before we retire tonight, just take me through the steps that are involved in helping someone mortify sin.” We sat talking about this for a little longer and then went to bed, hopefully he was feeling as blessed as I did by our conversation. I still wonder whether he was asking his question as a pastor or simply for himself — or both.

對這個問題最佳的答案是什麼呢首先要作的是翻開聖經。是的,也請翻開約翰·歐文(從來不會是個餿主意!),或者翻開其他人的著作。但是請謹記,在這個領域裏,上帝不是只把我們遺留給一些佳美的人類資源。我們要受「上帝的口」的教導,好叫我們正在學習應用的原則能帶著上帝的權柄和上帝的應許,而能發揮果效。How would you best answer his question? The first thing to do is: Turn to the Scriptures. Yes, turn to John Owen (never a bad idea!), or to some other counselor dead or alive. But remember that we have not been left only to good human resources in this area. We need to be taught from “the mouth of God” so that the principles we are learning to apply carry with them both the authority of God and the promise of God to make them work.

我想到幾段經文可以用來學習羅八13十三814奧古斯丁的經文);林後六14~七1弗四17~五21西三117彼前四111約壹二28~三11。重要的是,這些經文中只有兩段含有「治死」這個動詞。同等重要的是,這些經文的背景都比要治死罪這個單一的勸勉要來得廣闊。我們將會看到這原來是個相當重要的觀察。
Several passages come to mind for study: Romans 8:13; Romans 13:8–14 (Augustine’s text); 2 Corinthians 6:14–7:1; Ephesians 4:17–5:21; Colossians 3:1–17; 1 Peter 4:1–11; 1 John 2:28–3:11. Significantly, only two of these passages contain the verb “mortify” (“put to death”). Equally significantly, the context of each of these passages is broader than the single exhortation to put sin to death. As we shall see, this is an observation that turns out to be of considerable importance.

在這些經文中歌羅西書三章117節大概是最好的起點。
Of these passages, Colossians 3:1–17 is probably the best place for us to begin.

這裏是一些相對年輕的基督徒。他們擁有從異教歸入基督的美好經驗已經進入到一個滿有榮耀的、全新的、並使人得著釋放的恩典世界裏了。或許——我們若能讀出字裏行間的意思——他們感到得著釋放已經有一陣子了,不只是脫離了罪的刑罰,更是幾乎脫離了罪的影響——他們所得到的新自由實在太美妙了。然而,罪再次揚起它醜陋的面貌。既然經歷過恩典的「已然」,他們如今發現到在不斷成聖過程中的那種痛苦的「未然」。很熟悉吧
Here were relatively young Christians. They have had a wonderful experience of conversion to Christ from paganism. They had entered a gloriously new and liberating world of grace. Perhaps — if we may read between the lines — they had felt for a while as if they had been delivered, not only from sin’s penalty but almost from its influence — so marvelous was their new freedom. But then, of course, sin reared its ugly head again. Having experienced the “already” of grace they were now discovering the painful “not yet” of ongoing sanctification. Sounds familiar!

在我們福音派裏流行一種講求快速解決老問題的次文化。和這種文化一樣除非歌羅西教會的人能牢牢掌握福音的原則否則他們就會身處險境因為在這個階段年輕的基督徒相對容易成為假教師的獵物這些假教師應許會給人更高的靈命。這正是保羅所擔心害怕的(西二816)。如今,「產生聖潔」的方法大行其道(西二2122)——而且它們看似非常屬靈,正是最熱切的年輕基督徒所追求的。但是事實上,它們「在克制肉體的情慾上是毫無功效」的(西二23)。不是一些新方法,而是只有對福音如何發揮功效有清楚的認識,才能給我們足夠的基礎和模式來對付罪。這是歌羅西書三章117節的主題。
But as in our evangelical sub-culture of quick fixes for long-term problems, unless the Colossians had a firm grasp of Gospel principles, they were now at risk! For just at this point young Christians can be relatively easy prey to false teachers with new promises of a higher spiritual life. That was what Paul feared (Col. 2:8, 16). Holiness-producing methods were now in vogue (Col. 2:21–22) — and they seemed to be deeply spiritual, just the thing for earnest young believers. But, in fact, “they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh” (Col. 2:23). Not new methods, but only an understanding of how the Gospel works, can provide an adequate foundation and pattern for dealing with sin. This is the theme of Colossians 3:1–17.

保羅給了我們所需要的模式和節奏。就像奧林匹克的跳遠選手除非我們從起跳點往後到一個我們能獲得奮力對付罪的能量的地方否則我們便無法成功。如此保羅教我們要怎麼作呢
Paul gives us the pattern and rhythm we need. Like Olympic long jumpers, we will not succeed unless we go back from the point of action to a point from which we can gain energy for the strenuous effort of dealing with sin. How, then, does Paul teach us to do this?

首先保羅強調我們要熟悉我們在基督裏的新身份是何等地重要14。當我們在屬靈的事上失敗時,我們經常會感到哀傷,因為我們忘記了我們究竟是誰——是屬基督的。我們有一個新身份。我們不再是「在亞當裏」,而是「在基督裏」;不再是在肉體中,而是在聖靈中;不再被舊創造所統治,而是活在新造當中(羅五1221,八8,林後五17)。保羅花了一點時間闡釋這點。我們已經與基督同死(西三3;我們已經與基督一同埋葬,二12);我們已經與基督一同復活(三1),我們的生命藏在祂裏面(三3);誠然,我們與基督的聯合到如此緊密的地步,以至於當基督在榮耀裏顯現時,不會沒有我們(三4)。
First of all, Paul underlines how important it is for us to be familiar with our new identity in Christ (3:1–4). How often when we fail spiritually we lament that we forgot who we really are — Christ’s. We have a new identity. We are no longer “in Adam,” but “in Christ”; no longer in the flesh, but in the Spirit; no longer dominated by the old creation but living in the new (Rom. 5:12–21; 8:9; 2 Cor. 5:17). Paul takes time to expound this. We have died with Christ (Col. 3:3; we have even been buried with Christ, 2:12); we have been raised with Him (3:1), and our life is hidden with Him (3:3). Indeed, so united to Christ are we that Christ will not appear in glory without us (3:4).

沒有能好好處理罪的同在往往可以追溯到屬靈的健忘症遺忘了我們新的、真實的身份。身為信徒,我是個從罪的權勢中被拯救出來的人,我因此是自由的,並且被鼓勵要對抗還殘留在我心中的罪惡大軍的殘兵敗將。
Failure to deal with the presence of sin can often be traced back to spiritual amnesia, forgetfulness of our new, true, real identity. As a believer I am someone who has been delivered from the dominion of sin and who therefore is free and motivated to fight against the remnants of sin’s army in my heart.

因此首要的原則是認識你的新身份——你已經在基督裏安立在這個身份上並照著這個新身份來行事為人。
Principle number one, then, is: Know, rest in, think through, and act upon your new identity — you are in Christ.

其次保羅繼續暴露出罪如何運行在我們生命的所有範圍裏511。如果我們要按照聖經來對付罪,我們絕不可犯這個錯誤,以為我們只需要對付我們生命中一小塊失敗的範圍。我們必須對付所有的罪。保羅因此整理出罪在這些範圍裏的表現:在我們私下的生活中(第5節),在日常的公眾生活裏(第8節),以及在教會生活中(911節;「彼此」,「在此」,也就是說,在教會團契裏)。治死罪的挑戰有點像節食的挑戰(它本身就是治死罪的一種形式!):我們一旦開始這個過程,就會發現到我們體重過重的各種原因。我們要對付的其實是我們自己,不只是要控制卡路里。問題在我身上不在洋芋片治死罪是生命整體的轉變。
Second, Paul goes on to expose the workings of sin in every area of our lives (Col. 3:5–11). If we are to deal with sin biblically, we must not make the mistake of thinking that we can limit our attack to only one area of failure in our lives. All sin must be dealt with. Thus Paul ranges through the manifestation of sin in private life (v. 5), everyday public life (v. 8), and church life (vv. 9–11; “one another,” “here,” that is, in the church fellowship). The challenge in mortification is akin to the challenge in dieting (itself a form of mortification!): once we begin we discover that there are all kinds of reasons we are overweight. We are really dealing with ourselves, not simply with calorie control. I am the problem, not the potato chips! Mortifying sin is a whole-of-life change.

第三保羅的闡釋為治死罪提供了實用的指引。保羅有時候看似是在給人勸勉「治死……5),卻沒有給人「實際」的幫助來回答我們「該如何」的問題。今天的基督徒往往會去找保羅,要保羅告訴他們要做什麼,然後到附近的基督教書房去找該怎麼做的方法!為什麼要把它們拆開呢?可能是因為我們在保羅的話裏逗留的還不夠久。我們沒有把我們的思想沉浸在聖經裏,只停留在表面。因為每當保羅發出一個勸勉時他很典型地都會用我們該如何將它付諸實現的各種指引圍繞在這個勸勉的周圍。
Third, Paul’s exposition provides us with practical guidance for mortifying sin. Sometimes it seems as if Paul gives exhortations (“Put to death…,” 3:5) without giving “practical” help to answer our “how to?” questions. Often today, Christians go to Paul to tell them what to do and then to the local Christian bookstore to discover how to do it! Why this bifurcation? Probably because we do not linger long enough over what Paul is saying. We do not sink our thinking deeply into the Scriptures. For, characteristically, whenever Paul issues an exhortation he surrounds it with hints as to how we are to put it into practice.

這裏確實就是如此。請注意這段經文如何幫助我們解答「如何作」的問題。This is certainly true here. Notice how this passage helps to answer our how to? questions.

 1. 學會承認罪的本相。要直言不諱——「淫亂」就是淫亂sexual immorality),不要稱之為「我受到了一點誘惑」「污穢」impurity就是污穢而不是「我正在與我的思想生活作鬥爭」「貪婪就與拜偶像一樣」而不是「我認為我必須稍微調整我的優先順序」。這個模式出現在這整段經文裏。這種揭開自我欺騙的過程是非常有力的會幫助我們揭發埋伏在我們內心隱蔽角落的罪。
1. Learn to admit sin for what it really is. Call a spade a spade — call it “sexual immorality,” not “I’m being tempted a little”; call it “impurity,” not “I’m struggling with my thought life”; call it “evil desire, which is idolatry,” not “I think I need to order my priorities a bit better.” This pattern runs right through this whole section. How powerfully this unmasks self-deceit — and helps us to unmask sin lurking in the hidden corners of our hearts!

 2.明白你的罪在上帝面前的實況。「因這些事神的忿怒必臨到那悖逆之子。」(三6)許多屬靈生活的大師都說到要把我們的私慾硬拉到十字架面前(儘管它們會又踢又叫,死命抵抗),拽到替我們承擔神的震怒的基督面前。我的罪只會帶給上帝聖潔的憎惡,而不是永恆的喜悅。要根據罪的刑罰來看你的罪的真正本質。我們太輕易會以為,基督徒身上的罪並不如非信徒身上的罪那麼嚴重。「不是全都赦免了嗎?」如果我們還繼續犯罪,答案就是斬釘截鐵的「不是!」(約壹三9)要用屬天的眼光來看待罪,並且感受到那種羞辱,你過去曾行在其中(西三7;另參見羅六21)。
2. See sin for what your sin really is in God’s presence. “On account of these the wrath of God is coming” (3:6). The masters of the spiritual life spoke of dragging our lusts (kicking and screaming, though they be) to the cross, to a wrath-bearing Christ. My sin leads to — not lasting pleasure — but holy divine displeasure. See the true nature of your sin in the light of its punishment. Too easily do we think that sin is less serious in Christians than it is in non-believers: “It’s forgiven, isn’t it?” Not if we continue in it (1 John 3:9)! Take a heaven’s-eye view of sin and feel the shame of that in which you once walked (Col. 3:7; see also Rom. 6:21).

 3. 認識到你的罪是反覆無常的。你脫去了「舊人」已經穿上「新人」910。你已經不再是那「舊人」了。你「在亞當裏」的身份已經消失了。舊人已經「和祂[基督]同釘十字架,使罪身[大概是指『被罪主宰的身體所過的生活』]滅絕,叫我們不再作罪的奴僕」(羅六6)。新人會過新的生活。低於這個標準和我「在基督裏」的身份就是格格不入的。
3. Recognize the inconsistency of your sin. You put off the “old man,” and have put on the “new man” (3:9–10). You are no longer the “old man.” The identity you had “in Adam” is gone. The old man was “crucified with him [Christ] in order that the body of sin [probably “life in the body dominated by sin”] might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom. 6:6). New men live new lives. Anything less than this is a contradiction of who I am “in Christ.”

 4. 要治死罪5。就是這麼「簡單」。拒絕犯罪,把罪餓死,抵制犯罪。沒有感受到殺死的痛苦,就無法「治死」罪。別無他法
4. Put sin to death (Col. 3:5). It is as “simple” as that. Refuse it, starve it, and reject it. You cannot “mortify” sin without the pain of the kill. There is no other way!

但是請注意到保羅是把它放在一個非常重要的、更廣的背景裏。脫離了福音要我們「披戴」主耶穌基督的「正面」呼召羅十三14),治死罪的「負面」任務就無法獨立完成。保羅在歌羅西書三章1217節闡明這點。把房間打掃乾淨,會讓我們很容易受到罪的進一步侵擾。但是當我們明白恩典福音那「榮耀的交換」的原理,我們就會開始在聖潔上獲得真實的進步。當犯罪的私慾和習慣不只是被棄絕,而是被「像基督」(Christ-like)的各種恩典(三12)和行動(三13)所替換;當我們穿上基督的品格,而且用愛心將祂所有的恩典結合在一起(14節;和合本作『用愛心聯絡全德』),不只是在我們個人的生活裏,更是在教會的團契生活中(1216節),基督的名和榮耀就會被彰顯出來,在我們裏面、在我們當中得到高舉(三17)。
But notice that Paul sets this in a very important, broader context. The negative task of putting sin to death will not be accomplished in isolation from the positive call of the Gospel to “put on” the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 13:14). Paul spells this out in Colossians 3:12–17. Sweeping the house clean simply leaves us open to a further invasion of sin. But when we understand the “glorious exchange” principle of the Gospel of grace, then we will begin to make some real advance in holiness. As sinful desires and habits are not only rejected, but exchanged for Christ-like graces (3:12) and actions (3:13); as we are clothed in Christ’s character and His graces are held together by love (v. 14), not only in our private life but also in the church fellowship (vv. 12–16), Christ’s name and glory are manifested and exalted in and among us (3:17).

這是我和我的友人在那個值得紀念的夜晚所談論到的一些事。我們後來沒有機會再次彼此問候「你過得如何」因為那是我們最後一次的談話。他在幾個月後就過世了。我經常會想要知道那幾個月在他生命裏所發生的事。但是在他的問題裏所表現出來的個人和教牧的關切,仍然迴盪在我的思緒裏。這些話和十八世紀的英國傳道人西緬(Charles Simeon)曾經說過的,他從他所鍾愛的偉大的亨利·馬丁(Henry Martyn)的畫像裏所感受到的:「不要虛度光陰」,具有類似的效果。These are some of the things my friend and I talked about that memorable evening. We did not have an opportunity later to ask each other, “How are you going?” for it was our last conversation. He died some months later. I have often wondered how the months in between went in his life. But the earnest personal and pastoral concern in his question still echoes in my mind. They have a similar effect to the one Charles Simeon said he felt from the eyes of his much-loved portrait of the great Henry Martyn: “Don’t trifle!”

本文原刊於Tabletalk雜誌。


如何治死罪
傅格森用歌羅西書三117節的經文舉出了幾個關鍵要點
首先保羅強調我們務必要熟悉我們在基督裏的新身份14
其次保羅繼續暴露出罪如何運行在我們生命所有的範圍裏511
第三保羅的闡釋為治死罪提供了實用的指引。
1. 學會承認罪的本相。
2. 明白你的罪在上帝面前的實況。
3. 認識到你的罪是反覆無常的。(三910)。
4. 要治死罪(三5)。


31天纯洁之旅31 Days of Purity
作者: Tim Challies译者: Duncan Liang