66  反律法主义——我们得释放并不是为了去犯罪Legalism - Working for God'sfavour forfeits it

《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/index.html#creator

66  反律法主义——我们得释放并不是为了去犯罪

Legalism - Working for God's favour forfeits it

小子们哪，不要被人诱惑，行义的才是义人，正如主是义人一样。（约一3:7）

废弛道德律主义（antiomianism）就是[反律法]（anti-law）的意思，它是这类看法的总名称，此主义否认圣经里的律法可直接用来管理基督徒的生活。

二元废弛道德律主义出现在犹大和彼得著书所反对的诺斯底派异端里（犹4-19；彼后2章），它视救恩只是为人的灵魂预备的，身体的行为与神和灵魂的健康两者无关；所以，一个人可以行为放荡，而无关宏旨。

以灵为中心的废弛道德律主义信靠圣灵内在的激动到一个地步，甚至否认任何让律法来教导人如何生活的需要。脱离律法的自由既然成了救恩之道，他们就认为，这也带来脱离律法作行为导引的自由。在教宗改革时代的头一百五十年，这种类型的废弛道德律主义时常威胁到教会。保罗坚称：一个真正属灵的人，会承认透过基督使徒所传讯的神话语的权柄（林前14:37；另参7:40）；这也正好提示我们；着迷圣灵的哥林多教会，是被相同的心态[即废弛道德律主义]套住了。

以基督为中心的废弛道德律主义则辨称：神在信徒身上看不见罪恶，因为他们是藏在基督里，而基督已为他们守住律法了。所以，只要他们不断地信主，他们实际做什么都没有区别。然而，约翰一书1:8-2:1（诠释约一1:7）和3:4-10指的却是另一个方向，清楚表明：人在基督里，却同时又过着罪恶的生活方式，是不可能的。

时代主义派的废弛道德律主义主张说，我们已经过了遵守道德律的阶段，因为我们现在活在恩典时代，而非律法时代。但罗马书3:31和哥林多前书6:9-11却很清楚地指明；遵守律法对基督徒来说，是一种继续不断的责任。保罗说：[其实我在神面前，不是没有律法，在基督面前，正在律法之下。]（林前9:21下）

辩证派的废弛道德律主义，如巴特（karl barth）和布伦诺（emil brunner）神学里所提倡的，否认圣经律法是神直接的命令。他们断言：圣经的祈使语气的叙述激发了[圣灵之道]；但是当[圣灵之道]来时，却不一定恰好和经上所写的道相呼应。这种新正统派对圣经权威的看法不当，十分明显，它是以圣经为工具，作为神今日对祂百姓说话的管道，来解释圣经的灵感。

处境派废弛道德律主义则说，爱的动机和意愿是神今日唯一要求基督徒一定要有的；他们还说，十诫的命令和圣经其他伦理的部分，虽都是直接从神而来的，但充其量不过就是爱人的指引；任何时候因着爱，我们都可将此指引置之不理。持这种观点的人诉诸罗马书13:8-10，却忘了其中的教导；这些特定命令之能实践，正是因为有爱作为动机。他们立场显出他们不看重圣经，这是我们无法接受的。（注1）

我们必须要强调一点：无论是在十诫里被具体化了的教导，还是在新约圣经所传讲的伦理教训，道德律都是首尾一致的，是神在每一个时代都是祂百姓遵行的律法。此外，悔改的意思是指，从今而后，我们矢志在遵守律法一事上，寻求神的帮助。圣灵赐下，是为了加能力给我们，帮助我们能遵守律法，好使我们愈来愈像基督，因祂才是原初真正遵守律法的人（太5:17）。遵守律法实际上是完成我们的人性；圣经主张：对于任何一个人而言，不管他如何宣称自己相信，若不愿转离罪恶、趋向公义的话，他就没有得救的盼望（林前6:9-11；启21:8）。

译者注：这一段论及处境派废弛道德律主义的话，作者似乎有些语焉不详。在以上五种观点中，他都提出他的批判，唯独这一种，他没有提出。由下一段（结论）来看，爱不仅是动机，也必须是动机。换句话说，作者当然不苟同处境派的看法。（处境派是见风转舵，惟用动机来安慰自己是合伦理的，其实一种道德侏儒，拿不出勇敢的道德动机。）

LEGALISM

WORKING FOR GOD’S FAVOR FORFEITS IT

.... Do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. Everything they do is done for men to see... MATTHEW 23:3-5

The New Testament views Christian obedience as the practice of “good deeds” (works). Christians are to be “rich in good deeds” (1 Tim. 6:18; cf. Matt. 5:16; Eph. 2:10; 2 Tim. 3:17; Titus 2:7, 14; 3:8, 14). A good deed is one done (a) according to the right standard (God’s revealed will, i.e., his moral law); (b) from a right motive (the love to God and others that marks the regenerate heart); (c) with a right purpose (pleasing and glorifying God, honoring Christ, advancing his kingdom, and benefiting one’s neighbor).

Legalism is a distortion of obedience that can never produce truly good works. Its first fault is that it skews motive and purpose, seeing good deeds as essentially ways to earn more of God’s favor than one has at the moment. Its second fault is arrogance. Belief that one’s labor earns God’s favor begets contempt for those who do not labor in the same way. Its third fault is lovelessness in that its self-advancing purpose squeezes humble kindness and creative compassion out of the heart.

In the New Testament we meet both Pharisaic and Judaizing legalism. The Pharisees thought that their status as children of Abraham made God’s pleasure in them possible, and that their formalized daily law-keeping, down to minutest details, would make it actual. The Judaizers viewed Gentile evangelism as a form of proselytizing for Judaism; they believed that the Gentile believer in Christ must go on to become a Jew by circumcision and observance of the festal calendar and ritual law, and that thus he would gain increased favor with God. Jesus attacked the Pharisees; Paul, the Judaizers.

The Pharisees were formalists, focusing entirely on the externals of action, disregarding motives and purposes, and reducing life to mechanical rule-keeping. They thought themselves faithful law-keepers although (a) they majored in minors, neglecting what matters most (Matt. 23:23-24); (b) their casuistry negated the law’s spirit and aim (Matt. 15:3-9; 23:16-24); (c) they treated traditions of practice as part of God’s authoritative law, thus binding consciences where God had left them free (Mark 2:16-3:6; 7:1-8); (d) they were hypocrites at heart, angling for man’s approval all the time (Luke 20:45-47; Matt. 6:1-8; 23:2-7). Jesus was very sharp with them on these points.

In Galatians, Paul condemns the Judaizers’ “Christ-plus” message as obscuring and indeed denying the all-sufficiency of the grace revealed in Jesus (Gal. 3:1-3; 4:21; 5:2-6). In Colossians, he conducts a similar polemic against a similar “Christ-plus” formula for “fullness” (i.e., spiritual completion: Col. 2:8-23). Any “plus” hat requires us to take action in order to add to what Christ has given us is a reversion to legalism and, in truth, an insult to Christ.

So far, then, from enriching our relationship with God, as it seeks to do, legalism in all its forms does the opposite. It puts that relationship in jeopardy and, by stopping us focusing on Christ, it starves our souls while feeding our pride. Legalistic religion in all its forms should be avoided like the plague.