顯示具有 《基督徒的信仰:天路客的系統神學》 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 《基督徒的信仰:天路客的系統神學》 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2017-11-16

你能證明有天堂嗎?Is There Proof of Heaven?

作者:Matt Smethurst   譯者:駱鴻銘

看不見的東西是否存在?如果你問的是氧氣、重力,或你正在用來閱讀此文的WiFi(無線網絡)訊號,答案是很明顯的。但是那些無法用科學方法來測量的看不見的現實又怎麼說呢?比如說,愛、尊嚴、公平、希望。Do unseen things exist? The answer is obvious once you consider oxygen, gravity, or the WiFi signal youre using to read this article. But what about invisible realities that can’t be scientifically measured? Well, think of love, or dignity, or justice, or hope.

是否存在一個靈性的世界,雖然眼不能見,卻是完全真實的呢?這正是聖經所教導的(林後四18)。其中之一就是天堂。Now might there be a spiritual world that, though unseen, is entirely real as well? This is precisely what the Bible teaches (2 Cor. 4:18). And one of these realities is heaven.

原來我們不是顧念所見的,乃是顧念所不見的;因為所見的是暫時的,所不見的是永遠的。 (2Co 4:18)

儘管你無法像證明台北存在一樣,證明天堂也是存在的,但是這不能代表天堂這個地方是虛構的。誠然,相信天堂的存在最終是要靠信心——雖然不是盲目的或沒有理性的信心,但仍然是信心。希伯來書的作者是這樣定義信心的:「信就是所望之事的實底,是未見之事的確據。」(來十一1While its impossible to prove the existence of heaven in the same way youd prove the existence of Chicago, that doesnt mean the place is fictional. To be sure, belief in heaven finally boils down to faith—not blind or irrational faith, but faith nonetheless. As the author of Hebrews puts it, “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).

基督徒相信有天堂,基本上是因為他們相信聖經,因為聖經清楚說到了天堂,而上帝的話是值得信賴的真理,是人生命的靠山。無可否認地,我們經常會渴望更確定的事,盡信書不如無書,不是親眼目睹的都不算數。然而使徒彼得告訴我們,比起耶穌自己在登山變相時所顯現的榮耀,聖經是「更確實」的啟示(彼後一19;參《新譯本》)。這是一個會讓人目瞪口呆的聲明。彼得是說,聖經本身是上帝所曾經賜給人、最有說服力的「證據」。Christians believe in heaven fundamentally because they believe the Bible that so clearly speaks of heaven. You can bank your life on God’s Word. Admittedly, we often crave something more certain, more verifiable, more impressive than words in a book. Yet Peter tells us Scripture is a revelation “more sure” than even Jesus himself in transfigured glory (2 Pet. 1:19 NASB). That’s a stunning claim. He is saying the Bible itself is one of the most convincing “proofs” God’s ever given.

雖然聖經也許沒有告訴我們一切我們想知道的有關天堂的內容,但是它們的確告訴了我們一切我們必須知道的。它們的見證是完整的、充足的、足夠的。So, while the Scriptures may not tell us everything we want to know about heaven, they do tell us everything we need to know. Their witness is complete, sufficient, enough.

真的有天堂嗎?Heaven Is for Real?

對我們許多人來說,天堂算是我們熟悉的觀念,但究竟天堂是什麼呢?最簡單地說,天堂是上帝的住所。「我們在天上的父」,這是我們在主禱文裏所複誦的。好,這不代表上帝不在其他地方,上帝是無所不在的。但是天堂是祂的居所,是祂特別與人同在,要賜福給人的地方。我們的財寶藏在那裏(太十九21),我們是那裏的國民(腓三20),我們的產業在那裏(彼前一4-5),我們的盼望也存在那裏(西一5)。Heavens a familiar idea to many of us, but what exactly is it? Most simply, it’s the place where God lives. “Our Father in heaven,” we recite in the Lord’s Prayer. Now, this doesn’t mean God is absent elsewhere; he’s present everywhere. But heaven is the place where his presence uniquely dwells to bless. It’s the place of our treasure (Matt. 19:21), our citizenship (Phil. 3:20), our inheritance (1 Pet. 1:4–5), and our stored-up hope (Col. 1:5).

或許你注意到我一直在用這個字「那裏」。這是因為天堂不只是一個概念,或心靈狀態;它是一個真實的地點(約十四2-3;徒一9-11;七55-56)。當跟隨耶穌的人過世時,雖然我們的身體會留在地上,但是我們的靈魂馬上就會與上帝同在(腓一23;林後五8)。這是一個暫時的處境或「中間狀態」,到耶穌再來的那日,我們的身體會復活,與我們的靈魂重新結合在一起,直到永遠。Perhaps youve noticed I keep using the word place. Thats because heaven isn’t a mere concept or state of mind; it’s a real location (John 14:2–3; Acts 1:9–11; 7:55–56). When followers of Jesus die, though our bodies remain on earth, our souls immediately enter God’s presence (Phil. 1:23; 2 Cor. 5:8). This is a temporary situation or “intermediate state” until the day when Jesus returns and our bodies are raised and reunited with our souls forever.

沒有圓嘟嘟的天使No Chubby Angels

你明白嗎,身為基督徒,我們最終的盼望不是完全脫離這個地球,而是使全地得到恢復。有一天,當得贖的罪人領受一個得贖的世界時,天上的城市會裂天而降(啟廿一1-4;參:彼後三13;羅八13)。這就是為什麼聖經用具體的、實質的措辭來描繪我們未來的家的原因——「新天新地」(賽六十五17;彼後三13;啟廿一1-4)。換句話說,我們不會飄浮在黃金豎琴和圓嘟嘟的天使周圍,而是會不斷奔跑、工作、玩耍、歌唱、歡笑、安息,並陶醉在對美善和榮美上帝的無盡驚訝中。Our ultimate hope as Christians, then, is not evacuation from this earth but the restoration of this earth. One day, heaven’s city will split the skies as redeemed sinners inherit a redeemed world (Rev. 21:1–4; cf. 2 Pet. 3:13; Rom. 8:13). This is why the Scriptures picture our future home in concrete, material terms—“new heavens and a new earth” (Isa. 65:17; 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1–4). We won’t be floating around with golden harps and chubby angels, in other words. We’ll be running and working and playing and singing and laughing and resting and reveling in the endless wonders of good and beautiful God.

因此談論永恆的「天堂」並不算錯,只要我們記得,天堂只是「新天新地」的簡稱——在我們的君王面前,一個永遠長存、越來越喜樂的世界。So its fine to talk about eternity in heaven so long as we remember the word is just shorthand for the new heavens and new eartha world of everlasting, ever-increasing joy in the presence of our King.

深切的盼望Longings that Point

根據傳道書的說法,上帝已經「把永生安置在世人心裏」(傳三11)。按照上帝的形象被造,我們有永恆的生命,並且有永生的能力,會本能地盼望永生。我們被造本是要永遠活著。According to Ecclesiastes, God has put eternity into the human heart (Eccl. 3:11). As persons crafted in his image, we are eternal beings with an innate longing and capacity for eternal life. We were made to live forever.

人類對無盡幸福的渴望永遠得不到滿足,也是無可否認的。我們在世上最成功的人身上,經常可以親眼目睹他們的坐立難安與不滿足。他們已經擁有一切,卻仍然滿懷失落。如同金凱瑞這位著名的戲劇演員曾經說過的,「我認為每個人都應該變得有錢有名,並實現所有的夢想,好叫他們能明白,這並不是答案。」Humanitys desire for unending happiness is insatiable and undeniable. Consider the deep restlessness and dissatisfaction we often witness among the world’s most accomplished people. They have everything, yet something is still missing. As actor Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

這怎麼解釋呢?What explains this?

在一篇以「我們的神話故事」為題的長篇論文裏,托爾金(J.R.R.Tolkien)思考著人類對奇幻故事的愛好(註1)。像我們這樣的現代人明知這些故事不是真的,我們為什麼會深受吸引呢?托爾金指出,這些故事所具有的某些特色,會與我們的靈魂起共鳴,比如說:In a lengthy essay titled On Fairy Stories, J. R. R. Tolkien ponders the human love for fantasy stories.1 Good moderns like us know the tales aren’t true; why, then, are we so drawn to them? Tolkien suggests they contain features that uniquely resonate with our souls, things like:

l           英雄的自我犧牲
l           站到時間之外
l           與非人的生物交往
l           好人戰勝惡人
l           逃過死亡
l           永不分離的愛情(「從此過著幸福快樂的日子」)
Heroic self-sacrifice
Stepping outside of time
Communion with non-human beings
Good triumphing over evil
Escape from death
Love without parting (“happily ever after”)

神話故事會深入到我們的渴望裏,這是現代寫實小說無法觸及的。儘管我們從理智上深信,沒有什麼東西可以滿足我們的渴望,因為這些東西是「美的讓人難以相信」,但是我們仍然會不自主的懷有這些盼望。心靈深處,我們有著揪心的懷疑——盼望——懷疑這個世界原本不是這樣,未來也不會如此。因此,神話故事會把我們傳送到「那裏」,喚醒我們在「這裏」的天生渴望。它們指向一種潛在的實況,而我們心靈深處知道那是真實的。Fairy tales tap into desires that realistic fiction cant touch. Though we’re intellectually convinced nothing can fulfill our desires for what’s “too good to be true,” the desires won’t leave us alone. Deep down we have a gnawing suspicion—a hope—that our world isn’t the way it’s supposed to be and isn’t the way it always will be. So by transporting us to places “out there,” fairy tales awaken hardwired longings “in here.” They point an underlying reality we sense deep in our souls is somehow true.

基督信仰之美在於:福音不只是又一個指向潛在事實的美妙故事,福音就是那潛在的事實,而其他的故事都是指向這個事實。當耶穌再來時,那原本捉摸不定、遙不可及,以及「美得讓人難以相信」的事,會直接撞入到現在,包裹我們的經驗,並使我們喜樂充滿。The beauty of Christianity is that the gospel is not just one more wonderful story pointing to the underlying reality; rather, the gospel is the underlying reality to which all the other stories point. When Jesus returns, what always felt elusive and distant and “too good to be true” will come crashing into the present, enveloping our experience and drenching us with joy.

托爾金的朋友魯益士說得也許更妙:「如果我們在自己身上找到這個世界所無法滿足的渴望,最有可能的解釋是我們是為另一個世界造的。」Tolkiens friend C. S. Lewis perhaps put it best: If we find in ourselves a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.

天堂的大門是敞開的Heavens Open Door

清教徒湯瑪斯·布魯克斯說道,「我們無法誇大基督或天堂」。我們不可能高估那在來世裏與基督同在的生命的美妙。因為我們所要探索的基督恩典有無窮無盡的層面,天堂因此是永恆的。“Neither Christ nor heaven can be hyperbolized, observed Puritan Thomas Brooks. Its impossible to overestimate the wonder of life with Christ in the world to come. Heaven will be eternal because the dimensions of his grace to be explored will be endless.

雖然你我都無法從科學上「證明」天堂是存在的(或不存在),但持守這個信念卻是完全合理的。聖經可靠的見證,以及我們靈魂澆滅不息的渴望,都強而有力地證實了這個事實。Though you or I cannot scientifically prove heavens existence (or non-existence, of course), it is an entirely plausible belief to hold. The reliable testimony of the Scriptures, as well as the unquenchable longings of our souls, powerfully attest to its reality.

最後,我們必須謹記,我們可以上天堂唯一的理由是因為上帝已經讓天堂臨到我們身上。兩千年前,在耶穌基督身上,上帝已經活出我們未能活出的生命,為我們應得的死亡而死,並從死裏復活,好叫所有接待祂的人可以享受祂,直到永遠。Finally, we must remember the only reason we can go to heaven is because God left heaven to come to us. Two thousand years ago, in the person of Jesus Christ, God lived the life we’ve failed to live, died the death we deserve to die, and rose again so that all who embrace him might enjoy him forever.

如果你為了救恩而信靠耶穌,宇宙的審判者看到你——罪和一切——就會看到祂毫無瑕疵的愛子。If youre trusting Jesus for salvation, the Judge of the cosmos looks at yousin and alland sees his spotless Son.

陶恕(A.W Tozer)曾經問道:「你是否曾駐足思考,上帝會很高興在天堂與你同在,就像你很高興到天堂一樣。」“Did you ever stop to think, asked A. W. Tozer, that God is going to be as pleased to have you with him in heaven as you are to be there?

祂等不及了,你呢?He cant wait. Can you?

註:

1. 2014年二月20日在救贖主長老教會,凱勒(Tim Keller)把這篇文章應用在一場以「轉變人的盼望」為題的演講裏,作為他們「探索基督信仰」系列的一部分。以上對托爾金作品的討論是引自這場演說。

編者按:本文的另一個版本刊載於ExploreGod.com

1 Tim Keller helpfully applies this essay in a lecture titled “Hope That Transforms,” delivered February 20, 2014 at Redeemer Presbyterian Church as part of their “Questioning Christianity” series. The discussion of Tolkien’s work above is indebted to this lecture.


Editors’ note: A version of this article appeared at ExploreGod.com.

悔改

摘录自何顿(Michael Horton)著,《基督徒的信仰》(麦种,2016年九月)

基督来,不是要改善我们的生命——用保罗的话说是「老我」——而是将它钉十字架,把它与基督一起埋葬,让我们可以在新生命中与祂一同复活(罗六15)。 悔改(metanoia)表示「改变心意」。 圣经首先将它当作因律法而知罪(罗三20)。 正如我们在前面耶稣的楼房讲论中看到的,圣灵是个律师,被派来在我们里面使我们确信神的义和我们的不义。 不过,这知识不单是智力上的,也是情感上的——它涉及全人。

我们在大卫的认罪祷告中,看到悔改的这些特点很好地展示出来:

省(诗五十一19

我们看到,首先,大卫不单对自己的行为感到羞耻,也感到有罪。 其次,虽然他残忍地对拔示巴犯了罪,密谋害死她的丈夫,但他知道他的罪首先并首要是得罪神。 悔改不单是后悔对不起邻舍,而是看到最受冒犯的是神。 第三,大卫并未尝试以自己的悔罪为自己赎罪,或平息神公义的忿怒。 大卫承认,在神的宝座前他被定罪,他不尝试证明自己无罪。 第四,大卫不单承认他有罪的行为,也承认他从怀胎开始就处于有罪的光景。 悔改不单与某些罪有关;异教徒也可能因为不恰当的行为而悔罪。 确切地说,悔改是整个灵魂对于灵魂与罪和死的结盟的强烈反感。

虽然这种敬虔的哀伤使大卫对自己的义感到绝望,但却没有带领他到最终完全的绝望,像经常使不敬虔的人走向自我毁灭或良心灼热那样。 正如保罗指出的:「因为依着神的意思忧愁,就生出没有后悔的懊悔来。 以致得救;但世俗的忧愁是叫人死」(林后七10)。 毕竟,「神的恩慈是领你悔改」(罗二4)。 律法产生了法律性的悔改(害怕审判),福音则产生福音性的悔改,结出真正改变的果子。 大卫从自己向外转向怜悯的神。 在这里,我们看到悔改和信心可能有的最紧密的关联。 悔改本身只是定罪的经验—直到人以信心仰望耶稣基督为止。

悔改往往更广义地被界定为包括性格和行为的实际改变,但圣经将它描述为「与悔改的心相称」的果子(太三8),或者「行事与他们悔改的心相称」(徒二十六20;参:太七16;路三9,八15;约十二24;罗七4;加五22;西一10)。 当然,就着这个意义来说,悔改在此生总是部分的、软弱的和不完全的。 它也不是一次过的行动。 正如路德的《九十五条论纲》的第一条所说的:「我们的主和主人耶稣基督,在说『你们要悔改』等等之时,是要信徒整个生命都痛悔。 」圣灵以律法定我们的罪,藉此带领我们悔改,福音带领我们相信基督,这信心在我们里面产生对自己的罪的恨恶,对公义的渴求。 我们即使身为信徒,仍倾向转回到自己,并且信任自己的悔改,因此,我们必须再次受到驱使,对自己的义感到绝望,对自己可能靠律法除去我们的罪感到绝望,然后紧紧连于基督。 因此,这不是一劳永逸的转折—由律法上的悔改过渡到相信基督,再到福音性的悔改—而是界定基督徒生命的一个持久循环。

在罗马天主教的神学和实践中,这悔改的呼召被一个补赎系统取代了。 正如文艺复兴的学者伊拉谟斯所发现的,使徒行传二章38节希腊语的命令语气「你们要悔改! 」(metanoēsate),拉丁文《武加大译本》错误地翻译为「你们要实行补赎! 」(poenitentiam agite)。 罗马天主教将这种补赎界定为涉及四个元素:悔罪(contrition)、认罪(confession)、补罪(satisfaction)和赦罪(resolution)。 由于很少有人可以达到真正的悔罪(真心为罪哀伤),不彻底的忏悔(attrition;害怕惩罚)在这第一个阶段被视为可接受的。 对赦免来说,每一项罪都必须回想起来,口头向神父承认,然后神父决定执行适当的行动或一连串行动,藉以补偿那罪。 只有那时,悔罪的人才能够得到赦罪。

不过,更正教里面(特别是比较偏向亚米念派的版本)盛行的有力教导说,神的赦免和称义,其条件要看悔改和新顺服的真诚程度而定。 甚至在更广阔的福音派圈子中,一些基督徒对他们悔改的素质和程度是否足以得到赦免,也挣扎到近乎绝望的地步,彷佛悔改是赦免的基础,而赦免是可以根据情感和决心的强烈程度来量度的。

不过,根据圣经,满足神的审判,确立与神的和好的,不是我们的眼泪,而是基督的宝血(罗五1811)。 用〈万古盘石〉这首诗歌的话来说,「纵我热心能持久,/纵我眼泪永远流,/仍不足以赎愆尤,/必须你来施拯救。 神医治祂所压伤的骨头,搀扶那些被祂丢弃的人。 「但祂赐更多的恩典,所以经上说:『神阻挡骄傲的人,赐恩给谦卑的人』」(雅四6)。 律法借着定我们罪引发了悔改,但只有福音可以带领我们和大卫一起大胆地支取神的应许:「求你使我得听欢喜快乐的声音,使你所压伤的骨头可以踊跃。 求你掩面不看我的罪,涂抹我一切的罪孽」(诗五十一89)。

每当悔改在归信中被边缘化,通常是因为不够看重神的圣洁或祂公义的律法对公平的要求。 结果,只是把归信描绘为在道德上的改进:加上某些独特的基督徒敬虔。 不过,圣经的悔改涉及根本地弃绝世界、肉体和魔鬼:包括个人信任的灵性、经历和道德努力。 整个自我都必须转离自我信任和独立自主,这种独立自主对于人要相信甚么,人当信任谁,和人当怎样生活,要求有最终决定权。


認識神

摘錄自何頓(Michael Horton)著,麥種編輯部譯,《基督徒的信仰》(麥種,2016),第一章
Chapter 1: Dissonant Dramas: Paradigms for Knowing God and the World
3) Epistemology: Knowing God (p. 47)
a) How Can We Know God? Post Reformation Interpretation
i) God’s Incomprehensible Majesty

往後我們會再三回到神的本質與能量之間這東方教會神學所提出的重要區別。正如我會更全面地論證的,西方神學跟隨奧古斯丁和阿奎那(Thomas Aquinas),不承認這區別,堅稱:我們現在不能看見神的本質,唯一的原因在於我們身體的形式。雖然東方和西方一樣易受柏拉圖主義影響,前者對本質和能量的區分,是更全面考慮到創造主和受造物之間的差別,並常常提防在西方教會神秘主義中明顯的泛神傾向。
We will return several times to this crucial distinction of Eastern theology between God’s essence and energies. As I will argue more fully, Western theology — following Augustine and Aquinas — did not recognize this distinction and insisted that the only reason we do not behold God in his essence at present is our bodily form. Although the East was as susceptible as the West to the influences of Platonism, its essence-energies distinction reckoned more fully with the Creator-creature difference and often guarded against the pantheistic tendencies evident in Western mysticism.

在這方面,改教家們反映出東方教會所強調的,即神在祂本質方面不能被人測透,在祂能量方面屈尊俯就的自我啟示。正如我們只因太陽光線使身體變得溫暖,才能認識太陽;我們只有按著神對我們的作為,而不是按祂自己之所是,才能認識祂。 雖然中世紀的神學系統對神的本質作了冗長的處理,但當加爾文討論三一論的時候只是匆匆的對神的靈性和無限廣大性做了必要的斷言,他說:「企圖發現神是甚麼的人,都是瘋狂的。」 「神是甚麼?提出這問題的人只是在玩弄無用的猜測……。簡單來說,認識一位與我們無關的神有甚麼用呢?」「神的本質當受人敬拜,而非探究。」
In this respect, the Reformers reflect the East’s emphasis on God’s incomprehensibility (in his essence) and God’s self-revealing condescension (in his energies). As we know the sun only as we are warmed by its rays, we know God only in his activity toward us, not as he is in himself. While medieval systems contained lengthy treatments of the divine essence, Calvin moves quickly through a necessary affirmation of God’s spirituality and immensity to discuss the Trinity. “They are mad who seek to discover what God is,” he says. “What is God? Men who pose this question are merely toying with idle speculations. . . . What help is it, in short, to know a God with whom we have nothing to do? . . . The essence of God is rather to be adored than inquired into.”

——Michael Horton, The Christian Faith, p. 52


聽道就是信道Hearing isBelieving

摘錄自邁克何頓(Michael Horton)著,《基督徒的信仰》(麥種,2016),第二章
Chapter 2: The Character of Theology: A Theoretical or a Practical Science?
3) Hearing is Believing

一場革命隨著宗教改革發生,從新柏拉圖主義強調之眼見的主導地位,回歸到聖經強調的,以語言為媒介的、受造物之現實的存在與知識。布盧門伯格指出,即使連奧古斯丁也將聆聽神說話從屬於默觀異象(contemplative vision)之下,但路德的《論意志的捆綁》(De servo arbitrio)卻「以耳的隱喻對比眼的隱喻。眼游移、選擇、接觸事物,追求事物;而耳本身是受影響和接受話語的。眼可尋求,耳只能等待。看見安排事物的『位置』;聆聽則被安排。……那作出無條件要求的,在『聆聽』中得到回應。良心有『說話聲』,光沒有。」With the Reformation came a revolution from the dominance of Neoplatonist vision back to the biblical emphasis on the existence and knowledge of creaturely reality mediated by language. Whereas even Augustine subordinated hearing God speak to contemplative vision, Luther’s De servo arbitrio (On the Bondage of the Will), Hans Blumenberg observes, “plays metaphors of the ear against those of the eye. The eye wanders, selects, approaches things, presses after them, while the ear, for its part, is affected and accosted. The eye can seek, the ear can only wait. Seeing ‘places’ things; hearing is placed That which demands unconditionally is encountered in ‘hearing.’ Conscience has a ‘voice,’ not light.”34

我到目前為止所說的一切——在救贖歷史的這個時代裏,聆聽優先於觀看——都是更正教改教家所強調的。事實上,在這個主題上,路德的觀點十分接近聖經所說的,即神一切作為都是以神的話語為媒介。拜爾(Oswald Bayer)解釋了這觀點:「新造是歸向世界,正如歸向創造主,聆聽神的聲音通過祂所造之物向我們說話、針對我們說話。奧古斯丁說神的聲音吸引我們離開神所造之物,帶領我們進入內在自我,然後走向超越,但這是錯的。」 事實上,制訂威斯敏斯特信仰告白的神學家們指出,神賜福人讀經,但「特別是〔賜福〕傳講神的話」,以此作為一種蒙恩之道,因為藉著這方法,聖靈與封閉自我生命的罪人對質,「驅使他們脫離自我,吸引他們歸向基督」(《威斯敏斯特大要理問答》〔Westminster Larger Catechism〕,回答155)。神的道呼召我們離開我們的主觀性,令我們變成外來、外向和社會性的受造者,以信心抓緊基督,以愛心抓緊鄰舍。Everything I have suggested thus far concerning the priority of hearing over seeing in this era of redemptive history was emphasized by the Protestant Reformers. In fact, Luther held closely to the biblical motif of all divine actions being mediated through God’s Word. Oswald Bayer explains this view: “The new creation is a conversion to the world, as a conversion to the Creator, hearing God’s voice speaking to us and addressing us through his creatures. Augustine was wrong to say that his voice draws us away from God’s creatures into the inner self and then to transcendence.”35In fact, the Westminster divines pointed out that God blesses the reading “but especially the preaching of the Word” of God as a means of grace since it is by this means that the Spirit confronts sinners in their self-enclosed existence, “driving them out of themselves, and drawing them unto Christ” (Westminster Larger Catechism, Answer 155). This Word calls us out of our subjectivity and renders us extrinsic, extroverted, and social creatures who hold fast to Christ in faith and to our neighbors in love.

韋伯(Stephen Webb)甚至主張,宗教改革代表「聲音歷史上的一件大事」,一個「讓道重新發聲」的事件。 集體敬拜主要並不是視覺事件(戲劇表演),填滿超越的主和被帳幕分開的百姓之間的空間距離,而是成了一場口語的事件。神話語的事奉不僅在講道中,也在集體讀經,在禱告和歌唱,在認罪和宣告赦免中發生—誠然,貫穿了從神宣召我們到祝禱的整個崇拜儀式。甚至聖餐也是來自神用口語表達的保證,由整個聖約群體接受,並在歡慶中加以回應。韋伯指出:「這源自於加爾文的信念,就是神的道成就它所命令的。神的道是立約的言說,活潑並充滿生命。即使它是斷斷續續發出,也有能力賜下它所要求的。神的話發令,世界就存在,它並繼續通過由聖靈充滿的教會的言說托住世界。」 中世紀的崇拜使話語隸屬於視覺,但宗教改革(著重對歷史的人文關注,以及用原文解經)追求的是讓人聽見神的聲音。「這不是因需要解釋一個畫面或提出道德論點而產生的嘮叨之言,而是為了藉著聲音傳遞恩典而產生的嘮叨之語。」Stephen Webb goes so far as to suggest that the Reformation represents an event within the history of sound,” an event of “revocalizing the Word.”36 Instead of a chiefly visual event — a theatrical display—that fills the spatial distance between transcendent Lord and the people separated by a screen, public worship became a verbal event. This ministry of the Word occurred not only in the sermon but in the public reading of Scripture, in the prayers and singing, in confession and absolution — indeed, throughout the entire liturgy from God’s greeting to the benediction. Even Communion was a vocal pledge from God which the whole covenant community received and to which it responded in celebration. “This follows,” notes Webb, “from Calvin’s belief that God’s Word accomplishes what it commands. It is covenantal speech, active and full of life. Even in its stuttering, it has the power to give what it asks. God’s Word called the world into being, and it continues to uphold the world through the speech of the Spirit-filled church.”37 Whereas medieval worship subordinated speech to sight, the Reformation (capitalizing on humanist concern for history and exegesis in the original languages) sought to expose the people to God’s voice. “This was a verbosity caused not by the need to explain an image or to make a moral point. Rather, it was a verbosity intended to convey grace through sound.”38

拜爾指出:「我們西方的哲學傳統,在人類的官能中給了智力最突出的地位。不過,路德說,『人最有力和高貴的工作莫過於言說。』我們首先不是理性的生物;我們主要是說話的生物。」 對路德而言,這並非無關痛癢的一點。「對路德來說,一切都取決於聖經;聆聽、使用和傳講聖經,以它作為福音活潑的說話聲(viva vox evangelii)。」 這與奧古斯丁相反,對奧古斯丁來說,「外在之道是記號(signum),只是將我們指向〔事物本身〕(res)。」 韋伯提醒我們:「對奧古斯丁來說,……我們在賦予神說的話一種外在聲音前,已經內在地聽到了這話語。……因此,信心好像思想一樣,始於心的內室,在發聲之前是安靜的。」 請回想李文森在上面提出的一點(見「以色列啊,你要聽……」部分,108-10頁),對猶太教來說,真理是公開的,從我們以外臨到我們,然後影響我們個人。我們希臘智力傳統的傾向,則是將這動向倒轉過來,以致真理首先是安靜、自主和私下的思想或經驗,然後我們通過言說將它公開表達出來。This is in contrast toOur Western philosophical tradition has given the intellect prominence among our human faculties,” notes Oswald Bayer. “Luther, however, says that ‘there is no mightier or nobler work of man than speech.’ We are not rational beings first of all; we are primarily speaking beings.”39 This is not a slight point for Luther.40“For Luther everything depends upon the Bible; hearing, using, and preaching it as the living voice of the gospel (viva vox evangelii).”41 Augustine, for whom “the external Word is a sign (signum) that simply points us to the [thing itself] (res).”42 Webb reminds us, “For Augustine … the Word that God speaks is heard internally before we give it an external voice…. Consequently, faith, like thought, begins in the interior recesses of the heart, where it is silent before it makes a sound.” 43Recall again Levenson’s point above (see “‘Hear, O Israel,’” pp. 86 — 87) that for Judaism truth is public, coming to us from outside ourselves, and then affects us personally. The tendency of our Greek intellectual heritage is to reverse this movement, so that truth is first a silent, autonomous, and private thought or experience that we then express publicly through speech.

我們甚至可以在奧古斯丁的一些思想中,發現到從笛卡兒到施萊馬赫的現代知識論和詮釋學的先兆。然而,對改教家而言,這關係是倒過來的:道是神的言說,從外到內,而非從內到外。外在的道靠著聖靈內化在我們心中,卻不失去作為神的聲音那超越的「他性」,而不是內在自我的迴聲。這樣強調外在的道(verbum externum),完全是對應神在基督裡、在我們自己以外(extra nos)對我們的拯救。在個人和群體之內成為可見的一切—悔改、信心、愛心和道德更新的其他方面—都是這種在他們以外的明確宣告的漸進結果。“For Luther everything depends upon the Bible; hearing, using, and preaching it as the living voice of the gospel (viva vox evangelii).”41 This is in contrast to Augustine, for whom “the external Word is a sign (signum) that simply points us to the [thing itself] (res).”42 Webb reminds us, “For Augustine … the Word that God speaks is heard internally before we give it an external voice…. Consequently, faith, like thought, begins in the interior recesses of the heart, where it is silent before it makes a sound.” 43Recall again Levenson’s point above (see “‘Hear, O Israel,’” pp. 86 — 87) that for Judaism truth is public, coming to us from outside ourselves, and then affects us personally. The tendency of our Greek intellectual heritage is to reverse this movement, so that truth is first a silent, autonomous, and private thought or experience that we then express publicly through speech.

改教家視羅馬和激進派更正教人士為「狂熱分子」,因他們傾向讓外在的道從屬於信徒內在的言語(內在之光)。按路德的說法:The Reformers regarded both Rome and the radical Protestants as enthusiasts because they tended to make the external Word subordinate to the internal word (inner light) of the believer. According to Luther:
如果你問一位基督徒,他藉以配稱為「基督徒」的行為是甚麼,他能絕對給出的回答,無非就是聆聽神的話,也就是信心。因此,只有耳朵才是基督徒的器官,因他得以稱義,被宣告為基督徒,不是因著任何器官的作為,而是因著信心。If you ask a Christian what the work is by which he becomes worthy of the name Christian, he will be able to give absolutely no other answer than that it is the hearing of the Word of God, that is, faith. Therefore, the ears alone are the organs of a Christian man, for he is justified and declared to be a Christian, not because of the works of any member but because of faith.”44

因此,講道不是無關重要的媒介,而是在神看來適合傳遞那本身就是拯救信息的消息。神把我們放在領受的一方,人不僅唯獨通過信心得稱為義;信心本身也從聽道而來。Therefore, preaching is not an indifferent medium but is deemed by God to be suitable to the delivery of a message that is itself saving news. Putting us on the receiving end of things, not only does justification come through faith alone; faith itself comes through hearing.45

雷思(John H. Leith)指出,「正如對路德那樣,對加爾文而言,只有耳朵是基督徒的器官。」 加爾文總結說:「奉神的名傳講福音時,彷彿是神自己親身說話。」 雷思闡釋說:「講道的理據,不在於它對教育或改革的效用。……加爾文敢於說,講道的人就是神的口。」令講道有效的,是神的意圖和作為。神使傳道人的話與那本質——就是基督和祂的一切福益——聯合起來,就像聖禮的物質元素一樣。因此,言語不僅描述救恩,也傳遞救恩。「加爾文論講道之聖禮性質的教義,使他既能將講道理解為完全是人的工作,也能將它理解為神的工作。」“For Calvin as for Luther,” John H. Leith observes, “‘the ears alone are the organ of the Christian.’”46 Calvin summarized, “When the Gospel is preached in the name of God, it is as if God himself spoke in person.”47 Leith elaborates, “The justification for preaching is not in its effectiveness for education or reform…. The preacher, Calvin dared to say, was the mouth of God.” It was God’s intention and action that made it effective. The minister’s words, like the physical elements of the sacraments, were united to the substance: Christ and all of his benefits. Therefore, the word not only describes salvation but conveys it. “Calvin’s sacramental doctrine of preaching enabled him both to understand preaching as a very human work and to understand it as the work of God.”48?