作者: Rick Ritchie 譯者:駱鴻銘譯
特別愛爭辯的早期教會領袖特土良（Tertullian）對假道是絲毫不假辭色的，以至於會拒絕那些假教師引用聖經的權利。他認為古典的知識遠遠比不上基督信仰的教導，以至於他用這個問題來加以拒絕：「雅典（代表哲學）和耶路撒冷（代表神學）究竟有何相干？」對這樣的人，我們會期望他對異端表達感謝嗎？如此火爆的人會感謝基督的敵人，闡釋被人忽略的基督信仰教義嗎？當然不會！然而，這正是特土良所作的，他論到異端馬吉安時，說道：「馬吉安最特別、最主要的工作就是把律法和福音切割開來。」（註1）The feisty early church leader Tertullian was
so impatient with error that he rejected their right of false teachers to quote
the Scriptures. He esteemed classical learning so inferior to Christian teaching
that he dismissed it with the question, "What hath Athens to do with
Jerusalem?" Are we to expect a man like this to express any gratitude
toward a heretic? Will such a firebrand ever thank an enemy of Christ for
expounding a neglected Christian doctrine? Never! Yet this is exactly what
Tertullian did, saying of the heretic Marcion that "Marcion's special and
principal work was the separation of the law and the gospel." (1)
確實，馬吉安在這方面的教導也無法贏得特土良的贊同，但是馬吉安確實在律法和福音之間直接建立了一堵厚厚的障礙，而特土良認為很適合把這堵牆留在原地，即使他展望未來，知道馬吉安其他的教導會荒廢成為一片廢墟。Surely Marcion's
teaching even in this area would not have earned Tertullian's approval, but
Marcion constructed a thick barricade between Law and Gospel which Tertullian
saw fit to leave in place, even as he looked forward to the day when Marcion's
other teachings would lay in ruins.
如果不是因為馬吉安的緣故，聖經本身也會迫使教會對律法和福音進行區分，因此我們今天所擁有的不只是律法的教義和福音的教義，而是「律法與福音」的教義。我們都清楚律法和福音是不同的，但是就如同來自同一對父母的兒女一樣，當我們同時觀察他們時，最能把他們區分開來。If it hadn't been
for Marcion, the Scriptures themselves would still have forced the church to
distinguish between law and gospel, but now we have not only a doctrine of law
and a doctrine of gospel, but a doctrine of law and gospel. We are all aware
that the law and the gospel differ, but as in the case of two children who
sprang from the same parent, we are best able to tell them apart when we
examine them together.
了解這些詞彙Getting our Terms Straight
所有的基督徒都熟悉「律法」和「福音」這些詞彙。有哪個基督徒不知道得救的道路被稱為福音呢？「律法」（或譯為法律）這個詞在日常生活裏也很常見，即使最不常去教會的異教徒，從「上帝的律法」這樣的詞句也大致能猜到這些詞大概是什麼意思。儘管基督徒都熟悉「律法」和「福音」這些詞彙，但是這兩個詞之間究竟什麼關聯，基督徒卻常常搞不清楚。The words
"Law" and "Gospel" are surely familiar to all Christians.
What Christian doesn't know that the way of salvation is called the Gospel? The
word "Law" is common enough in daily life that even the most
unchurched pagan would, from the very words "God's Law," have some
inkling of what those words meant. While the terms "Law" and
"Gospel" are familiar to all Christians, how the two terms relate to
each other is often rather murky.
大多數人都不知道，我們可以藉由這些詞彙明白聖經的內容分類。身為基督徒，我們也許會以為，我們所相信的一切都可以稱為福音，律法則是給那些生在其他時代、其他地方的人的。又或者以為律法和福音都和我們有關，但只限於我們要信耶穌基督時。我們現在已經將它們拋諸腦後了，準備迎接更偉大、更好的事了。如果福音已經完成了它的工作，我們為什麼還要去研究它呢？讓我們專注在福音之後的新生活吧。已經得救的基督徒所關注的是成聖、靈命、、或神蹟奇事。為什麼還要回到「靈奶」或「道理的開端」呢？For some of us, we
were never taught that these were categories through which to understand
Scripture. Perhaps we always assumed that as Christians, everything that we
believed was Gospel. The Law was for those born in another time and another
place. Or maybe Law and Gospel were both pertinent to us, but only in the past,
at conversion. We were ready to move on to bigger and better things. Why study
the Gospel when it has already done its work? Let us immerse ourselves in the
study of the new life that follows the Gospel. Sanctification or spirituality
or signs and wonders are the business of the already-saved Christian. Why
return to the "milk" or the "elementary principles"?
問得好！若改教家是正確的，我們就必須研究律法和福音之間的差異，因為就實際意義來說，聖經所說的，不外乎這兩個內容。即使我們談到成聖，我們要麼是在法律的意義（律法）上來談成聖，要麼是在宣講福音（福音）的意義上來談成聖。我們所說的，要麼是上帝要求我們的（律法），要麼是上帝賜給我們的（福音）。我們無法超越過這個範圍。Why indeed! If the
Reformers were correct, we must study the distinction between Law and Gospel
because in a real sense, Scripture never presents us with anything else. Even
when we speak of sanctification, we will either be talking about it in a legal
sense (Law), or an evangelical sense (Gospel). We will be talking of something
that God requires of us (Law), or something that God gives to us (Gospel). We
never move beyond this.
改教家對這個教義非常有把握，以至於他們宣告說，若缺少這個教義，我們就無法理解聖經。路德甚至宣稱，如果一個人不知道這個不同，「你就完全無法確定，他是個基督徒，還是個猶太人，或是一個異教徒，因為他們的區別完全取決於這個分別。」（註2）在他那個時代以「美國的路德」著稱的華達（C. F. W. Walther）同意路德的看法，華達說到：The Reformers were so certain
of the importance of this doctrine that they declared that without it no one
would be able to make sense out of Scripture. Luther even declared of the
person ignorant of this distinction that "you cannot be altogether sure
whether he is a Christian or a Jew or a pagan, for it depends on this
distinction." (2) In agreement with Luther is C. F. W. Walther, known in
his own day as the American Luther. Walther says:
真正認識律法和福音之間的區分有，不只是一道榮耀之光，讓我們可以正確明白整本聖經，而且若缺乏這種認識，聖經就是一本封閉的書，永遠無法開啟。（註3）The true knowledge of the distinction between
the Law and the Gospel is not only a glorious light, affording the correct
understanding of the entire Holy Scriptures, but without this knowledge
Scripture is and remains a sealed book. (3)
只要我們搞不清楚聖經的內容，聖經就會是一個無法參透的奧秘。The Bible will be
an impenetrable mystery as long as we are confused about its intent.
倘若改教家的看法是正確的，聖經就包含了兩種不同的信息，交織在舊約和新約聖經當中。其中一個信息，即律法，「是一個神聖的教義，它教導我們什麼是對的，什麼是討神喜悅的，並且定一切犯罪的、違背上帝旨意的事有罪」（註4）。另一個信息，即福音，「教導我們一個未遵行律法而被律法定罪的人應該相信什麼，即基督已經滿足並償付所有的罪咎，並且在不需要人的功績的條件下，已經為他贏得了赦罪，即『在上帝面前的義』，和永生」（註5）。這兩個教義的共同之處是它們都是上帝的話，都和我們息息相關，也都需要被人傳講。它們的不同之處是律法定人的罪，而福音卻會拯救人。難怪混淆這兩個教義會引發一些問題。如果我們讓人誤以為律法就是福音，當他們在早晨的講道之後回到家中，一定會感到被定罪了——因為他們的確被定罪了！學習分辨這兩個教義之間的差別是非常重要的。讓我們一同透過研究人們是如何混淆這兩個教義，來學習分辨這兩個教義。If the reformers
were correct, Scripture contains two different messages which thread their way
through both the Old and New Testaments. One message, the Law, "is a
divine doctrine which teaches what is right and God-pleasing and which condemns
everything that is sinful and contrary to God's will." (4) The other
message, the Gospel, "teaches what a man who has not kept the law and is
condemned by it should believe, namely, that Christ has satisfied and paid for
all guilt and without man's merit has obtained and won for him forgiveness of
sins, the 'righteousness that avails before God,' and eternal life." (5)
These two doctrines are similar in that both are the word of God, they both
pertain to us, and both should be preached. They differ from each other in that
the Law condemns while the Gospel saves. Small wonder then that confusing these
two doctrines will cause problems. If we present Law to people thinking that it
is Gospel, they will return home from the morning's sermon feeling condemned -
because they have been! It is vitally important that we learn to recognize the
difference between these two doctrines. We will do this by studying various
ways in which people confuse these doctrines.
混淆一：福音是新律法Confusion #1: The Gospel is a
New Law
你是否曾聽過這樣的講道，說你如果想靠遵行摩西律法就絕對不能上天堂，但是卻暗示你，只要履行了基督的律法就可以上天堂呢？這類的講道是最糟糕的示範，破壞了律法和福音之間的界限。如同華達所說的：Have you ever heard
preaching which left you certain that you could not get to heaven by keeping
the commandments of Moses, but suggested that you would get to heaven by
fulfilling the commandments of Christ? This type of preaching is the worst
violation of the distinction between Law and Gospel. As Walther says:
把律法和福音混為一談的第一種方式是最容易辨認出來的，也是最令人噁心的。羅馬天主教、蘇西尼主義者（譯按：中世紀的理性主義者）、理性主義者都採用這種方式。這種說法認為，基督是新摩西，或賜下律法者，而福音則被轉變成一種功績性的工作；與此同時，那些教導說福音是上帝在基督裏白白的恩典的人會被定罪、被咒詛，如同羅馬天主教所作的。（註6）The first manner of confounding Law and Gospel
is the one most easily recognized--and the grossest. It is adopted, for
instance, by Papists, Socinians, and Rationalists and consists in this, that
Christ is represented as a new Moses, or Lawgiver, and the Gospel turned into a
doctrine of meritorious works, while at the same time those who teach that the
Gospel is the message of the free grace of God in Christ are condemned and
anathematized, as is done by the papists. (6)
福音派教會在他們的教導中很少會加重這種混淆的深度。然而，這給了我們一個絕佳的起點，幫助我們明白律法和福音之間的區分究竟是什麼。首先要注意到的是當你在兩件事情中做出區分時，這兩件事就不是一件事。律法/福音的區分，首要的問題就是：福音並不是律法。Few evangelical
churches are likely to promote this depth of confusion in their teaching.
Nevertheless, this gives us a good starting point in understanding what the
distinction between Law and Gospel is really about. The first thing to note
when you make a distinction is that the two things being distinguished are two
things and not one. The first point at issue in the Law/Gospel distinction is
that the Gospel is not a Law.
如此明白的聲明，其重點很明顯，以至於我們會懷疑，真的有必要作這種聲明嗎？然而，當我們深入考察，就會發現必須一再重申這個要點，即使對那些看似很熟悉聖經的人來說也是如此。When stated
outright like this, the point is so obvious that we wonder that it needs to be
made at all. If we take a deeper look at the issue, however, we might find that
this point needs to be made over and over again even with people who otherwise
seem to understand their Bibles well.
舉例來說，我們羅馬天主教的朋友們，當然不會這麼無知到會相信他們是靠遵守十誡而得救的。他們被絆倒之處是相信有一種他們可以靠著履行的某種律法，就可以上天堂。相信羅馬天主教（據說是唯一曾在公開辯論中打敗魯益士的人）的安康姆（Gertrude Anscombe）在一篇寫於1939年的文章裏，曾提到有關參與到她的政府（英國）與德國的戰事裏是否正義的問題。對她來說，正當地評估戰爭是否是道德的，是一件關乎得救或定罪的事，因為救恩是可以靠著遵行自然律而獲得的（註7）。在天特會議的法規和敕令中，天主教會說我們乃是「靠著遵行誡命這個條件」而得救的，並且「基督耶穌是作為一位我們應當順服的立法者而被賜下的」（註8）。在安康姆和天特會議的這兩個例子中，基督在十字架上的工作都有其地位，但不是最核心的。Our Roman Catholic
friends, for instance, are certainly not so ignorant as to believe that they
will be saved by keeping the Ten Commandments. Where they get tripped up is in
believing that there is a Law, the fulfilling of which could get us into
heaven. In an article written in 1939, Gertrude Anscombe, a believing Roman
Catholic (and reportedly the only individual ever to beat C. S. Lewis in public
debate), wrote concerning the justice of participating in her government's war
with Germany. For her, properly appraising the morality of the war was an issue
of salvation or damnation, for salvation would be attained by following natural
law. (7) In the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent, the church said
that we are saved "on the condition of observing the commandments,"
and that "Christ Jesus was given...as a legislator whom to obey." (8)
In the case of both Gertrude Anscombe and the Council of Trent, there was a
place for Christ's work on the cross, but it was not central.
在我們決定當基督在登山寶訓的講道是在做什麼之前，我們最好先澄清祂所做的不是什麼。基督來不是要給我們一個比摩西律法更好的律法，使我們得救，「因為律法是惹動忿怒的；哪裏沒有律法，那裏就沒有過犯。」（羅四15）如果律法是惹動上帝怒氣的，我們知道基督來不是要帶來上帝的忿怒，「因為上帝差祂的兒子降世，不是要定世人的罪，乃是要叫世人因祂得救。」（約三17）如果基督受差不是要來定罪的，而律法是定人罪的，基督奉差遣就不是要為我們帶來更多的律法。Before we decide
what Christ was doing when he delivered the Sermon on the Mount, we had better
clarify what he was not doing. Christ did not come to give us a law superior to
Moses' which could save, for "law brings wrath. And where there is no law
there is no transgression" (Romans 4:15). If law brings wrath, we know
that Christ did not come to bring it, "for God did not send his Son into
the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him" (John
3:17). If Christ was not sent to condemn, and law condemns, Christ was not sent
to bring us more law.
然而基督的確談到了誡命和律法。在登山寶訓的講道中，祂嚴厲地警告說：「無論何人廢掉這誡命中最小的一條，又教訓人這樣做，他在天國要稱為最小的。」（太五19），保羅也勸勉我們要「成全基督的律法」（加六2；見《新譯本》）。基督的確是用最嚴厲的話來論及律法。Yet Christ does
speak of commandments and laws. In the Sermon on the Mount, he sternly warned
that "anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches
others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven"
(Matthew 5:19), and Paul exhorts us to "fulfill the law of Christ"
(Galatians 6:2). Christ did speak of law in the sternest of language.
基督談到了律法，但是祂並沒有賜下律法。這是我們無法逃避的兩件事實，而我們唯一能得出的結論是：基督所說的律法是已經被賜下的律法。在登山寶訓的講道中，先前已經賜下的律法是摩西律法。基督澄清了人們對摩西律法的誤解。Christ spoke of
law, but he did not give law. These are two unavoidable facts. The only
conclusion that can be drawn is that Christ spoke concerning a law which had
already been given. In the Sermon on the Mount, the law which had been given
was the law of Moses. Christ cleared the Law of Moses.
基督為什麼要宣講摩西律法呢？因為為了要讓基督完成祂的救贖工作，祂所要拯救的人必須認識到他們需要基督。猶太人的宗教領袖已經「馴服」了律法，扭曲律法，讓律法更容易履行全。在耶穌的聽眾當中，有些人以為他們已經成功地脫離了律法。為了祂的救恩工作，耶穌必須嚴厲地宣講律法，好叫它可以「引我們到基督那裏，使我們因信稱義」（加三24）（註9）。Why would Christ preach about the Law of Moses? In
order for Christ to do his saving work, the people he intended to save needed
to know that they needed him. The Jewish religious leaders had
"tamed" the Law, twisting it to make it easier to fulfill. Some of
Jesus' hearers thought that they had pulled it off. For the sake of his saving
work, Jesus had to preach the Law in its full rigor so that it would "lead
us to Christ that we might be justified by faith" (Galatians 3:24). (9)
如果我們只需要與這個教導爭論，即福音是新律法，而基督是新的頒布律法者，事情就已經夠糟糕了，然而問題還不止於此。那些受到這些錯誤所害的人還執迷不悟，定罪那些不這樣教導的人，正如天特會議讓我們看到的一樣，它說到：It would be bad
enough if we had only to contend with the teaching that the Gospel was a new
law and Christ a new lawgiver, (10) but problems do not stop there. Those who
are subject to these errors go further, condemning those who teach otherwise,
as we find in the Council of Trent, where it is said that:
「如果有人持下述主張，那麼，此人應受絕罰，即：讓人能夠稱義的那一信仰不是別的，就是要對上帝的慈悲堅信不疑，即為了基督的緣故，上帝以其慈悲之心而赦免了我們的罪愆，或者說，任憑對上帝慈悲的這種堅信，就可以使我們得以稱義。」（註11）"If anyone says that justifying faith is
nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's
sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be
anathema." (11)
在這點上，羅馬天主教定罪那些相信福音的人。我們盼望我們所認識的天主教徒不會持守這個教導，但是重要的是我們認識到那些將律法和福音混淆的人，往往會進一步定罪那些不加以混淆的人。At this point the
Roman church condemned those who believe the Gospel. It is to be hoped that the
Catholics that we know do not hold to this teaching, but it is important that
we recognize that those who confuse Law and Gospel often go further and condemn
those who do not.
混淆二：律法和福音被混雜起來Confusion #2: Law and Gospel
are Mingled
如果混淆律法和福音的第一種方式是把福音變成一種新律法，這在福音派教會並不常見，那麼，第二種混淆律法和福音的方式就是比較常見的。華達如此描述這種混淆：If the first manner
of confusing Law and Gospel, that of making the Gospel into a new law, is
rarely found in the evangelical churches, the second manner of confusing Law
and Gospel is more common. Walther describes this confusion as follows:
第二，當講道者沒有完全展示出律法的嚴厲以及福音的甘甜，反而把福音的要素摻雜到律法裏，或者是把律法的要素摻雜到福音裏，就是沒有按照正意分解上帝的道。（註12）In the second place, the Word of God is not
rightly divided when the Law is not preached in its full sternness and the
Gospel not in its full sweetness, when, on the contrary, Gospel elements are
mingled with the Law and Law elements with the Gospel. (12)
若我們正確地分辨律法和福音，就會看到律法的嚴厲和苛刻，和福音的自由和甘甜。當兩者被混合起來時，嚴厲的元素會被摻雜到福音裏，使的福音變得像是對人的要求，或者是把放縱的元素摻雜到律法裏，讓律法變得更容易達成。When Law and Gospel
are properly distinguished, the Law is stern and rigorous, the Gospel free and
sweet. When the two are confused, an element of sternness is introduced into
the Gospel, making it demanding, or an element of laxity is introduced into the
Law, making it more attainable.
要在一開始就明白為什麼這是一種混淆是不容易的。新約聖經所說的福音不是有對人提出要求嗎？的確，應許是甘甜的，但是耶穌拒絕那些心不甘、情不願的門徒（太八18-22）又該怎麼說呢？保羅克制他的身體，以免被棄絕（林前九27）又該怎麼說呢？或者是新約聖經裏給我們的成打的其他警告和勸勉呢？福音是甘甜的，但是它不是純糖，難道不是嗎？同樣，我們在律法裏不是也可以找到一些寬鬆之處嗎？改教家強調舊約律法那種做不到的嚴厲，不可能是正確的，律法容許我們有軟弱之處。整個獻祭系統不就是為此而設的嗎？（註13）It is not at first as easy to see why this
would be considered a confusion. Is not the New Testament Gospel demanding?
Sure, the promises are sweet, but what about the way Jesus turned away his
reluctant followers (Matthew 8:18-22)? What about Paul's example of chastening
his body so that he would not become a castaway (1 Corinthians 9:24)? Or the
dozens of other warnings and exhortations given in the New Testament? The
Gospel is sweet, but surely it is not pure sweetness, is it? And in the same
manner, can we not find some laxity in the Law? The Reformers could not be
correct in stressing the unattainable harshness of the Law in the Old
Testament. There was room for weakness. What else was the sacrificial system
set up for? (13)
當我們問這類問題時，很明顯我們已經不清楚律法和福音之前的區別究竟是什麼了。我們已經落入到以下的信念裏，即律法和福音之間的分界是位於馬太福音和瑪拉基書之間，位於舊約聖經的結尾和新約聖經的開頭。我們不明白的是律法和福音是上帝對我們說話的兩種方式。倘若祂對我們說的是律法，祂的目的是讓我們要負責任，不是要藉著律法賜給我們什麼東西。正如保羅所說：「我們曉得律法上的話都是對律法以下之人說的，好塞住各人的口，叫普世的人都伏在神審判之下。所以凡有血氣的，沒有一個因行律法能在神面前稱義，因為律法本是叫人知罪。」（羅三19-20） 我們必須認識到當牧師在講道時要我們對上帝負責任時，這個講道就是律法。When we ask
questions like these, it is clear that we have missed what the distinction
between Law and Gospel is about. We have fallen into the belief that the line
between Law and Gospel is drawn between Matthew and Malachi, at the end of the
Old Testament and the beginning of the New. What we have missed is that Law and
Gospel are two different ways that God speaks to us. If he is speaking Law to
us, his purpose is to hold us accountable, not to give us anything through that
Law. As Paul says: "we know that whatever the law says, it says to those
who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world
held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his
sight by observing the law; rather through the Law we become conscious of
sin" (Romans 3:19-20). We must recognize preaching to be Law whenever it
is making us accountable to God.
這裏要記得兩件事。首先，我們必須將所有聖經裏面要我們向上帝負責的部分都標註為律法，尤其是聖經說到必須要愛上帝、愛鄰舍的部分。耶穌說，愛上帝和愛鄰舍是律法的核心（太廿二37-40）。作為福音派，如果我們看到一節與十誡有關的經文，我們很擅長於辨識出那是律法，但是如果是一節與愛有關的經文，我們經常會忽略掉。「愛」聽起來比較像是安慰。There are two
things to keep in mind here. First, we must brand all Scripture which holds us
accountable to God as Law. This will be true even when, or I should say,
especially when the Bible speaks of the necessity of love for God or others.
Jesus said that love for God and neighbor was at the heart of the law (Matthew
22:37-40). As evangelicals we are good at recognizing law if it has to do with
the Ten Commandments, but we often miss it when it has to do with love. Love
sounds so much more comforting.
我們是否經常聽到人們說（或經常告訴人），「基督教不是宗教，而是一個個人關係」呢？這句話的目的是要讓基督教變得更容易吸引人。誰喜歡在交朋友時被一大堆規則限制呢？這種對「愛」的強調必定是好消息！How often have we
heard (or told people) that "Christianity is not a religion, it is a
personal relationship"? This is always said to make Christianity more attractive.
Who would prefer having a list of rules to having a friend? This emphasis on
love must be good news!
不，這不是好消息！至少不永遠是。正是在愛的範圍內，我們沒有達到標準。這正是當我們為了專注在愛上帝、愛鄰舍時，會破壞所有的規則和規定的原因。如果萬事取決於此，當我缺乏愛心的時候，我該怎麼想呢？為什麼有時候好消息會看起來像是一個重擔呢？No, it isn't! At
least not always. It is exactly in the area of love that we do not measure up.
This is what so many of us find when we have torn up the list of rules and
regulations in order to just focus on loving God and neighbor. If it all turns
on this, what am I to think when I am unloving? How come the good news seems
like such a burden sometimes?
倘若律法的核心真的是愛，而律法賜給我們的目的是要我們向上帝負責，那麼我們的結論就必然是上帝要我們負責，尤其是當祂設立了一個愛的標準之時，而我們卻沒有達到這個標準。我們已經被傳喚到上帝的法庭，不是因為違背了某個禮儀規定，而是因為我們和上帝與鄰舍的關係上，不夠忠心，不夠有愛心。If the Law really
has love at its heart, and the Law was given to hold us accountable to God,
then we must conclude that God holds us accountable especially when he sets
forth a standard of love to which we do not measure up. We have been summoned
to the divine court room not for some picky infraction of a ceremonial code,
but for being unfaithful and unloving in our relationships with God and man.
光靠我們更忠心、更有愛心是無法修補這個裂縫的。許多偏差的佈道策略讓人以為上帝非常寂寞，需要人去愛祂。請記得：伊甸園有可能因為我們不好的行為而失去，但是如今的問題是我們已經被踢出來了，而不是我們逃離了伊甸園。我們無法告訴人「要回到上帝那裏」以便解決他們的問題。問題是他們已經被逐出了伊甸園，而不是他們離家出走。The breach cannot
be healed by our trying to be more faithful and loving. So much bad evangelism
makes it sound as if God were lonely and needed someone to love Him. Remember:
Eden may have been lost by our bad conduct, but the problem now is that we have
been kicked out, not that we ran away. We cannot tell people to "Come back
to God" to solve their problem. The problem is that they got banished, not
that they walked out.
即使是那些說到愛心的經文，如果被用來控告我們，也是一個相當恐怖的場景。但是保羅還說了什麼呢？他說，「因為上帝將眾人都圈在不順服之中，特意要憐恤眾人。」（羅十一32）律法是嚴厲的，使眾人都成為罪人，但是這個罪咎卻創造了一個機會，顯明出上帝的憐憫。我們是不忠心的，要對上帝交帳，上帝卻利用這個處境來顯明祂對我們的信實。我們因為缺乏愛心而遭到審判，而上帝的回應是，將祂的愛澆灌在我們身上。This is a pretty
grim situation if even passages which speak of love are used against us. But
what else does Paul say? He says that "God has bound all men over to
disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all" (Romans 12:32). The
severity of the Law leaves us all guilty, but that very guilt creates an
opportunity to show forth God's mercy. We are held accountable for being
faithless, and God uses the situation to show how faithful he is. We are judged
for being unloving, and in response, God pours forth his love on us.
問題出在假使我們把律法和福音混雜在一起，上帝在這兩方面的意圖就無法完成了。祂要用不順服來使人住嘴，使他們對此負責，然後憐憫他們。為了完成第一個目的，人們必須知道他們是不順服的。他們不只是不順服，也沒有能力順服。他們不只沒有能力順服，連順服的意願都沒有。（註14）我們必須用這樣的方式來宣講律法，即沒有一個人可以站立得住。我們都試著扭動身軀，想要脫離上帝的掌握，並且告訴自己，有一天我們可以掙脫。也許我們現在還沒有達到標準，但是有一天我們會做得更好。在一篇精彩的律法講道之後，我們會發覺自己甚至不想要做得更好。我們只想去吃午餐，忘了這個講道，好叫我們在牧師開始下一個新的講道系列時，可以覺得比較舒服。The problem is that
if we mix Law and Gospel, neither of God's intentions is carried out. He
desires to shut people up under disobedience, holding them accountable, and
then has mercy on them. To accomplish the first goal, the people have to know
that they are disobedient. Not only that they have been so, but that they
cannot be otherwise. Not only that they cannot be otherwise, but that they have
no desire to be otherwise. (14) We need to preach the Law is such a way that
nobody is left standing. We all try to squirm out of God's hand by telling
ourselves that some day we might pull it off. Maybe we fall short now, but some
day we will do better. After good Law preaching, we realize that we don't even
really want to do better. We just want to go to brunch and forget the sermon so
that we can feel better when the pastor starts a new sermon series.
如果這很無情，且讓我們回想起那最終極的目的。我們想要用死刑來使人住嘴，好叫上帝可以憐恤他們。除非人們被「逮到」，他們不會覺得需要憐憫。If this is grim,
let us remember the ultimate end. We want to shut people up under a death
sentence so that God can have mercy on them. Until the people are
"caught," they won't feel any need for mercy. Not real mercy.
再次說，上帝的總體意圖讓我們明白，為什麼不能把福音變成對人的要求。倘若我們對有可能信主的人作出要求，我們是否真的讓他們明白上帝的憐憫了呢？也許是某種的憐憫，但是我們實際上所作的，只是把債務人放到一個還款計劃裏面而已。（註15）這前提是債務人還有償還的能力，而從來沒有把這個人推到一個地步，認識到他如今真的需要上帝的憐憫。Again, the overall
intention of God tells us why the Gospel cannot be made demanding. If we make
demands of the potential convert, are we really presenting him or her with
mercy? Mercy of a sort, perhaps, but what we have really done is to put the
debtor into a debt repayment plan. (15) This always implies that the debtor can
still repay, and never pushes the individual to the point of realizing that he
or she is now really at the mercy of God.
我們從來都不真的想要以上帝使用律法和福音的方式來使用它們。上帝要定罪，也要赦免，而我們要的是怪罪上帝和討價還價。上帝的嚴厲和慷慨的程度都不是我們会感到自在的。我們現在就想要知道結果。我們忘了上帝懲罰性的公義是地獄，而祂的寬宏大量是天堂。我們想要把這兩部分以同等的分量結合在一起，讓這個世界更友善、更祥和。當我們把律法和福音混雜起來，我們只是證明了我們要的不是上帝，而是一個道德警察。We never really
want to use Law and Gospel the way God intended them to be used. God wants to
condemn and to pardon. We want to chide and to bargain. God is more stern and
more generous than we are comfortable with. We want results now. We forget that
God's punitive justice is hell and his generosity heaven. We want to combine
equal portions of each to make a kinder, gentler earth. When we mix Law and
Gospel, we only prove that we don't want a God, we want a moral policeman.
只有完完全全地宣講律法的嚴厲，才能讓人在上帝面前知罪。（註16）只有完完全全地宣講福音的甘甜，才能使人在上帝面前成為公義。倘若我們不好好面對上帝的威嚇或應許，就是隨從自己的主意，而不是上帝的旨意。Law must be
preached in its full rigor to make people guilty before God. (16) The Gospel
must be preached in its full sweetness to make people righteous before God. If
we try to do anything else with God's threatenings or promises, we are
following our own agenda, and not God's.
混淆三：把福音變成宣講在基督裏的新生活Confusion #3: The
Gospel is Turned into a Preaching of the New Life in Christ
在沒有好好分清楚什麼是律法、什麼是福音的人當中，下一種混淆大概是最常見的。在許多教會裏，會對潛在的歸信者傳講真正的恩典。他們宣講基督的方式會讓人毫不懷疑基督的恩惠，這恩惠連最邪惡的罪人也可以得到。但是只有那些歸信很久的基督徒才會在這類講道中得益。The next confusion
is probably the most common among those whose preaching is otherwise very clear
in distinguishing Law from Gospel. In many churches, real grace is preached to
the potential convert. Christ is preached in such a way as to leave no doubt
that his benefits are even for the vilest of sinners. It is the
long-since-converted workaday Christian who gets ground in the gears of this
kind of preaching.
有時候我們必須假設，當牧者以熱切的語句來描繪在基督裏的新生活時，其目的是為了讓潛在的歸信者渴望成為上帝永恆救贖計劃的一部分。然而，在其他時候，這種講道是直接針對那些已經歸信的人，或者是針對那些以為他們已經歸信的人。Sometimes we must
assume that when pastors paint the new life in Christ in glowing terms, the
intent is to make the potential convert long to be part of God's eternal plan
of salvation. At other times, however, this preaching is directed precisely to
those who have already been converted, or think that they have been converted.
當這類的講道是針對那些僅僅相信他們已經是歸信的人的時候，牧師會選擇這類的講道是可以理解的。這類的講道是在宣講律法，其目的是為了使肉體的確據絕望，好叫他們可以飛快地跑到救主那裏。When this type of
preaching is directed at those who merely believe that they are converted, it
is understandable that the pastor would choose to preach like this. This type
of preaching is law preaching. It is intended to drive the carnally secure to
despair so that they might fly to the saviour.
問題出在當一個粗心大意的牧師向會眾當中已經得救的人宣講這類信息之時。宣講律法就是宣講律法，無論它針對的是誰。真正的問題不是出在牧師宣講律法是針對已經重生的羊群，而是牧師沒有接著用福音來補強。牧師之所以沒有這麼作，恰恰是因為他們相信他們所宣講的就是福音！這種混淆有部分是來自我們被正確地教導，上帝是新生活及其美好結果的來源。喜樂的順服，對兄弟自發的愛心，耐心地忍受試煉——所有這些都是上帝滿有恩典的禮物。這怎麼會是律法呢？The problem comes
when the careless pastor addresses preaching like this to the saved in the
congregation. Law preaching will be Law preaching no matter to whom it is
directed. The real problem will not be that the pastor has directed Law preaching
at the regenerate flock, but that the pastor does not follow up with Gospel.
Pastors often forget to do this precisely because they believe that what they
have been preaching is the Gospel! Some of this confusion comes because we have
rightly been taught that God is the source of the new life and all of its
wonderful results. The cheerful obedience, the spontaneous love for the
brethren, the patient endurance of trials--all of these things are said to be
God's gracious gifts. How could this be Law?
再次說，我們必須回到聖經是怎樣定義福音的。按照定義，福音是好消息（希臘文的字面意義）。相對的，律法是上帝對我們的要求（太五17-20）。上帝要求我們要喜樂地順服祂（林後九7），我們要自動自發地愛弟兄（加五14；約壹四7-8），要耐心地忍受試煉（提後二12）。這是要求，而達到這些要求就有獎賞的應許，以及沒有達到標準的懲罰的威脅。Again we must
return to the definitions which we derive from Scripture. The Gospel, by definition,
is good news (the literal meaning of the Greek word). In contrast, the Law is
God's demand upon us (Matthew 5:17-20). God demands that we cheerfully obey him
(2 Cor 9:7), that we spontaneously love the brethren (Galatians 5:14; 1 John
4:7-8), that we patiently endure trials (2 Timothy 2:12). This is demand, and
there is promise of reward for living up to them, and threat of punishment for
falling short.
牧師向他的會眾提出這些要求是合乎聖經的。牧師應當發出這些要求，把它們當作嚴肅的呼召，要會眾活出新的生活方式。然而，我們必須承認，會眾會不斷地虧欠這些要求。當他們開始明白這點，而越好的講道越能顯明這點，他們就需要聽見福音。我們不能把會眾已經明白福音，已經超越對福音的需求，當成是理所當然的。如同路德所說，沒有人可以對自己傳講福音。基督徒需要有人不斷地向他們傳講福音。It is biblical for
a pastor to issue these demands to his congregation. The pastor should issue
them as serious calls to a new way of life. It must be recognized that the
congregation will continually fall short of these demands, however. When they
begin to realize this, and the better the preaching the more obvious this will be,
they need to hear the Gospel. It cannot be taken for granted that they already
know the Gospel and have moved beyond it. As Luther said, no man can preach the
Gospel to himself. Christians need to hear it preached to them again and again.
總結Conclusion
對我們許多人來說，真正的律法和福音的講道是一個全新的經驗。我們的牧師從聖經的經文來講道，但他們從來沒有讓我們確信上帝站在我們這邊。有時候牧師是把福音呈現為一種新律法。其他時候，牧師會緩和律法的語氣，好讓人不會感到牧師講的不會那麼負面，也緩和福音的語氣，以免「給人錯誤印象」，也就是即使是真正惡劣的罪人也可以得救。對那些少數的幸運兒來說，當他們以潛在的歸信者的身份來到教會時，所聽到的是白白的恩典的信息，但是對在基督裏的新生活的描述，卻與我們所經歷到的大異其趣，以至於我們開始懷疑我們的信仰究竟是不是真的。For many of us,
true Law and Gospel preaching would be a new discovery. Our pastors preached
from biblical texts, but they never left us certain how God is disposed toward
us. Sometimes the pastor presents the Gospel as a new Law. At other times, the
pastor tones down the Law so he doesn't sound too negative, and tones down the
Gospel so he won't "give people the wrong idea" that even really bad
sinners can be saved. For the lucky few, the Gospel was preached as a message
of free grace when we came to church as potential converts, but the
descriptions of the new life in Christ have been so different from anything we
have experienced that we begin to doubt the genuineness of our faith.
對我們所有的人來說，真正的律法，其效用不是為了激勵我們作出更大的委身，而是讓我們感到害怕。的確有一位上帝是我們必須對祂交帳的。無論是在祂創造的工作上，或是祂救贖的工作上，我們都沒有活出祂呼召我們活出的標準。To all of us,
whatever our situation, the real Law does not serve to inspire us to greater
devotion, but drives us to terror. There really is a God out there to whom we
are accountable. We do not live up to what he has called us to, either in his
creative work or his redemptive work.
對那些害怕的人來說，福音會以這樣的信息來到：基督已經為我們成全了一切。即使我們已經是基督徒了，基督也已經為我們成全了一切。即使對那些在教會裏長大的人來說，仍然有恩典給他們！筵席已經擺好了，來享用吧！贖價已經被償付了，你是自由的！死亡已經死了，去活出來吧！地獄的苦已經有人受了，天堂如今已經向你開啟了！To the terrorized,
the Gospel then comes as a message that all has been done for us. All has been
done for us even if we are already Christians. There is grace even for those
who grew up in the church! The banquet is set. Come and eat. The ransom has
been paid. You are free. The death has been died. Go and live. Hell has been
suffered. Heaven is open to you.