40 主的神人二性——耶稣基督是完全的人TwoNatures - Jesus Christ is fully human

《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。

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2020/01/blog-post_98.html

http://www.geocities.ws/gary_bee_za/packer/twonatures.htm

40 主的神人二性——耶稣基督是完全的人

Two Natures - Jesus Christ is fully human

因为有许多迷惑人的出来，他们不认耶稣基督是道成了肉身来的，这就是那迷惑人、敌基督的。（约二7）

耶稣是一个曾说服过那些与祂最亲密者祂也是神的人，所以，祂生为人的这一点并不可疑。约翰对否认[耶稣基督是成了肉身来的]（约一4:2-3；约二7）者的定罪，旨在对付幻影派，此派人士视耶稣乃一超然的幽魂（不是神），以此思想来取代道成肉身的真理；他们说耶稣看似人，实际上不过是一个幽灵；只是一位教师，并未真的为赎罪而死。

福音书显示耶稣受到人性的限制（饥饿，太4:2；疲倦，约4:6；不知情，路8:45-47），也经历过人性的痛苦（见在拉撒路坟前的哀哭，约11:35,38；在客西马尼园的悲恸，可14:32-42；另参路12:50；来5:7-10；以及十字架上的苦痛）。希伯来书强调，假如祂没有这样经历过人性的压力——软弱、受试探、痛苦，祂就没有资格在我们经历这些事的时候帮助我们（来2:17-18；4:15-16；5:2,7-9）。正如以上所说的，主身为人的经历向我们保证，当我们与神交通同行的路上，有所需求、有所受压之时，我们可以到祂那里，知道祂曾经经历过这一切，所以祂是我们所需要的帮助者。

基督徒注重耶稣的神性，以致有时会有一种想法，以为降低耶稣的人性，就是尊荣祂。早期[基督——性论]的异端表达的就是这种想法（monophysitism，认为耶稣只是一种性情）——如现代人的一些说法，以为耶稣只是假装不知道一些事情（基于祂是无所不知的前提，即祂知晓每一件事情），或假装饥饿、疲倦（认为祂的神性超然，无时无刻不加在祂的人性上，因而使祂的人性能超越一般生存的需要之上）。但是道成肉身的意思却是说，神的儿子在祂人生的每一点上，都是籍着心思和身体来度过祂的神人生活；这样，祂将自己投入祂所要救赎的人中间，扩大与他们的认同感和对他们的同情心；而且只有在父神旨意特殊要求的情况下，祂才会支取神性的资源，以超越人性知识与能力之限制的方法行事。

又有人以为，耶稣的神人二性好像交流电——有时表现祂的人性，有时则表现祂的神性——这种思想也是错的。祂所做得，所经历的每一件事，包括祂在十字架上的受苦，都是在神人[二性在]一个位格的合一之内进行的。（亦即神的儿子具有人行动、反应、经历的能力，但却又保持自己是一个未曾堕落者。）这种说法并没有与神的[无痛感性]这种属性相矛盾，因为神的[无痛感性]非指神从来不会经历到痛苦，而是说神的感受——包括痛苦在内——是出于祂的自愿、凭祂自己预定的抉择而有的。

耶稣具有神性，没有罪性（不能犯罪），但这并非说祂不会遭受试探。撒旦曾试探祂，要叫他自求满足、显扬自己、夸张自己，以违背父神（太4:1-11）。欲从十字架前退去的试探也是常有的（路22:28[磨练]一词的希腊文亦可译作；太16:23；以及耶稣在客西马尼园的祷告）。耶稣既身为人，祂无法不挣扎就战胜试探；但祂之为神，实行神的旨意却是祂的本性（约5:19,30），因此祂必须抵挡试探，与之争战，直到胜过试探为止。从耶稣在客西马尼园的经历，我们可以推断祂的挣扎有时非常尖锐、痛楚，远非人所能知晓。其佳果则是[祂自己既然被试探而受苦，就能搭救 被试探的人。]（来2:18）

TWO NATURES

JESUS CHRIST IS FULLY HUMAN

Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 JOHN 7

Jesus was a man who convinced those closest to him that he was also God; his humanness is not therefore in doubt. John’s condemnation of those who denied that “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4:2-3; 2 John 7) was aimed at Docetists, who replaced the Incarnation with the idea that Jesus was a supernatural visitant (not God) who seemed human but was really a kind of phantom, a teacher who did not really die for sins.

The Gospels show Jesus experiencing human limitations (hunger, Matt. 4:2; weariness, John 4:6; ignorance of fact, Luke 8:45-47) and human pain (weeping at Lazarus’ grave, John 11:35, 38; agonizing in Gethsemane, Mark 14:32-42; cf. Luke 12:50; Hebrews 5:7-10; and suffering on the cross). Hebrews stresses that had he not thus experienced human pressures—weakness, temptation, pain—he would not be qualified to help us as we go through these things (Heb. 2:17-18; 4:15-16; 5:2, 7-9). As it is, his human experience is such as to guarantee that in every moment of demand and pressure in our relationship and walk with God we may go to him, confident that in some sense he has been there before us and so is the helper we need.

Christians, focusing on Jesus’ deity, have sometimes thought that it honors Jesus to minimize his humanness. The early heresy of Monophysitism (the idea that Jesus had only one nature) expressed this supposition, as do modern suggestions that he only pretended to be ignorant of facts (on the supposition that he always actualized his omniscience and therefore was aware of everything) and to be hungry and weary (on the supposition that his divinity supernaturally energized his humanity all the time, raising it above the demands of ordinary existence). But Incarnation means, rather, that the Son of God lived his divine-human life in and through his human mind and body at every point, maximizing his identification and empathy with those he had come to save, and drawing on divine resources to transcend human limits of knowledge and energy only when particular requirements of the Father’s will so dictated.

The idea that Jesus’ two natures were like alternating electrical circuits, so that sometimes he acted in his humanity and sometimes in his divinity, is also mistaken. He did and endured everything, including his sufferings on the cross, in the unity of his divine-human person (i.e., as the Son of God who had taken to himself all human powers of acting, reacting, and experiencing, in their unfallen form). Saying this does not contradict divine impassibility, for impassibility means not that God never experiences distress but that what he experiences, distress included, is experienced at his own will and by his own foreordaining decision.

Jesus, being divine, was impeccable (could not sin), but this does not mean he could not be tempted. Satan tempted him to disobey the Father by self-gratification, self-display, and self-aggrandizement (Matt. 4:1-11), and the temptation to retreat from the cross was constant (Luke 22:28, where the Greek for “trials” can be translated “temptations” ; Matt. 16:23; and Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane). Being human, Jesus could not conquer temptation without a struggle, but being divine it was his nature to do his Father’s will (John 5:19, 30), and therefore to resist and fight temptation until he had overcome it. From Gethsemane we may infer that his struggles were sometimes more acute and agonizing than any we ever know. The happy end-result is that “because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted” (Heb. 2:18).