神学问答TheologicalFAQs 38-49

作者:  Monergism Ministries  译者:  诚之

转载自:  守诚阁
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/qna/FAQs.html
https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theological-faqs-1-16-monergism.html

目录

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theological-faqs-1-16-monergism.html

神学问答1-17

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theologicalfaqs-1-17-ministries-httpwww.html

神学问答18-27

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theologicalfaqs-18-27-ministries-httpwww.html

神学问答28-37

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theologicalfaqs-28-37-ministries-httpwww.html

神学问答38-49

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theologicalfaqs-38-49-ministries-httpwww.html

神学问答50-62
https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2019/01/theologicalfaqs-ministries-httpwww.html

38. 什么是宗教改革神学？

What is Reformation Theology?

 “宗教改革神学”（Reformation Theology）是用来指称16世纪抗议宗的改教家，包括马丁路德，墨兰顿，慈运理，加尔文等人所共同认信的神学教义的一个语词。虽然这些改教家中，在某些领域的信仰有很大的差别，他们仍然坚定地团结在一起，在一些非常基础性的教义上，对抗罗马天主教的教导。他们都相信，要管理所有信徒的信仰与实践，唯独圣经是足够的，而圣经教导称义唯独靠恩典，因着信，且唯独在耶稣基督里。同样，他们强调一个健全的盟约，或圣约神学（见问答31），而且他们主张人的意志是完全受罪所捆绑的，只有圣灵重生的恩典，才能赐给人信心，带来称义。

“Reformation Theology” is a term designating the theological doctrines and convictions held in common by the great sixteenth century Protestant reformers, including Martin Luther, Philip Melancthon, Uldrich Zwingli, John Calvin, and others. Although some of these reformers had widely varying beliefs in certain areas, they were nevertheless firmly united against the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church in some very foundational doctrines. They all believed that the scriptures alone were sufficient to govern all believers in matters of faith and practice, and that the scriptures taught that justification was by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Likewise, they stressed a robust federal, or covenant theology (see questions 31 ff. above), and they held that man's will is wholly bound in sin, and that only the regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit could give the faith that results in justification.

要理解使这些改教家团结在一起的基础性真理，最好的途径大概是通过阅读16-17世纪所写的各种信经和信仰告白。“三项联合信条”（three forms of unity），包括《海德堡要理问答》，《比利时信条》，和《多特信经》，为第一代改教家提供了也许是最清楚的共同信仰的解释。同样，“威斯敏斯德标准”（Westminster Standards），包括《威斯敏斯德信仰告白》，《小要理问答》，《大要理问答》，是17世纪作品的里程碑，将宗教改革的教义编纂成法典。

Perhaps the best way to understand the foundational truths that united these different reformers is to read through the various creeds and confessions that were composed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The “three forms of unity,” consisting of the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession of Faith, and the Canons of Dort, provide perhaps the clearest explanation of the common faith of the first reformers. Also, the Westminster Standards, including the Westminster Confession of Faith and the shorter and longer catechisms, were a landmark seventeenth century work codifying the doctrines of the Reformation.

Related Reading for Further Study

Introduction to the Reformed Faith by John Frame (.pdf)

A Brief and Untechnical Statement of the Reformed Faith by B.B. Warfield

The Reformed Faith by Loraine Boettner

What is the Reformed Faith? by Dr. Michael S. Horton

Reformed Theology by James Montgomery Boice

Three Pillars of the Reformed Faith by Jason A. Van Bemmel

39. “五大唯独”是什么？它们各是什么意思？

What are the “five solas,” and what do they mean?

更正教改教家们有五个伟大的基础性诉求，这是他们团结的基础。“五大唯独”就是用来称呼这些诉求的名称。它们分别是：“唯独圣经”（Sola Scriptura），“唯独恩典”（Sola Gratia） “唯独信心”（Sola Fide） “唯独基督”（Solus Christus），和“唯独把荣耀归给神”（Soli Deo Gloria”）。

The “five solas” is a term used to designate five great foundational rallying cries of the Protestant reformers. They are as follows: “Sola Scriptura” (Scripture Alone); “Sola Gratia” (Grace Alone); “Sola Fide” (Faith Alone); “Solus Christus” (Christ Alone); and “Soli Deo Gloria” (To God Alone Be Glory).

这“五大唯独”是为回应败坏的罗马天主教会所教导的，对真理特定的曲解所发展出来的。罗马教会教导：信仰和实践的基础是圣经，圣传和教皇的敕令所组成的；但是改革家说，“不，我们的基础唯有圣经。”天主教会教导，我们得救是靠神的恩典，和我们透过悔罪和善工所累积的功德，以及在我们之前的圣徒所积聚的额外功德。改教家的回应是：“唯独恩典”。天主教会教导，我们被称义是靠信心和我们所作的善工，而这些善工是神藉著信心，把义一点一滴地灌注到我们身上所成就的。改教家回应说：“不，我们唯独靠信心称义；信心就是抓住外来的基督的义，这是上帝白白地加在那些相信的人的帐户里的。”天主教会教导，我们是靠基督和圣徒的功德而得救的，我们可以靠基督、圣徒和马利亚，他们都为我们祷告代求，而来到神的面前。改教家回应说：“不，我们唯独是靠基督的功德而得救，而且我们唯独靠着基督来到神的面前。”天主教会持守的是马丁?路德所说的“荣耀神学”（相对与“十字架的神学”）；在这种神学中，罪人得救的荣耀，部分是基督的贡献，部分是马利亚和圣徒的贡献，而且部分是来自罪人自己。改教家的回应是：“不，只有圣经中所教导的唯一真正的福音，才能把所有的荣耀归给神。”

These “five solas” were developed in response to specific perversions of the truth that were taught by the corrupt Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Church taught that the foundation for faith and practice was a combination of the scriptures, sacred tradition, and the teachings of the magisterium and the pope; but the Reformers said, “No, our foundation is sola scriptura”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved through a combination of God's grace, the merits that we accumulate through penance and good works, and the superfluity of merits that the saints before us accumulated; the reformers responded, “sola gratia”. The Catholic Church taught that we are justified by faith and the works that we produce, which the righteousness that God infuses in us through faith brings about. The reformers responded, “No, we are justified by faith alone, which lays hold of the alien righteousness of Christ that God freely credits to the account of those who believe”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved by the merits of Christ and the saints, and that we approach God through Christ, the saints, and Mary, who all pray and intercede for us. The Reformers responded, “No, we are saved by the merits of Christ Alone, and we come to God through Christ Alone”. The Catholic Church adhered to what Martin Luther called the “theology of glory” (in opposition to the “theology of the cross”), in which the glory for a sinner's salvation could be attributed partly to Christ, partly to Mary and the saints, and partly to the sinner himself. The reformers responded, “No, the only true gospel is that which gives all glory to God alone, as is taught in the scriptures.”

今天，天主教会教导相同的扭曲的真理；而我们在许多圈子和宗派中，看到许多更正教（新教）的信徒退回到同样的败坏中。世界各地的基督徒有这个迫切的需要，要重新确认、并积极更新这赋予宗教改革动力，也是其基础的“五大唯独”。

Today, the Catholic Church teaches the same essential perversions of truth; and much of Protestantism has seen a regress to many of the same corruptions, in many circles and denominations. It is a pressing need for Christians everywhere to reaffirm and champion anew the “five solas” which underlay and gave impetus to the Protestant Reformation.

40. 神恩独作是什么意思？

What does monergism mean?

神恩独作（Monergism）：在重生时，不是依靠我们未重生的人性与神有任何的合作，而是圣灵使我们与基督联合。祂藉著外在的呼召，即神的道的宣讲，解除我们内在敌意的武装，除去我们的瞎眼，照亮我们的心智，使我们明白，把我们的石心变成肉心——使我们喜爱神的话——以我们被更新的情感，竭尽全力、心甘情愿地拥抱基督。被圣灵所默示的先知以西结断言：“我要使他们有合一的心，也要将新灵放在他们里面，又从他们肉体中除掉石心，赐给他们肉心，使他们顺从我的律例，谨守遵行我的典章。他们要作我的子民，我要作他们的神。”（结11：19-20；另参36：26）。使徒保罗说，“被神所爱的弟兄啊，我知道你们是蒙拣选的；因为我们的福音传到你们那里，不独在乎言语，也在乎权能和圣灵，并充足的信心”。（帖前1：4-5）这就是说，在重生时，神的道不是单独做工的，必须伴随着圣灵的“萌芽”。彼得也说：“你们蒙了重生，不是由於能坏的种子，乃是由於不能坏的种子，是藉著神活泼常存的道。”（彼前1：23）

Monergism: In regeneration, the Holy Spirit unites us to Christ independent of any cooperation from our unregenerated human nature. He quickens us through the outward call cast forth by the preaching of His Word, disarms our innate hostility, removes our blindness, illumines our mind, creates understanding, turns our heart of stone to a heart of flesh -- giving rise to a delight in His Word -- all that we might, with our renewed affections, willingly & gladly embrace Christ. The Prophet Ezekiel inspired by the Holy Spirit asserted "I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh. Then they will follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. They will be my people, and I will be their God." (Eze 11:19, also 36:26) The Apostle Paul said, "For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction." (1 Thess 1, 4, 5). I.e. In regeneration the word does not work alone but must be accompanied by the "germination" of the Holy Spirit. And again "...you have beenborn again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God." (1 Pet 1:23)

世纪辞典是这样定义「重生」的：

“在神学里，圣灵是重生唯一有效的媒介（agent） – 人的意志在重生之前不具备任何圣洁的倾向，因此无法与重生合作。”它的意思是，对「信心」的渴望——即我们藉以相信祂、祂会称罪人为义的信心，乃是藉著重生临到我们的；而如果有任何人说信心是天生就属于我们的，而不是神的恩赐，也就是说，是靠圣灵的感动，修正我们的意志，使它从不信到信，从不敬虔到敬虔，那么，他/她就否认了使徒的教导，因为保罗说：“祂便救了我们，并不是因我们自己所行的义，乃是照祂的怜悯，藉著重生的洗和圣灵的更新。”（提多书3：5）再次，“你们得救是本乎恩，也因著信；这并不是出於自己，乃是神所赐的；”（弗2：8）任何人说神的恩典需要人的协助，神的恩典取决于人性或人的顺服，而不同意我们的顺服和谦卑本身是恩典的礼物，就抵触了使徒所说的，“你有什麽不是领受的呢？”（林前4：7），以及“这原不是我，乃是神的恩与我同在。”（林前15：10）

The Century Dictionary defines it as follows:

"In theology, the doctrine that the Holy Spirit is the only efficient agent in regeneration - that the human will possesses no inclination to holiness until regenerated, and therefore cannot cooperate in regeneration." It means that the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly comes to us through regeneration -- and if anyone says that this belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, he/she ignores the teaching of the Apostles, for Paul says, "...Even when we were dead in sins, [God] hath quickened us together with Christ, by grace ye are saved." and "...he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit." (Titus 3:5) And again, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).

这与救恩的“神人合作说”（synergism）是不同的。世纪辞典这样定义「神人合作」：“这个教义说，在重生时需要两个有效的媒介的「合作」（以严格的意义来说），即人的意志和神的圣灵。因此，这个理论主张，在一般性动机的影响下，人的灵魂在堕落中没有失去所有圣洁的倾向，也没有失去寻求圣洁的能力。”

It is in contrast to synergism which the Century Dictionary defines as

"...the doctrine that there are two efficient agents in regeneration, namely the human will and the divine Spirit, which, in the strict sense of the term, cooperate. This theory accordingly holds that the soul has not lost in the fall all inclination toward holiness, nor all power to seek for it under the influence of ordinary motives."

41. 圣经是否教导因信而得重生？

Doesn't the bible teach that we're born again through faith?

虽然在当代福音派中，这是相当常见的观念，就是我们乃是藉着信而得重生的，但是圣经的教导实际上是与此相反的：我们是因为重生才有信心的。“重生”（born again），即神赐给我们一个新的属灵生命，是从旧约以西结书而来的观念，在那里，上帝应许要把一个新的、活的肉心，赐给那些像石头一般的死人，结果是他们会信靠祂，顺服祂，喜爱祂的律法（结36：26-27）。在新约中，耶稣在约翰福音3：1-21展开这个主题，祂告诉尼哥底母，除非他先“重生”，否则无法“看见”神的国，也就是说，不明白属灵的事。这就是为什么约翰在先前说到每一个“接待”耶稣的人，也就是以信心拥抱耶稣的人，不是因他们自己的意志或努力所生，而是神所生的（约1：11-13）。换句话说，当神赐给我们一个新的生命，我们立刻就会以相信并拥抱耶稣来回应。重生（新的生命）从逻辑和因果的关系上来说，是先于信心的。信心只是称义的工具（instrumental cause），藉著信心，我们在神面前被宣告为义。

Although it is a very common conception in contemporary Evangelicalism that we're “born again” through faith, the bible actually teaches the very opposite: that we have faith by being born again. Being “born again,” or being given a new, spiritual life, is a concept that comes from the Old Testament book of Ezekiel, where God promises to give new, living hearts of flesh to those who were stone dead, with the result that they would then believe in him, obey him, delight in his laws (Ezek. 36:26-27). Then, in the New Testament, Jesus expands on this theme: in John 3:1-21, he tells Nicodemus that he cannot “see” the Kingdom of God, that is, he will have no understanding of spiritual things, unless he is first “born again”. This is why John had said earlier that everyone who “received” Jesus, that is, embraced him in faith, had not been born of their own will or efforts, but of God (John 1:11-13). In other words, when God gives us a new birth, then we immediately respond by believing and embracing Christ. Regeneration (the new birth) logically and causally precedes faith, which is the instrumental cause of justification, or being declared righteous in God's sight.

有众多的经文证明此教义：另外有许多经文教导神主权地在祂的选民心里创造了一个新的、“重生”的心，使他们相信祂，唯独神自己把信心和悔改赐给那些相信的人。这些经文包括：申30：6；耶31：33；32：40；结11：19-20；37：3-6,11-14；太16：15-17；路10：21；约3：27；5：21；6：37-40，45；徒s5：31；11：18；16：14；18：27；林前4：7；林后4：6；弗2：1-10；腓1：29；提后2：25-26；雅1：18；彼前：3；彼后1：1；约壹2：29等。但是最简单、最清楚教导这项真理的经文是约壹5：1。那里，使徒没有说，“凡信的都得了重生”，而是完全相反的：“凡信耶稣是基督的，都是从神而生的。”换句话说，如果你相信基督，那是因为你已经得到重生了。

The scriptures to confirm this doctrine are legion: some additional passages which teach that God sovereignly creates in his elect a new, “born again” heart which believes in him, and that he alone gives the faith and repentance of those who believe are Deut. 30:6; Jer. 31:33; 32:40; Ezek. 11:19-20; 37:3-6, 11-14; Mat. 16:15-17; Luk. 10:21; John 3:27; 5:21; 6:37-40, 45; Acts 5:31; 11:18; 16:14; 18:27; 1 Cor. 4:7; 2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 2:1-10; Phil. 1:29; 2 Tim. 2:25-26; Jam. 1:18; 1 Pet. 1:3; 2 Pet. 1:1; 1 John 2:29). But one of the simplest, clearest passages that teaches this truth is 1 John 5:1. There, the apostle does not say that “everyone who is born again has believed,” but rather quite the opposite: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God”. In other words, if you believe in Christ, it is because you have been born again.

42. 重生和得救是同一回事吗？

Is being born again the same thing as being saved?

当代福音派通常把“得救”和“重生”和成为基督徒混为一谈。在圣经中，关于神把人从黑暗国度拯救出来，迁移到祂爱子国度的教导，反映出更详尽、更微妙的认识。“得救”有时被视为是过去的事件，有时候是正在进行的事实，而有时又是我们所盼望的未来的拯救。我们过去从罪和罪咎中得拯救（如路7：50；弗2：5，8），目前正从这个邪恶的世界和在我们心中残余的败坏中得拯救（如林前1：18），我们在审判的日子时，也将会免受神的震怒而得救，并被带到新耶路撒冷（如罗5：9）。

It is common in contemporary Evangelicalism to hear the terms “saved” and “born again” as catch-all terms for becoming a Christian. In the bible, the teaching about man's being brought out of the kingdom of darkness and transferred into the Kingdom of his Son reflects a much more detailed and nuanced understanding. Being “saved” is seen sometimes as a past event, sometimes as an ongoing reality, and sometimes as a future deliverance we have to look forward to. We were saved from our sin and guilt in the past (e.g. Luk. 7:50; Eph. 2:5, 8), we are being saved from this present evil world and the remaining corruption in our hearts in the present (e.g. 1 Cor. 1:18), and we will be saved from God's wrath on the Day of Judgment, and brought into his eternal New Jerusalem (e.g. Rom. 5:9).

“重生”的教导更加明确，圣经总是把它放在基督徒生活的开端，在归信、称义等等之前（见问答41）。当这些用词没有准确使用时，很容易犯下这样的错误，就是掉入自己的理解当中，例如我们是因着信心而得重生的，而圣经的教导是我们乃是重生后才有信心的，也就是说，是上帝重生的恩典在我们心中产生了愿意信靠祂的意愿，然后我们才得救的。

The teaching on being “born again” is much more specific, and the bible always places that event at the beginning of the Christian life, before conversion, justification, and so on (see question 41 above). When these terms are used imprecisely, it is easy for errors to slip in to one's understanding, such as the teaching that we're “born again” through faith, when the bible teaches that we're “born again” to faith, that is, that God's regenerating grace produces in our hearts the willingness to believe in him and be saved.

43. “救赎次序”是什么意思？它为什么很重要？

What does “ordo salutis” mean, and why is it important?

 “救赎次序”（Ordo salutis）源自拉丁语，意思是“救赎的次序”。它是把救恩过程中所有的事件和事实加以组织的一种方式，它们会按照这个次序出现在一个人的生命中。这个次序有时候是时间上的（例如，我们在被称义一段时间之后，在永恒之中才得荣耀）；有时只是逻辑或因果上的（例如，当神给我们一个新生命时，我们就开始运用我们的信心，但是祂重生我们是我们信心的起因）。“救赎次序”是很重要的观念，因为救恩真理是如此丰富和微妙，牵涉到许多不同的真理，如果我们不仔细定义所有的元素，我们就无法按照正当的方式来认识它。当我们对福音有更深入的认识时，我们就在成圣和圣洁中成长，并认识到我们在基督里所有的属灵福分。如此，如果我们不清楚神救恩的次序，不知道这些宝贵的事件如何发生在我们生命当中，我们的信心和行为就会停留在不成熟的状态。

“Ordo salutis” is a Latin term which means “the order of salvation”. It speaks of a way of organizing all the events and realities in the process of salvation, in the order that they show up in an individual's life. This order is sometimes temporal (e.g., we are justified a certain amount of time before we are glorified in the eternal state); but sometimes it is just logical, or causal (e.g., we exercise faith as soon as God gives us a new birth, but his regeneration is the cause of our faith). The “ordo salutis” is a very important concept because the doctrine of salvation is so rich and nuanced, and involves so many different realities, that we will not understand it the way that we should if we do not define all of its elements very carefully. We grow in sanctification and holiness as we grow in our understanding of the gospel, and realize all the spiritual blessings that we have in Christ; and so, if we are unclear on the many precious things that God's Word has to say about the order of events which his salvation brings about in our lives, we will remain immature in our faith and conduct.

简单的“救赎次序”如下：要使我们得救，首先必须发生的事是在永恒的过去中，神对我们的爱和拣选。然后，祂在我们的生命中发出一个「外在的呼召」，也就是说，藉著阅读神的话或听到神的话，神把福音的信息放在我们生命的道路里。其次，祂藉著圣灵的感动给我们「内在的呼召」，这呼召使我们重生，让原来死去的心得到生命。因着这个重生，我们经历到信仰的归正（conversion），也就是从我们的罪中悔转，信靠基督（悔改+信心）。然后，在我们的信心之后，我们被神称义，即神在法律上宣称我们是义人，这是靠着把基督完全的义「算」在我们的帐户上。与此同时，神收养/收纳（adopt）我们，让我们成为祂的儿女，基督的弟兄姐妹；也使我们与基督联合，以至于我们从此在祂里面。从这开始，在我们整个人生中，神将我们分别为圣，让我们成为圣洁，使我们在信心中坚忍到底，以至于我们最后不会失落。然后，在死亡之时，我们进入到一个居间的状态，那时我们与主同在，但不包括我们的身体。最后是得荣耀，我们的身体会复活，得到改变，从此不再会朽坏；我们会得到新天新地的产业，与我们的以马内利永远同在。

A simple “ordo salutis” is as follows: the first event that had to take place for us to be saved is God's unconditional love and election of us in eternity past. Then, God sent us an outward call at some point in our lives, or in other words, he brought the message of the gospel across our paths, either through the reading or the hearing of the word. Next, he gave an inward call, through the prompting of the Holy Spirit, which regenerated, or brought to life our previously dead hearts. Because of this regeneration, we experienced conversion, that is, repentance from our sin and faith in Christ. Then, in consequence of our faith, we are justified, that is, God legally declares us righteous, by imputing or reckoning Jesus' perfect righteousness to our own account. At the same time, God adopts us, making us his children and the brothers and sisters of Christ; and he also unites us with Christ, so that henceforth we are in him. Beginning at that point, and on throughout our lifetime, God sanctifies us, or makes us holy, changing us into his likeness. Throughout this time, God is also preserving us, causing us to persevere in the faith, so that we do not finally fall away. Then, at death, we enter an intermediate state, where we are in the presence of the Lord, but without our physical bodies. And finally comes glorification, when our bodies will be resurrected and changed so that they will no longer decay, and we will inherit the new heavens and new earth, where we will live in the presence of our Immanuel for all eternity.

44. 所有发生在地球上的事，神都掌主权吗？

Is God sovereign over every single event that takes place on earth?

对许多基督徒来说，神在所有发生的事上——无论有多渺小——都有绝对的主权，似乎是很可笑的观念。把神当作一个好好先生，只关心一些“大”事，不会在一些小事上蹚浑水，或者把祂当作是宇宙的“钟表制造者”，把宇宙上紧发条后就让它自行运转，这样的观念也是非常普遍的。其他人则是说，虽然神似乎在所有事上掌主权，祂并未积极地运用这个主权，主宰人的行动，因为这样就会违反了自由意志的原则，把人变成机器人。但是与其依靠这些哲学观念和反对意见，我们应该查考圣经，看圣经对这个议题是怎么说的。

To many Christians the idea of God's absolute sovereignty over every event that takes place, no matter how minute, seems laughable. The conception of God as a dignified old gentleman, who only concerns himself with the “big” matters, and would not get his hands dirty in minor affairs, or else as a cosmic “watchmaker,” who wound up the universe and lets it keep on ticking, is common. Others would say that, while God is somehow “sovereign” over everything, he does not actively exercise that sovereignty in directing the actions of men, for to do so would violate the principle of free will, and make people mere robots. But instead of dwelling on these philosophical ideas and objections, we ought instead to examine the scriptures, and see what they have to say on the subject.

幸运的是，圣经对这个问题的立场非常明確。圣经描述上帝是宇宙唯一且绝对的君王，祂统管万物，并随己意行作万事（出15：18；代上29：11-12；代下20：6；诗22：28）。祂不只是以抽象的方式掌主权，即祂保留根据祂的旨意积极地管理万事的权利，却选择不这样作；而是实际上积极地命定所有发生在地上的事，并使它们得以实现（申32：39：撒上2：6-8；伯9：12；12：6-10；诗33：11；115：3；135：6；赛14：24；45：7；徒15：17-18；弗1：11）。从最小的“偶然”的事，例如“签放在怀里”（箴16：33），到地球上的强大王国这等大事（例如，赛45：1-4），上帝总是根据祂的旨意使万事得以实现。祂统管并超自然地计划“巧合”的事（王上22：20，34，37），人邪恶的行动（创45：5；50：20；出4：21；士14：1-4；诗76：10；箴16：4；21：1；赛44：28；摩3：6；徒2：22-23；4：27-28），人的善行（约15：16；弗2：10；腓2：12-13），邪灵和天使的行动（撒上16：14-16；王上22：19-23；代上21：1/代下24：1；诗103：20-21；104：4），动物的习惯（民22：28；王上17：4；诗29：9；耶8：7；结32：4；但6：22），以及所有被造物的运行（创8：22；诗104：5-10, 13-14, 19-20；可4：39）。

Fortunately, the scriptures are very clear on this matter. The bible depicts God as the only and absolute King of the universe, who rules over all, and does everything he pleases (Exo 15:18; 1Ch 29:11-12; 2Ch 20:6; Psa 22:28). And not only is he sovereign in some abstract way, in that he retains the right to govern all events actively according to his will, but chooses not to do so; but he actually and actively ordains and brings to pass everything that takes place on the earth (Deu 32:39; 1Sa 2:6-8; Job 9:12; 12:6-10; Psa 33:11; 115:3; 135:6; Isa 14:24; Isa 45:7; Act 15:17-18; Eph 1:11). From the smallest matters of “chance,” such as the casting of a lot into the lap (Pro 16:33), to the greatest events of the earth's mighty kingdoms (e.g. Isa 45:1-4), God is bringing all things to pass according to his will. He governs and superintends “coincidental” happenings (1Ki 22:20, 34, 37), the wicked actions of men (Gen 45:5; 50:20; Exo 4:21; Jdg 14:1-4; Psa 76:10; Pro 16:4; 21:1; Isa 44:28; Amo 3:6; Act 2:22-23; 4:27-28), the good deeds of men (Joh 15:16; Eph 2:10; Phi 2:12-13), the actions of both evil spirits and good angels (1Sa 16:14-16; 1Ki 22:19-23; 1Ch 21:1/2Sa 24:1; Psa 103:20-21; 104:4), the habits of animals (Num 22:28; 1Ki 17:4; Psa 29:9; Jer 8:7; Eze 32:4; Dan 6:22), and the operations of all creation (Gen 8:22; Psa 104:5-10, 13-14, 19-20; Mar 4:39).

圣经很明确说，邪恶之事不可归罪给上帝（雅1：13），人要为自己的行动负道德责任（结18：4）；所以我们不能容让我们对神的主权的理解引诱我们去减损这些真理；然而，在「神藉著人的行动，也在人的行动当中积极地统管」这件事上，圣经也同样地明确，我们不可加以否认。如果我们在某个方向上有错，就必须导正我们错误的思想，仰望十字架，这是上帝为历世历代所成就的旨意，是祂在世界开始之前就已经计划好的；但是祂是透过在道德上最该受谴责和受责难的行动，即犹大的背叛，犹太人的假见证，罗马人的酷刑等等，所成就的。

The bible is clear that God is in no way culpable for evil (Jam 1:13), and that humans are all morally responsible for their actions (Ezek 18:4); so we must not let our understanding of God's sovereignty tempt us to minimize these truths; however, the bible is equally clear on the matter of God's active governance in and through all the actions of men, and we must not deny this either. If we err in one direction or the other, we must set our errant thought aright by looking to the cross, where God accomplished his intention for the ages, which he had planned before the world began; but he did so through the most morally reprehensible and culpable actions ever done, in the betrayal of Judas, the false witnessing of the Jews, the cruelty of the Romans, etc. (see Acts 2:23; 4:27-28).

45. 神的主权和人的自由能相容吗？

How can God be sovereign and man still be free?

责任和自发的选择，和自由意志不是同一回事。我们确认，人的确要为他作的选择负责，但是我们否认圣经教导人有自由意志，因為圣经没有一个地方提到这点。反而，圣经教导的是，神预旨所有会发生的事（弗1：11，神“随己意行做万事”），也教导人要为他所做的选择受责备（结18：20；太12：37；约9：41）。既然圣经是我们最终极的权威与最高的预设前提，在这个问题上，圣经许多清楚的宣告必须超约所有人类的逻辑。我们发现，几乎所有对上帝巨细靡遗地护理万事的异议，都是道德和哲学上的，而不是解经上的。这意味着我们必须努力有意识地确认圣经所宣告的，而不是凭我们有限的理解，以及罪恶的、想要独立的内在驱力。

Responsibility and voluntary choice are not the same thing as free will. We affirm that man is indeed responsible for the choices he makes, yet we deny that the Bible teaches that man has a free will since it is no where taught in the pages of Scripture. The Bible teaches, rather, that God ordains all things that come to pass (Eph 1:11) and it also teaches that man is culpable for his choices (Ezek 18:20, Matt 12:37, John 9:41). Since the Scripture is our ultimate authority and highest presuppsosition, the multitude of clear scriptural declarations on this matter outweigh all unaided human logic. We find that almost always the objections to God's meticulous providence over all things are moral and philosophical rather than exegetical. This means we must strive to consciously affirm what the Scripture declares over all our finite understanding and sinful inner drive for independence.

为了更好地理解这点，神学家使用了一个词，“兼容论”（compatibilism）来描述神的主权和人的责任之间的协同（concurrence）关系。兼容论是决定论（determinism）的一种形式，而我们应该注意，这个立场的命定成分并不比坚定的决定论（或宿命论）来得弱。它只是说神先前的决定和巨细靡遗的护理，与自发的选择是“兼容”的。我们的选择不是被迫的，换句话说，我们的选择并没有违背我们想要的，或我们的欲望，然而我们的选择从来不在神的主权的预旨之外。神所决定的，必定会实现（弗1：11）。

In order to understand this better theologians have come up with the term "compatibilism" to describe the concurrence of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. Compatibilism is a form of determinism and it should be noted that this position is no less deterministic than hard determinism. It simply means that God's predetermination and meticulous providence is "compatible" with voluntary choice. Our choices are not coerced ...i.e. we do not choose against what we want or desire, yet we never make choices contrary to God's sovereign decree. What God determines will always come to pass (Eph 1:11).

根据圣经，（根据兼容论），人的选择是出于他的自愿，但是他作出这些选择的欲望和处境，是透过神的决定。例如，圣经说神定旨祂的儿子被钉十字架，但是邪恶的人处心积虑而且是自发地要钉死祂（见徒2：23；4：27-28）。根据这些经文，这个邪恶的行为不在神的预旨之外，但是它是自愿的，因此这些人要为这些行动负责。或者，当约瑟的弟兄把他买到埃及为奴，约瑟之后回顾说，虽然他的兄弟是出于邪恶的心想要害他，但是上帝的意思却是好的（创50：20）。神决定并定旨这些事件会发生（即约瑟会被卖为奴），但是自发作出这个邪恶选择，并付诸行动的兄弟，仍然要负责。这意味着，罪要归到约瑟的兄弟身上，因为他们做了这些邪恶的举动，而上帝仍然不受责备。在这两个例子中，我们可以说上帝虽然预旨了罪，但是上帝却是无罪的。万事都不在祂全权可喜悦的旨意之外。

In light of Scripture, (according to compatibilism), human choices are exercised voluntarily but the desires and circumstances that bring about these choices about occur through divine determinism. For example, God is said to specifically ordain the crucifixion of His Son, and yet evil men willfully and voluntarily crucify Him (see Acts 2:23 & 4:27-28). This act of evil is not free from God's decree, but it is voluntary, and these men are thus responsible for the act, according to these Texts. Or when Joseph's brothers sold him into slavery in Egypt, Joseph later recounted that what his brothers intended for evil, God intended for good (Gen 50:20). God determines and ordains that these events will take place (that Joseph will be sold into slavery), yet the brothers voluntarily make the evil choice that brings it to pass, which means the sin is imputed to Joseph's brothers for the wicked act, and God remains blameless. In both of these cases, it could be said that God ordains sin, sinlessly. Nothing occurs apart from His sovereign good pleasure.

我们必须清楚说，无论是兼容论或坚定的宿命论都没有说人有自由意志。相信人有自由意志的人，不是兼容论者，应该说是“立场矛盾者”（inconsistent）。我们的选择之所以是我们的，是因为它们是自发的，不是被迫的。我们做选择并没有违背我们的欲望或本性，也不在神巨细靡遗的护理之外。此外，兼容论也和随意自由意志（libertarian free will）直接抵触（译按：随意自由意志是亚米念主义坚持的信念）。因此，自发的选择（voluntary choice）不是指有做其他选择的自由，即不受任何影响，没有任何先前的偏见、倾向或性情的选择。不过，“自发”的确是指我们有能力根据我们的性情和性格倾向，来选择我们所想要的，这样的能力。前述的观点（随意自由意志）被称为“相反的选择”（contrary choice），而后一种观点则是“自由代理”（free agency）。（所谓的自由代理是指堕落的意志从来没有脱离我们败坏本性的束缚，所以在任何意义上，都无法脱离神永恒的预旨。）（译按：请参考林慈信牧师《自由意志真伪辨》一文）。我强调这点是因为兼容论在这点上常常被坚定的宿命论者所误读。他们总是跟立场不一致的加尔文主义者混淆在一起。兼容论者使用“兼容性的自由”这个语词时，他们通常是指“自发的”选择，而不是指脱离神的预旨或绝对的主权之外的选择（这是不可能的假设）。

We should be clear that NEITHER compatibilism nor hard determinism affirms that any man has a free will. Those who believe man has a free will are not compatibilists, but should, rather, be called "inconsistent". Our choices are our choices because they are voluntary, not coerced. We do not make choices contrary to our desires or natures, nor seperately from God's meticulous providence. Furthermore, compatibilism is directly contrary to libertarian free will. Therefore voluntary choice is not the freedom to choose otherwise, that is, a choice without any influence, prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. Voluntary does mean, however, the ability to choose what we want or desire most according to our disposition and inclinations. The former view (libertarianism) is known as contrary choice, the latter free agency. (the fallen will is never free from the bondage of our corrupt nature, and not free, in any sense, from God's eternal decree.) The reason I emphasize this is that compatibilists are often misrepresented by hard determinists at this point. They are somehow confused with inconsistent Calvinists. When compatibilists use such phrases as "compatibilistic freedom", they are, more often than not, using it to mean 'voluntary' choice, but are not referring to freedom FROM God's decree or absolute sovereignty (an impossible supposition).

圣经的用语是，堕落的人被败坏的本质所束缚，这就是圣经作者为什么认为人不是自由的（见罗马书第6章）。耶稣自己确认说，所有犯罪的，就是罪的奴仆（约8：34），只有神的儿子可以使他们得自由。注意这里，即使连耶稣也说到某一种的自由。祂不是说脱离神的自由，而是说不受罪的束缚的自由，也就是那些在基督里的人所享有的自由。在这个意义上，上帝是最自由的，因为祂是圣洁的，与罪完全分开的，但是祂不能作出违背祂本质的选择，例如，祂不能成为不圣洁。所以，我们必须根据耶稣在约翰福音8：31-36所说的，下此结论：天然的人没有自由意志。他的意志是罪的奴隶。所有立场一致的神学家，当他们使用“自由”一词时，他们通常是指这样的事实，即虽然神主权地预旨了所有将会发生的事，但是人“自由的选择”（自发的）与神主权的预旨是兼容的。换句话说，这个意志不受外力的强迫，但是并没有脱离必然性。我认为使用“自由意志”这个语词是没有圣经根据的，因为圣经从来没有肯定或使用这个词，或这个概念。所以，当一些神学家使用“自由”这个字时，他们也许是在误用或把哲学语言加到圣经里，但是任何与经文一致的人，当他们说“自由”的时候，他们的意思是“自发（自愿）的”，从来没有说是离开神之外。因为说神主权地成全我们的选择，然后说人可以离开神（man is free FROM GOD），是自我矛盾的。我再次重复，许多人把自由这个词等同于“自发”。任何说“自由”是指“离开神”的人，是头脑不清的。我曾听到史鲍尔（R. C. Sproul）说，没有“未烙印的分子”（maverick molecules）。没有偶然发生的事，万事都在神巨细靡遗的护理之下，毫无例外。

In biblical terminology, fallen man is in bondage to a corruption of nature and that is why the biblical writers considered him not free (see Rom 6). Jesus Himself affirms that the one who sins is a "slave to sin" and only the Son can set him free. Note that even Jesus speaks of a kind of freedom here. He is not speaking of freedom from God but freedom from the bondage of sin, which is the kind of freedom those have who are in Christ. In this sense God is the most free Person since He is holy, set apart from sin... yet He cannot make choices contrary to His essence, i.e. He cannot be unholy. So, we must conclude, according to Jesus in John 8:31-36, that the natural man does not have a free will. The will is in bondage to sin. Any consistent theologian who uses the term "freedom" usually is referring to that fact that while God sovereignly ordains all that comes to pass, yet man's "free choice" (voluntary) is compatible with God's sovereign decree. In other words the will is free from external coercion but not free from necessity. In my reckoning, there is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term or concept. So when some theologians use the word "free" they may be misusing or importing philosophical language from outside the Bible, but I think anyone who is consistent with the Text means "voluntary" when they say "free", but NEVER affirm they are free from God in any sense. For to affirm that God sovereignly brings our choices to pass and then also say man is free FROM GOD, is self-contradictory. So I repeat, many of those whom I read seem equate the word freedom with the meaning "voluntary". If any mean "free from God" they are confused. I heard R. C. Sproul say there are "no maverick molecules". Nothing happens by chance, but all falls within God's meticulous providence, no exceptions.

对兼容论最佳的声明，是我从加尔文那里读到的：

“我们承认人有选择，是自己决定的，所以如果他做了任何邪恶的事，都要算到他头上，算是他自己自愿的选择。我们把强迫和外力都排除在外，因为这抵触了意志的本质，和意志不可能并存。我们否认选择是自由的，因为透过人内在的邪恶，必然会受邪恶的驱使，只能去寻求邪恶的事。从这点我们可以推论必然性（necessity）和强迫（coercion）之间有极大的不同。因为我们不是说人心不甘情不愿地被拉去犯罪，而是说因为他的意志是败坏的，被罪恶所辖制，因此出于必然，会定意向恶。因为哪里有束缚，哪里就有必然性。但是此束缚是自愿的还是被迫的，有很大的不同。我们把必然犯罪的理由放在败坏的意志上，接着就是自己的决定。”----约翰加尔文，《意志的束缚与解放》，99-70页。

One of the best statements on compatibilism is one I found from John Calvin:

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined.

- John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

堕落之前，亚当的意志并不是罪恶的奴仆，所以他的意志不受罪和败坏的束缚，但是它不能脱离上帝的谕旨。他选择悖逆是完全自愿的，虽然上帝预旨，这必然会发生。他还没有得到义的印记，虽然他的性格趋向于善。透过撒但的手段，亚当制服了他自己善良的天性，并选择邪恶，这使得原罪更为可憎。

Prior to the fall, Adam's will was not in bondage to sin, thus it was free from sin's bondage and corruption but it was not free from God's decree. His choice to rebel was completely voluntary even though God has ordained with certainty that it would come to pass. He was not yet sealed in righteousness even though his inclination was toward the good. Through Satans devices, that he overcame his own good inclination and chose evil makes original sin all the more heinous.

46. “兼容论”是什么意思？它合乎圣经吗？

What does the term “compatibilism” mean, and is it biblical?

“兼容论”是用来描述我们在上面讨论过的，两个协同而不互相抵触而存在的真理的一个语词。这两项真理是：(1) 上帝积极地以主权统管发生在地球上所有发生的事，以及(2) 人行动的责任，在不受外来的强迫下遵循他天然欲望（自从堕落后就完全败坏了）的自由（即自发的选择）。兼容论（也被称为“软性的宿命论”soft determinism）相信，上帝预先决定并巨细靡遗地掌管护理所有的事，和自发的选择是可以“兼容”的。这些概念都是真的，都合乎圣经，因此，他们彼此间是不互相抵触的，而是可以完全“兼容”的。

“Compatibilism” is a term which describes the concurrent non-contradictory existence of the two truths we have been discussing above: God's active sovereignty and governance over every event that takes place on earth, and man's responsibility for his actions and freedom (i.e. voluntary choice) to follow his natural desires (which since the fall are wholly corrupt) apart from external coercion. Compatibilism (also known as soft determinism), is the belief that God's predetermination and meticulous providence over all events is "compatible" with voluntary choice. These concepts are both true and biblical, and hence, they are not at odds with each other, but are fully “compatible”.

兼容论的教导不只是合乎圣经，它也是解决所谓的“自由意志的问题”唯一合乎圣经的解方。首先，圣经教导说神必不说谎，或背乎自己（来6：18）；其次，上帝预旨了所有将会发生的事（见问答43）；第三，人要为他的恶性负完全的责任，也要为此遭受永恒的惩罚，除非祂得到神在基督里白白的礼物（雅1：13-15；启20：11-15；罗2：5-6）。因此，圣经要求，上帝的主动全权和人真正的选择与责任，并不会彼此矛盾，否则神就是说谎的，或是个糊涂的作者。我们是否能领会这些真理如何能和谐地并存，相对来说是件小事；重要的是我们要相信神的话，且相信这两项突出的圣经教导，事实上是彼此兼容的。

Not only is the teaching of compatibilism biblical, it is the only solution to the so-called “free will problem” that scriptures allow. The bible teaches, first, that God does not lie, or contradict himself (Hebrews 6:18); second, that God ordains everything that comes to pass (see question 43); and third, that man is fully responsible for his wicked actions, and will suffer eternal punishment for them unless he is given the free grace of God in Christ (Jam 1:13-15; Rev 20:11-15; Rom 2:5-6). Hence, the bible demands that God's active sovereignty and man's real choice and responsibility do not contradict each other, or else God would be a liar, or the author of confusion. Whether we can comprehend the way in which the truths co-exist harmoniously is relatively minor; what matters is that we take God at his word, and believe that these two eminently biblical teachings are in fact compatible with each other.

47. 圣经是否教导人有自由意志？

Does the bible teach that man has free will?

当有人问起自由意志的问题时，首先我们必须很小心地定义这个词。“自由”是不是说我们不会受到外来的压迫而做出真正的选择？还是说我们可以选择任何理论上可能的选择，而不必要受到我们天然的倾向、偏见或欲望的限制？如果我们的意思是前者，那么“自由”这个词就是没有必要的，也是误导人的，因为真正的选择，不受外来的压迫，本来就是“意志”的定义的一部分。如果我作了选择，就是出于自愿的，因为那是我想作的；我没有受到外来的强迫，因此，我不能为自己辩护说，“有什么东西控制我的身体，强迫我做我不想做的事——不要怪我！”不，无论我做了什么，我都是自愿做的，我要为我的行动向神负责。

When the question of free will arises, it is imperative that we define our terms very carefully. By “free,” do we simply mean that we make real choices apart from external coercion, or do we mean that we can choose any theoretically possible option, without being necessarily constrained by our natural inclinations, prejudices, and desires? If we mean the former, then the term “free” is unnecessary and misleading, for real choice without external coercion is part of the very definition of “will”. If I make any choice at all, I do so willingly, because it is what I want to do; I am not constrained from the outside, and therefore, I cannot say in my defense, “Something took control of my body and forced me to do what I didn't want to do – I'm not to blame!”. No, whatever I have done, I have done willingly, and I am responsible to God for my actions.

但是如果我的意思是后者，就是说我有能力选择行善或作恶，顺服神或不顺服祂，或至少是相信或不相信神的福音（这是许多人所理解的“自由意志”），那么，我们就和许多经文有直接的抵触了。我们有“自由”去做我们想做的，但是我们却是被我们邪恶的本性和欲望所捆绑的。我们无法用我们的意志去塑造我们的本性，正好相反，是我们的本性决定我们会如何使用我们的意志。如此，圣经经常用种种的方式说到，我们是彻底被罪所捆绑的。在我们的肉体中，我们无法讨神的喜悦（罗8：5-8），我们无法明白神的事（林前2：14；约3：3，10-13；14：17），我们不去寻求神（罗3：11），我们无法信靠神（约6：44，65；10：26；12：37-41），我们完全无法行善（伯15：14-16；箴20：9；耶12：23；罗3：10-18）。我们彻底地被罪所束缚（约8：34；罗6：20；多3：3），我们是魔鬼的囚犯，被迫去行撒但的欲望（约8：43-45；提后2：25-26；约壹5：19），我们心中所想的都是恶（创6：5），因此我们的每个行动，不管我们认为它有“多好”，实际上都是邪恶的，不过是“污秽的衣服”（赛64：6）。从人类堕落之后，我们就没有自由去行任何的善；只有当圣灵给我们一个新的本性（结36：26-27），才能开始行善。只有当神的儿子释放我们，我们才能得到自由（约8：36）。

But if we mean the latter, that we have the power to choose to do good or evil, to obey God or not to obey him, or at least to believe or disbelieve his gospel, as many people intend to suggest by the term “free will,” then we are in direct contradiction to many scriptures. We are “free” to do what we want to do, but we are bound in what we want by our evil nature and desires. We may do as we please, but we cannot please as we please. We cannot use our will to shape our natures, but rather, our natures determine how we will use our wills. Thus, the bible says very often, and in many different ways, that we are utterly bound in sin. In our flesh, we cannot please God (Rom. 8:5-8), we cannot understand the things of God (1 Cor. 2:14; John 3:3, 10-13; 14:17), we cannot seek God (Rom. 3:11), we cannot believe in God (John 6:44, 65; 10:26; 12:37-41), we cannot do anything good at all (Job 15:14-16; Prov. 20:9; Jer 13:23; Rom. 3:10-18). We are utterly captive to sin (John 8:34; Rom. 6:20; Tit. 3:3), we are prisoners of the devil and constrained to do his desires (John 8:43-45, 2 Tim. 2:25-26; 1 John 5:19), every impulse of the thoughts of our hearts is only evil continually (Gen. 6:5), and so every action we perform, no matter how “good” we think it is, is actually evil, nothing but “filthy rags” (Isa. 64:6). Ever since the fall, we are not free to do anything good whatsoever; and we can only begin to do good as the Spirit gives us a new nature (Ezek. 36:26-27). We are only free when the Son sets us free (John 8:36).

约翰?加尔文在他关于《意志的捆绑与释放》的论文中，很巧妙地表达出这些真理：

John Calvin has very adeptly expressed these truths in his treatise on the Bondage and Liberation of the Will:

“我们相信人有选择，人可以自主，所以，如果他做了任何邪恶的事，这个帐应该要算在他头上，要算在他自愿做的选择身上。我们把外在的强迫排除在外，因为这和意志的本质是相反的，这两者是无法并存的。我们否认选择是自由的，因为借着人内在的邪恶，必然会使人趋向邪恶，只会寻求邪恶。从这点我们可以推论出必然和强迫之间极大的差别。因为我们不是说人是心不甘情不愿地被拖去犯罪，而是说因为他的意志是败坏的，他就被犯罪的恶所辖制，因此出于必然，必然会走上邪恶的道路。因为哪里有束缚，哪里就有必然。但是这个束缚是自由的还是强迫的，会有极大的不同。我们说必然会犯罪是出于意志的堕落，而人的自主就是出自这个堕落的意志。”

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined." John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

48. 什么是加尔文主义？

What is Calvinism?

严格来说，“加尔文主义”是指16世纪伟大的日内瓦宗教改革家，约翰?加尔文的神学教导。他的巨作，《基督教要义》，可以说是过去500年来最重要的著作中。在这部作品中，他把基督教信仰的原则作了非常详尽的概括。他的作品最突出的强调是要说明并论证神绝对的主权，以及神事先决定将要会发生在地球上所有的事，特别是与人的救恩有关的；这也是当人论及“加尔文主义”或“加尔文神学”时所主要强调的。

Strictly speaking, “Calvinism” refers to the theological teachings of the great sixteenth-century Geneva reformer, John Calvin. In his magnum opus, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, which is one of the most important works produced in the past five hundred years, he outlines the principles of the Christian faith in great detail. One of the outstanding emphases of this work is his concern to demonstrate and argue for the absolute sovereignty of God, and his predetermination of all that takes place on the earth, particularly as it relates to the salvation of man; and this emphasis is usually what is primarily intended when one speaks of “Calvinism,” or “Calvinistic theology”.

不过，“加尔文主义”的流行用法，通常是不是指加尔文整体的教导，而是特别指“多特信条”的教导，那是在1618-1619年所举行的一次会议所产生的文件。在那次会议中，加尔文在救恩论上的教导，被用来对抗雅各?亚米念（Jacobus Arminius）（的学生）所领导的抗议者（the Remonstrance）（抗议加尔文的救恩论）。这个历史性的会议提出了一些要点，来回应由抗议者提出的五要点，结果就产生了所谓的加尔文主义五要点，可以简单用英文的“郁金香”（TULIP）来缩写。这五要点是：“Total Depravity”（全然败坏）。“ Unconditional Election”（无条件的拣选）。“ Limited Atonement”（限定的救赎），“ Irresistible Grace”（不可抗拒的恩典），以及“ Perseverance of the Saints”（圣徒的坚忍）。多特信条在今天是非常有影响力的文件，因为它是“三项联合信条”（Three Forms of Unity）之一，即当代许多欧陆改革宗教会和宗派的主要信仰告白标准。加尔文五要点有时也特别被称为为“恩典的教义”（the Doctrines of Grace）。我们会在以下的问题中详细讨论。

However, when the term “Calvinism” is popularly used, it often refers, not to Calvin's teaching in general, but specifically to the Canons of Dort, which was a document produced in a synod held in 1618-1619, which upheld Calvin's teaching on soteriology against the opposition of the Remonstrance, led by Jacobus Arminius. This historic council responded to the five points of the Remonstrance with what have come to be called the five points of Calvinism, and which are commonly remembered by the acrostic “TULIP”. The points are as follows: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. The Canons of Dort is a very influential document today, as it is one of the “Three Forms of Unity,” which are the primary confessional standards of many modern Reformed churches and denominations. The five points of Calvinism are sometimes called “the Doctrines of Grace”. They will be discussed in more detail in the questions below.

49. “伯拉纠主义”，“半伯拉纠主义”和“阿民念主义”是什么意思？它们彼此的关系如何？

What do the terms “Pelagianism,” “Semi-Pelagianism,” and “Arminianism” mean, and how do they relate to each other?

 “伯拉纠主义”，“半伯拉纠主义”和“阿民念主义”这些词的共同点是它们所呈现的是一种“神人合作”（synergistic）的神学形式；也就是说，人救恩的起点，即“重生”时，不是神单独、单方面的行动，而是由神和人“合作”（working together）的产物，在某种程度上。所有这些神人合作的系统，都与“加尔文主义”或“奥古斯丁主义”抵触；“加尔文主义”或“奥古斯丁主义”都教导：神主权地把一个新的、活的心赐给选民，使他们能信靠基督，因此被称义而永恒地得救。

The terms “Pelagianism,” “Semi-Pelagianism,” and “Arminianism” have in common that they all present a form of synergistic theology; that is, the beginning of man's salvation, in regeneration, is not accomplished by the sole and unilateral act of God, but is produced by God and man “working together,” in some sense. Each of these synergistic systems is in opposition to “Calvinism” or “Augustinianism,” which teaches that God sovereignly gives to each of his elect a new, living heart which cannot do otherwise than believe in Christ, and so be justified and eternally saved.

伯拉纠主义是最早、也是最极端的神人合作的神学，它是由第四世纪一位英国的僧侣，名叫“伯拉纠”（Pelagius）所阐述的。伯拉纠教导说，人的本性没有受到亚当堕落的影响，所有的人都还是自由的，可以选择善或选择恶，选择顺服神或不顺服神。人生来并不是有罪的（guilty），只有当他们行邪恶之事后，才成为有罪；而亚当的失败并没有败坏他的子孙，只是给他们一个坏榜样，他们可以自己选择是否要效法他。希坡的主教奥古斯丁极力反对伯拉纠，他根据圣经教导说，人生来受到罪的捆绑，而神的命令的涵义不包括人有顺服神的道德能力。伯拉纠在主后413年的以弗所大公会议（Council of Ephesus）被定为异端。

Pelagianism, the first and most radical of these synergistic theologies, was expounded by a fourth-century British monk named Pelagius. Pelagius taught that man's nature was not affected by Adam's fall, but that all men are still free to choose good or evil, to obey God or disobey him. Men are not guilty by nature, but only become guilty when they choose to do that which is evil; and Adam's failure did not corrupt his offspring, it just gave them a bad example, which they could choose to follow or not to follow. Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo, was Pelagius' great adversary, and he taught that man is bound in sin according to the scriptures, and that God's commands do not imply man's moral ability to obey them. Pelagianism was officially condemned by the Church in AD 431, at the Council of Ephesus.

“半伯拉纠主义”是宗教改革时期的用词，是指一种出现在在第六世纪，以弗所会议之后的、比较软性的伯拉纠主义。根据半伯拉纠主义的看法，人没有自由选择善或恶，但是他至少有自由，可以靠信心做出归向神的第一个行动，因此，靠着神的恩典，神就赐给他选择善的能力（译按：神的恩典是必要的，但是人必须和神合作）。人在堕落的本性中，无法行善，但是他至少能以他自己天然的能力相信并归向上帝。这种比较软性的伯拉纠主义，在主后529年，被奥兰治会议（Council of Orange）定为异端（诚之按：奥兰治会议拒绝了半伯拉纠主义，但是也否定了奥古斯丁的“遗弃reprobation”说）。不过，改教家们正确地认识到，16世纪的罗马教会已经再度彻底地变成了半伯拉纠主义。

“Semi-Pelagianism” is a Reformation-era term that came to designate a softer sort of Pelagianism that arose after the Council of Ephesus, in the sixth century. According to Semi-Pelagianism, man is not free to choose good or evil, but he is at least free to make the first move to God, to turn to him in faith, and so be given the power to choose good by God's grace. Man is not free to do good in his fallen nature, but he is at least able to believe and come to God in his own native strength. This softer variety of Pelagianism was officially condemned by the Church in 529, at the Council of Orange; however, the Reformers rightly recognized that the Roman church of the sixteenth century had become thoroughly Semi-Pelagian again.

“阿民念主义”是指雅各布?阿民念（Jacobus Arminius）的教导，或以他为首的“抗议者”（the Remonstrance）的五要点。根据亚米念（及跟随他的人）的教导，人没有堕落到一个地步，使他无法自然地寻求上帝；神拣选人是根据祂预先看见人的信心，人会在一定的时间归向祂；基督的救赎是要给世上所有的人的，但是是否会被分配到具体的个人身上，就取决于人自由的决定，是信还是不信；神的恩典是足够的，如果人这样选择，就可以使人有能力相信，但是神的恩典并不会迫使人相信（necessitate faith）；而当人真正在基督里得到真实的得救的信心，他仍然可以自由地离开，从恩典中坠落，而永远地失落。主后1618-1619的多特会议，正式地定阿民念主义有罪，并坚持所谓的“加尔文五要点”；不过，今天有许多更正教教会和宗派仍然持守阿民念神学。阿民念主义和半伯拉纠主义的不同之处在于前者教导“在先的恩典”。这是为了反对半伯拉纠主义。阿民念主义通常教导人没有天然的能力相信；然而，神把先在的恩典毫无例外地给了所有的人，给予他们所需要的道德能力选择信或不信。人是否得救，完全取决于这个人是否选择运用这个先在的恩典，并相信神。

“Arminianism” refers to the teachings of Jacobus Arminius, and the five points of the Remonstrance which he headed. According to Arminius, man is not so depraved that he cannot naturally seek God; God's election of men is based on his foreseeing the faith they would come to in time; the atonement of Christ was intended for every person on earth, but whether it will actually be applied to anyone in particular rests upon his free decision to believe or not to believe; God's grace is sufficient to enable men to believe if they so choose, but does not necessitate faith; and after a man has come to a genuine saving faith in Christ, he is still free to turn aside and fall away from grace, and so be eternally lost. The Synod of Dort, in 1618-1619, officially condemned Arminianism, and upheld the so-called five points of Calvinism; however, there are many Protestant churches and denominations today that hold to an Arminian theology. Arminianism differs from Semi-Pelagianism in the former's teaching on prevenient grace: against Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism usually teaches that man does not have the natural ability to believe; however, God extends his prevenient grace to all men without exception, giving them all the moral ability to choose to believe or not to believe. Whether or not any man is actually saved depends entirely on whether a person chooses to improve upon this prevenient grace, and believe in God.

Further Reading

Arminainism, Semi-Pelagianism on Monergism.com

附录：

半伯拉纠主义

http://carm.org/languages/chinese/%E5%8D%8A%E4%BC%AF%E6%8B%89%E7%BA%A0%E4%B8%BB%E4%B9%89

半伯拉纠主义（Semi-Pelagianism）是伯拉纠异端一种较中立的形式，伯拉纠异端由公元五世纪罗马的一个教师伯拉纠（Pelagius）提出。半伯拉纠主义則由五世纪马赛港(Marseilles)的卡西安[Cassian]提出）他并没有否认原罪以及其对人的灵魂和意志的影响。但是它教导神与人的合作才实现对人的救赎。这种合作並非人的努力守律法的意思，而是人根据自己意志做出自由选择的能力。半伯拉纠主义教导，人能通过其自由的意志寻求迈向被上帝救赎第一步，然后依靠神的恩赐与神合作，之后通过自己的努力来保持信仰。这就意味着，人能否被救赎依靠的是上帝的恩赐，而上帝的恩赐对于维持信仰却不是必须的。

该异端的错误在于，它所指的恩赐已不再是恩赐。恩赐是上帝对罪人完全并且自由给予的。但是，如果是由人首先去寻求上帝，上帝才因为他的努力而给予恩赐。这意味着，上帝的得救恩典仅仅是决定了人是主动尋求。这不再是恩赐，是人去选择相信上帝，而不是上帝主动对人的恩赐。

半伯拉纠主义教导，罪恶中的人有能力去选择信仰上帝。

半伯拉纠主义教导，上帝的恩赐救赎，是人最初努力的结果。

半伯拉纠主义否认基督教的预定论（predestination）。

半伯拉纠主义在主后529年召开的奥朗日会议（The Council of Orange）上被谴责为异端.