信心與悔改Faith& Repentance

作者：傅格森（Sinclair Ferguson） 譯者：駱鴻銘

https://www.ligonier.org/blog/faith-repentance/

http://www.asrpci.org/asrpci-370963385326684-blog/7943388

當福音被宣告出來，乍看之下似乎會要求人作出兩種不同的、甚至是二選一的回應。有時候福音的要求是「悔改！」所以，「施洗的約翰出來，在猶太的曠野傳道，說：『天國近了，你們應當悔改。』」（太三1～2；《新譯本》，下同）再者，彼得敦促那些在五旬節當天良心被撕裂開來的聽眾，「你們應當悔改，並且每一個人都要奉耶穌基督的名受洗」（徒二38）。後來，保羅呼籲雅典人要「悔改」，以回應復活的基督所傳講的信息（徒十七30）。

 When the gospel is proclaimed, it seems at first sight that two different, even alternative, responses are called for. Sometimes the summons is, “Repent!” Thus, “John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, ‘Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (Matt. 3:1–2). Again, Peter urged the hearers whose consciences had been ripped open on the day of Pentecost, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38). Later, Paul urged the Athenians to “repent” in response to the message of the risen Christ (Acts 17:30).

然而，在其他場合，對福音的正當回應是「相信！」當腓立比獄吏問保羅，他必須做什麼才能得救時，使徒告訴他，「當信主耶穌，你和你一家都必定得救」（徒十六31）。

 Yet, on other occasions, the appropriate response to the gospel is, “Believe!” When the Philippian jailer asked Paul what he must do to be saved, the Apostle told him, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31).

但這裡沒有甚麼奧祕或矛盾，我們進一步看使徒行傳十七章，就會發現福音究竟在哪裏要求人作出悔改的回應，而那些歸信的人就被描述為「相信」（徒十七30、34）。

 But there is no mystery or contradiction here. Further on in Acts 17, we discover that precisely where the response of repentance was required, those who were converted are described as believing (Acts 17:30, 34).

這個事實會破解任何的混淆，那就是當耶穌在加利利傳講「神的福音」時，祂呼籲祂的聽眾，「時候到了，神的國近了，你們應當悔改、相信福音。」（可一14～15）在這裏，悔改和信心是互為表裡的。它們代表「歸信」（conversion）裏的兩個同等重要、同樣不可或缺的層面。因此，兩個詞都暗示對方的存在，因為每一件事實（無論是悔改或相信）都是另一件事實不可或缺的條件。

 Any confusion is surely resolved by the fact that when Jesus preached “the gospel of God” in Galilee, He urged His hearers, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:14–15). Here repentance and faith belong together. They denote two aspects in conversion that are equally essential to it. Thus, either term implies the presence of the other because each reality (repentance or faith) is the sine qua non of the other.

因此，用文法的術語來說，「悔改」和「相信」這兩個詞都具有「提喻」（synecdoche）的功能——一種比喻的說法，用一部分來代表整體。因此，悔改暗示著信心，而信心也暗示著悔改；失去一方，另一方也無法存在。

 In grammatical terms, then, the words repent and believe both function as a synecdoche—the figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole. Thus, repentance implies faith and faith implies repentance. One cannot exist without the other.

但是在邏輯上，哪一個首先出現呢？是悔改嗎？是信心嗎？還是兩者沒有絕對的先後？關於這點，改革宗的思想已經辯論了很久。以下三種可能的答案都有人提倡：

 But which comes first, logically? Is it repentance? Is it faith? Or does neither have an absolute priority? There has been prolonged debates in Reformed thought about this. Each of three possible answers has had advocates:

首先，謝德（W. G. T. Shedd）一口咬定，在自然的順序上，信心必定在悔改之先：「雖然信心和悔改是不可分割、同時存在的，但在自然的順序上，信心乃在悔改之前」（《教義神學》，2.536）。謝德的論證是基於：悔改的動力有賴於信心對神的憐憫的把握。如果悔改在信心之前，那麼悔改和信心都會具有法律的特色，它們會成為恩典的先決條件。

 First, W. G. T. Shedd insisted that faith must precede repentance in the order of nature: “Though faith and repentance are inseparable and simultaneous, yet in the order of nature, faith precedes repentance” (Dogmatic Theology, 2.536). Shedd argued this on the grounds that the motivating power for repentance lies in faith’s grasp of the mercy of God. If repentance were to precede faith, both repentance and faith would be legal in character, and they would become prerequisites for grace.

其次，伯克富（Louis Berkhof）似乎是採取相反的立場：「毫無疑問，按邏輯來說，悔改和認識罪，必定在信心之前，使人以信靠的愛順服基督」（《系統神學》，頁492）。

 Second, Louis Berkhof appears to have taken the reverse position: “There is no doubt that, logically, repentance and the knowledge of sin precede the faith that yields to Christ in trusting love” (Systematic Theology, p. 492).

第三，約翰•慕理（John Murray）認定，這個議題會引發：

 Third, John Murray insisted that this issue raises

「一個不必要的問題，而堅持一個比另一個優先是徒勞無功的。沒有誰先誰後的問題。使人得救的信心是一種悔改的信心，而使人得生命的悔改是一種相信的悔改……得救的信心離不開悔改，而悔改也離不開得救的信心。」（《再思救贖奇恩》[Redemption—Accomplished and Applied]，頁113；中譯本第98頁，筆者另譯。）

an unnecessary question and the insistence that one is prior to the other is futile. There is no priority. The faith that is unto salvation is a penitent faith and the repentance that is unto life is a believing repentance … saving faith is permeated with repentance and repentance is permeated with saving faith. (Redemption—Accomplished and Applied, p. 113).

這當然是更合乎聖經的觀點，我們不可以把「在悔改中轉離罪惡」和「以信心來到基督面前」拆開來。它們所描述的是同一個人所採取的同一種行動，只是從不同的角度來看。在一種情況下（悔改），我們是從這個人與罪的關係來看他的；而在另一種情況下（信心），我們是這個人與主耶穌的關係來看他的。但是這位信靠基督的人，也同時轉離了罪惡。他藉著相信悔改了，也藉著悔改相信了。或許達布尼（R. L. Dabney）的說法是最精彩的，他堅持說，悔改和信心是「雙胞胎」的恩典（或者我們可以說是「連體雙胞胎」）。

 This is, surely, the more biblical perspective. We cannot separate turning from sin in repentance and coming to Christ in faith. They describe the same person in the same action, but from different perspectives. In one instance (repentance), the person is viewed in relation to sin; in the other (faith), the person is viewed in relation to the Lord Jesus. But the individual who trusts in Christ simultaneously turns away from sin. In believing he repents and in repenting believes. Perhaps R. L. Dabney expressed it best when he insisted that repentance and faith are “twin” graces (perhaps we might say “conjoined twins”).

說到這裏，我們該說的話絕非都已經說完了。在任何一種「歸信」的神學裏，都會交織著一種「歸信」的心理學。在任何特定的個體身上，在他的意識層面裏，或許是悔改、或許是信靠，會顯得較為突出。在神學層面上是統一的，在心理層面上也許是分歧多樣的。因此，一個深深被罪咎感定罪、被罪惡綑綁的個體，在他或她的歸信中，可能會以轉離罪惡（悔改）作為他/她所經驗到的最主要的音符。而其他人對基督的愛感到驚奇，也許是最主要的感覺，他們在心理層面沒有那麼痛苦（在他們歸信之後，定罪的經驗會更加深化）。在這裏，這個個體，相對於從罪中悔改，更多意識到的是對基督的信靠。但是在真正的歸信中，兩者是缺一不可的。

 But having said this, we have by no means said everything there is to say. Entwined within any theology of conversion lies a psychology of conversion. In any particular individual, at the level of consciousness, a sense of either repentance or trust may predominate. What is unified theologically may be diverse psychologically. Thus, an individual deeply convicted of the guilt and bondage of sin may experience turning from it (repentance) as the dominant note in his or her conversion. Others (whose experience of conviction deepens after their conversion) may have a dominant sense of the wonder of Christ’s love, with less agony of soul at the psychological level. Here the individual is more conscious of trusting in Christ than of repentance from sin. But in true conversion, neither can exist without the other.

因此，在心理上伴隨著歸信而來的產物是變化多端的，有時候取決於在罪人面前，福音最主要的強調是什麼 （罪的可惡還是恩典的偉大）。這與西敏聖徒機敏的解說是相當一致的，其大意是：信心（即個人對福音話語的信靠回應）「對聖經各處經文，會以不同的行動來回應」（WCF 14.2）。

 The psychological accompaniments of conversion thus vary, sometimes depending on the dominant gospel emphasis that is set before the sinner (the sinfulness of sin or the greatness of grace). This is quite consistent with the shrewd comment of the Westminster Divines to the effect that faith (that is, the trusting response of the individual to the word of the gospel) “acteth differently upon that which each particular passage thereof [of Scripture] containeth” (WCF 16.2).

然而，真正的歸信離不開同時會有悔改和信心，因此既會有喜樂、又會有憂傷。只以喜樂來領受福音的話語，卻缺少因罪而來的各種憂傷的「歸信」，必將是暫時的。

 In no case, however, can real conversion take place apart from the presence of both repentance and faith, and therefore both joy and sorrow. A “conversion” that lacks all sorrow for sin, that receives the word with only joy, will be temporary.

耶穌撒種的比喻在這裏很有啟發性。有一種土壤，種子會快速發芽，卻突然死亡。這代表「歸信的人」歡喜領受——卻沒有意識到休耕的土地正在被罪的自覺所翻攪，或沒有意識到轉離罪會有任何痛苦 （可四5~6、16~17）。另一方面，一個只為罪憂傷、卻對赦罪絲毫不感到喜樂的歸信，必定會被證明只是「叫人死」的「世俗的憂傷」（林後七10）。到頭來，它必定會化為烏有。

 Jesus’ parable of the sower is instructive here. In one type of soil, the seed sprouts quickly but dies suddenly. This represents “converts” who receive the word with joy—but with no sense of fallow ground being broken up by conviction of sin or any pain in turning from it (Mark 4:5–6, 16–17). On the other hand, a conversion that is only sorrow for sin without any joy in pardon will prove to have been only “worldly grief” that “produces death” (2 Cor. 7:10). In the end, it will come to nothing.

然而，這會引發最後的問題：在歸信中悔改的必要性是否會讓悔改構成一種行為，因而損及信心是「兩手空空」而來？這是否會妥協了恩典？

 This, however, raises a final question: Does the necessity of repentance in conversion constitute a kind of work that detracts from the empty-handedness of faith? Does it compromise grace?

一言以蔽之，沒有。罪人必須總是兩手空空而來，而這剛好是重點。從本性來說，我的雙手是充滿的（充滿罪、充滿自我，和我自己的「善行」），然而，充滿的雙手無法憑信心抓住基督，相反，雙手要能抓住祂，必定是空的。那攔阻我們信靠祂的東西，必然會掉落在地上。舊的生活方式不能留在抓住救主的雙手裏。

 In a word, no. Sinners must always come empty-handed. But this is precisely the point. By nature, my hands are full (of sin, self, and my own “good deeds”). However, hands that are full cannot hold on to Christ in faith. Instead, as they take hold of Him, they are emptied. That which has prevented us from trusting Him falls inevitably to the ground. The old way of life cannot be retained in hands that are taking hold of the Savior.

是的，悔改和信心在歸信中是兩個必要元素，它們構成了永遠無法分割的「雙胞胎恩典」。正如約翰加爾文對我們的妥善提醒，這不僅僅適用於一開始，也適用於我們整個的基督徒生活。在邁向榮耀的道路上，我們會是一路相信的悔罪者，又是一路悔改的信徒。

Yes, repentance and faith are two essential elements in conversion. They constitute twin graces that can never be separated. As John Calvin well reminds us, this is true not only of the beginning but of the whole of our Christian lives. We are believing penitents and penitent believers all the way to glory.