復活的確實性點燃我們的心HeartsSet Aflame with Certainty of the Resurrection
作者: R.C. Sproul 譯者: 喬蘭山以妲
耶穌的一生遵循一個從降卑到升高的一般模式，然而這一升移並不是完全直線型的，而是伴隨著一些對比情節。降生敘事既包含恥辱又包含威嚴，祂的公開侍奉引來讚美和嘲諷、歡迎與拒絕，既有「和散那」的呼聲，又有「釘祂十字架」的呼喊。臨近死亡陰影時，祂彰顯了登山變像的半遮掩轉折。
The
life of Jesus follows a general pattern of movement from humiliation to
exaltation. The movement is not strictly linear, however, as it is interspersed
with vignettes of contrast. The birth narrative contains both ignominy and
majesty. His public ministry attracts praise and scorn, welcome and rejection,
cries of “Hosanna!” and “Crucify Him!” Nearing the shadow of death, He
exhibited the translucent breakthrough of transfiguration.
從十字架的悲慟到復活的壯麗，這一過渡並不突然。從裹屍布到墳墓的石頭，敘事越發增強地往轉折點推進。升高始於下十字架，人們常常會想到古典基督教雕像「哀悼基督」。在耶穌屍體的處置上，規則被打破。在正常司法處境下，被釘十字架的罪犯屍體要被政府拋棄，沒有埋葬儀式就扔到「欣嫩子谷」——耶路撒冷城外的垃圾站。在那裏屍體被焚燒，以外邦方式火化，失去傳統猶太葬禮的尊嚴。作為一種維持公共衛生的方式，欣嫩子谷的火不停地焚燒，以便使城市的垃圾得以清除。對於耶穌來說，欣嫩子谷是地獄的一個恰當比喻，一個火永遠不滅、蟲子永遠不死的地方。
The
transition from the pathos of the cross to the grandeur of the resurrection is
not abrupt. There is a rising crescendo that swells to the moment of breaking
forth from the grave clothes and the shroud of the tomb. Exaltation begins with
the descent from the cross immortalized in classical Christian art by the
Pieta. With the disposition of the corpse of Jesus, the rules were broken.
Under normal judicial circumstances, the body of a crucified criminal was
discarded by the state, being thrown without ceremony into gehenna, the city
garbage dump outside Jerusalem. There the body was incinerated, being subject
to a pagan form of cremation, robbed of the dignity of traditional Jewish
burial. The fires of gehenna burned incessantly as a necessary measure of
public health to rid the city of its refuse. Gehenna served Jesus as an apt
metaphor for hell, a place where the flames are never extinguished and the worm
does not die.
彼拉多在耶穌的事上作了例外，也許他飽受良心煎熬，因著同情同意了埋葬耶穌的請求。也許他是被神至高的護理推動，確保先知以賽亞有關耶穌與財主同葬、神不會讓祂的聖者見朽壞的預言得以實現。基督的屍體被香料膏抹，用細麻布裹起來，放在一個屬於貴族亞利馬太的約瑟的墳墓裏。
Pilate
made an exception in the case of Jesus. Perhaps he was bruised of conscience
and was moved by pity to accede to the request for Jesus to be buried. Or
perhaps he was moved by a mighty Providence to ensure fulfillment of the
prophecy of Isaiah that Jesus would make His grave with the rich or of God’s
promise that He would not let His Holy One see corruption. The body of Christ
was anointed with spices and wrapped in fine linen to be laid in the tomb
belonging to the patrician, Joseph of Arimathea.
三日之久世界陷入黑暗，跟隨耶穌的婦女們悲慟哀哭，僅有一點安慰就是被允許執行一個溫柔之舉——膏抹耶穌的屍體。門徒們已經逃竄，抱團躲藏起來，他們的夢想被一句呼喊終結了：「成了。」
For
three days the world was plunged into darkness. The women of Jesus’ entourage
wept bitterly, taking but small consolation in the permission to perform the
tender act of anointing His body. The disciples had fled and were huddled
together in hiding, their dreams shattered by the cry, “It is finished.
三日之久神在沈默，然後祂發出可畏的響聲。神以大能滾開墳墓前的石頭，發出生命的創造之能，將之充滿基督靜止的身體。耶穌的心臟開始跳動，在榮耀的動脈裏輸送著榮耀的鮮血，將榮耀的能力輸送到死亡所萎縮的肌肉中。裹屍布不再束縛祂，祂站起身離開墓穴。在一瞬間，已死的變為不朽，死亡被勝利吞沒。在歷史中的這一刻，約伯的問題一次為所有人作答：「人死了，還能再活嗎？」這是人類歷史的分水嶺，在這裏，人類的愁苦化為輝煌。在這裏，初代教會傳講的福音訊息隨著一聲呼喊誕生：「祂復活了。」
For
three days God was silent. Then He screamed. With cataclysmic power, God rolled
the stone away and unleashed a paroxysm of creative energy of life, infusing it
once more into the still body of Christ. Jesus’ heart began to beat, pumping
glorified blood through glorified arteries, sending glorified power to muscles
atrophied by death. The grave clothes could not bind Him as He rose to His feet
and quit the crypt. In an instant, the mortal became immortal and death was
swallowed up by victory. In a moment of history, Job’s question was answered
once and for all: “If a man die, shall he live again?” Here is the watershed
moment of human history, where the misery of the race is transformed into
grandeur. Here the kerygma, the proclamation of the early church, was born with
the cry, “He is risen.”
我們可以將這一事件視為一個象征，一個可愛的關於希望的故事。我們可以將之降低為一種道德主義，作出一個講道人如此總結的宣稱：「復活的意義在於我們可以用辯證的勇氣面對每一天的黎明。」辯證的勇氣是現代虛無主義鼻祖尼采發明的把戲，辯證的勇氣是處於張力中的勇氣，這張力就是：人生沒有意義，死亡即根本。我們必須鼓舞起來，即使我們的勇氣毫無意義。這種對復活的否定滲透著刪節版存在主義盼望的絕望。
We
can view this event as a symbol, a lovely tale of hope. We can reduce it to a
moralism that declares, as one preacher put it, “The meaning of the resurrection
is that we can face the dawn of each new day with dialectical courage.”
Dialectical courage is the variety invented by Frederick Nietzsche, the father
of modern nihilism. Courage that is dialectical is a courage in tension. The
tension is this: Life is meaningless, death is ultimate. We must be courageous,
knowing that even our courage is empty of meaning. This is denial of
resurrection bathed in the despair of a truncated existential hope.
然而，新約宣告的復活是一個清醒的歷史事實。早期基督徒對辯證符號沒什麽興趣，只對斬釘截鐵的事實有興趣。真正的基督教與時空中的耶穌復活共存亡。基督徒這個稱號飽受苦難，從成千種考驗的重擔到無數種不同定義。一本詞典將基督徒定義為一個文明人，一個人可以不相信復活就做個文明人，但按照聖經這個人絕對做不了一名基督徒。宣稱自己是基督徒卻否認復活的人是拿虛謊的舌頭說話，我們應當躲避這樣的人。
However,
the New Testament proclaims the resurrection as sober historical fact. The
early Christians were not interested in dialectical symbols but in concrete
realities. Authentic Christianity stands or falls with the space/time event of
Jesus’ resurrection. The term Christian suffers from the burden of a thousand
qualifications and a myriad of diverse definitions. One dictionary defines a
Christian as a person who is civilized. One can certainly be civilized without
affirming the resurrection, but one cannot then be a Christian in the biblical
sense. The person who claims to be a Christian while denying the resurrection
speaks with a forked tongue, and we should turn away from such.
耶穌的復活其原初意義是顛覆性的，它涉及基督徒信仰的根本。沒有了它，基督教不過是另一個以人類智慧的陳腔濫調給我們的道德感撓癢癢的人造宗教。
The
resurrection of Jesus is radical in the original sense of the word. It touches
the radix, the “root” of the Christian faith. Without it, Christianity becomes
just another religion designed to titillate our moral senses with platitudes of
human wisdom.
使徒保羅言明了一個「沒有復活」的基督教有什麽清楚、無可辯駁的後果。他推理說，如果基督沒有復活，我們就必須得出以下結論（林前十五14-19）：
The
apostle Paul spelled out the clear and irrefutable consequences of a
“resurrectionless” Christianity. If Christ is not raised, he reasoned, we are
left with the following list of conclusions (1 Cor. 15:13–19):
我們所傳的是枉然。我們的信心也是枉然。我們是為神妄作見證的。我們仍在罪中。我們所愛的那些死去的人已經滅亡了。我們是眾人中最可憐的。
1.
Our preaching is futile.
2.
Our faith is in vain.
3. We
have misrepresented God.
4. We
are still in our sins.
5.
Our loved ones who have died have perished.
6. We
are of all men most to be pitied.
這六個後果尖銳地揭示了復活與基督教本質間的內在關聯，耶穌的復活是基督信仰的必要條件，拿走了復活你就拆毀了基督教。
These
six consequences sharply reveal the inner connection of the resurrection to the
substance of Christianity. The resurrection of Jesus is the sine qua non of the
Christian faith. Take away the resurrection and you take away Christianity.
然而，聖經作者並不是將他們對復活的宣講建立在它與整個信仰的內在一致上，它並非僅僅是從其他教義得出的一個邏輯推論，我們必須肯定復活，不是因為它的反面是殘酷的，我們肯定復活，不是因為沒有它人生就是無望而不可忍受的。我們的宣信不是建立在猜測上，而是建立在經驗性數據上。他們看見了復活的基督，他們與祂交談，與祂一同吃飯。不論是祂的死還是祂的復活，都不是發生在一個角落裏，就像約瑟•史密斯宣稱領受了特殊啟示那樣。耶穌的死是一個公共奇觀，是一個有公共記錄的事件，復活的基督一次被五百人看見。聖經在這件事上呈現的是歷史。
The
biblical writers do not base their claim of resurrection on its internal
consistency to the whole of faith, however. It is not simply a logical
deduction drawn from other doctrines of faith. It is not that we must affirm
the resurrection because the alternatives to it are grim. Resurrection is not
affirmed because life would be hopeless or intolerable without it. The claim is
based not on speculation but on empirical data. They saw the risen Christ. They
spoke with Him and ate with Him. Neither His death nor His resurrection
happened in a corner like Joseph Smith’s alleged reception of special
revelation. The death of Jesus was a public spectacle and a matter of public
record. The resurrected Christ was seen by more than five hundred people at one
time. The Bible presents history on this matter.
對於聖經關於耶穌復活記載的最強烈抗議，跟對聖經其他神跡的最強烈抗議一樣，就是說這些事是不可能的。諷刺的是新約對於耶穌的復活采用了截然相反的方向，彼得在五旬節的講道中宣告說：「神卻將死的痛苦解釋了，叫他復活，因為他原不能被死拘禁。」
The
strongest objection raised against the biblical account of Jesus’ resurrection
is the same objection raised against other biblical miracles, namely, that such
an event is impossible. It is ironic that the New Testament approaches the
question of Christ’s resurrection from exactly the opposite direction. In
Peter’s speech on Pentecost, he declared: “God raised him up, loosing the pangs
of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it” (Acts 2:24).
為了聲明這裏宣布的原則，我必須允許自己使用一次雙重否定。基督不復活是不可能的，因為要死亡拘禁基督，必須對死亡定律做出極限、不可想象的違背。現代人將「死去的就一直死亡」視為不可改變的定律，然而，這是一條墮落自然界的定律。在猶太教的自然觀念中，死亡是作為對罪的審判進入世界，創造主命定了罪的工價是死刑：「你吃的日子必定死」，這是原初的警告。神在人犯罪之後對人類生命予以延緩，但不是無期限的。原初的刑罰並未完全撤除，大自然母親變為最主要的死刑執行者。亞當被造時，既有「死亡的可能性」，也有「避免死亡的可能性」；藉著他的犯罪，他「避免死亡的可能性」被沒收，並且作為審判，他獲得了「不死亡的不可能性」 。
To
set forth the principle stated here, I must indulge myself with the use of a
double negative. It was impossible for Christ not to have been raised. For
death to have held Christ would have required the supreme and unthinkable
violation of the laws of death. It is viewed by modern man as an inexorable law
of nature that what dies stays dead. However, that is a law of fallen nature.
In the Judeo-Christian view of nature, death entered the world as a judgment on
sin. The Creator decreed that sin was a capital offense: “In the day that you
eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen. 2:17) was the original warning. God
granted an extension of life beyond the day of sin, but not indefinitely. The
original sanction was not completely rescinded. Mother Nature became the
paramount executioner. Adam was created with both the possibility of death
(posse mori) and the possibility of avoiding it (posse non mori). By his
transgression, he forfeited the possibility of avoidance of death and incurred,
as judgment, the impossibility of not dying (non posse non mori).
耶穌不是亞當，祂是第二個亞當；祂沒有罪，不論是原罪還是本罪。死亡對祂不具有合法的占有權，祂是因著被歸算給祂的罪受刑，然而一旦贖價付清，歸算就從祂身上移除，死亡在祂身上就失去能力。藉著死，祂付上了贖價；在復活中，耶穌被證明清白、完全無罪。正如聖經所宣稱，祂是為了我們的稱義復活，也是為了祂自己的清白復活。
Jesus
was not Adam. He was the second Adam. He was free from sin, both original and
actual. Death had no legitimate claim on Him. He was punished for the sin
imputed to Him, but once the price was paid and the imputation was lifted from
His back, death lost its power. In death, an atonement was made; in
resurrection, the perfect sinlessness of Jesus was vindicated. He was, as the
Scriptures assert, raised for our justification as well as His own vindication.
休謨的概率論因著復活是一個獨特事件而將之拋棄，他在一種算法上是對的，復活的確是個獨特事件。盡管聖經也記載了其他復活事件，例如拉撒路的復活，但它們全都歸屬一個截然不同的類別，拉撒路後來又死了。耶穌復活的特殊性與祂獨特性的另一個方面緊密相連，就是祂的無罪；如果獨特性也能有程度之別，那麽無罪就是耶穌位格中更加獨特的一維。
Hume’s
probability quotients discard the resurrection because it was a unique event.
He was right on one count. It was a unique event. Though Scripture relates
other resurrection accounts, such as the raising of Lazarus, they were all in a
different category. Lazarus died again. The uniqueness of Jesus’ resurrection
was tied to another aspect of His uniqueness. It was tied to His sinlessness, a
dimension of the person of Jesus that would be even more unique if uniqueness
were capable of degrees.
要神允許耶穌永遠被死亡拘禁，等於是要神違背祂自己義的性情；那就變成了一件不義之舉，一件神絕對不可能犯下的舉動。真正的震驚之處不是耶穌復活了，而是祂在墳墓裏待了三天之久。也許這是神屈就人類不信的軟弱，因此允許基督暫時被拘，以便耶穌的確死了以及復活的事實不會被質疑，被人錯誤地當成昏厥後的復蘇。
For
God to allow Jesus to be bound forever by death would have been for God to
violate His own righteous character. It would have been an injustice, an act
that is supremely impossible for God to commit. The surprise is not that Jesus
rose, but that He stayed in the tomb as long as He did. Perhaps it was God’s
condescension to human weakness of unbelief that inclined Him to keep Christ
captive, to ensure that there would be no doubt He was dead and that the
resurrection would not be mistaken for a resuscitation.
復活將耶穌與世上任何主要宗教區別開來。布哈達死了，默罕默德死了，孔夫子也死了；這些人中沒有一個是無罪的，沒有一個提供代贖，沒有一個以復活被證明清正。
The
resurrection sets Jesus apart from every other central figure of world
religions. Buddha is dead. Mohammed is dead. Confucius is dead. None of these
were sinless. None offered atonement.
None were vindicated by resurrection.
如果我們在復活事實前在不信中蹣跚搖擺，我們若是能思想一下那個周末往以馬忤斯路上走的兩個人的遭遇就好了。路加為我們記載了這一事件，那兩個人正在離開耶路撒冷的路上，耶穌匿名與他們同行。他們努力向耶穌講解十字架事件，對耶穌明顯的茫然無知感到明顯的不耐煩。當他們講到婦女們說耶穌復活時，耶穌責備他們：「『無知的人哪，先知所說的一切話，你們的心信得太遲鈍了。基督這樣受害，又進入他的榮耀，豈不是應當的嗎？』於是從摩西和眾先知起，凡經上所指著自己的話，都給他們講解明白了。」當兩個人的眼睛開了以後，他們當晚認出了耶穌，彼此說：「在路上，他和我們說話，給我們講解聖經的時候，我們的心豈不是火熱的嗎？」
If we
stagger with unbelief before the fact of resurrection, we would do well to
consider the plight of the two walking to Emmaus that weekend. Luke records the
event for us (Luke 24:13–35.). As the two men were walking away from Jerusalem,
Jesus joined them incognito. They presumed to inform Jesus about the events of
the crucifixion and showed obvious impatience with His apparent ignorance of
the matters. When they related the report of the women concerning the resurrection,
Christ rebuked them: “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the
prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these
things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the
Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning
himself. When the two had their eyes opened and they recognized Jesus that
night, they said to each other, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he
talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the Scriptures?”
基督徒絕不是懷疑論者，基督徒是一個帶著一顆燃燒之心的人，一顆被復活實際點燃的心。
A
Christian is not a skeptic. A Christian is a person with a burning heart, a
heart set aflame with certainty of the resurrection.
This
excerpt is from Who Is Jesus? by R.C. Sproul. Download all 28 Crucial Questions
ebooks for free here.
