神學入門：基督不能犯罪
Theological Primer: Impeccability
作者：KEVIN DEYOUNG  譯者：誠之
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/theological-primer-impeccability/
https://www.facebook.com/peddrluo/posts/10159105343619653
 
在這個叫做「神學入門」的持續系列中，我時常會加入新的條目。我們的想法是用500字左右的篇幅介紹一些碩大的神學概念。今天，我們將探討的是基督不能犯罪的教義。
From time to time I make new entries into this continuing series called “Theological Primer.” The idea is to present big theological concepts in around 500 words (or sometimes, 1,000 words). Today we will look at the doctrine of Christ’s impeccability.
 
基督不能犯罪的教義指出，基督不僅沒有罪，而且不能犯罪（non posse peccare）。作為上帝道成肉身的兒子，基督面臨著真實的試探，但這些試探在基督身上並不是因為罪的欲望而產生的。基督不僅能夠戰勝試探，而且不能被試探所勝（Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, 659）。
The doctrine of impeccability states that Christ was not only sinless, he was unable to sin (non posse peccare). As the incarnate Son of God, Christ faced real temptations, but these temptations did not arise in Christ due to sinful desires. Christ was not only able to overcome temptation, he was unable to be overcome by it (Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, 659).
 
基督不能犯罪在教會歷史上得到了廣泛的肯定，並得到大多數主要的改革宗系統神學家的辯護。然而，在過去的150年裏，許多神學家拒絕了基督不能犯罪的觀點，反而認為，基督的試探要想成為真正的試探，基督要想同情祂的子民，就必須可能會犯罪。令人驚訝的是，即使是著名的賀治（Charles Hodge，1797-1878）也否認基督的不能犯罪（Hodge, Systematic Theology, 2:457），這可能是他的同代人薛德（W. G. T. Shedd，1820-1894）在他的《教理神學》（Dogmatic Theology）中為該學說提供了特別有力的辯護的原因之一。
Christ’s impeccability has been widely affirmed throughout the history of the church and defended by most of the leading Reformed systematicians. In the last 150 years, however, many theologians have rejected the idea that Christ was unable to sin, arguing instead that peccability is necessary for Christ’s temptations to be genuine and for Christ to sympathize with his people. Surprisingly, even the redoubtable Charles Hodge (1797–1878) denied impeccability (Hodge, Systematic Theology, 2:457), which may be one of the reasons his contemporary W. G. T. Shedd (1820–1894) offered an especially robust defense of the doctrine in his Dogmatic Theology.
 
在為基督的不能犯罪辯護時，薛德提出了三大要點。
In defense of Christ’s impeccability, Shedd makes three broad points.
 
首先，基督的不能犯罪可以從聖經中推導出來。如果耶穌基督昨日、今日，一直到永遠都是一樣的（來十三8），祂的聖潔一定是不變的。一個可變的聖潔並不符合基督的全能性，也不符合基督是我們信仰的創始成終者的事實（來十二2）。基督與第一個亞當不同，祂是一切聖潔的泉源，從祂那裏只能得到生命和光明。如果基督能夠犯罪，那麼根據定義，祂的聖潔就會有變化——祂的順服就會有失敗——即使最後證明基督是信實的。一個可能犯罪的基督是一個只能在事後才可以信任的救主。
First, Christ’s impeccability can be deduced from Scripture. If Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever (Heb. 13:8), he must be unchanging in his holiness. A mutable holiness would be inconsistent with the omnipotence of Christ and irreconcilable with the fact that Christ is the author and finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:2). Christ is unlike the first Adam in that he is the fountain of all holiness, and from him can proceed nothing but life and light. If Christ were able to sin, his holiness would, by definition, be open to change—his obedience open to failure—even if Christ proved in the end to be faithful. A peccable Christ is a Savior who can be trusted only in hindsight.
 
其次，基督的不能犯罪是與祂位格的構成息息相關的。可以肯定的是，基督被聖靈賦予了非凡的恩典，但基督不僅被賦予能力抵擋試探，神的道（divine Logos）的同在，使人無可置疑地肯定基督會抵擋試探。我們決不能認為基督的兩種本性是彼此獨立運作的，好像它們是對立的一方，或者是知與行的兩個源頭，彼此是互相隱藏的。同樣，我們也不能把基督的兩個意志設想為互相對立。有限的人性意志無一例外地完美地順服了無限的神性意志，以致于基督從來沒有經歷過肉體的私欲和聖靈敵對，聖靈也和肉體敵對（加五17；參見《新譯本》）。
Second, Christ’s impeccability is tied to the constitution of his person. To be sure, Christ was empowered by the Spirit with extraordinary grace, but Christ was not only strengthened to resist temptation, the presence of the divine Logos made it infallibly certain that Christ would resist. We must not think that Christ’s two natures operated independently of each other, as if they were rival parties or two sources of knowing and doing veiled one from the other. Likewise, we must not conceive of the two wills of Christ as antagonists. The finite will invariably and perfectly obeyed the infinite, such that Christ never experienced the flesh lusting against the spirit, and the spirit lusting against the flesh (Gal. 5:17).
 
但基督的痛苦、饑餓、憂傷、軟弱和死亡怎麼說呢？這些對神而人者來說怎麼可能呢？如果我們斷定基督是不能犯罪的，是否也必須斷定基督不能受苦呢？當然不是。薛德區分了「有限者的一切無罪的缺陷和局限」和罪人的「可責備的缺陷和局限」。神成為肉身的兒子有責任承受來自人體的軟弱，但沒有來自人性的道德缺陷，或道德缺陷的可能性。
But what about Christ’s pain, hunger, sorrow, weakness, and death? How are these possible for the God-man? If we conclude that Christ is impeccable must we also conclude that Christ was unable to suffer? Surely not. Shedd distinguishes between “all the innocent defects and limitations of the finite” and “the culpable defects and limitations” of sinful man. The en-fleshed Son of God was liable to the weaknesses that come from a human body, but without the moral defects—or possibility of moral defect—that come from a human nature.
 
這第二點的核心是迦克墩聖徒的信念，即無論基督做了什麼，祂都是作為一個不可分割的位格做的。因此，薛德認為，基督犯罪的能力必須根據「祂最強大的本性」來衡量。就像鐵絲本身可以彎曲，但一旦焊接到鐵條上就會變得無法撼動一樣，神人耶穌基督也因人的本性和神的本性的結合而變得不能犯罪（《教理神學》，660-61）。換句話說，雖然基督擁有可能犯罪的人性，但祂是一個不能犯罪的神而人者。
At the heart of this second point is the Chalcedonian conviction that whatever Christ did, he did as one undivided theanthropic person. Consequently, Shedd argues, Christ’s ability to sin must be measured according to “his mightiest nature.” Just as an iron wire by itself can be bent, but once welded to an iron bar is rendered immoveable, so the God-man Jesus Christ is rendered impeccable by the union of the human and divine natures (Dogmatic Theology, 660-61). In other words, while Christ possessed a peccable human nature, he was an impeccable theanthropic person.
 
第三，不能犯罪與試探是一致的。邏各斯（道）取了人性的原因之一，是為了讓邏各斯可以像人一樣受試探，能夠對人表示同情（來二14-18）。如果我們抬高基督的不能犯罪，把祂的可試探性丟在一邊，我們就與聖經脫節了。
Third, impeccability is consistent with temptation. One of the reasons for the assumption of a human nature by the Logos is so that the Logos might be tempted as a man and be able to sympathize with men (Heb. 2:14-18). If we elevate Christ’s impeccability in a way that casts aside his temptability, we are out of step with Scripture.
 
然而，我們決不能把我們的試探與基督的試探絕對等同起來。雅各書一章2節中譯為「試煉」的同一個希臘名詞（peirasmois）在雅各書一章14節中以動詞形式呈現為被試探（peirazetai）。有些試探是從外而來的試煉和苦難——基督一直在忍受這些。但也有一些試探是從內而來的，是罪惡的欲望——這些是基督從未經歷過的。當希伯來書四章15節說基督和我們一樣，凡事都受過試探，只是沒有犯罪，我們應該理解 「沒有」（choris）這個介詞既延伸到試探的結果（和我們不同，基督沒有犯罪），也延伸到試探的性質（和我們不同，基督的試探不是有罪的）。換句話說，我們受到世界、肉體和魔鬼的試探，而基督從來沒有面對來自肉體的試探。或者如歐文（John Owen）所說，基督面對試探的痛苦部分；我們也面對犯罪的部分。
And yet, we must not absolutely equate our temptations with Christ’s temptations. The same Greek noun translated “trials” (peirasmois) in James 1:2 is rendered in verb form as tempted (peirazetai) in James 1:14. Some temptations arise from without as trials and sufferings—these Christ constantly endured. But also, temptations that arise from within as sinful desires—these Christ never experienced. When Hebrews 4:15 says Christ was tempted in every respect as we are, yet without sin, we should understand the preposition “without” (choris) as extending both to the outcome of the temptations (unlike us, Christ did not sin) and also to the nature of the temptations (unlike ours, Christ’s temptations were not sinful). In other words, we are tempted by the world, the flesh, and the Devil, while Christ never faced temptation from the flesh. Or as John Owen put it, Christ faced the suffering part of temptation; we also face the sinning part.
 
基督不能犯罪，並不使祂的試探不那麼真實。戰無不勝的軍隊仍然可以遭到攻擊（《教理神學》，662）。如果有區別的話，那就是基督的試探比我們的試探更強烈，因為祂從不向試探屈服。我們的試探時強時弱，因為我們有時經得起考驗，有時又屈服於考驗。但基督從不屈服，因此，在祂的一生中，試探的經驗只會越來越多。在這一點上，基督能夠同情我們人類的試探經歷，儘管作為神而人者，祂不能屈服於這些試探。
Christ’s inability to sin does not make his temptations less genuine. The army that cannot be conquered can still be attacked (Dogmatic Theology, 662). If anything, Christ’s temptations were more intense than ours because he never gave in to them. Our temptations wax and wane as we sometimes withstand them and sometimes succumb to them. But Christ never gave in, and as such the experience of temptation only mounted throughout his life. In this, Christ is able to sympathize with us in our human experience of temptation, even though as the God-man, he was incapable of giving in to these temptations.