顯示具有 《比利時信條》 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 《比利時信條》 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2020-03-25


/Peter Y. De Jong  /梁曙东  /述宁
PeterY. De Jong, The Church’s Witness To The World , Preface ,(St.Catharines, Canada: Paideia Press, 1980).

公认信条关于罗马天主教和重洗派信仰的论述
 The Confession on Romanism and Anabaptism

我们在此不会关注这本小册子包含的三十七条基督信仰条款的具体内容,这要留待后面讨论。我们目前感兴趣的,主要在于德布利尝试采取怎样的进路,来表达在他所在的年代改革宗信徒心里活着、口里承认的信仰。
Here we will not concern ourselves with the specific contents of the thirty seven articles of the Christian faith which this little book contained. This will be dealt with later. Our interest now is chiefly in the approach which de Bres took, when he attempted to express the faith which lived in the hearts and was confessed with the lips of the Reformed believers in his age.

虽然这份公认信条按相当系统化的顺序阐述了基督信仰的重大主题,但它却不是一本基督教教理手册。并非教会相信的每件事,都在书中逐一阐述。如果有人对神学术语的完整定义感兴趣,通常在这份公认信条里是找不到的。然而它却简单、严肃和震撼性地陈述了基督教真理的总体轮廓。在这种意义上,它可谓是对一次交付给上帝百姓的真道的一份可敬的介绍。作者按逻辑顺序,论述了上帝、以及我们应当如何认识上帝的教义,然后更具体讲到三位一体上帝的生命、及上帝创造和护理的工作。然后他讨论人的堕落及其后果,由此带我们来看上帝拯救的计划。作者对主耶稣基督拯救的工作,连同这工作在信徒生命中结出的善果进行了详细的思考。这又引至对教会和圣礼的说明。信条以论述民事官员及其与基督教信仰关系的条款,以及论述最后审判的条款结束。
Although the major themes of the Christian religion are expounded in a rather systematic order, this is not a manual in Christian dogmatics. Not everything that the church believed is presented in these pages. If one is interested in full definitions of theological terms, he usually looks in vain in the Confession. Yet the whole round of Christian truth is simply, soberly and strikingly stated. In this sense it could serve as an admirable introduction to the faith once for all delivered to the people of Cod. In logical order the author treats the doctrine of Cod and how he is known to us, then more specifically the life of the Trinity together with the works of Cod in creation and providence. Thereupon he discusses the fall of man and its consequences, which serve to introduce us to the divine plan of salvation. The saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ together with its blessed fruits in the lives of believers are considered at length. This leads to a consideration of the church and sacraments. The Confession concludes with an article on the magistracy and its relation to the Christian faith and an article on the final judgment.

与《高卢信条》形成对比的是,这份公认信条并没有明确论及罗马天主教的教义和崇拜,但它不时地反驳重洗派严重错谬的观点。正如我们之前指出的,因为尼德兰当时的大环境,德布利似乎刻意选择采取了这种进路。
In contrast with the Gallican Confession nothing is said explicitly of the Romish doctrine and worship, while from time to time the opinions of the Anabaptists are rejected as serious errors. As we noted before, this approach seems to have been deliberately chosen by de Bres because of the situation which prevailed in the Netherlands.

这份公认信条没有公开谴责罗马天主教信仰,我们不应把这仅仅解释为,这是因为德布利和如此急切地接受和采用了这份公认信条的众教会害怕报复。在早些年日,有许多小册子和书籍出版,揭露罗马教会的教导与实践与圣经冲突、不能容忍。它们在福音派人士当中广泛传播。公认信条有几条间接引用了一些相关的内容。针对罗马教会以基督之名倡导的宗教敬虔与实践所基于的教义,改革宗信仰发起了强有力和持续的抗议。对包括德布利在内的改教家来说,罗马教会的这些教义正是摒弃了圣经的权威,并拒绝相信唯独靠恩典得救。
That the Roman Catholic religion is not openly condemned should not be interpreted solely as occasioned by fear for reprisals on the part of de Bres and the churches which so eagerly received and adopted his Confession of Faith. In those early years many pamphlets and books appeared, which exposed the teachings and practices of that church which were in flagrant conflict with the Scriptures. These were widely disseminated among the evangelicals. To some of these pertinent, although indirect, references are made in several of the articles. The Reformed faith was a strong and sustained protest against those doctrines which undergirded the religious piety and practice which that church championed in the name of Christ. To the reformers, including de Bres, these were no less than a repudiation of the authority of the Scripture and a rejection of salvation by grace alone.

当时宗教改革处在转型期,在尼德兰尤其如此。天主教等级制度的上层因着拒绝福音真理和压制百姓、使其落入属灵无知而被视为基督的仇敌,但早期改教家晓得在此教会之内仍有千万对福音话语如饥似渴之人。在整个国家,某些城镇和乡村全心接受了上帝话语的教义,也有些人立意拒绝纯正的宣讲。然而还有很多人根本没有、或仅有极少的机会了解路德、加尔文和其他呼吁归回圣经之人的教导。赢得这些人接受真信仰,成了传道人和已经在基督丰富恩典的宣告中找到安慰与盼望之人的目标。对他们来说,正面和清楚地阐述上帝的话语,要比对罗马天主教会错谬的迎头痛击有更强的吸引力。
At that time the Reformation was in a period of transition especially in the Netherlands. While the upper echelons of the hierarchy were recognized as enemies of Christ because of their rejection of evangelical truth and suppression of the people in spiritual ignorance, the early reformers were aware that within that church there were still thousands hungering and thirsting for the word of the gospel. Certain towns and villages throughout the land had embraced the doctrine of God's word wholeheartedly. Others had wilfully rejected the pure preaching. Many more, however, had enjoyed little if any opportunity to become acquainted with the teachings of Luther, Calvin and others who called men back to the Bible. To win these for the true faith was the aim of both preachers and people who had found comfort and hope in the proclamation of the rich grace of Christ. To them a positive and clear exposition of God's word would make a stronger appeal than any frontal attack on the perversions of the Roman Catholic Church.

对重洗派采用的进路则完全不同。这份公认信条透露出温柔及和好的气息,证明德布利并非反对与追随路德的人会面,而是盼望所有福音派信徒最终都能联合;而他却单单挑出重洗派,不下三次直接点名,并在其他条款中未提名地驳斥他们的若干错误。
Quite different is the approach taken with regard to the Anabaptists. While the Confession breathes a mild and conciliatory spirit, evidence of the fact that de Bres was by no means averse to conferences with the followers of Luther in the hope of an eventual union of all evangelical believers, it singles out the Anabaptists no less than three times by name and without mentioning them attacks several of their errors in other articles.

在我们看来,这一切很是奇怪,因我们已经习惯了认为,重洗派运动的属灵后裔都是敬虔守法之人,他们严肃的、常常是与世隔绝的生活似乎提供了强有力的见证,表明他们有在耶稣基督里的盼望。公认信条对这支改教运动的反对态度,遭到质疑,且不时有人否认其正确性。因为重洗派运动是如此大大影响了英格兰和美国教会的历史。
All this seems strange to us, who are accustomed to thinking of the spiritual descendants of the Anabaptist movement as a godly and law-abiding people. Their sober and frequently secluded life seems to offer strong testimony to their hope in Jesus Christ. Voices have been raised questioning and at times even denying the correctness of the Confession's opposition to this reformatory movement which has so largely influenced English and American church history.

重洗派这一名词(Anabaptism,意思是“再洗礼”,因这些人坚持给婴孩时已领受这圣礼的人重新施洗),讲的是一种开始于瑞士、最早由格列伯(Conrad Grebel)和曼慈(Felix Manz)二人带领的宗教运动。它很快在北欧和西欧,特别是在穷人和未受教之人中广泛传播。它以各种形式继续存在,直到门诺·西蒙斯(Menno Simons1496-1561)去世,此后重洗派这名字被门诺派取而代之。
The term Anabaptism (meaning—re-baptism, because of the insistence on baptizing again those who had received the sacrament in infancy) denotes a religious movement which began in Switzerland under the leadership of Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz. Soon it spread widely throughout northern and western Europe especially among the poor and uneducated. In various forms it continued until after the death of Menno Simons (1496-1561), when the term Anabaptist was replaced by the name Mennonite.

这场运动的起源曾经是被广泛研究的课题,学者们通常认同,要充分和准确追溯它的源头非常困难。一些声称重洗派是其合理的属灵祖先的浸信会护教人士,采取在中世纪教会内外与教会意见分歧的团体是重洗派的前身的立场。这些团体的一些教导被重洗派采纳并传播,这是不容否认的。但最困难的就是无法准确定义他们的主要信仰是什么。他们并不跟从一位单独的领袖,也没有采纳共同的信仰告白。一些人教导的,被其他人公开否认,还有另外的人则根本无视。所知的他们间的唯一一致之处,是地方教会中的教会的带领权被交给从未或受教非常之少的普通人。然而在所有重洗派曾经兴盛一时的地方,都是有一两位有特色的人物兴起,引起不得不有的关注,并且往往不仅给民事长官、也给无论罗马天主教还是福音派的教会带来混乱。他们的确是信仰群体,并且用当时的神学语言阐述了他们的信仰。但不能忽视的是,他们的许多理想和计划都根植于影响他们生命之社会、经济和政治形势。
The orgins of this movement have been the subject of much intensive study, and scholars are usually agreed that these are exceedingly difficult to trace adequately and accurately. Some Baptist apologists, who claim the Anabaptists as their legitimate spiritual forebears, take the position that many of the dissenting groups found within and outside of the medieval church were their antecedents. That several of the teachings of these groups were taken over and vigorously propagated by the Anabaptists cannot be denied. But it is most difficult to define precisely what their chief tenets were. They followed no single leader and adopted no common confession of faith. What some taught was openly denied or ignored by others. In the local congregations, the only unity which they knew, guidance was in the hands of simple folk who had little if any education. Yet in every land where they flourished for a season, one or two colorful figures arose to compel attention and often to create confusion not only for the civil magistrates but also for the churches, both Roman Catholic and evangelical. Theirs was indeed a religious group, and they stated their convictions in the theological language of that day. But it must not be overlooked that many of their ideals and programs stemmed from the social, economic and political situations which colored their lives.

这场运动在格列伯和曼慈两人的带领下,从一开始就持一种教会和国家根本分离的立场。这两方若有任何联系与合作,在他们看来都是否认基督和新约圣经的教导。他们论证说,教会是可见的重生之人的群体。洗礼作为内在重生和归信的外在记号,只能向生命有属灵改变的可靠证据的成人施行。在运动早期,他们反对所有暴力,强调服兵役是犯罪,而向卷入战争的国家交税是违背基督信仰。他们的特征是极端按字面意思理解圣经。由于他们强调内在信仰,许多人通过异象和新的启示寻求特别引导。只有得到圣灵特别的光照,信徒才能理解经文属灵的意思,否则圣经被看作仍然是死的字句。慈运理(Zwingli)一开始就意识到这样的基本立场会驱使重洗派走到什么地步,也毫不犹豫用严厉的话警告他们。对他来说,这些人严重威胁着教会和国家的一切秩序和常态。
From its inception under the guidance of Grebel and Manz the movement championed the position of a radical separation of church and state. Any affiliation and cooperation between the two was to them a denial of the teachings of Christ and the New Testament. The church, so they argued, was the company of the visibly regenerate. Baptism as the outward sign of inward regeneration and conversion might be administered only to adults who gave credible evidence of a spiritual change in their lives. In these early years they were opposed to all violence, insisting that military service was sinful and payment of taxes to a state engaged in warfare a violation of the Christian faith. They were characterized by an extreme Biblical literalism. Because of their emphasis on inward religion, many looked for special guidance through visions and new revelations. Apart from a special illumination by the Holy Spirit, which alone enabled the believers to comprehend the spiritual meaning of the Scriptures, the Bible remained and was appraised as a dead letter. Zwingli sensed at an early date to what lengths their basic positions would drive the Anabaptists and did not hesitate to warn against them in strong language. To him they were a serious threat to all order and decency in both church and state.

路德宗人士和重洗派的第一次公开冲突,始于慈味考的先知们(Zwickau prophets)来到威登堡的时候。当时路德被关在瓦特堡(Wartburg)的城堡里。这些人控告路德宗人士并非全心全意地改革,并预言说,在五到七年内现今的世界就要终结,那时所有不义的人都要被杀,只有接受真信仰、已经重洗的人才能得救。
The first open conflict between the Lutherans and the Anabaptists occurred when the Zwickau prophets came to Wittenberg. In those days Luther was being held in the castle at Wartburg. These men accused the Lutherans of a half-hearted reformation and prophesied that within five to seven years the present world would end. Then all the unrighteous would be slain and only those who professed the true faith and had been rebaptized would be saved.

闵采尔(Thomas Munzer)注意了这些人的话。不久后他就成为在德语地区突出的重洗派领袖。他相信,要明白上帝的话,人需要一种特别的内在的声音。如此受教的,不管是什么,都要比教会以及教会神学家的所有教导都更有价值。因此他宣称,他特别的任务,就是按使徒时代的榜样,引入上帝的国度。因此他强烈主张社会地位平等和凡物公用,如果不能和平地带来新世界,信徒将不得不使用暴力——上帝的一个选民能扼杀一千个仇敌,两人能杀死一万!在农民战争期间(1525年),他在带领他那些纪律混乱的跟从者战斗时在战场上被杀死。
To these men Thomas Munzer gave heed. Soon he became the outstanding Anabaptist leader in German lands. He believed that a special inner voice was required to understand God's word. Whatever was so taught had more value than all the teachings of the church. and her theologians. His special assignment, so he claimed, was to usher in the kingdom of God after the example of apostolic times. Thus he argued vehemently for equality of social status and community of goods. If the new realm could not be brought in peacefully, then the believers would be compelled to use force. One of God's elect could strangle a thousand foes; two could slay ten thousand! During the Peasants' War (1525) he was killed in battle as he led his disorderly followers.

许多这样的难题也在苏黎世出现,慈运理就致力于反对重洗派的极端立场。他们主张教会和国家完全分离,教会只能由重生之人组成,婴孩洗礼被看作魔鬼欺骗教会的设置。许多人公然否认预定论,倡导伯拉纠主义关于人的自由意志的观念。当慈运理不能劝服重洗派人士认识到自己错误,苏黎世的官员就变得警觉起来。不久官员判决淹死那些持守重洗派观念的人。这就开始了他们的殉难故事,宗教改革历史上最为悲剧性的篇章之一,路德宗、加尔文主义者以及罗马天主教人士都必须要为此认罪。
Many of these difficulties arose in Zurich, where Zwingli opposed the outstanding positions of the Anabaptists. They wanted complete separation of church and state, a church composed only of the regenerate, and a recognition that infant baptism was a device by which the devil deceived the church. Many openly denied predestination and championed Pelagian notions concerning the free will of man. The officials at Zurich became alarmed, when Zwingli was unable to persuade the Anabaptists of their errors. Soon they made drowning the penalty for all who held Anabaptistic notions. Here begins the story of their martyrdom, one of the most tragic chapters in the history of the Reformation to which Lutherans and Calvinists as well as Roman Catholics must plead guilty.

但如果把重洗派争论简化为仅仅是教义之争,那就显出对那时代形势的整体无知。若真是教义之争,这些人就不会被如此激烈和报复性地驱逐出境。像胡伯迈尔(Hubmaier)和汉斯·登克(Hans Denck)这样一些人确实拒绝曼慈的革命观念。但若干年中他们的影响力完全被革命的派别盖过。革命派可能比其他任何人都更使宗教改革染上恶名。
To reduce the Anabaptist controvery merely to doctrinal differences, however, is to betray gross ignorance of the situation which obtained in those days. Had this been the case, these folk would not have been harried out of the land with such vehemence and vengeance. Some like Hubmaier and Hans Denck indeed rejected the revolutionary ideas of Manz. But for several years their influence was completely overshadowed by that of the revolutionary wing. It was this party which possibly more than anything else brought the Reformation into disrepute.

最早公开宣扬说必须使用暴力建立上帝国度的人之一是赫德(Hans Hut)。魏德曼(Jacob Wiedemann)教导说,凡物公用是基本的圣经教义,因此必须成为各处基督徒的准则。霍夫曼(Melchior Hoffmann)用极其耸人听闻的语言预言基督马上就要再来,结果许多跟从他的人放弃了他们的日常工作,在一种癫狂的信仰状态当中盼望新的属天秩序降临,终结他们一切的苦难。
One of the first to proclaim openly that God's kingdom must be established by the use of brute force was Hans Hut. Jacob Wiedemann taught that community of goods was a basic Biblical doctrine and must therefore serve as a rule for Christian believers everywhere. Melchior Hoffmann foretold the imminent return of Christ in such lurid terms, that many of his followers forsook their daily occupations and lived in a state of religious ecstasy looking for the coming of the new and heavenly order which would end all their sufferings.

在这背景之下,我们能更好地理解发生在蒙斯特的黑暗故事,这是重洗派历史上最可怕丑陋的一章。哈勒姆(Haarlem)的马修松(John Matthyszoon)和莱顿(Leiden)的约翰·克松(John Beukelszoon),这两人都是尼德兰人,他们要为此事负责。他们特别受到霍夫曼教导的鼓动,敦促跟从者与他们一起去到威斯特伐利亚(Westphalia)的蒙斯特这座城市。他们认为,在这里,锡安要在完全的荣耀中显现在地上。这两位领袖故意破坏市议会的合法权威和权力,好使他们可以代表上帝的圣徒施行统治。不久这城就被周边城市和省份的军队包围。马修松在一种先知般的疯狂状态下跑出城去,攻击敌人,因此丧掉了性命。这时城内所有的约束都如烟吹散。莱顿的约翰获得了权力。人常常把他描绘为一位勇敢、极有口才和英俊的人。他可能是这样,但他仍是一个恶棍,甚至在来到蒙斯特之前,他就犯了多妻淫乱之罪。在他坚持之下,蒙斯特全城,无论是否认同重洗派的立场,都要按照旧约圣经的模式生活。在此我们再次留意到,这群人中的一些人,可能因为未正式受教,当然更是因为他们拒绝承认圣灵在历代教会当中的引导之工,就随意解释上帝的话语。约翰任命了十二位长老,在他手下治理。之前所有婚姻都被废除。一夫多妻制被公开引入。除了与曾作修女的、马修松之妻蒂华纳(Divara)结婚,约翰最终容许自己有特权享有十六位妻子。这新耶路撒冷的王就是莱顿的约翰他本人。几个月之后,他差遣二十八位他最热心和有抱负的门徒出去,作为使徒使万民归正,结果这些人在形势所迫中全数逃走,把一百二十四位妻子和数不尽的子孙留在身后。
Against this background we can better understand the dark story of Munster, the most horrible and hideous chapter in Anabaptist history. For this John Matthyszoon of Haarlem and John Beukelszoon of Leiden, both Netherlanders, were responsible. Inspired especially by the teachings of Hoffman, they encouraged their followers to come with them to the city of Munster in Westphalia. Here Zion was to appear in full glory upon earth. The two leaders deliberately undermined the legal authority and power of the town council, in order that they might seize the government on behalf of the saints of Cod. Soon the town was besieged by the forces of surrounding cities and provinces. Matthyszoon lost his life when in prophetic frenzy he ran out of the town to attack the enemy. Now all restraint within the city was thrown to the winds. John of Leiden assumed power. Often he is depicted as courageous, eloquent and handsome. True as this may possibly be, he was a rascal nonetheless, being guilty of polygamy even before he came to Munster. Upon his insistence the whole city of Munster, whether agreeing to the positions of the Anabaptists or not, was to conform to the pattern of the Old Testament. Here we notice again how some of these people, possibly because of their lack of formal education and surely because of their refusal to recognize the guidance of the Holy Spirit within the church of all ages, could play fast and loose with the word of Cod. Twelve elders were appointed by John to rule under him. All previous marriages were annulled. Polygamy was publicly introduced. John eventually allowed himself the privilege of sixteen wives in addition to the radiant Divara, previously a nun who had been married to John Matthyszoon. The king of this new Jerusalem was John of Leiden himself. A few months later he sent out twenty-eight of his most ardent and ambitious disciples as apostles who were to convert the nations, these men compelled by circumstances to leave behind their one hundred and twenty four wives and numerous progeny.

蒙斯特发生这些事之前和过程中,为实现自己目的而鼓吹革命的重洗派人士,通过讲道把尼德兰中尤其较贫穷和未曾受教的人煽动起来。在几座城镇,男男女女赤身露体在大街上奔跑,宣告这世界因其罪恶有祸了。其他人敦促杀死所有的修道士和神父,说他们是启示录预言的那大淫妇的仆人。一些人甚至倡导废除所有民事官员和政府。
Before and during these happenings at Munster, the preaching of these Anabaptists who championed revolutionary means to gain their ends stirred up especially the poorer and uneducated in the Netherlands. In several of the towns men and women ran naked through the streets proclaiming woe to the world on account of its sins. Others urged the slaying of all monks and priests as servants of the great whore foretold in the book of Revelation. Some even dared to advocate the abolition of all civil authorities and governments.

在这混乱中,许多重洗派人士抵制了诱惑,没有离开温柔和平的行事之道。但动乱如此严重,以至于民事长官不得不把全部有重洗派倾向的人都看作是有害人群。即使在蒙斯特城溃败、1536年动乱告终之后,像约翰·范巴腾堡(John van Batenburg)和大卫·犹利斯(David Joris)这样的人还奉基督教信仰之名口出狂言。前者坚持说他就是先知以利亚,后者说他是所应许的弥赛亚。两人都捍卫一夫多妻制,论证说婚姻的誓言对重生的人而言并无约束力,毕竟恩典已经终结了自然和自然律对人生活提出的一切要求。
Amid this confusion many Anabaptists refused to be wooed from the ways of gentleness and peace. But so great were the disturbances that the magistrates were constrained to regard all those who had Anabaptist leanings as a pestilential crowd. Even after the debacle of Munster, which finally ended in 1536, such men as John van Batenburg and David Joris made outrageous claims in the name of the Christian religion. The former insisted that he was the prophet Elijah and the latter that he was the promised Messiah. Both defended polygamy and argued that marriage vows were not binding on the regenerate. Grace, after all, put an end to all the claims of nature and natural law on man's life.

尽管我们永远都信任那些更清醒的重洗派人士否认这些革命党人可以正当地归属于他们的群体,但极端派别的许多过分做法,完全是从他们这群人的教导得出的必然结论。他们强调内在引导和新的启示更胜一筹,这为反叛分子错谬的宣告铺平道路。这些叛党不仅在理论上,还在实际生活当中,根据他们个人的看见、为了自我的私欲利用圣经上帝的话语。他们在自然本性和恩典之间作出根本区分,这就朝着取消婚姻关系、引入他们许多人犯下的多妻的罪恶迈出了第一步。关于基督马上再来的异象,挑动那些属灵状况不太好、本性也较不敏感的人,为使用暴力带来基督的国度而辩护。整个政教关系的问题是特别困扰更正教人士的难题,他们继承了有一千多年之久的传统,在这传统中构建的政教关系并无法经受得起圣经的检验。但许多人发现无法摈弃这传统的大部分内容,因此他们自己的观念就变得多变和含糊。但他们异口同声谴责重洗派人士提出的解决方案,感受到当中有蕴含的革命种子是违背上帝的话语的。在蒙斯特悲剧这件事上,他们确定地感到得到了无可辩驳的证据,表明错误的原则衍生出的实践对所有秩序和规范(decency)都是致命的。尽管我们强烈谴责这些受误导之人遭到的可怕逼迫,为我们的先辈也让如此多较为温和的重洗派人士承受苦难深感难过,但我们能理解和认同德布利在他著作和公认信条当中,为了反对重洗派的错误而发出的警告。几乎毫无例外,路德宗和改革宗教会的领袖在重洗派中看到,这异端极为危险地、狡猾地歪曲了上帝的道。
Although it is to the everlasting credit of the saner Anabaptists that they disclaimed these revolutionaries as belonging properly to their company, many of the excesses of the radical wing were simply the legitimate conclusions of the teachings of this group. Their insistence on the superiority of inner guidance and new revelations paved the way for the extravagant claims of the rebels who not only in theory but also in practice used the written word of God according to their personal insights and for their private profit. The radical distinction between nature and grace was the first step on the road to the dissolution of the marriage tie and the introduction of polygamy of which many made themselves guilty. Visions concerning the imminent return of Christ challenged men of less spiritual and sensitive natures to justify the use of violence to bring in Christ's kingdom. The whole matter of church-state relations was a peculiarly vexing problem for Protestants. They were heirs of a tradition of more than a thousand years in which these relations had been conceived of in a manner which could not pass the test of Holy Scripture. With much of this tradition many found it impossible to break, so that their own conceptions were fluid and ill-defined. But with one accord they denounced the solution proposed by the Anabaptists, sensing that it contained the seeds of revolution which was contrary to God's word. In the tragedy of Munster they felt certain that they possessed irrefutable evidence that false principles produced a practice which is fatal to all order and decency. Much as we deplore the awful persecution to which these misguided souls were subjected and deeply as we sorrow that our forefathers also added to the sufferings of so many of the gentler Anabaptists, we can understand and justify the warnings which Guido de Bres sounds in his writings and Confession against their errors. Almost without exception the leaders of the Lutheran and Reformed churches recognized in the Anabaptist heresy a most dangerous and subtle perversion of the word of God.

众教会正式采纳了公认信条
 The Official Adoption of the Confession by the Churches

1561年的法文版印行之后,紧接着第二年就有了荷兰文译本。这是意料中事,因为那时的尼德兰人讲双语。讲法文和讲荷兰文的教会都采纳了德布利写的公认信条,将其作为对他们信仰的正式阐述。
The French edition of 1561 was speedily followed by a translation into the Dutch language the next year. This was to be expected, since the Netherlands in those days was bilingual. Both the French and the Dutch churches adopted de Bres' Confession of Faith as the official statement of what they believed.

虽然因逼迫而不得不各自秘密聚会,众教会却马上共同认可了这份文件,因它如此准确说出了教会的心声。前面已提到过,在1561年结束以前,这信条被称为《安特卫普公认信条》。两年之后,许多改革宗教会在阿尔芒蒂耶尔(Armentieres)召开预备会议,作出裁决:所有长老和执事都应签署“我们采纳的这份公认信条”。1566年安特卫普召开的教会会议,按差不多同样的方式讲到“这国家众教会的公认信条”。这次会议决定,每一次教会会议都应以诵读这份公认信条开始,既表明他们在真道上合一,也为要探寻能否对其措辞有所改善。后来人们确实对信条作了轻微的编辑,但德布利执笔的内容依旧不变。这些教会一再地见证,他们接受这些信条作为圣经教导的忠实可靠的陈述。众教会完全认识到,这份文件一经采纳,要进行修改,就是一件很严重的事情。他们明白这可能会危及他们的合一。因此,当安特卫普教会会议(1566年)修改几处文字,他们就希望这些修订可以得到日内瓦弟兄们认可。没有哪家教会,甚至一些教会,可以稍微独自进行修订。这份公认信条是他们共有的财产,只有获得共识后才能修改。
Although persecution compelled the churches to assemble themselves only in secret, they immediately endorsed this document which gave such accurate utterance to what lived in their minds and hearts. It has already been noted that before the end of 1561 these articles were referred to as the "Confession of Antwerp." Two years later a number of Reformed congregations gathered together in 5 preparatory session at Armentieres and ruled that "the confession of faith, which is adopted by us" should be signed by all elders and deacons. The synod held in Antwerp in 1566 spoke in much the same vein of "the confession of faith of the churches in this country." It was there decided that the sessions of every synod should be opened with a reading of the Confession both to signify their unity in the true faith and to inquire whether or not its language could be improved. Slight redactions were indeed made, but the substance of what de Bres had penned remained unchanged. Repeatedly these churches testified that they accepted these articles as a true and faithful representation of the teachings of Holy Writ. The churches were fully cognizant of the seriousness of introducing changes into what had once been adopted. They were aware that this might endanger their unity. Thus when the synod of Antwerp (1566) altered the reading at some points, the brethren sought approval of these emendations from the brethren at Geneva. No congregation or even group of congregations was to undertake a revision lightly or singlehandedly. The confession was their common property and might be changed only by common consent.

讲荷兰语的教会第一次出席是在维泽尔(Wezel)修道院召开的会议(1568年)。这一次教会会议作出决议,在改革宗教会中任何牧师接受按立之前,都要公开表达认同这份公认信条。埃姆登(Emden)教会会议(1571年)上,所有与会代表都必须在这份公认信条抄本上签名。
The Dutch-speaking churches seem to have been represented for the first time at the convent of Wezel (1568). This synodical gathering ruled that before any minister might be installed in the Reformed churches, he was to express public agreement with the Confession. The synod of Emden (1571) made obligatory upon all the delegates the affixing of their signatures to a copy of these articles of faith.

战乱和逼迫造成了公认信条第一版大量被毁。它需要经常重印,通常是在极为艰苦的情况下重印,这就造成了文字上的许多改动。多特(Dordt)召开的省级宗教会议(1574年),认为有需要印行一份正式版本,与安特卫普会议(1566年)认可的修改和谐一致。但因为这份文件属于所有教会,人们就决定,这要等到荷兰所有的改革宗教会召开教会全体大会时再进行。但它确实作出决议,所有牧师、长老和执事都要公开认同这份公认信条。1583年,讲荷兰文的教会在海牙举行的省级教会大会上,采纳了这份公认信条的一个正式版本。它由代尔夫特(Delft)教会的牧师哥尼流森(Arent Cornelissen)预备,在这个版本里,每一条款都加上了标题,后来多特全国大会(1618-1619年)撤销了这些标题。信条本来也包含有参考经文,但是当最后定稿被正式采纳时,参考经文未获保留。这份文件也被公开呈递给政府,因为大会意识到“基督教的改革”正被各教派包括罗马天主教的捍卫者极力抵挡。在荷兰共和国建国早期,拉丁学校的学生都要背诵比利时信条和海德堡教理问答,并且是同时以拉丁文和希腊文背诵。
War and persecution took severe toll of the original editions of the Confession. Frequently it was reprinted and usually under adverse conditions. In this way many changes in reading were introduced. The provincial synod of Dordt (1574) recognized the need for an official edition in harmony with the revisions endorsed by the Antwerp synod (1566). But since this document belonged to all the churches, it determined to wait until a general synod of all Reformed congregations in the Netherlands could be assembled. It did rule that all ministers, elders and deacons were to subscribe publicly to this Confession. In 1583 the Dutch-speaking churches adopted an official version of these articles at the provincial synod of the Hague. This was prepared by Arent Cornelissen, minister of the church at Delft. In this edition captions appeared above every article, which were later removed by the national synod of Dordt (1618-19). Scriptural references were also incorporated, but these were not retained when the Confession was officially adopted in final form. The document was publicly presented to the government, since the synod was convinced that the "Christian reformation" was being greatly hindered by various sects as well as by defenders of the Roman Catholic church. In the early days of the Dutch republic both this Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism  were committed to memory in Latin and in Greek by the pupils of the Latin schools.

当阿民念主义者(抗辩派)的意见开始渗透进改革宗教会,公认信条的立场受到严重威胁。那些不再认同教会正式采纳的教义的人,基于这份公认信条的不同版本,论证说无人能判断所有人都应保证认信的信念到底是什么。这些不同的版本带来一个无法否认的难题。许多发行这份公认信条各版本的出版商犯了工作马虎的错误。他们引用信条的条款,却并未注意安特卫普大会(1566年)通过的改变。多特总会(1618-1619年)决定终止这种不确定的局面,下令用荷兰文、法文和拉丁文发行它的准确版本。前两种版本在大会休会前完成,被会议正式采纳。拉丁文版本由赫米乌斯(Festus Hommius)预备,因完成得太迟,不能在会议上得到正式批准。虽然做出了修正和改变,但《比利时信条》的实质内容,和出自古伊多·德布利笔下的内容是一样的。这次大会也预备并采纳了信仰准则,所有改革宗教会的牧师都有义务签署。会议还为神学教授、学校的教师和探访病人者制订了一份类似的标准文件,不过对长老和执事的还没有。
When Arminian (Remonstrant) opinions began to filter into the Reformed churches, the position of the Confession was seriously threatened. Those who no longer agreed with the doctrines officially adopted by the churches argued on the basis of variant readings that no one was in a position to judge what really were the convictions to which all were supposed to be pledged. That these different readings posed a problem cannot be denied. Many of the printers who issued editions of the Confession were guilty of slovenly work. Often the articles were quoted without regard to the changes approved by the synod of Antwerp (1566). To this uncertainty the great synod of Dordt (1618-19) determined to make an end by ordering authentic texts in the Dutch, French and Latin languages. The first two were completed before the synod adjourned. These were officially adopted. The Latin version, prepared by Festus Hommius, appeared too late for official endorsement. Although some corrections and changes were made, the substance of the Belgic Confession remained as it had flowed from the pen of Guido de Bres. This synod also prepared and adopted a Formula of Subscription, the signing of which was made obligatory for all ministers in the Reformed churches. A similar Formula was drawn up for theological professors, teachers in the schools and visitors of the sick, but none for elders and deacons.

在度过荷兰改革宗教会的黄金岁月之后,这份公认信条不再被使用,在一些地方,它甚至遭遇恶名。唯理派和敬虔派以各自的方式破坏众教会曾经满有活力的信仰。在许多教会,纯正的福音遭扭曲,面目全非。十九世纪最早期的年月里,荷兰教会的灵性处于最低潮。国王强迫教会采用与他们数代人生活的秩序相反的新的教会治理体系。教会被迫与国家相捆绑。那些年间,人发声呼吁改革。教会领袖在国家的支持之下执行教会纪律惩治,这导致自由改革宗教会的形成,纯正的福音宣讲再次被人听到。举国上下,教会呼吁人重新按照上帝的话语服事祂。教会脱离政府干预的第一次运动,始于1834年;而第二次运动,带动了这国家数以千计受过良好教育的领袖们,是始于1886年。人们再次认真关注符合改革宗教会认信标准的纯正教义,其中包括历史最为悠久的《比利时信条》。这些运动的影响遍及全世界范围接受荷兰改革宗传统的教会。今天,这份教义陈述仍然被正式看作各大洲改革宗教会保持合一的重要方式。
After the golden age of the Dutch Reformed churches the Confession. of Faith fell into disuse and in some quarters into disrepute. Rationalism and Pietism each in its own way undermined the vigorous faith by which the churches had once lived. In many congregations the pure gospel was perverted beyond recognition. During the earliest years of the nineteenth century spiritual life in the Netherlands was at its lowest ebb. The king compelled upon the congregations a new system of church government contrary to the order by which they had lived for generations. Now the church was shackled to the state. In those years voices were heard calling for reform. The disciplinary action enforced by ecclesiastical authorities under the aegis of the state led to the organization of free Reformed congregations wherein the pure preaching of the gospel was once more heard. Throughout the land people were called back to serve God according to his word. The first movement for churches free from government interference dates from 1834; a second, which carried along with it thousands of highly educated leaders in the land, from 1886. Strict attention was once more given to sound doctrine according to the confessional standards of the Reformed churches, of which the Belgic Confession is the oldest. These movements had repercussions throughout the world wherever Reformed churches with roots in the Netherlands had been established. Today this statement of doctrine is officially recognized as one of the forms of unity by Reformed churches in every continent.

公认信条的价值
 The Value of the Confession

通过以上的综览我们可以清楚看到,包括比利时信条在内的任何教义陈述,如果说它有无意义和有何意义,可以说它在教会当中发挥着非常独特的功能。
From the survey it becomes apparent that any creedal statement including the Confession, if it is to mean anything at all, has a very distinct function in the churches.

这些信仰条款的首要功能是被用来更仔细和清晰地教导教会内的信徒,学习上帝在基督里的恩典的信息。这是德布利的原意。这样的目的在圣经中有充足的根据:圣经不断鼓励我们“要在我们主救主耶稣基督的恩典和知识上有长进”(彼后3:18)。
Primarily these articles of faith are an instrument by which believers within the church may be more carefully and clearly instructed in the message of God's grace in Christ. This was the original intent of de Bres. For such a purpose there is ample warrant in Scripture, which does not cease to encourage us to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." (II Pet. 3:18)

它也可以起护教或向世界,包括向着民事当局作见证的作用。教会认真看待上帝要她承认在上掌权者的呼召。他们被赋予上帝之下的权柄,维持所在国家的秩序与和平。为此目的,他们应了解他们治理之下人民的宗教信仰和倾向。教会向他们呈现公认信条,盼望可以驱除对基督徒的一切无端和邪恶控告。不仅如此,这样的见证让世人得知她的信息。通过这些途径,教会在某种程度上履行向万民宣教的责任。
It is also an instrument of apology or witness to the world, including the civil authorities. The church takes seriously her calling to recognize the magistrates. They are endowed with authority under God to preserve order and peace within their lands. To this end they should be aware of the religious convictions and persuasions of those whom they rule. By presenting to them the creed the churches may hopefully dispel unwarranted and evil charges levelled against Christian believers. Even more, such a witness informs the world of her message. By means of this she in some measure discharges her missionary responsibility among the nations.

与以上密切相关的,还有第三种目标与功能。比利时信条连同其他信条陈述一起,是一种捍卫真信仰、反对错误的工具。没有一家教会能在她认信标准的范围之内详尽地重述所有上帝的真理;而这也不是教会生命的本质所在。但教会必须保守某些处于基督信仰中心地位的基要信条,不容它们遭人侵犯。教会的生命与这些基要信条共同进退。我们绝非尝试完整列出这些基要信条,但必须提到三位一体,基督的道成肉身与赎罪,圣灵在信徒个人和集体之内施恩的工作,上帝在万有之上主权的统治,以及圣经的权威。
Intimately associated with the above is the third aim and function. The Confession, together with the other creedal formularies, serves as an instrument by which the true faith is defended against error. No church can exhaustively reproduce the truth of Cod within the confines of her confessional standards. Nor is this essential to her life. But certain fundamentals, which lie at the center of the Christian faith, must be preserved inviolate. With these the life of the church stands or falls. Without in any way attempting a complete list, mention should be made of the Trinity, the incarnation and atonement wrought by Christ, the gracious work of the Spirit within believers individually and corporately, the sovereign rule of Cod oyer all things, and the authority of the Scriptures.

在这方面,所有基督徒都当有某种程度的警惕。就连教会内最有能力的教师,包括加尔文,也不断警告我们,不要为了个人神学意见的缘故破坏基督身体的合一。这些信条没有一份是要打算穷尽教会共同领受和传扬的教导。它们的作用,是设定一些清楚分明的界限,使教会的宣讲和个人的见证可以在这范围之内合法地展开。信条的这种界限功能能够帮助信徒更容易地分辨真理和谬误,这功能并不是以信条自身任何的内在权威为根据。改革宗教会所有的信条陈述都是可供检验的,就是说,可以接受质询、调查和审视。它们的权威单单来自于上帝的话语;只因为教会深信它们准确地复述了圣经清楚无误教导的具体要点,它们才成为教会可以依赖的权威。只要有客观证据表明,公认信条的教导存在任何有违上帝话语的地方,就要接受修订。只要不能证明这一点,它们就继续具有权威。因此,信徒认真地、带着祷告的心查考这些公认信条,就能脱离圣经所警告的虚假教义的网罗。这样,公认信条是针对错谬的预防措施和解药。
Here a measure of caution becomes all Christians. Even the most competent teachers within the church, including Calvin, warned continually against undermining the unity of Christ's body for the sake of personal theological opinions. None of the creeds are intended to exhaust those teachings commonly received and propagated by the church. These rather serve to set some well defined limits within which alone the church's proclamation as well as personal testimony may legitimately move. This limiting function of the creeds, by which believers may more readily discern truth from error, does not rest upon any inherent authority. All confessional statements of the Reformed churches are examinable, that is, subject to inquiry, investigation and scrutiny. Their authority is derived from the word of. God alone and may be invoked only because the church is convinced that they accurately reproduce on specific points what the Bible clearly teaches. They are subject to revision, as soon as objective evidence is adduced that they teach anything contrary to God's word. As long as this cannot be demonstrated, they retain their authority. A careful and prayerful study of them therefore enables believers to escape the snares of false doctrine against which the Bible warns. Thus they function as a preventative as well as an antidote to falsehood.

最后,信条有保守和促进基督教会的合一的作用。人常常指责信条会起分裂作用,因此摧毁我们满有恩慈的上帝在基督耶稣里带来的联合。这通常是因为人完全误解了圣经所说“在基督里”的意思。虽然我们与救主的联合所包括的内容远远不止于教义纯正,但教义纯正却是我们与祂生命相交不可或缺的元素。上帝的话语明明确确地说:“二人若不同心,岂能同行呢?”(摩3:3)先知主要不是把这句话应用在普通的人际联合方面,而是特别指我们与上帝的圣约交往。改革宗教会完全认识到以和平来保守真道中的合一的范围与意义,他们明确地采用他们的公认信条文件作为合一的方式。公认信条正式陈述了教会对圣经启示之上帝的共同信仰,教会不仅表明、而且也努力保守和增进他们与各处真信徒的合一。
Finally, the creeds function as an instrument of preserving and promoting the unity of Christ's church. Often the charge is levelled that they are divisive and thus destroy what our gracious God has joined together in Christ Jesus. This usually rests upon a complete misunderstanding of what the Bible means by being in Christ. Although our union with the Savior includes much more than doctrinal soundness, this is an integral/ element of our life-communion with him. God's word states explicitly, "Shall two walk together, except they have agreed?" (Amos 3:3) The prophet applies this not so much to common association among men but specifically to our covenant fellowship with God. In full realization of the scope and significance of maintaining the unity of the faith in the bond of peace, Reformed churches have explicitly adopted their confessional writings as forms of unity. By these official statements of their common faith in the God of the Scriptures, they not only give expression to but also seek to preserve and increase their unity with true believers everywhere.

人强调这些功能的任何一样时,都不可以牺牲其他功能为代价。在人们极力呼吁要有一种没有分裂的基督教信仰的年代,我们达到基督的目标的最好服事办法,就是知道我们是谁、我们信什么,好让我们可以完全顺服上帝的话语,以温柔、谦卑和仁爱的心,与所有和我们一道呼求主耶稣基督之名的人,思想“基督的爱是何等长阔高深;并知道这爱是过于人所能测度的,便叫上帝一切所充满的,充满了我们”(弗3:18-19)。一家改革宗教会应当在教义和实践上不断地改革。为此目的,她努力实现上帝对她的呼召,就是尽可能完全和信实地向全世界陈明主永生的道。
None of these functions may be stressed at the expense of the others. We serve Christ's cause best in these times which clamor for a Christianity without divisions by knowing who we are and what we believe, in orders that thereupon in full obedience to the word of God and in the spirit of meekness, humility and love we may consider with all who name the name of, our Lord Jesus Christ "what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge, that we (ye) may be filled unto all the fulness of God." (Eph. 3:18, 19) A Reformed church ought always be engaged in reforming herself both in doctrine and duty. To this end she pursues her calling of presenting as fully and "faithfully as possible the living word of the Lord to the whole world.

今天的改革宗教会拥有富有活力、清楚定义的公认信条,但他们身处在一个在灵命和神学方面躁动不安的年代。
Today the Reformed churches with their dynamic and well-defined Confession find themselves in an age of spiritual and theological ferment.

我们的处境与几十年前教会的处境截然不同,那时加拿大和美国教会主导的气氛在根本上是反智的。在这方面,正统教会必须与自由派人士一同接受责备。
Our situation differs radically from that which obtained a few decades ago, when the dominant mood in the churches of Canada and the United States was radically anti-intellectual. For this the orthodox must be ready to share blame with the liberals.

但多年以来,自由主义人士处在上升阶段。在课堂上,人们一起攻击圣经,说它充满了不一致的地方,除了少数耶稣的教导,圣经所教导的是有缺陷的伦理道德规范。人们对历史上基督教信仰的主要信条不屑一顾,认为这些是不必要的,或者违背了我们主简单的话。宗教刊物和教会讲台经常玩这种游戏,污蔑保罗是恶棍,用他复杂和无法弄清头绪的神学取代了耶稣吸引人的信仰。这种颠覆基督教信仰的过程,不知不觉从十九世纪开始发展。那时聪明的年轻人游学海外,在黎秋(Ritschl)、特尔慈(Troeltsch)和哈那克(Harnack)脚前学习一段时间。他们一回来,就用唯理主义和高等批判的病毒传染了神学院和教会。这种对圣经和教理的态度如同瘟疫,在讲台上猖獗蔓延,蹂躏了台下的听众。一个接一个教义被揪出来接受争辩,遭人否认,直到在饶申布士(Rauschenbusch)和他门徒的影响之下,一种观点流行起来,就是认为基督教信仰不是教义,而是一种生活之道,一种个人和社会伦理,极为肤浅地将其与基督和祂十字架的教义脱离开来。
For years the liberal star was in ascendency. In the classroom common practice was to attack the Scriptures as replete with discrepancies and informed with an imperfect ethic apart from a few teachings of Jesus. The major tenets of the historic Christian faith were dismissed as either unnecessary or contrary to the simple words of our Lord. In this parlor game, played by religious press and pulpit, Paul was tarred as the villain who substituted for the attractive religion of Jesus his intricate and intractable theology. The inconspicuous beginnings of this levelling process of the Christian faith rooted in the nineteenth century, when brilliant young men went abroad to study for a season at the feet of Ritschl, Troeltsch and Harnack. Upon their return they infected seminaries and churches with the virus of rationalism and higher criticism. Like a pestilence this attitude to the Bible and dogma raged through the pulpits and ravaged the pews. One doctrine after another was opened to dispute and denial, until under the influence of Rauschenbusch and his disciples it became fashionable to regard Christianity not as doctrine but solely as a way of life, a personal and social ethio too superficially divorced from the doctrine of Christ and his CAM

刚强捍卫信仰的人兴起,倡导历史性的信仰。我们必须提到像普林斯顿神学院的贺智和华腓德这样的著名的理性和灵命巨人,他们捍卫改革宗信仰的努力并没有全然白费。更近的时候有梅钦(J. Gresham Machen)。但与此同时,教会自己越来越向含糊、失了味道的教导屈服。1910年,有人发表了一系列小册子,标题为《基要信仰》,供大众学习。这些册子讲的是基督教信仰的重要主题,指出在美国基督教界内部,战斗沿着怎样的战线展开。从那时开始,基要派一词就流行来指那些抵抗教义冷漠和教义偏离之冲击的人。但因这一群人当中也有许多人或看不起可尊重的神学学术研究,或被极端时代论吸引,或看重像讲方言、医治和洗脚这样哗众取宠的东西并以这些证明信仰是否合乎圣经正统,“基要派”这名称最后就陷入众人的非难。
Doughty defenders arose to champion the cause of the historic faith. Mention must be made of such intellectual and spiritual giants as the Hodges and Warfield of Princeton fame, whose efforts to defend the Reformed faith were not entirely in vain. To a more recent time belongs J. Gresham Machen. But meanwhile the churches were surrendering themselves increasingly to vague and vapid teaching. For popular consumption a series of tracts was published in 1910 entitled The Fundamentals. These dealt with the major themes of the Christian faith and pointed out where the battle lines were being drawn within American Christianity. Since then the term fundamentalist has been in vogue to designate those who resisted the onslaughts of doctrinal indifferentism and heresy. But because to this group belonged also many who had little regard for respectable theological scholarship or were captivated by an extreme dispensationalism or esteemed such exotic excrescences as speaking in tongues, healings and foot-washings as tests for Biblical orthodoxy, the term has come into reproach.

随着冲突加剧和深化,福音派基督徒的回应常常就不外乎是两种方式的其中一种,而这两种方式都证明是阻挠了历史性信仰的发展。坚持纯正教义的人经常把自己孤立出来,留在他们自己的小圈子内,因此他们的见证外人无法听到。其他人在攻击自由派的时候变得不够客观,更多是诉诸于谩骂。许多人企图把基督教信仰简化成为最低程度的教义,只局限于承认圣经无谬、三位一体、耶稣基督为童女所生、祂的神性、祂流血赎罪,以及基督再来。各处相信圣经的基督徒似乎都在缓慢却稳步地撤退。许多人满足于活在过去,还在打那属于过去几个世纪的仗,并没有意识到环境在不断改变,因为美国的理性和灵性氛围受制于像经济衰退、战争和存在主义兴起这样的压力。他们就像从前的利未人和祭司,绕过受伤流血的教会,丝毫没有暖心的关怀。
As the conflict increased and intensified evangelical Christians often reacted in one of two ways, both of which proved frustrating to the cause of historic Christianity. Frequently the adherents of sound doctrine isolated themselves within their small circle, so that their witness could not be heard by those on the outside. Others became less objective and more vituperative in their attacks on the liberals. Many sought to reduce the Christian faith to a doctrinal minimum restricted to an acknowledgement of the infallibility of the Scriptures, the Trinity, the virgin birth and deity of Jesus Christ, the atonement through his blood, and the second coming. Everywhere Bible-believing Christians seemed to beat a slow but sure retreat. Many were content to live in the past, fighting the battles of bygone centuries and unaware of the continual changes to which the intellectual and spiritual climate of America was being subjected by such pressures as economic recessions, wars, and the rise of existentialism. Like the Levite and priest of old they passed by a wounded and bleeding church with little heart-warming concern.

庆幸的是,这浪潮已经转向。
Happily the tide has shifted.

基督徒重新关注正统,积极和持续地向所有人见证基督信仰,当中有很多原因值得提及。在某些情形里,文化孤立的障碍倒塌。近期的战争表明,美国的影响力正迅速取代欧洲。在过去二十年,自由派人士开始对自己和他们的立场信心不足,意识到他们面对一个被张力撕裂的世界时,并无信息可传。许多人若不是凭信心,至少也是带着某种程度的尊重,学习聆听辩证神学,这辩证神学认真看待具有深度的基督教福音。上帝再次呼吁教会回归祂的话语,就连自由派可能也假心假意地一道为此发声。
Many causes for the renewed concern of the orthodox with a positive and continual Christian witness to all men might be mentioned. In certain instances the barriers of cultural isolation were broken down. Recent wars revealed that the American nations were rapidly replacing Europe in influence. During the past two decades liberals began to feel less sure of themselves and their positions, realizing that they had no message for a world torn by tension. Many learned to listen, if not in faith at least with a measure of respect, to the dialectical theology which took seriously the depth dimension of the Christian gospel. Once again the church was called back to the word of God. Even the liberals, possibly with tongue in cheek, joined the chorus.

卡尔·亨利(Carl F. H. Henry)分析我们时代的基督教的责任时,列举了正统信仰的基督教当尽的以下各样本分。1 它必须让自己在当前迫切发声,呼吁人回归合乎圣经的神学。2)它必须让自己重新委身“积极和得胜的传道”,看这是“福音派讲台极大的需要”。3)它需要“对基督徒生活有一种崭新和全面的认识”。4)它必须展示“对个体的关切,且是在对其基督徒经验的整体中的关切”。5)最后,它“也需要持续学习新约圣经的教会论,更关注重生信徒的合一”。
In his analysis of Christian responsibility in our day Carl F. H. Henry lists the following duties for orthodox Christianity. (1) It must align itself earnestly with the current plea for a return to biblical theology. (2) It must rededicate itself "to positive and triumphant preaching" as "the evangelical pulpit's great need." (3) It "needs a fresh and pervading conception of the Christian life." (4) It must manifest "a new concern for the individual in the entirety of his Christian experience." (5) Finally it "needs also the sustained study of the New Testament doctrine of the Church and a greater concern for the unity of regenerate believers."

这也是对我们这些珍惜更正教宗教改革运动丰富历史传承(更具体来说,是由加尔文和他的直接传承人极为有力并真切地开展的宗教改革运动历史)的人的呼吁。我们这些改革宗教会,太久以来一直处在美国教会生活的边缘,满足于自成一派,几乎只关注向我们的后辈传递我们的传承、使之不受污染这项任务。也许过往几十年在我们教会之内持续出现的、危害我们集体生活的各样问题,正是主对我们的审判,因我们过分专注自己和自己的机构,以至于我们几乎只是口头认同“所以,你们要去,使万民作我的门徒”的这条圣经命令。
This call comes also to us who cherish the rich heritage of the Protestant Reformation, more particularly as set forth so vibrantly and relevantly by Calvin and his immediate successors. Too long have we as Reformed churches lived on the fringes of American ecclesiastical life, content to be by ourselves and concerned almost exclusively with the task of delivering to the next generation our legacy untainted and unsullied. May it possibly be that the problems which have persistently risen up within our churches during .the past decades to plague our corporate life are the Lord's judgment for being so preoccupied with ourselves and our institutions, that we paid little more than lip-service to the Biblical injunction, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations?"

我们不会否认,我们总算(特别是在二战之后)让自己挣脱了文化和灵命舒适的安乐窝,用改革宗信仰挑战凡愿意听的人。在过去四十年,《回归圣经》这档电台节目,以及它大量的固定听众已经为我们开路,让我们得以进入许多家庭和社区。我们比以往更全心全意,不仅扩展海外、也扩展国内的宣教工场。改革宗社区特有的,这场由父母拥有并主管的基督教学校的运动,已经在北美大陆上我们教会从前没有进入的几个地区点燃了火花。由教会支持的、为精神病患人士设立的医院,作为我们坚持基督教慈惠事工的一部分,已经变得广为人知,有很好口碑。基督教劳工协会,努力把福音对社会生活的影响运用到纠缠不清的劳资关系网中,他们的声音不会被人忽视。
We would not deny that at long last, especially after the second World War, we are finally disentangling ourselves from the comfortable cocoon of cultural and spiritual isolation to challenge with the Reformed faith all who will hear. The Backto-God hour with its large sustained listening audience over more than four decades has paved an entrance for us into many homes and communities. More wholeheartedly than ever before we are expanding not only foreign but also domestic missions. The movement for parentally owned and operated Christian schools, so indigenous to the Reformed community, has fired a spark in several parts of the continent where our churches were not represented. Institutions for the mentally afflicted, supported as part of our commitment to the work of Christian mercy, have become widely and favorably known. The voice of the Christian Labor Association, seeking to apply concretely the social implications of the gospel to the tangled web of industrial relations, is not going unheeded.

但我们需要强调的是,我们带来的太少,而且我们似乎来得太迟。
But, and this needs underscoring, we have come with so little and we seem to have come so late.

更让人心生挫败感的就是这事实,并非所有认信改革宗信仰的人看来都委身一种彻底的行动计划。我们常常只见树木不见森林。我们内部为着方法论的细节争吵,结果就是我们见证的冲击力被削弱。但未来是更阴影重重的,因为我们发现许多人似乎对支持着我们基督教见证的原则知之甚少,而唯有这些原则才能让这见证充满活力和能量。我们大可以问,我们是出于一种根深蒂固的习惯去教会,还是我们渴慕合乎圣经的讲道;我们送儿女上基督教学校,为的是便利,为要在改革宗社区之内受到某种程度的尊重,还是出于内心坚定的信念;我们支持我们主的事业,是要安抚我们的良心,还是出于爱心的回应,欢喜祂恩典拯救的信息。作为改革宗的基督徒,我们还未能逃离对教义无动于衷这种风气带来的影响。太过经常的是,我们的信仰刊物讨论一些教义点的时候,一些带着善意但认识不足的人就会大声疾呼,告诉我们更应当传讲基督。他们几乎不明白,除非我们越来越清楚认识上帝宏伟的救赎计划(这计划涵括我们生活的全部),否则我们就不能带着炽热的确信传讲基督。
Even more frustrating is the fact that not all who profess the Reformed faith seem committed to a thorough program of action. Often we fail to see the forest in our preoccupation with a single tree. We still bicker among ourselves about methodological details, with the result that the impact of our witness is blunted. But more ominous for the future is the discovery that many seem to know so little about the principles which undergird and alone can give vibrancy and strength to our Christian testimony. Well may we ask whether our church attendance springs more from ingrained habit than from a thirst for Biblical preaching; whether we send our children to Christian schools for the sake of convenience and to insure a measure of respectability in the Reformed community or out of conviction of heart; whether we support the causes of our Lord to salve our consciences or as the response of loving hearts which rejoice in his message of salvation by grace. As Reformed believers we have by no means escaped the effects of the winds of doctrinal indifferentism. Too often when some point of doctrine is discussed in our religious press, the cries of well-intentioned but ill-informed people tell us we should rather preach Christ. Little do they understand that we cannot preach Christ with blazing conviction, unless we arrive at increasing clarity of God's great plan of redemption which embraces the totality of our life.

在基督教教会历史上,教义从来就不是可有可无,在我们当今似乎完全失去了属灵方向感的时候更是这样。在我们聆听那些在房顶上发声,说“看哪,在这里”或者“看哪,在那里”的人之前,我们最好还是反思我们先辈付出血汗和眼泪的代价,留给我们的遗产。
Doctrine has never been expendable in the history of the Christian church, least of all in our days which seem to have lost all sense of spiritual direction. And before we listen to those voices which proclaim from the housetops, "Lo, here" or "Lo, there," we do well to reflect upon what our forefathers bequeathed at the cost of their blood and sweat and tears.

确实,《比利时信条》表明的真理,并非是那必须诉说之道的最终定论。这荣耀唯独归于这份公认信条建立其上的根基,就是上帝的话语。虽然人常常误解和错误运用公认信条,我们却可以使用约翰·罗宾逊(John Robinson)在我们先辈天路客上船前往美洲荒野时,对他们说的这番话。他的一位学生为我们保留了这份记载:
The truths expressed in the Belgic Confession are, indeed, not the last word which must be spoken. That honor belongs alone to the word of God upon which this creed rests. Although often misinterpreted and misapplied, we may appropriate the words of John Robinson, spoken to the Pilgrim fathers as they embarked for the American wilderness. One of his disciples has preserved this record for us:

他嘱咐我们……跟从他,不超过他跟从基督的地步;如果上帝要通过祂任何其他途径启示我们任何事,就让我们快快领受,就如我们当快快领受祂的工作带给我们的真理一样;因他非常相信,主有更多的真理和亮光,仍有待从祂的圣言向我们表明。
"He charged us . . . to follow him no further than he followed Christ; and if God should reveal anything to us by any other instrument of his, to be as ready to receive it as ever we were to receive any truth by his ministry; for he was very confident the Lord has more truth and light yet to break forth out of his Holy Word."

但是在教会能正当期望圣经发出新的亮光之前,教会必须行在这已照耀在她身上的光中,因为这是她对上帝、她自己和她所生活其中的世界所负的责任。
But long before the church may rightly expect new light to break from the sacred page, she owes it to God, herself and the world in which she lives to walk in that light which has already shined upon her.

在这方面,《比利时信条》要亲自带领我们回归圣经。研究这份公认信条,要在这寒冷的日子滋养稚嫩的信心,它加强对神的确信,由此抵挡错误和异端。它要让我们勇敢面对所有企图剥夺我们理当传承之事、削弱我们力量和盼望的人。在圣灵赋予从前上帝百姓、引导他们的亮光的光照下,今天的教会反思上帝圣言启示的救恩信息,就要起来勇敢地为全然荣耀全然施恩的上帝作见证。她要带着孩童般的信心,与使徒异口同声地说:“我们知道我们是属上帝的,全世界都卧在那恶者手下;我们也知道上帝的儿子已经来到,且将智慧赐给我们,使我们认识那位真实的,我们也在那位真实的里面,就是在祂儿子耶稣基督里面。这是真神,也是永生。”(约壹5:19-20
Here the Confession will take us by the hand and lead us back to the Scriptures. Its study will nourish the tender plant of faith in these chill days. It will strengthen holy convictions by which error and heresy can be resisted. It will nerve us for the fight against all who would rob us of our rightful heritage and impoverish our strength and hope. As the church today in the light of the guidance which the Holy Spirit imparted to God's people of a bygone age reflects upon the message of salvation revealed in the holy word of God, she will rise up and boldly testify to the God of all glory and all grace. With childlike confidence she will say with the apostle, "We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in the evil one. And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son, Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." (I John 5:19, 20)

作者简介
彼得·德荣(Peter Y. De Jong1910-2005),毕业于加尔文神学院和哈特福德神学院。多年担任改革宗教会牧师,也是学者和教师。曾在美国新泽西、密歇根、爱荷华和加拿大安大略等地服事。


比利时信条:教会向世界的见证(上




2020-02-23

《比利时信条》简释合集(五)第四条和第六条:正典与次经的差别



《比利时信条》简释合集|王一牧师带领学习

《比利时信条》简释合集(一)背景介绍,第一条:独一上帝

《比利时信条》简释合集(二)第二条:认识上帝的途径

《比利时信条》简释合集(三)第三条:书写下来的道

《比利时信条》简释合集(四)第四条和第六条:正典与约

《比利时信条》 简释合集(五)第四条和第六条:正典与次经的差别
https://www.ccreformed.org/sermons/%e6%af%94%e5%88%a9%e6%97%b6%e4%bf%a1%e6%9d%a1%e7%ae%80%e9%87%8a05%ef%bc%9a%e6%ad%a3%e5%85%b8%e4%b8%8e%e7%ba%a6%ef%bc%88%e7%ac%ac46%e6%9d%a1%ef%bc%89/

————


《比利时信条》 简释合集(五)第四条和第六条:正典与次经的差别

比利时信条简释05

我们一同祷告。天父:我们来到你的面前,再一次地感谢你给我们机会来聆听你的话语,领受你的圣礼。有机会再一次地学习《比利时信条》,求你继续用你的圣灵来带领我们接下来的时间,好叫我们能够从你的信条当中能够学到属你的真理。我们这样的感谢祷告是奉靠耶稣基督的名。阿门!好,我们今天要重复讲一下我们上周讲过的内容,因为我们上周录音没有录上,但是我们上周讲的时候有的东西没有讲到,所以我打算就把所有的新约、旧约的整个的形成过程,包括新约、旧约正典之外的一些的文献,给大家简单的讲一讲。我们还是在谈第四条和第六条,然后我们下周会谈第五条、第七条,就是讲的圣经的属性,我们讲圣经还要再讲一周,然后我们就进入到三位一体,接下来就是一个讨论。我们现在来读一下《比利时信条》第四条和第六条:

第四条、圣经正典

我们相信,圣经包含两部分,即旧约与新约。它们是正典书卷,
无可争议。在上帝的教会中,圣经正典的清单如下:

在旧约圣经里,摩西五经:创世记、出埃及记、利未记、民数记、申命记;约书亚记、士师记、路得记;两卷撒母耳记,两卷列王纪,两卷历代志;以斯拉记、尼希米记、以斯帖记;约伯记,诗篇,三卷所罗门的书卷:箴言、传道书、雅歌;四大先知的五卷书:以赛亚书、耶利米书、耶利米哀歌、以西结书、但以理书;十二小先知书:何西阿书、约珥书、阿摩司书、俄巴底亚书、约拿书、弥迦书、那鸿书、哈巴谷书、西番雅书、哈该书、
撒迦利亚书、玛拉基书。

在新约圣经里,四卷福音书:马太福音、马可福音、路加福音、约翰福音;使徒行传;十三卷保罗书信:罗马书、两封哥林多书信;加拉太书、以弗所书、腓立比书、歌罗西书;两封帖撒罗尼迦书信;两封提摩太书信;提多书、腓利门书;希伯来书;七封其他使徒的书信:一封雅各书;两封彼得书信;三封约翰书信;一封犹大书信;以及使徒约翰的启示录。

第六条、圣经正典与次经之间的差异

我们区分圣经正典有别于次经,所谓的次经就是:

第三、第四卷以斯拉记,多比传,犹滴传,所罗门智训,便西拉智训,巴录书,以斯帖补篇,火窑中三圣童诗歌集,苏撒拿传,彼勒与大龙传,玛拿西祷词与马加比传上下。

教会当然可以读这些次经;只要其中内容与正典书卷一致,也可以从其中汲取教训;但次经绝无此等能力与价值,以至于我们可以从它们的见证来确认基督教信仰的任何内容,更不能夺取其他圣典的权威。

我们今天就再次来再重温一下新旧约的写作的过程传递的过程,以及主要讨论的是旧约的正典与次经的问题。我们上一次大概讲到的是正典是约的概念,还记得吧?正典是约的概念,正典的概念是在条约的语境下产生的。犹太人他们自己知道自己有旧约正典,他们知道在跟上帝立约的关系当中,所以当耶利米先知在《耶利米书》第31章说:将来上帝要与他们另立新约的时候,其时他们已经有概念说将来要有新约的书卷要产生,所以不是后来的一些神学的辩论方强加在教会身上的,是一个很自然的,因为新立了新约,就会产生新的正典。我们今天简单地来谈一下新旧约的正典的形成过程,以及它们与次经、伪经之间的区别。

首先旧约的形成过程,大约在公元前2200年左右的时候是亚伯拉罕的时代,再往前推的话就是亚伯拉罕之前的、洪水之前的、世界史前的记录等等。我们知道旧约的最开始的写作点是从谁开始的?是从摩西开始的,所以摩西的时间大概是在这个时间段,就是1500-1200年左右的时间。我们之前提到过,旧约圣经与赫梯条约之间的这种形式上的相似(见比利时信条简释05)。那赫梯帝国的时间也大概是在这个区间左右,所以从这个文本形式学的批判来看,我们可以有更多的证据。当然在旧约的学术圈子里面,有一派在现在非常非常的,就是讲到说巴比伦帝国把犹太人掳走之后,旧约实际上是在犹太人被掳到巴比伦之后在巴比伦写的,或者说他们有最主要的这些文本形成是为了抵抗巴比伦的一些异教的侵袭而最终写成的。如果是这样的话,就把时间推到了这个位置,所以你要看到这差的很远。

圣经旧约的三大部分:Tanakh(塔纳赫,指旧约圣经)
- Torah (妥拉),律法
- Ketuvim(文集),诗篇智慧书
- Navim(先知书),先知和其它的写作

我们是坚持旧约的最开始的写作有三个大的部分。上次我们讲到了旧约,Tanakh(塔纳赫,旧约圣经),提到旧约有三个大的部分叫:一个是Torah (妥拉),这是律法,然后一个部分是Ketuvim(文集),然后一个部分是Navim(先知书),先知和其它的写作(writings)。妥拉指的就是摩西五经,摩西五经最早写作的话传统上教会的观点是在摩西亲自写作的,当然这后面有一些整理和修订的过程。Navim就是先知书,指的是从摩西以后开始一直到最后一个先知,就是哈该、撒迦利亚和玛拉基这个时代为止,整个的这个时代都是先知的时代。然后再另外有四卷的其它的写作。上周我读了约瑟夫(Flavius Josephus)的一段话,这是第一世纪的犹太历史学家,他当时在他的一个作品里提到说:“我们不像希腊人一样,希腊人有成千上万卷这些书卷,这些经书,我们只有22卷书,是上帝启示的。其中5卷属于摩西(也就是妥拉),然后从摩西的死到波斯王阿尔塔薛西斯的统治期间,先知们继摩西之后继续写作了13卷书。另外还有4卷向上帝的赞美诗和人生规范。”所以,约瑟夫说妥拉有5卷书,Navim13卷书,Ketuvim4卷书,总共加起来是多少?就是22卷书。

按理说我们旧约有多少卷书?39卷书。为什么犹太人有22卷书,我们有39卷书?是不是不一样?不是的,它们是一样的,只不过他们记书卷的方式不一样。犹太人把十二小先知书全都编为一卷书,然后把《耶利米书》和《耶利米哀歌》编为一卷书,撒母耳记和列王纪不都有上下吗?他们都编成为一卷书,所以编来编去跟他们是一样的。所以,基督新教的旧约正典跟犹太人的旧约正典是一样的。

但是,罗马天主教在1563年的天特会议上宣告了把旧约的次经也纳入到正典当中。这是他们后来强加上去的,我们一会再谈次经的问题。这里我们看到很重要的是,约瑟夫他提到圣经写作的时间从摩西到阿尔塔薛西斯的统治。阿尔塔薛西斯的统治就是在第五世纪,就是在这个时候,445年是玛拉基最后写作的时候。约瑟夫接下来说:“在阿尔塔薛西斯王之后,我们的历史还继续被写下,但是这些作品没有与之前的那些先辈们留下来的作品有同样的权威,因为从那以后就没有先知了。”所以约瑟夫他不是个基督徒,他是个犹太人,他告诉我们从这之后就没有先知了。所以这个点,最后的先知写作之后整个旧约就完成了。从摩西开始到撒迦利亚、玛拉基、哈该的时代旧约写作就完成了。但是这个时候的旧约都是一卷一卷的书,但是旧约写作的过程是非常非常长的。我们知道在摩西写作的时候,还没有我们今天所谓的希伯来语,我们今天所看到的这种方块形的,我们叫“Square Hebrew”,还没有出现,还是当时叫“腓尼基希伯来语”,这是一种腓尼基语言的变体。我们大概可以推测,摩西当时写作使用的语言是用这种腓尼基式的希伯来语和有可能是用埃及语,因为我们记得摩西当时是在埃及当宰相,所以他学了埃及所有的学问。

在辩论这个旧约写作的时间线的时候,现在比较流行的是说在巴比伦时期写作的人,他们的使用的一些的辩论的方式是什么呢?他们说:“你看,我们在美索不达米亚平原发现了这些史前的这些的记录,比如说,阿特拉哈西斯(Atra-Hasis,古巴比伦神话),还有什么其他的这些美索不达米亚的神话里面,跟圣经的创世纪的记载很像:有洪水,有这个上帝过来消灭巴别塔等等这些类似像这些的故事,所以是犹太人在那个环境下写作的。这个就是我不想太深入的进去谈论太多的学术圈子里面的一些辩论。

但是,我们相信如果你真的读圣经《创世记》的话,你会看到《创世记》里面自己展现告诉你说这个是公元前1500年到公元前1300年左右的人写的,因为里面透露了很多其他人不能够知道的信息,很重要的就是上帝与亚伯拉罕立约的方式。这个是很大的一个点,就是我们上一次讲到的正典与约的关系。另外,还有比如说《创世记》里面提到约瑟被卖的时候,被卖到埃及的时候,他的卖的价钱和我们在古埃及的考古学发现了一些其他的文献,所记载是吻合的。也就这些人把约瑟卖到埃及去,换了多少钱,是当时古埃及的奴隶的平常的价格,所以这些考古学我们都可以发现的。所以,从很多侧面都证实说我们现在所有的摩西五经,的确是在摩西的时代写作的。

我们知道接下来希伯来语在进化。希伯来语在公元前1350年的时候,有一次的进化,把它从这种腓尼基式的语言进入到了这个新的一个语言的变体,从“古体字”变到“方形字”。然后接下来,每次语言进化的时候,你就发现这个圣经都会被重新抄写。

当时摩西写作的时候很可能是写在泥板上,我们知道上帝给摩西的是两块法版,那个是整个旧约的最核心。然后再围绕这两块法版所建立的约的过程当中,有其他的摩西五经写作出来,这些文本在不断的翻抄,并且进行修整。比如说在《申命记》,在最后写道摩西死了之后的故事吧,这个肯定不是他自己写的,还是后面的这些抄记的人他们添加上去的。但是这并不代表着说,圣经是不可靠的或者怎么样的,因为我们对于正典的定义是最终的产品,也就是整个的编辑的过程,也都是正典形成的过程。最终,整个旧约形成结束是在主前(公元前)300年左右的时间。

那在这我们看现在,我们拿到的这些旧约的抄本,我们看到他们的使用的语言是统一的,那也就意味着他们都是被经过统一化的。这是我们没有保留下来:比如说是公元前1500年的语言,和公元前1000年的语言,和公元前500年语言,他们都是不一样的。但是这个都是被后面的这些的文士们抄记的时候又统一起来的。

另外旧约发展的传承的过程当中,有一个很重要的时期就是从旧约的正典形成,然后传递到公元后135年左右的时间,那也就是在他们犹太人已经被掳走,被掳到巴比伦之后,他们在巴比伦地区,他们还要延续自己的宗教,他们抄写圣经。然后在他们发生战争的时候,很多的犹太人跑到埃及去躲避灾难的时候,还有一部分人留在了这个迦南地,所以在这个历史时期,这些犹太人他们都在抄写圣经,他们都在延续自己的宗教。

那就形成了三大家族的文本。这三大家族的文本就是以这三个主要的犹太人的聚集地为命名的。也是巴比伦的抄本,还有这个留在迦南地的这些在巴勒斯坦地区的抄本,然后还有在埃及的抄本。然后另外在这个时期在主前300年这个时期经历了一个很重要的,在埃及旧约圣经被翻译成希腊语,所以被称为七十士译本。最开始有七十个文士,是他们把摩西五经最开始翻译成希腊文,然后就是应当是亚历山大大帝的,还有他们在他们是在亚历山大市有一个非常大的市,是世界上最大的图书馆,政府出资然后请他们来把这个翻译了。

所以,在两约之间的犹太人他们读的很多的抄本都是七十士译本,因为亚历山大就统一了整个地中海地区,包括这个金融地区之后,希腊语被称为,就是就像今天的英语一样,就是通用的语言,对所有人都说希腊语的,这些犹太人也说希腊语。像保罗,他的母语是希腊语,他虽然会说希伯来语,但是他最feel comfort,让他感觉最舒服的语言是希腊语,所以他跑到耶路撒冷的时候,他专门给在耶路撒冷说希腊话的犹太人传福音。

但是他在被控告的时候,他为了平衡那些人,他也用他也讲希伯来语,所以它是基本上算是双语者,我们不知道他会不会拉丁文,但是他很有可能他也会一点,但是并不是特别精通。这里面埃及,就是七十士译本。然后在巴勒斯坦地区,有这个撒玛利亚城的撒玛利亚抄本。然后在巴比伦地区有一些这个巴比伦的抄本。这些抄本,他们都有自己的一些特点,这也是为什么我们能把他们划分成这三个大的家族,然后他们之间互相又有一些的互动,所以非常非常庞大,非常复杂的一个系统。

基本上世界上没有几个人愿意去学习这个,这个文本鉴定学的这个学科,因为太复杂了。

然后在这个阶段形成了,形成了所谓的叫做“前马索拉抄本”。我们今天说的,我今天本来想要把那个这个希伯来圣经,和我们现在通用的希伯来圣经是马索拉抄本。但是现在在德国有一个很大的委员会(committee),他们在制作一个Critical Version of the Old Testament,旧约的文本批判性的一个编辑本。但是他们的这个过程是非常非常漫长的,因为你可以看到,因为首先你会看到旧约写作时间之长,然后再加上抄本的这种翻译本的这种复杂,使得文本批判学的过程是非常非常复杂,要比新约复杂上百倍的,不仅文本的内容很多,而且文本的抄本的这些复杂程度也非常大。但是我们现在使用的,就是牧师使用,就是我们用的是马索拉抄本。马索拉抄本是在公元后1000年的时候形成的,也是逐渐形成的。

简单的讲一下旧约的写作和传递的过程,但是至少我们知道的是在约瑟夫的时候,在约瑟夫的时代(Flavius Josephus,第一世纪的犹太历史学家)。约瑟夫已经告诉我们,正典是在这个阶段形成的。

那接下来,我们要来谈简单谈一谈的是旧约正典和次经的问题。在《比利时信条》的第六条,那里面罗列下来了旧约的次经。什么是旧约的次经?次经指的就是那些在两约之间这个时期,在耶稣基督还没有来,在玛拉基最后的先知写作完之后,在两约之间犹太人写作的东西叫做次经,他们有的是在旧约正典上的添加。比如说像在这个《但以理书》后面加上了一些东西,比如说《苏萨拿传》是放在这个《但以理书》后面的一部分。有点完全单独讲述两约之间的事情,比如说《马可比传》,《马可比传》讲的是马可比王朝犹太人的农民起义。

次经并不是意味着这些东西是不好的东西,次经是有非常高的价值的。所以我们在信条里说我们可以读次经,但是这些次经不是正典,所以刚才我读到约瑟夫他提到说“从阿尔塔歇斯王之后我们还继续写作我们的历史”,他说的就是次经的写作,“但是这些作品不能与没有前辈先辈留下来的正典有同样的权威”。原因是因为从玛拉基之后就不再有先知了,那犹太人的传统是(我们是继承了犹太人的传统的),犹太人自己告诉我们从玛拉基、撒迦利亚之后就没有先知了。有另外一个证据就是,在巴比伦的塔木德(Babylonian Talmud),是相当于犹太人的教父作品,在这里它提到说“在哈该撒迦利亚和玛拉基先知之后,圣灵就离开以色列了”,这是犹太人自己告诉你的,他们自己非常清楚已经没有圣灵了。所以在两约之间写作的不是正典,但是是有用的一些历史文献。比如说你在新约里看到突然冒出来一堆法利赛人,这些人是干嘛的,这些人是从哪里来的,旧约根本就没有提到这些人,你需要想要了解法利赛人是怎么来的,那么就需要去读次经了。因为次经会告诉你,法利赛人是在两约之间产生的一个党派等等。

所以,次经提供了这些宝贵的历史资料,但是次经是有错误的,次经不是正典,次经不能作为我们建立教义的基础。这也是我们作为基督新教反对罗马天主教把次经纳入到正典当中一个非常重要的原因。因为次经当中,罗马天主教使用次经的一些内容来为他们自己一些错误的教导、教义来背书。例如罗马天主教的炼狱的教义和赎罪券的教义。炼狱的教义里面在他们用《马加比传下》1245节来支持所谓的炼狱说:“在它那里说在那坚定和诚实的信念中,上帝全体信众都会得到美妙的报偿,犹大预备赎罪祭以便超脱死者的罪孽。”这里面提到说犹大献的赎罪祭可以为已经死了的人赎罪,这个就罗马天主教拿来证明来说有炼狱,这些人在死亡状态中还可以把他们的罪洁净。这个就是其中一个例子。

另外一个例子是赎罪券的教义。那个是在《多比传》129节,《多比传》129节这里面说:“仗义疏财将救你脱离死亡,将会洗净你一切的罪。”所以它这里说仗义疏财,金钱可以洗净你一切的罪,天主教把这个拿来支持他们他们赎罪券的教义。他们把d次经纳入到正典是有教义背后神学的原因的。但是在此之前在公元1563年之前,教会从来就没有承认过这些次经是正典。

我们反对这些次经是正典有以下几个理由:

第一个理由,犹太人不承认这些书卷次经为正典,犹太人自己不承认这些次经书卷为正典。我刚才提到约瑟夫和巴比伦塔木德作的见证。犹太人告诉你,这些次经是我们犹太人写的,但我们不承认他们是正典,你们基督徒干么要操这份心,对吧?这是第一点。

第二个理由,耶稣没有承认次经当中任何书卷是正典,而相反耶稣在很多地方是延续了犹太人的传统。例如,如果你有圣经的话,可以打开《路加福音》2444节,耶稣在这里面把旧约用这三个词来表达。对于耶稣来说旧约就是“摩西律法、先知的书和诗篇上所记的。”所以耶稣说的哪三个,就是这三个词——摩西的律法、先知的书和诗篇。对于耶稣来说这就是旧约的正典,而不是两约之间写作的其他东西。另外一个地方,《马太福音》2335节,在这里耶稣虽然没有明确说但是提到了两个先知:一个先知是亚伯,亚伯是谁?亚伯是亚当和夏娃的小儿子,那个事件记载在哪里?在《创世记》里。所以耶稣在这里就说《创世记》是正典的起头,然而到什么为止?到撒迦利亚先知为止,撒迦利亚先知是什么时候?就是哈该、撒迦利亚和玛拉基,他们是同一个时代的。到那个时代为止,先知的时代结束了,这个是正典启示的全部。他告诉我们一个起头是《创世记》,另外一个终点是撒迦利亚和玛拉基。这是第二个,耶稣告诉我们的见证,祂从来就没有引用过次经的,而在他的一些表达方式上,他告诉正典的范围是什么。

第三个理由,新约圣经重来没有引用过次经。

第四个理由,次经本身没有说自己是正典。这个在某一卷书,好像是所罗门智训的前言部分它提到说,这本书里面可能会有错误,它自己会告诉你这里可能会有错误。所以,次经本身告诉你不要把它当正典来看。

这个是旧约的写作过程,还有旧约的正典跟次经之间的区别。

那接下来我们来看新约,新约的话相对来说比较简单一些,因为新约的写作跨度比较短,相比旧约写作跨度来说,旧约的写作跨度基本上是一千年左右的时间。那新约的时间就比较短,从耶稣钉十字架之后大概40-50年到100年左右的这段时间,非常非常短。新约的写作语言是通用希腊文。通用希腊文(Koine Greek), 是亚历山大帝征服之后使用的希腊文,也不是古典希腊文,也不是后面的中世纪希腊文,不是文艺复兴时的希腊文。

新约写作,这个是我们今天我们很多的问题的集中讨论点,因为我在第一堂课就提到正典,现在有一种思想,现在有一种思想叫做Walter Bauer他的论点是什么,还记得吗?他的论点是:正典是后期正统派利用政治权柄压迫了一些所谓的异端,然后强加给教会了。他说,在基督教最开始形成的时候,有许多不同的基督教的团体,每一个团体都是平等的合法的,不同团体,有自己的正典; 但是后来到了第4世纪,这些正统派他们借用罗马皇帝的这种政治权柄压迫了其他的就胜过了其他的这些团体,然后才把正典确立,这是Water Bauer一个非常流行的论点,这种论点也随着我们发掘出来了很多的这种诺斯底主义的福音书,然后包括其他的许多的、伪经的这些文献,是在第一、二世纪写作的。因为这些文献被发掘,使得这种论点变得非常非常流行。今天,其中他有一个非常热情的追随者,叫Bart D. Ehrman,他写了一本非常有名的书,叫作Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew。你看他这里面用的是复数,就“这些失丧的基督教们”,各种不同的基督教,他的意思是,今天我们所知道的基督教正统派基督教,只是其中的一个,之前还有很多很多其他的基督教,有的基督教喜欢多马福音,有的基督教喜欢犹大福音,有的基督教喜欢各种其他的福音书等等。我在第一堂、专门讲正典的里面我也提到过说,其实这种现象的确是一个事实、一个现实,就是耶稣问彼得问门徒们说:“人说人子是谁?”大家说我是谁?然后他们就报告说,不同的人把你当做不同的人,有人说你是先知,有人说你是以利亚,有人说你是施洗约翰复活了,有人说你是那个的。所以,存在很多对耶稣的理解,但是这并不代表说这些都是同样的合法地位的,耶稣最后问彼得说:“你说我是谁?”然后彼得说:“你是基督,是上帝所应许要来的救主。”然后耶稣说:“这不是属血气的指示你的,这是我在天上的父指示你。”所以耶稣授权这个是真正的正典的理解,是对耶稣的理解,所以正典从耶稣的时候就已经有了。耶稣告诉门徒们他是谁。所以,耶稣基督的救赎事件发生在历史当中,然后接下来就有这一个对救赎事件的权威性的解释。就是使徒们所传的福音,有口传的福音开始出现,然后接下来有一些书写下来的耶稣的言行的片段,最后出现这些圣经的书卷的写作、整理出来的写作。所以圣经的作者他们知道自己在做什么。我之前提到了,当先知说“将来上帝要另立新约”的时候,当他们看到耶稣已经完成了救恩的,他们知道这是一个新约设立的时刻的时候,他们非常的知道自己在做什么,他们说,我们是在写作一个新约的正典,就像西乃山上上帝赐给以色列民的旧约的正典一样。有的时候,圣经的新约的作者知道自己是在写作圣经,有的时候他们不知道。他们有意识的知道自己在写作圣经的一些例子是,比如说在马太福音的开头,他用到geneology,耶稣基督的家谱这个词,家谱这个是在希腊希伯来语里面是“toledot" (generations)。然后这个词在七十士译本里面翻译和《马太福音》所使用的家谱那个词是一样的,所以马太很有意识的把自己的福音书作为新的《创世记》来讲述。在创世记的时候说,这是创造天地的家谱。然后马太说这是耶稣基督的家谱,所以他很有意识的去做这样的一个平行的比较。另外一个很直观的是在《路加福音》,路加福音所使用的希腊语,是我们所谓的叫七十士译本的希腊语。当然你必须要了解一点,对希腊语的这种文体,和一些也简单的一些研究就可以看得出来,七十士译本的希腊语,并不是很纯正的希腊语,它是在用希腊语去翻译希伯来语,而有的要翻译的很硬。比如说,有的时候英文译本也会这样翻译,他们在翻译的过程当中,英文直译过来,比如说,“这件事情发生”,然后说这是什么事情,听起来感觉很啰嗦,但是他要用这样的方式,因为在希伯来语里面的原文里面是这样阐述的,所以他用希腊语很拗口的、很费劲的方式去直译过来。然后路加在其他地方,他在《使徒行传》里面展现了自己的非常完美的希腊语,路加是一个受过高等希腊语教育的人,但是他竟然在路加福音里面用这种很拗口的,这种七十士译本式的希腊语来写作他的福音书,所以他有意识的在告诉他的犹太人的读者,这是和七十士译本一样的一个作品。

七十士译本是什么?七十士译本是旧约的正典。所以路加在告诉他的读者,我所写作的和那个是同样的一本东西。这是一些从你直接读这些文本就可以感受出来的一些东西。当新约正典形成的时候,它们就立刻被教会保存起来视为正典。

我在这里面简单谈几点很重要的,一个是最早留下来的这些合集。然后第二我要谈一个叫做,双约结构这是我们上周已经讲过的。

最早收集下来的新约的正典,其实在新约虽然在跨度这么短的时间里面,但是它也有写作的先后。 比如说我们知道保罗书信写作的时间,因为保罗殉道的时候大概是64年或者68年,所以我们相信所有保罗书信都是保罗自己写的,所有这些书信都是在6468年之前写作的。我们知道,约翰他活到了主后100年,对他的有一些写作是可以把他定的比较晚一点。当这些书卷被写下来的时候,他们就被教会保存起来,把它们钉在一起成为一个合集。我们知道圣经里面本身自己有这样一些见证,比如说《彼得后书》第3章第16节,那里面说彼得评价保罗的书信,他这样说:“保罗一切的信上都是讲论这事,信中有些难明白的,那无学问不坚固的人,强解就如强解别的经书一样,就是自取沉沦。”这是《彼得后书》第3章第16节,所以那里面你看看这里面非常有意思。彼得首先提到了“保罗的一切信上”,也就是不只是一封信,他知道这些人有保罗的很多书信,而且他把它们都囊括在一起了,所以它们是一个合集的形式产生的。另外,彼得在这里面说,“有些人解释保罗的书信就如同解释其他的圣经一样”,这是什么意思?这就表明保罗的书信对于彼得来说保罗的这些书信就是圣经,这些人解释保罗的书信和解释其他的圣经是同等的地位。

如果我们相信《彼得后书》这封书信是彼得自己亲自写的话,那彼得跟保罗基本上是同一个时期死的。按照传统上来说就是尼禄皇帝的时期死的,尼禄是公元68年死的,所以彼得肯定比尼禄死的更早。就算他和尼禄是同一年死的话,那也是68年之前彼得就已经说“保罗所写的书信是圣经”了。所以,这个根本不是第四世纪产生的概念,是主后60年左右的时间就已经产生的概念,当然在学术圈的辩论里面不会所有人都认为《彼得后书》是主后60年左右写的,很多人认为《彼得后书》不是彼得写的,是另外一些人写的。但是就算我们同意他们的说法,他们把《彼得后书》定在100-125年,即便是这样的话也是非常非常早的,已经出现了《保罗书信》的合辑被作为圣经来对待。

那接下来我要讲的是一个双约结构。这个是一个很有意思的一个现象,什么是双约结构?双约结构指的就是,一个作者不仅引用旧约的正典,同时也引用新约的正典,当作是一气呵成的,然后把旧约的正典和新约的写作当作是同等的权威来对待,这叫做双约结构,所以从这个侧面就体现出来他们对待新约的这些文本的态度就是他们把它们当作是正典。

举个例子:《提摩太前书》518,这叫做双约结构,经上说X,又说YXY都是圣经说的。那前面这半句,“牛在场上踹谷的时候不可拢住它的嘴”,这是出于旧约《申命记》254。所以这个大家都可以理解,这是旧约的正典。然后接下来,又说“工人得工价是应当的”,这句话出自哪?这句话不在旧约,是在新约《路加福音》107。所以保罗在这里面对提摩太说:“经上说X(从旧约说),又说Y(从新约说)。”他把《路加福音》和《申命记》都当作是圣经,这叫作双约结构。

另外,除了圣经当中本身的见证之外,在100年到200年之间的教父们,我们称他们为使徒教父。这些教父们他们引用新约作为圣经来使用、当作权威的教导来使用。比如说《十二使徒使徒遗训》(Didache)是100年左右的一份使徒教父的作品,里面引用《马太福音》第六章讲到主祷文的时候,它一个字不差的直接抄写《马太福音》这个部分,然后说,“这是耶稣教我们祷告的方式。”所以Didache把《马太福音》当作是知道耶稣的言行的教导的来源。然后另外一个很重要的例子是坡旅甲(Polycarp)他在写信给腓立比教会的时候,他引用《以弗所书》,但是他说圣经这样说:“正如圣经上写着说‘生气却不要犯罪,不可含怒到日落。’”所以他把《以弗所书》当作是圣经来对待。很多很多这样的例子,我只是简单的举几个例子而已。在整个这个时期的使徒教父们,你会看到几乎新约圣经里面所有的书卷都被提到了,可能唯一提到比较少的是《启示录》,但是包括《雅各书》、《希伯来书》这些都被提到了。 

结论是,正典的概念并不是第四世纪神学辩论的胜者强加给教会的,正典的概念是教会很早就有的,是教会期待要有的。因为旧约的正典,因为新约的开启就暗示了新约的正典必须要出现,所以新约教会期待会有正典出现,而正典出现的时候他们就马上识别出来这是正典,并且保存下来。

最后花一点点的时间讲一下新约正典之外的一些文献叫做“伪经”。首先,当新约圣经还没有的时候,也就是在使徒他们在传福音的过程当中,他们还没写作新约圣经的时候,他们怎么分辨、怎么去排除一些错误的教导?他们用的是旧约。所以他们最开始就有正典,不是说他们需要等到使徒们写了新约才有正典,他们已经就有正典,就是旧约,单单用旧约教会就能排除很多错误的教导,例如:马吉安主义、诺斯底主义……很多错误的教导。不用新约,单用旧约就可以排除了,因为旧约教导上帝直接创造宇宙万物,而不是藉着一个次等的造物主(Demiurge)去创造,所以单凭这一点就可以论证。使徒、基督传福音的时候都是直接用旧约就传福音了。

然后,这里面有很多教父的一些见证,包括早期的爱任纽、亚历山大的革利免、特土良、俄里根等等。我就不过多给你们这些数据了,我想给你们一个最直观的一个感受,让你感受一下正典的圣经跟诺斯底主义的福音书到底有什么区别,我接下来给你们读一段诺斯底主义福音书,现在非常流行的一个福音书,叫做多玛福音(Gospel of Thomas),我简单摘选了几条比较有代表性的:“以下是在世的耶稣不为人知的话,而提都玛、犹大、多玛将它记录下来。”所有的诺斯底主义福音一开始都是这样“这是耶稣不为人知说的话”,所以你们都不知道这个,现在我来告诉你。旧约次经也是这样,它们都在满足人的好奇心,它们写作出来的目的都是满足你的好奇心,比如《玛拿西的祷词》,这是怎么来的呢?因为旧约圣经里面提到玛拿西是非常邪恶的王,但是后来他被掳走后他就悔改了,他悔改相信耶和华了,然后人们就想他信主之后是什么样的呢?于是就有了《玛拿西的祷词》在两约之间写出来,告诉你这是玛拿西悔改信主后的敬虔是什么样的,满足你的好奇心。

同样的所有这些次经、伪经,它们的写作目的都是这是“卖点”,你不知道为什么要写“犹大福音”,耶稣跟犹大说了悄悄话,耶稣说了什么?耶稣单独跟犹大说了什么?多马也是这样,他说以下是耶稣不为人知的话,耶稣跟多马说的秘密的话。接下来也很有意思,让你感觉到为什么不是圣经,第7节,“耶稣说:‘被人吞噬,然后变成人的狮子,有福了’”这里就是说,被人吃掉、变成人的狮子有福了。“如果某个人被狮子吞噬,而这个狮子又变成了人的话,这个人就有祸了。”怎么听不懂呢?他们说这是耶稣不为人知的秘密的一些话。

29节:“耶稣说倘若肉身形成是因为灵,就是你的肉身的形成,是因为灵的话,为了灵的缘故的话,这的确是令人惊奇的;但是倘若灵是为了身子的缘故,那就更是惊奇中的惊奇,我感到惊讶,如此宝贵的财富竟然存在于这样的贫乏之中。”你说他在说什么?这是一个非常典型的柏拉图主义,灵与物质的二分对立。物质是邪恶的,所以说为了灵去造一个有肉身的身体,物质的身体这实在太令人惊奇了,为什么?因为物质是邪恶的呀,为什么要为灵造一个身体。然后他说更为惊奇的是为了身体去造一个灵,他说“我很惊讶,这样宝贵的财富就是‘灵’这个东西,竟然存在于这样的贫乏中,就是肉身物质身体当中”,这一听就是柏拉图主义,很典型的柏拉图主义。

114节,“西门彼得对他们说:‘让玛利亚离开我们吧,因为女人是不配得到生命的’。耶稣说:‘看,我会带领她,使她成为男的,好叫她也能变成活着的男性的灵,像你们一样。凡将自己变成男人的女人,都可以进天国。”这是《多马福音》。你相信这样的福音会成为圣经的正典吗?非常明显、非常直观,其实去读《多马福音》你就知道,因为你听学者们讨论,你会觉得啊,对阿,感觉有的人说的非常有道理,非常流行,现在所有的大学里面讲什么新约的时候都在讲《多马福音》、《多马福音》、《多马福音》,但是很少有几个人真的去读《多马福音》,去读一下你就感觉到为什么教会不能允许这样的写作成为正典,因为这简直是荒谬之谈,你们根本不需要去讨论写什么学术上的,这些大的一些概念,你就直接去读就知道了。这完全不是跟圣经的正典在一个档次的作品,这是一些学哲学没有学好的,学了柏拉图主义入门级,还没有过入门级的人写的东西,一看就知道。

所以,这是我给大家准备的今天的一些饭后甜点,关于旧约的写作,旧约的正典次经,新约的写作,新约的正典伪经之间有没有什么问题,或者想要讨论的?

问:新约正典中引用次经和伪经?犹大福音914,福彼得前书319,引用伪经。

答:对,其实不多可能,对是非常非常少,你看到的哪几个?也就是说这些作者们他们所生活的这个环境当中,他们知道这些事情,在这些情况下,包括在旧约里面,比如在旧约,像这个《列王记》里面提到的说什么犹大诸王记啊什么其它这些这些书里面,我们怎么去看待这些东西?我们看的这些东西就是说,凡是圣经里面写下来的都是正典,但是引用的外面的东西不是正典。也就是说如果今天有人挖出来一个比如说以诺的书,或者怎么样的,那个以诺的那个书不是正典,但是犹大引用的那件事情,是确实的。

问:引用有没有希望建立什么教义呢,还是只是一般的叙述?

引用的很少,一个或三个地方,所以没有任何教义上的改变,有或没有都不会产生教义上的改变,所以对我们的神学来说没有什么太大的影响。这个回到我们的最开始提到的,当我们相信圣经是默示的时候,我们不是说使徒们自己是被默示的,而是说圣经最终的产品是被默示的,最终的这个结果是被默示的,当时的使徒可能有很多错误的想法,当时使徒可能认为地是平的,天是圆的;当时使徒可能认为,他们已知的世界就是就是罗马帝国这么大的。他们不知道地球是圆的,他们不知道天上的星星其实是恒星等等,他们这些都不知道。所以使徒本身不是被默示,但是圣经的作品借着使徒、是上帝默示出来的。所以我们不能把使徒当时的所有的世界观,所有的他们相信的其他东西拿过来,说这些都是被默示。

问:这是不是也说明一些现在讲的所谓原本之类的底本,这个讲法也是有的,因为底本经过正典化的过程。

答:当我们说原本的时候就已经被被编辑过之后最终形成的那个第一份,然后在这个基础上再被抄写。没有人知道原本在哪,也没有人知道原本是什么。但是,这个原本无误的这个概念是建立我们对圣经无误的一个基础,这个观念还是必须要有的。就好像如果你要趟一个水过河的时候,虽然你不知道这个河底到底在哪儿,但是这个河必须要有一个底,你才能趟过去。你试一脚,这个底在这儿,下一脚又不在这儿了,但是必须有一个底,才能有这个支撑。所以,必须有第一个形成的原本的正典,那个正典是无误的,然后基于这个,以下的抄本才是可靠的,这是从概念的角度来讲。但是从我们现实的角度来讲,其实也的确如此,因为如果我们所有的抄本差距如此的细微,那就反过来推导出来,一定有一个他们出自一个共同的、正典的原本,不然的话他们就会千差万别,所以这也是我们做文本批判的一个基础,如果没有一个真正的第一个原稿的话,我们做文本批判是没有任何意义的。