感謝讚美上帝護理的大能与豐盛的供應。 本網誌內的所有資源純屬學習交流之用。

2019-12-13


限定的救贖DefiniteAtonement

誠之摘自 巴刻著,《簡明神學》(更新傳道會,1999), 120-121頁。
(部分翻譯略作更動,以更符合原文的意思)

「限定的救贖」(definte atonement)有時也稱作「特定的救贖」(particular atonement)、「有效的救贖」(effective atonement),或「有限的救贖」(limited atonement),這是改革宗一項歷史性的教義,論及三一神在耶穌基督之死的事上,其意向為何。這項教義不懷疑基督所獻的祭的無限價值,也不懷疑神真誠地向所有「聽見(福音)的人」發出的邀約(啟2217),它明言:基督的死真正除去了所有神選民的罪惡,並確保他們會藉著重生而有信心,並蒙神保守其信心,而得以進入榮耀裏──得榮耀才是主的救贖所要完成的目的。救贖的限定性與有效性帶來它的「有限性」:即基督就祂死的有效性而言,祂並不是為每一個人死。並非所有人都得救了的這個事實,證明這項教義,正符合聖經和經驗合起來所教導我們的。

此外,僅有的兩種可能選擇是:(1) 真正的普救論,認為基督的死保證了人類每一份子──過去的、現在的、未來的──都會得救;或者是(2)  假設的普救論,認為基督的死使每一個人都可能得到救恩,但是只有那些以信心回應並肯悔改的人,才會真正得著。但主的死並沒有保證人一定會相信並悔改。所以,選擇有三:效果無限、範圍有限的救贖(改革宗的特定救贖論);範圍無限、效果有限的救贖(假設的普救論);或是效果無限、範圍也無限的救贖(真正的普救論)。這三項我們究竟應該選哪一項,必須讓聖經作為我們的導引來決定。

聖經說,神已經揀選了我們這墮落族群中的許多人,要使他們得到救恩;神也曾差遣基督到世上來拯救他們(約637-401027-291151-52;羅828-29;弗13-14;彼前120)。聖經常說,基督已為特定的群體或個人而死,並清楚暗示,祂的死已為他們取得了救恩(約1015-1827-29;羅58-10832;加220313-1444-5;約壹49-10;啟14-659-10)。基督面對死亡時,祂只為那些父神所賜給祂的人禱告,而不為世人──其餘所有的人──禱告(約17920)。若主願意為任何一個人死、卻拒絕為他禱告,這是可思議的事嗎?限定的救贖是以上三種看法裏,唯一和聖經的記錄相符的。

新約聖經一方面教導我們,在福音裏有基督所賜的恩典,基督徒理當到處宣揚這福音;在另一方面,它則教導我們,基督在十字架上曾為神的選民獲得了完全有效的救贖;這兩者之間並沒有不一致,也沒有不連貫之處。所有憑信心到基督面前的人,都必得著憐憫,這點是千真萬確的(約63547-5154-57;羅116108-13)。蒙揀選的人在福音中聽到耶穌所要給予的;透過所聽到的福音,就被聖靈有效地呼召。福音和有效的呼召,都是因為基督受死,承擔了我們的罪才有的。那些拒絕基督所賜予之恩典的人,都是出於他們自己的自由意志(因為他們如此選擇,太221-7;約318),因此他們最終的滅亡也是自找的。而那些接待基督的人,則要學習為祂的十字架感謝祂,因為十字架是神主權救恩計劃的中心。


52 限定的救赎——耶稣基督为神的选民而死
Definite Redemption - Jesus Christ died for God's elect
《简明神学》Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs,巴刻(J. I. Packer)著/張麟至译,更新传道会,2007年。

我是好牧人,我认识我的羊,我的羊也认识我;正如父认识我,我也认识父一样,并且我为羊舍命。(约10:14-15

[限定的救赎]有时亦称作[特定的救赎][有效的救赎][有限的救赎],这是改革中一项历时性的教义,论及三一神在耶稣基督之死一事上,其意愿为何。这项教义毫不怀疑所献之祭的无限赎价,也不怀疑神真诚向所有[听见{福音}的人]发出的邀约(启22:17),它明言:基督的死真正除去了所有神选民的罪恶,并确保他们会重生,信主,并因信蒙神保守得以进入荣耀里——得荣才是主的救赎所要达到的目的。救赎的限定性与有效性带来它的[有效性]:即基督就祂死的有效性而言,祂并不是为每一个人死。并非所有人都得救了的这项事实,证明了这项教义,正符合圣经和经验合起来所教导我们的。

此外仅有的两种可能选择是:(1)真正的普救论,认为基督的死保证了人类每一份子——过去的、现在的、将来的——都会得救;或者是(2)假设的普救论,认为基督的死使每一个人都可能得到救恩,但是只有那些以信心回应并肯悔改的人,才会真正得着。但主的死并没有保证一定会相信并悔改。所以,选择有三:效果无限、范围有限的救赎(改革宗的特定救赎论),范围无限、效果有限的救赎(假设的普救论),或是效果无限、范围也无限的救赎(真正的普救论)。这三个我们究竟选择哪一个、其指引必须根据圣经来定。

圣经说,神已经拣选了我们这堕落族类中的许多人,要使他们得到救恩;神也曾差遣基督到世上来拯救他们(约6:37-4010:27-2911:51-52;罗8:28-29;弗1:3-14;彼前1:20)。圣经常说,基督已为特定的群体或个人而死,并清楚暗示,祂的死已为他们获取了救恩(约10:15-18,27-28;罗5:8-108:32;加2:203:13-144:4-5;约一4:9-10;启1:4-65:9-10)。基督面对死亡时,祂只为那些父神所赐给祂的人祷告,而不为世人——其余所有的人类——祷告(约17:920)。若主愿意为任何一个人死、却拒绝为他祷告,这是可思议的事吗?限定的救赎是以上三种看法里,唯一和圣经的记录符合的。


新约圣经一方面教导我们,在福音里有基督所赐的恩典,基督徒理当到处宣扬这福音;在另一方面,它则教导我们,基督在十字架上曾为神的选民获得了完全有效的救赎;这两者之间并没有不一致、也没有不连贯之处。所有凭信心到基督面前的人,都必得着怜悯,这点是千真万确的(约6:35,47-51,54-57;罗1:1610:8-13)。蒙拣选的人在福音中听到了基督的赐予;透过所听到的福音,就蒙圣灵有效的呼召了。福音和有效的呼召,都是因基督受死承担了我们的罪才有的。那些拒绝基督所赐予之恩典的人,都是出于他们自己的自由意志,愿意如此选择(太22:1-7;约3:18),因此他们最终的灭亡也是自找的。而那些领受基督的人,则要学习为祂十字架感谢祂,因为十字架是神主权救恩计划的中心。


DEFINITE REDEMPTION
JESUS CHRIST DIED FOR GOD’S ELECT

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. JOHN 10:14-15

Definite redemption, sometimes called “particular redemption,” “effective atonement,” and “limited atonement,” is an historic Reformed doctrine about the intention of the triune God in the death of Jesus Christ. Without doubting the infinite worth of Christ’s sacrifice or the genuineness of God’s “whoever will” invitation to all who hear the gospel (Rev. 22:17), the doctrine states that the death of Christ actually put away the sins of all God’s elect and ensured that they would be brought to faith through regeneration and kept in faith for glory, and that this is what it was intended to achieve. From this definiteness and effectiveness follows its limitedness: Christ did not die in this efficacious sense for everyone. The proof of that, as Scripture and experience unite to teach us, is that not all are saved.

The only possible alternatives are (a) actual universalism, holding that Christ’s death guaranteed salvation for every member of the human race, past, present, and future, or (b) hypothetical universalism, holding that Christ’s death made salvation possible for everyone but actual only for those who add to it a response of faith and repentance that was not secured by it. The choices are, therefore, an atonement of unlimited efficacy but limited extent (Reformed particularism), one of unlimited extent but limited efficacy (hypothetical universalism), or one of unlimited efficacy and unlimited extent (actual universalism). Scripture must be the guide in choosing between these possibilities.

Scripture speaks of God as having chosen for salvation a great number of our fallen race and having sent Christ into the world to save them (John 6:37-40; 10:27-29; 11:51-52; Rom. 8:28-39; Eph. 1:3-14; 1 Pet. 1:20). Christ is regularly said to have died for particular groups or persons, with the clear implication that his death secured their salvation (John 10:15-18, 27-29; Rom. 5:8-10; 8:32; Gal. 2:20, 3:13-14; 4:4-5; 1 John 4:9-10; Rev. 1:4-6; 5:9-10). Facing his passion, he prayed only for those the Father had given him, not for the “world” (i.e., the rest of mankind, John 17:9, 20). Is it conceivable that he would decline to pray for any whom he intended to die for? Definite redemption is the only one of the three views that harmonizes with this data.


There is no inconsistency or incoherence in the teaching of the New Testament about, on the one hand, the offer of Christ in the gospel, which Christians are told to make known everywhere, and, on the other hand, the fact that Christ achieved a totally efficacious redemption for God’s elect on the cross. It is a certain truth that all who come to Christ in faith will find mercy (John 6:35, 47-51, 54-57; Rom. 1:16; 10:8-13). The elect hear Christ’s offer, and through hearing it are effectually called by the Holy Spirit. Both the invitation and the effectual calling flow from Christ’s sin-bearing death. Those who reject the offer of Christ do so of their own free will (i.e., because they choose to, Matt. 22:1-7; John 3:18), so that their final perishing is their own fault. Those who receive Christ learn to thank him for the cross as the centerpiece of God’s plan of sovereign saving grace.