作者:
David VanDrunen 译者/校对者: 甘林/米利暗
译自《Living
in God’s Two Kingdoms-a biblical
vision for Christianity and culture》Introduction:
Christianity, Culture, and the Two Kingdoms
尼布尔（H. Richard Niebuhr）的《基督与文化》也许是论及基督教与文化[2]这一主题最著名的一本书，在书中他写道：“基督教与文明的问题绝非是一个新问题，基督徒在这方面的困惑早已旷日弥久，这难题历经基督教所有年代依然存在，记住这点会对我们有所帮助。”[3]你现在正开始阅读论述有关这令人困惑和长盛不衰之话题的一系列著作中的又一部，而我写这样一本书是出于两个主要原因：
In
perhaps the most famous bookever written on the topic of Christianity and
culture, H. Richard Niebuhr stated:“It is helpful to remember that the question
of Christianity and civilization is by no means a new one; that
Christianperplexity in this area has been perennial, and that the problem has
been an enduring one through all theChristian centuries.”1 You have begun
reading another in a long line of books that deal with this perplexing andperennial
topic. I have written such a volume for two primary reasons.
首先，基督教与文化这个问题非常重要，具有很强的现实意义。如果你是一个认真的基督徒，很有可能经常会想到基督教与文化这问题。无论你有意识与否，每当你反思你的信仰与你的工作、学业、政治观点、读的书或看的电影有何关系时，你就是在面对基督教与文化这一难题。或者当你思想你所在的教会在当代政治争论或经济发展方面负有什么责任时，你也是在面对基督教与文化这个问题。基督教会历史上之所以有如此多伟大的思想家在这问题上苦苦挣扎，论述这问题的书籍汗牛充栋，其实绝非偶然。想想看，在基督教群体内，人对于像信仰与现代科学，信心与政治这样的话题付出了多少时间、精力和热情。即便如此，这主题所讲的远远不止于只是明显的“文化”问题。培养一种连贯一致的对基督教与文化的观点，需要苦苦探索基督教信仰一些最根本的真理。一种论述基督教与文化的神学是否忠于圣经，这取决于人是否正确看待神的创造和护理、神的形像、罪、基督的工作、救恩、教会和末世论。因此我写这本书并不是要论述一个狭隘的问题，而是让人面对基督教信仰与人生的基要问题。这本书因此对我而言有一个非常个人化的层面——这是一种操练，我在其中表述和捍卫对我这相信基督的人来说许多至为宝贵的事。
First,
the issue of Christianity and culture is one of immense importance and
relevance. If you are a seriousChristian, you probably think about the
Christianity and culture question on a regular basis, whether you realize itor
not. Every time you reflect upon what your faith has to do with your job, your
schoolwork, your political views,the books you read, or the movies you see, you
confront the problem of Christianity and culture. When youconsider what
responsibilities your church might have with respect to contemporary political
controversies oreconomic development, you again come face-to-face with the
Christianity and culture issue. It is no accident thatso many of the greatest
minds in the history of the Christian church have wrestled with this problem
and that somany books have been written about it. Just think how much time,
energy, and passion topics like religion andmodern science or faith and
politics generate in the Christian community. Even so, this subject is about
muchmore than simply these overtly “cultural” topics. Developing a coherent
view of Christianity and culture demandswrestling with some of the most
fundamental truths of the Christian faith. A faithful biblical theology of
Christianityand culture depends upon a proper view of creation, providence, the
image of God, sin, the work of Christ,salvation, the church, and eschatology.
Therefore I write this book to address not a narrow issue but one thatconfronts
us with the fundamentals of Christian faith and life. This project thus has a
very personal dimension forme—it has been an exercise in expressing and
defending many things that are most precious to me as a believerin Christ.
第二，我写这本书，是发自一种越来越强烈的确信，就是当代关于基督教与文化的对话方向是错误的。本书所呈现的观点，今天很大程度上遭人忽视，但它的确做出一种合乎圣经的纠正，可以帮助此类的讨论重回正轨。虽然有许多人发声，都对这场当代对话做出了贡献，但这些声音却有极多共同之处。当代对话中经常强调的一些主题是直击问题要害的，对于正确看待基督教与文化的关系而言非常重要。但我恐怕其他一些主题却呈现出一种，关于基督教对文化的参与及其与教会并新天新地盼望的关系的扭曲观点。
Second,
I write this book out of a growing conviction that contemporary conversations
about Christianity andculture are on the wrong track and that the perspective
presented in these pages, largely overlooked today, offersa biblical corrective
that can help to get discussion back on the right track. Though a multitude of
voices arecontributing to the contemporary conversations, many of them have a
great deal in common. Some of the themesfrequently emphasized in contemporary
conversations are right on target and very important for a sound view
ofChristianity and culture. Other themes, I fear, present a distorted view of
Christian cultural engagement and itsrelationship to the church and to the hope
of the new heaven and new earth.
让我先提一提当代一些言论讲得正确的一些事。首先，许多当代言论强调神是万有的创造主，包括物质的和自然的。神在生活的所有领域作王，人类要在他们所做的一切事上向他交账。许多当代言论对我们也很有帮助，提醒我们基督徒参与各种文化事业是好的。基督徒不应抽身脱离更广阔的文化，而应欢喜担负在文化方面的责任，以此表明他们的基督教信仰。每一种合法的职业都是尊贵的。同时这些声音也提醒我们，罪的后果早已渗透到了生活的方方面面，基督徒因此必须在文化事业中保持警惕，认清和弃绝文化生活中有罪的模式，努力追求凡事顺服神的旨意。最后，许多当代言论强调，基督徒真正的盼望并不是追求一种脱离身体的生命，作为灵魂存在于天上，而在于复活和新天新地。所有这些断言都是正确并对人有帮助的。
Let me mention a few things
that the contemporary voices get right. First, many contemporary voices emphasizethat
God is the Creator of all things, including material and physical things. God
is king of all areas of life, andhuman beings are accountable to him in
everything they do. Many contemporary voices also helpfully remind usthat it is
good for Christians to be involved in a variety of cultural pursuits.
Christians should not withdraw from thebroader culture but should take up
cultural tasks with joy and express their Christian faith through them.
Everylawful occupation is honorable. These voices also remind us that the
effects of sin penetrate all aspects of life.Christians must therefore be
vigilant in their cultural pursuits, perceiving and rejecting the sinful
patterns in culturallife and striving after obedience to God’s will in
everything. Finally, many contemporary voices stress that the trueChristian
hope is not for a disembodied life as a soul in heaven but for the resurrection
and new heaven and newearth. All of these affirmations are true and helpful.
然而不幸的是，当代对话当中其他流行的主题却是有问题的。例如，许多当代的言论断言，神正在救赎所有正当的文化活动和制度，基督徒因此相应地蒙神呼召要转变这一切，通过这一工作建造神的国度。[4]一些倡导这种观点的人宣称，救赎是神恢复的工作，赋予人类能力，重拾最初的人类亚当和夏娃的任务，照他们原本所蒙召的那样发展人类文化。这一起始于对当前人类文化的救赎性转变的工作，要在新的创造——新天新地中达到完满。按照这种基督教对文化的参与的观点，我们的文化产品是要装饰那永恒之城。
Unfortunately,
other themes popular in the contemporary conversations are problematic. For
example, manycontemporary voices assert that God is redeeming all legitimate
cultural activities and institutions and that
Christians
are therefore called to transform them accordingly and to build the kingdom of
God through this work. 2Some advocates of this position claim that redemption
is God’s work of restoration, empowering all livingcreatures through empowering
human beings to pick up again the task of the first human beings, Adam and
Eve,and to develop human culture as they were originally called to do. This
redemptive transformation of presenthuman culture begins a process that will
culminate in the new creation—the new heaven and new earth.According to this
vision of Christian cultural engagement, our cultural products will adorn the
eternal city.
许多才华横溢的作者把这样的观点描绘成令人激动和鼓舞人心的异象，但这些观念合乎圣经吗？我认为它们并不忠于圣经，因此我在本书提出另外一种合乎圣经的观念。我把这种观念称为关于“两个国度”的教义。虽然许多作者在近年已忽视、误传或毁谤“两个国度”的观念，但它在基督教神学历史上却仍然占有一席之地，受人尊崇。它延续基督教思想的发展线索，由奥古斯丁在《上帝之城》一书中作了著名阐述，在路德和加尔文的宗教改革中得到发展，又继续在后宗教改革的改革宗传统中更深入成熟。[5]今天许多作者似乎把“两国论”与毫无根据的二元论、世俗主义、在社会生活中的道德中立、甚至否认基督的普世王权联系在一起。也许一些版本的“两国论”吻合这种陈词滥调，但我写本书的目的并不是要捍卫一切带着“两个国度”这个名称的理论，而是阐述一种彻底扎根在圣经叙事和圣经教义之上的“两国论”进路。这种进路接受奥古斯丁和宗教改革的传承，并努力进一步发展和增强这一传承。我要努力用一种通俗易懂和有用的形式，向二十一世纪之初的教会呈现这一进路。
Many
talented authors present such ideas as an exciting and inspiring vision, but
are they biblically sound? Ibelieve that they are not true to Scripture, and
therefore I offer a biblical alternative in this book. I refer to
thisalternative as a “two-kingdoms” doctrine. Though many writers in recent
years have ignored, mischaracterized, orslandered the idea of “two kingdoms,”
it has a venerable place in the annals of Christian theology. It stands in
theline of Christian thinking famously articulated by Augustine in The City of
God, developed in the Lutheran andCalvinist Reformations, and brought to
greater maturity in the post-Reformation Reformed tradition. 3 Manywriters
today seem to associate a two-kingdoms doctrine with unwarranted dualisms,
secularism, moral neutralityin social life, or even the denial of Christ’s
universal kingship. Perhaps some versions of the two-kingdomsdoctrine have fit
such stereotypes. My task in this book is not to defend everything that has
ever gone by thename “two kingdoms,” but to expound a two-kingdoms approach
that is thoroughly grounded in the story ofScripture and biblical doctrine. It
embraces the heritage of Augustine and the Reformation and seeks to developand
strengthen it further. I will strive to present it in an accessible and useful
form to the church in the earlytwenty-first century.
这种“两国论”坚信神创造了万物，罪败坏了生活的方方面面，基督徒应在人类文化中积极作工，一切合法的文化职业都有尊荣，所有人都要在所做的每一件事上向神交账，基督徒应努力在自己的职业中应用出他们的信仰。但一位基督徒并不需要采纳一种救赎性的文化观才能确信这些重要真理。一种合乎圣经的“两国论”，提供了如此确信的另一种强有力的方法。按此教义，神并不是在救赎这世界的文化活动和制度，而是通过他在创世记8:20-9:17藉着挪亚与一切有生命的受造物所立的约保守这一切。神亲自掌管这个“一般性国度”(common kingdom)，因此它并不像一些作者描述的那样是“人的国度”(kingdom of man)。这国度绝非一个道德中立或自主的领域。神让它的制度和活动有尊荣，虽然这只是为了短暂和临时的目的。与此同时，神因着他与亚伯拉罕所立、并在主耶稣基督的工作中得到荣耀成就的约，正救赎一群人归给他自己，主耶稣基督已经一次永远完成了亚当原来的使命。这些得救赎的人是这样一个“救赎性国度”(redemptive kingdom)的国民，神现在正把他们召聚进教会，要在基督荣耀再来时欢迎他们进入新天新地。但在这日到来之前，基督徒要作为两个国度的国民生活，在每一个国度履行他们理当尽的本分。他们欢喜以教会成员的身份作天上的国民，但也要认识到目前他们是住在巴比伦，在一个并非他们永久的家的土地上作客旅寄居，出于爱基督和爱人如己，在他们的文化工作中努力追求公义和卓越。[6]
This
two-kingdoms doctrine strongly affirms that God has made all things, that sin
corrupts all aspects of life, thatChristians should be active in human culture,
that all lawful cultural vocations are honorable, that all people
areaccountable to God in every activity, and that Christians should seek to
live out the implications of their faith intheir daily vocations. A Christian,
however, does not have to adopt a redemptive vision of culture in order to
affirmthese important truths. A biblical two-kingdoms doctrine provides another
compelling way to do so. According tothis doctrine, God is not redeeming the
cultural activities and institutions of this world, but is preserving
themthrough the covenant he made with all living creatures through Noah in
Genesis 8:20–9:17. God himself rules this“common kingdom,” and thus it is not,
as some writers describe it, the “kingdom of man.” This kingdom is in nosense a
realm of moral neutrality or autonomy. God makes its institutions and
activities honorable, though only fortemporary and provisional purposes.
Simultaneously, God is redeeming a people for himself, by virtue of thecovenant
made with Abraham and brought to glorious fulfillment in the work of the Lord
Jesus Christ, who hascompleted Adam’s original task once and for all. These
redeemed people are citizens of the “redemptive kingdom,”whom God is gathering
now in the church and will welcome into the new heaven and new earth at
Christ’sglorious return. Until that day, Christians live as members of both
kingdoms, discharging their proper duties ineach. They rejoice to be citizens
of heaven through membership in the church, but also recognize that for the timebeing
they are living in Babylon, striving for justice and excellence in their
cultural labors, out of love for Christ andtheir neighbor, as sojourners and
exiles in a land that is not their lasting home. 4
为了更清楚地介绍和解释这种“两个国度”的异象，我现在要简单描述当代基督教在与文化的对话中而有的一些突出的言论。所有这些言论都以不同方式捍卫某种基督教对文化的参与的救赎模式。在我描述他们的观点之后，我要请读者重新留意“两个国度”这个观念，并概括在接下来几章要阐述的这“两国论”的圣经根据。
In
order to introduce and explain this two-kingdoms vision more clearly, I now
briefly describe some of theprominent voices in contemporary conversations about
Christianity and culture. All of these voices, in variousways, defend a
redemptive model of Christian cultural engagement. After I describe their
views, I will turn readers’attention back to the two-kingdoms alternative and
summarize the biblical defense of the two-kingdoms doctrinethat will unfold in
the chapters to come.
一、当代的声音：救赎性的文化转变
Contemporary Voices: The Redemptive
Transformation of Culture
在当代关于基督教与文化的对话当中，也许没有一个声音是比那有时被称为“新加尔文主义”（neo-Calvinism）的主张更能言善辩的了。这种思潮最直接地可以追溯到荷兰哲学家和法学家杜伊维尔（Herman Dooyeweerd，1894–1977年）。这思潮也宣称自己是荷兰神学家和政治家亚伯拉罕•凯波尔（Abraham Kuyper，1837–1920年）和改教家约翰•加尔文的继承者。[7]“新加尔文主义”不仅在许多改革宗和福音派教会富有影响力，也鼓舞了近代许多基督教学校和大学。我自己在教会和学校接受的早期教育，都受这种思想极大的塑造。我所尊重的一些朋友、牧师和神学家很多都接受它的观点。它在许多事情上观点正确，在许多方面呈现出一种极具吸引力的基督教参与文化的异象。它帮助人对抗各种形式的对世俗文化活动无动于衷或只把信仰看作与星期日有关的基督教信仰。但说到底，它误读了一些重要的圣经主题，带给人一种扭曲的基督教文化参与的神学。
In
the contemporary conversations about Christianity and culture, there is perhaps
no voice more eloquent thanwhat is sometimes referred to as “neo-Calvinism.”
This school of thought traces back most immediately to thework of Dutch
philosopher and jurist Herman Dooyeweerd (1894–1977), and it also claims to be
heir of the Dutch theologian and statesman Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) and of
the Reformer John Calvin (1509–1564). 5 “Neo-Calvinism” has been influential
not only in many Reformed and evangelical churches but has provided
inspirationfor many Christian schools and colleges in recent generations. My
own early education, in both church and school,was significantly shaped by this
line of thought. A number of friends, pastors, and theologians that I
respectembrace its views. It gets many things correct and presents an
attractive vision for Christianity and culture inmany respects. It helpfully
combats forms of Christianity that are indifferent to mundane cultural activity
or see thefaith as only relevant on Sundays. In the end, however, it misreads
some important biblical themes and offers adistorted theology of Christian
cultural engagement.
当前局面中有一件奇妙的事，就是有许多其他卓越的基督徒的言论，听起来与新加尔文主义如此相似。当新加尔文主义者讲到当代教会中柏拉图哲学和二元论的倾向、救赎性的文化转变，以及文化工作与神的国度和新创造的联系时，他们的应者云集。我可以举出许多例子，但我要集中来看近年来在基督教世界获得相当多关注的两种言论：保罗新观——以赖特（N. T. Wright）为代表和新兴教会运动——以麦拉伦（Brian McLaren）为代表。保罗新观与新兴教会运动虽然倡导新加尔文主义，但肯定并非在所有问题上持同样观点，它们尊重彼此的工作[8]，最重要的是，它们有一种共同的异象，就是救赎性的文化转变在基督徒人生中处于中心地位。
One
fascinating thing about the current scene is that many other prominent
Christian voices sound so similar toneo-Calvinism. When neo-Calvinists speak
about Platonic and dualistic tendencies in the contemporary church,the
redemptive transformation of culture, and the connection of cultural work to
the kingdom of God and the newcreation, they have a lot of company. I could
cite many examples, but I focus on two that have gainedconsiderable attention
in the Christian world in recent years: the New Perspective on Paul (as
exemplified by N. T.Wright) and the emerging (or emergent) church (as exemplified
by Brian McLaren). Though advocates of neo-Calvinism, the New Perspective on
Paul, and the emerging church certainly do not hold identical views on
allissues, they show mutual respect for each other’s work6 and, most
significantly, they share a common vision thatthe redemptive transformation of
culture is central to the Christian life.
1、当代新加尔文主义
Contemporary
Neo-Calvinism
在某些方面，新加尔文主义是一场多样化的运动，但其倡导者却都团结在许多共同主题周围。两位当代倡导新加尔文主义异象的人士用三点总结了“新加尔文主义”：第一，恩典通过在基督里的救赎恢复自然（grace
restores nature）；第二，神是主权(sovereign）的神，为一切现实立定秩序；第三，创世记第一章原初的文化使命（culture mandate）有持续的现实意义。[9]这是一种简明和准确的概括，但稍微更详细地阐述新加尔文主义的教义，可能会对读者有所帮助。当我作这样的阐述时，是特别援引了两本表明新加尔文主义观点的著作：沃尔特斯（Albert Wolters）的《再得着创造》（Creation Regained），以及普兰丁格（Cornelius Plantinga）的《参与神的世界》（Engaging God’s World）。[10]这两位作者并不必然在每一个具体问题上都意见一致，但他们对于基督教与文化的整体异象是一样的。他们的著作通俗易懂，写作风格很吸引人，给许多基督教学校和大学带来了很大影响。
Neo-Calvinism
is a diverse movement in certain respects, but its proponents are united by
many common themes.Two contemporary advocates of the neo-Calvinist vision have
summarized “neo- Calvinism” in three points: first,grace restores nature
through redemption in Christ; second, God is sovereign and orders all of
reality; and third,the original cultural mandate of Genesis 1 has ongoing
relevance. 7 This is a concise and accurate summary, butit may be helpful to
unpack the tenets of neo-Calvinism at a little more length. To do so, I refer
especially to twobooks that present a neo-Calvinist perspective: Albert
Wolters’s Creation Regained and Cornelius Plantinga’sEngaging God’s World. 8
These writers do not necessarily agree with each other on every specific issue,
but theirgeneral vision of Christianity and culture is the same. Their books
are accessible and winsomely written, and theyhave been influential in many
Christian schools and colleges.
也许在一开始认识新加尔文主义时最需要了解的，就是它把圣经的叙事呈现为创造、堕落和救赎的模式。按照新加尔文主义的说法，对这种模式的认识构成了一种基督教世界观的核心，就是“神造的一切，包括当人按神的设计行事时而涌现的全人类所有领域的文化都是好的。但这一切都被罪恶败坏了，不仅包括文化，也包括自然界。因此一切——全宇宙——都必须被主耶稣基督救赎。”[11]沃尔特斯和普兰丁格同样坚信神创造了这个世界，整个世界都是他的国度，因此是好的，是蒙神祝福的。神向人类颁布了文化使命（创1:2-28），这意味着人类应当使用他们的能力看管这世界，发展人类文化，以此释放创造界中浩大的潜能。人类这工作的目标是永恒和末世性的，就是“新地”（new earth）。正如普兰丁格所言：“我们可以把圣城看作是伊甸园加上漫长世纪积累起来的完满。”[12]
Perhaps
the most important thing to know initially about neo- Calvinism is that it
presents the story of Scripture asthe story of creation, fall, and redemption.
Recognizing this pattern forms the heart of a Christian worldview,according to
neo-Calvinism. What this means is that “all has been created good, including
the full range of humancultures that emerge when humans act according to God’s
design. But all has been corrupted by evil, includingnot only culture but also
the natural world. So all—the whole cosmos— must be redeemed by Jesus Christ
theLord."9 Wolters and Plantinga share a general conviction that God
created this world and that the whole worldwas his kingdom and thus was good
and blessed. God gave the cultural mandate (Gen. 1:26–28) to the humanrace,
which meant that human beings were to use their abilities to care for the world
and to develop human culture,thereby releasing the vast potential latent in
creation. Their goal in this labor was eternal and eschatological: thenew
earth. As Plantinga puts it, “we may think of the holy city as the garden of
Eden plus the fullness of thecenturies.”10
人堕落犯罪使这整个计划陷入被摧毁的危险。堕落导致人的每一种官能、人的一切行动以及受造界秩序本身都败坏了。但神不仅保守世界，不让它马上崩溃，而且还对其实施一个拯救计划，确保他原来为这世界所定的旨意得到成就。对于新加尔文主义而言，基督带来的拯救或救赎在本质上就是恢复或再创造。神不是重新开始，而是实现他原初的计划。按沃尔特斯的观点，我们第一对祖先“搞砸”了他们原来的使命，但神现在已经给了我们“第二次机会”，“重新任命”我们作他在地上的管理者。[13]这并不意味着神通过基督只是把我们重新放回伊甸园，在亚当堕落前停下来的地方重新开始。神在起初赋予亚当一项长期的任务，通过人类的文化开启受造界的潜能，但是由于犯罪，人类在后来却是以败坏的方式参与到这一任务中的；在基督里的救赎恢复和更新了人类，让他们在去完成这项仍在进行中的任务时，将他们因罪对文化的扭曲洁除干净，并重新指引他们走顺服神、彼此造就和造福整个受造界的道路。[14]
The
fall into sin threatened to destroy this entire project. The fall produced the
corruption of every human faculty,all human action, and the created order
itself. God, however, not only preserved the world from immediatecollapse but
also undertook a plan of salvation to ensure that his original purposes for
this world are fulfilled. Forneo-Calvinism the salvation or redemption brought
by Christ is essentially restoration or re-creation. God does notstart over
new, but accomplishes his original plan. According to Wolters, our first
parents “botched” their originalmandate, but God has now given us a “second
chance” and has “reinstated” us as his managers on earth. 11 Thisdoes not mean
that God, through Christ, simply puts us back into the garden of Eden to pick
up where Adam left off before he fell. God originally gave Adam the long-term
task of unlocking the potentialities of creation throughhuman culture, and
despite his sin the human race subsequently has been engaging in that task,
though incorrupted form. Redemption in Christ restores and renews human beings
in this ongoing task, purging them oftheir sinful perversion of culture and
redirecting them in ways that are obedient to God and beneficial to oneanother
and the whole of creation. 12
创造界和人类文化的全部在堕落前是神的国度，因此现在在基督里更新和救赎整个受造界，就构成了对这个国度的更新与救赎。所有文化工作都是国度的工作。[15]所有文化工作的目标都是推进这国度在新的创造中完全实现。我们在这世界上的日常活动是“国度的服事”，生出“供那新地使用的建造材料”。[16]正如普兰丁格所言：“我们现在奉基督的名所做的——努力追求医治、公义和在黑暗中的理性之光，或是仅仅只是努力制造一些有助于维系其他人类生活的产品——这些都要得到保守，跨越进入来生。”[17]
As
all of creation and human culture was God’s kingdom before the fall, so now the
renewal and redemption of allcreation in Christ constitute the renewal and
redemption of that kingdom. All cultural labor is kingdom work. 13 Allcultural
labor aims to advance the full realization of that kingdom in the new creation.
Our ordinary activity in thisworld is “kingdom service,” which produces “the
building materials for that new earth.”14 As Plantinga writes,“What we do now
in the name of Christ—striving for healing, for justice, for intellectual light
in darkness, strivingsimply to produce something helpful for sustaining the
lives of other human beings—shall be preserved acrossinto the next life.”15
在这宏伟异象光照下，新加尔文主义常常警告和反对各种“二元论”观点，认为它们破坏了神在这世上国度的整全性质。例如，沃尔特斯严厉批判所谓的“两个领域”理论，把它看作是一种缠绕基督教信仰挥之不去的危险。[18]沃尔特斯拒绝任何把生活分成一方面是“圣”的领域，人在这领域做国度的工作，另一方面是“俗”的领域的观点。他担心持守这种观点的基督徒会贬低后一种领域，或看它是内在次等。他宣称，这种观点会成为一种“根深蒂固的诺斯替主义倾向”的牺牲品。它“限制了基督主权的范围”。沃尔特斯和其他新加尔文主义的作者使用“俗”或“世俗”这样的词语指代内在的邪恶，或至少对基督徒来说是妥协的事情。[19]而且，新加尔文主义的作者拒绝二元论的观点，努力要让基督徒摆脱对拯救的“垂直方向”的看法，就是“逃离”这世界上“天堂”，认为这是柏拉图，而非圣经的观点。[20]
In
light of this grand vision, neo-Calvinism often warns against various
“dualistic” views that compromise theholistic character of God’s kingdom in
this world. Wolters, for example, is very critical of so-called
“two-realms”theories that he sees as a perennial danger for Christianity. 16
Wolters rejects any division of life into a “sacred”realm on the one hand, in
which people do “kingdom” work, and a “secular” or “profane” realm on the other
hand.He fears that Christians holding such a view will depreciate the latter
realm or look upon it as inherently inferior.He claims that this view falls
prey to a “deep-seated Gnostic tendency.” It “restricts the scope of Christ’s
lordship.”Wolters and other neo-Calvinist writers use terms such as “secular”
and “profane” to denote things that areinherently evil or at least compromised
for the Christian. 17 By rejecting dualistic views, furthermore,
neo-Calvinistwriters aim to steer Christians away from “vertical” views of
salvation that involve “escape” from this world into“heaven,” which is the view
of Plato rather than Scripture. 18
2、赖特与保罗新观
N.
T. Wright and the New Perspective on Paul
虽然新加尔文主义在近代对许多改革宗和福音派圈子产生了很大影响，却绝非是近期基督教与文化的讨论中唯一的声音。正如之前指出的，今天在更广阔的基督教世界中有许多突出的声音，会强调与新加尔文主义相似的教导，例如：救赎性的文化转变的重要意义，教会中柏拉图主义和二元论倾向带来的问题。虽然我可以提到许多神学家和运动，但我却主要集中来看许多读者熟悉的两种运动：保罗新观（以赖特为代表）和新兴教会运动（以麦拉伦为代表）。当我在描述这两种运动时，读者应当可以认出我在前一部分所指出的许多新加尔文主义的主题。
Though
neo-Calvinism has been influential in many Reformed and evangelical circles in
recent generations, it isfar from being the only voice in current discussions
about Christianity and culture. As noted, however, many oftoday’s significant
voices in the broader Christian world emphasize themes that resemble
neo-Calvinist teaching,such as the importance of redemptive cultural
transformation and the problem of Platonic and dualistic tendenciesin the
church. Though there are many theologians and movements that I could mention, I
will focus briefly upontwo that may be familiar to many readers: the New
Perspective on Paul (as represented by N. T. Wright) and theemerging church (as
represented by Brian McLaren). As I describe these two, readers should
recognize many ofthe neo-Calvinist themes identified in the previous section.
首先我要看所谓的“保罗新观”。在过去几十年，这种新观点引发了很多讨论，让人思想在保罗的时代犹太教信仰的特点，保罗对初期教会中犹太人与外邦人关系的看法，他对称义的理解，以及他对旧约圣经律法的态度。倡导保罗新观的人已经挑战了传统更正教对保罗的解读，传统的解读聚焦在人类普遍的罪性，以及神通过基督的赎罪、称义和成圣，对人的罪的拯救性解决之道。有许多近期的著作在讨论这些主题。[21]这里我感兴趣的，就是保罗新观对基督教与文化会有何阐述。并不存在单独的一套信念，代表保罗新观在这些问题上的正式观点。对我们有用的，就是聚焦来看与保罗新观联系在一起的最出名的神学家——安立甘宗主教N.T.赖特。他近期的一本著作《惊人的盼望》（Surprised by Hope），在基督教信仰与文化这个问题上多有论述。值得留意的是，他的关注与例如沃尔特斯和普兰丁格这些新加尔文主义作者的关注是多么类似。
First I consider the
so-called New Perspective on Paul. In the past few decades, this new
perspective has sparkeddiscussions about the character of Judaism in Paul’s
day, Paul’s view of Jew-Gentile relations in the early church,his understanding
of justification, and his attitude toward the Old Testament law. Proponents of
the NewPerspective have challenged traditional Protestant readings of Paul that
focus upon the universal sinfulness ofhumanity and God’s saving answer to human
sin through Christ’s atonement, justification, and sanctification.Many recent
books address these subjects. 19 Of interest here is what the New Perspective
might have to sayabout Christianity and culture. There is no single set of
beliefs that constitute the official New Perspective view onsuch things. What
may be useful is to focus upon the most well-known theologian associated with
the NewPerspective, Anglican bishop N. T. Wright. One of his recent books,
Surprised by Hope, has much to say aboutChristianity and culture issues. It is
remarkable to see how similar his concerns are to those of neo-Calvinistwriters
such as Wolters and Plantinga.
赖特认为宗教改革对称义的传统观点认识有所不足，并且他也接受对人类文化救赎性的转变，这绝非偶然。在我们来看《惊人的盼望》这本书之前，让我简单作出一个大胆宣告，我会在接下来几章论证支持我的看法。这宣告就是，连贯一致持守传统更正教称义观的人，不应觉得救赎性转变这一观点具有吸引力。正如一些改教家理解的那样，两个国度的教义，理应与更正教的称义观相伴。[22]
It
is no coincidence that Wright both finds the traditional Reformation view of
justification inadequate and alsoembraces the redemptive transformation of
human culture. Before we consider Surprised by Hope, let me briefly
state
a bold claim that I will defend in subsequent chapters. Those who hold a
traditional Protestant view ofjustification consistently should not find a
redemptive transformationist perspective attractive. As some of theReformers
grasped, a two-kingdoms doctrine is a proper companion to a Protestant doctrine
of justification. 20
赖特清楚阐述了《惊人的盼望》一书的主要主题。他要捍卫身体复活，以及一个物质的新天新地，把这看作是基督徒重大的末世盼望，努力证明这盼望为基督徒提供了展望将来发生之事和转变当今世界的动力，以此反对一种流行的错误观念，即基督徒的盼望就是死后“上天堂”。[23]为了确立和进一步阐述这宣告，赖特花了相当多时间批评他认为是最近几个世纪西方教会的主流观点。这种观点强调个人得救，认为得救在于我们不灭的灵魂得救脱离当前这邪恶世界，进入天堂，天堂是一个非物质领域，当今世界在历史终结时完全被毁，而天堂则要保存下来。[24]按照赖特的看法，这种观点听起来更像柏拉图主义或诺斯替主义，而不像合乎圣经的基督教信仰。[25]与这种观点形成对照的是，赖特强调死人复活，这确立了当今世界和永恒状态之间有一种极深的延续性（虽然他承认也存在着非延续性）。[26]一件意义重大的事，就是基督徒相信复活，这就给了他们一种强有力的理由，在当今世界寻求公义和平。与之形成对比的是，相信得救是“上天堂”逃离这世界，这会导致对社会和文化事务不感兴趣或无动于衷。[27]
Wright
is clear about the major theme of Surprised by Hope. He sets out to defend the
physical resurrection andthe physical new heaven and new earth as the great
Christian eschatological hope, over against popularmisconceptions of Christian
hope as “going to heaven” after death, and aims to prove that this hope
providesmotivation for Christians to transform the present world in
anticipation of what is to come. 21 In order to establishand develop this
claim, Wright spends considerable time critiquing what he believes is the
predominantperspective of the Western church in recent centuries. This
perspective emphasizes individual salvation, whichconsists of our immortal
souls being rescued from the present evil world and entering into heaven, a
nonmaterialrealm that will survive when the present world is completely
destroyed at the end of history. 22 According toWright, such a perspective
sounds much more like Plato or Gnosticism than like biblical Christianity. 23
In contrastto this perspective, Wright highlights the resurrection of the dead,
which establishes a deep continuity betweenthis present world and the eternal
state (though he acknowledges that there is discontinuity too). 24
赖特为了捍卫这些宣告，指出圣经中三个宏伟主题：神创造的美好，因人的悖逆，这世界上存在的罪恶，以及神对世界的救赎，这救赎在于神“解放”和“再造”受造界，为要成就他为受造界制订的原初计划。[28]赖特对神国度的观点反映出这种救赎观。对赖特而言，国度与一种将来非物质的天堂无关，而与目前的地球有关，因这地球要在新的创造中完全更新。[29]虽然国度的降临最终是神的作为，但神却使用人类的努力把这国度带进最后的成全。目前的社会转变预示着在那末后日子的复活和宇宙的更新。[30]人类是神使用的“部分手段”，以此带来最终的拯救，人是“在受造界之上拯救性的管家”。这是神国度的“内在动态”。[31]赖特有几次让读者留意哥林多前书15:58以及它的应许，就是我们在主里的劳苦不是徒然的。他根据这一节经文宣告，我们现在所做的，就是“建造神的国度”，这工作“要持续进入神所定的将来”。[32]虽然赖特承认，他不知道这将来实际上是什么样子，他却向基督徒保证：“你们在成就一些事情，这些事情时候到了，就要成为神的新世界的一部分。”[33]有鉴于此，赖特其中一个首要关注就是重塑读者对教会使命的认识。他说，教会的使命不应只在于传福音，也应在于为当今世界的公义、和平与美好努力工作。[34]
In
order to defend these claims, Wright identifies three grand themes in
Scripture: the goodness of God’s creation,the evil in this world due to human
rebellion, and God’s redemption of the world, which consists in
God’s“liberating” and “remaking” of creation in order to accomplish his
original plans for it.26 Wright’s view of thekingdom of God reflects this view
of redemption. For Wright, the kingdom has to do not with a future
immaterialheaven, but with the present earth as it will be fully renewed in the
new creation. 27 Though the coming of thekingdom is ultimately God’s work, God
enlists the efforts of human beings in bringing the kingdom to
finalfulfillment. Social transformation in the present is an anticipation of
the resurrection and cosmic renewal on thelast day. 28 Human beings are “part
of the means” by which God brings ultimate salvation, and they are
“rescuingstewards over creation.” This is the “inner dynamic” of the kingdom of
God. 29 At several points Wright refersreaders to 1 Corinthians 15:58, with its
promise that our work in the Lord is not in vain. From this verse he claimsthat
what we do now is “building for God’s kingdom” and “will last into God’s
future.”30 Though Wright confessesthat he has no idea what this will actually
look like, he assures Christians: “You are . . . accomplishing somethingthat
will become in due course part of God’s new world.”31 In light of all this, one
of Wright’s chief concerns is toreshape his readers’ conception of the mission
of the church. The church’s mission, he says, should consist notonly in
evangelism but also in working for justice, peace, and beauty in this present
world. 32
所以赖特首要关注的，与当代新加尔文主义的关注非常相似。赖特和新加尔文主义者都反对那些他们认为存在于当代基督教当中藐视物质、贬低文化活动的柏拉图主义倾向，呈现出一种“创造—堕落—救赎”的观点，强调基督教文化工作的中心地位，认为这是一种建立神的国度、展望新创造的途径。
Wright’s
chiefconcerns, therefore, closely resemble those of contemporary neo-Calvinism.
Over against perceived Platonictendencies in modern Christianity that despise
physical things and devalue cultural activity, both Wright and neo-Calvinists
present a creation-fall-redemption perspective that emphasizes the centrality
of Christian cultural workas a means of building the kingdom of God and
anticipating the new creation.
3、新兴教会运动
The Emerging Church
近年来另一个越来越受欢迎的当代言论，就是“新兴”教会运动的声音。[35]参与在新兴教会运动中的人喜欢强调，他们是在参与一场关于一种新类型基督教的“对话”。他们说这对话仍在进行，因此很难预测这种新类型的基督教最终会是什么样子。它的倡导者批判传统形式的基督教信仰（特别是改革宗和福音派的不同派别，而他们当中许多人是出于这些信仰背景的），尤其不喜欢严谨的教义。他们也批判近期超大型教会类型的基督教信仰，要追求某些更新鲜和真实的事情，虽然人常常不清楚新兴基督教运动的正面立场，但有一件事肯定是很突出的：它强调救赎性的文化转变是基督教信仰的核心。新兴教会运动一位主要发言人麦拉伦的一本近作《一切都必须改变》（Everything Must Change）提供了一个很好的例子。虽然一些新加尔文主义者会发现麦拉伦的神学太极端，可能不认同他的左翼政治观点，但麦拉伦的观点却与他们核心和典型的主题产生了共鸣。
Another
contemporary voice that has gained popularity in recent years is that of the
“emergent” or “emerging”church. 33 Those involved in the emerging church
movement like to emphasize that they are involved in a“conversation” about a
new kind of Christianity. They say that this conversation is still ongoing, and
so it is hard topredict what exactly this new kind of Christianity will turn
out to be. Proponents are critical of traditional forms ofChristianity
(particularly Reformed and evangelical varieties, from which many of them have
come), and havespecial dislike for rigid doctrine. They are also critical of
recent megachurch types of Christianity, in search ofsomething more fresh and
authentic. Though it is often unclear what emergent Christianity stands for
positively,one thing certainly stands out: its emphasis upon the redemptive transformation
of culture as being at the heart of Christian faith. A recent book by leading
emergent spokesman Brian McLaren, Everything Must Change, providesa good case
in point. … He calls for Christians to develop an effective “framing story”
(something like a worldview),and the framing story that he defines has nothing
to do with Christ’s atonement or the forgiveness of sins buteverything to do
with social “transformation.”36
首先，这可以体现在麦拉伦与之抗争的基督教形式。麦拉伦要抛弃一种类型的基督教信仰，即宣称这罪恶的世界要被摧毁，拯救在于挽救“灵魂”“逃离”这世界，逃离永远的刑罚，被带进“天堂”。[36]同样，他反对在“属灵”和“属世”之间作对比，因此极少关注文化参与或当前全球危机的“二元论”基督教信仰。[37]他要用一种关注这世界的基督教取而代之。他呼吁基督徒培养一种有效的“框架故事”（类似世界观），他定义的这框架故事与基督的赎罪或赦罪毫无关系，却与社会“转变”息息相关。[38]他的框架故事断言基督来，为要“重新训练和恢复人类回到原初的呼召和潜能。这更新的人类可以回归看管受造界和看顾彼此的角色，因此这个星球和其中的一切都可以恢复到神所期待的健康和多结果子的和谐”。[39]因此耶稣不是从逃离这世界的角度，而是“从神对这地球的梦想成真，神的公义和平取代这地球的不公与不和谐的角度”宣告神的国度。[40]毫不意外，麦拉伦认为启示录21章新耶路撒冷的异象提供了“历史当中的盼望”，这意味着这异象“努力鼓舞我们的想象力，盼望我们的世界可以实际变成怎样”。它表明“一种在这宇宙中有可能的新的生活方式；正如神的公义和信实是确实的，一种新的社会制度要确实临到”。[41]因此神国度的福音是关乎我们以工作转化世界，使之达至和平与公义，新耶路撒冷是这过程的结果。
His
framing story affirms that Jesus came to “retrain and restorehumanity to its
original vocation and potential. This renewed humanity can return to its role
as caretakers ofcreation and one another so the planet and all it contains can
be restored to the healthy and fruitful harmony thatGod desires.37 Thus Jesus
proclaimed the kingdom of God not in terms of escaping from this world but “in
termsof God’s dream coming true for this earth, of God’s justice and peace
replacing earth’s injustice anddisharmony.”38 Not unexpectedly, McLaren sees
the vision of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21 as providing“hope within
history,” which means that this vision “seeks to inspire our imaginations with
hope about what ourworld can actually become.” It shows “a new way of living
that is possible within this universe, a new societalsystem that is coming as
surely as God is just and faithful.39 The gospel of the kingdom of God,
therefore, isabout our work of transforming the world toward peace and justice,
and the New Jerusalem is the result of thisprocess.
二、两个国度的观念
The Two-Kingdoms Alternative
当人阅读新加尔文主义、保罗新观和新兴教会运动作者的著作时，可以学到一些关于基督教信仰、基督徒文化责任非常重要的内容。这物质受造界是神美好的创造，罪是可怕和扭曲的事情，神并没有放弃他起初为受造界设立的目标，文化方面的呼召是有尊荣和有益的，基督徒应批判性的思想罪对文化生活的影响，复活和新天新地是基督徒的伟大盼望。但我认为，问题在于这些作者相当自信，给人留下一种印象，就是他们对文化转变、神的国度以及新受造界的异象，是确认这些事情的唯一方法。他们提示说，唯一反对他们这异象的人，就是那些对更广阔的文化无动于衷，拒绝复活，只是盼望逃往天堂，在那里他们要在空中飘来飘去，成为幸福的灵的人。这是大大扭曲和误导的说法。伟大的基督教领袖，如奥古斯丁、路德和加尔文（我只列举少数几位），都尊重地上的职业，断言死人复活。但他们也非常清楚地表明，基督徒的文化活动应仔细与将来的国度和对新创造的盼望区分开来。他们相信这样的区分对于基督教信仰和生活来说至关重要。[42]
A
person can learn some very important things about Christianity and the
Christian’s cultural responsibilities byreading neo-Calvinist, New Perspective,
and emerging authors. The physical created world is God’s good creation,sin is
a horrible and distorting thing, God has not given up on his original goal for
creation, cultural vocations arehonorable and beneficial, Christians should
think critically about sin’s effects upon cultural life, and theresurrection
and the new heaven and new earth are the great Christian hope. The problem is,
I believe, that theseauthors quite confidently give the impression that their
visions of cultural transformation, the kingdom of God, andthe new creation are
the only way to affirm these things. They suggest that the only people who
would opposetheir vision are those who are indifferent to the broader culture,
reject the resurrection, and hope only to escape toheaven where they will float
around as happy spirits. This is a terribly distorted and misleading
suggestion. GreatChristian leaders such as Augustine, Luther, and Calvin—to
name but a few—respected earthly vocations andaffirmed the resurrection of the
dead. But they also made very clear that the Christian’s cultural activities
have tobe carefully distinguished from the coming of the kingdom and the hope
of the new creation. Such distinctions,they believed, were crucial to Christian
faith and life. 40
本书在发展一种当代的、基于圣经的两国论时，遵循奥古斯丁和宗教改革的发展路径。虽然我所呈现的看待基督教与文化的进路，有别于由新加尔文主义、赖特和麦拉伦为代表的转化主义异象，读者却应料到，我在本书的字里行间一定是要捍卫诸如创造、堕落和复活等这些经典的基督教教义。同样，读者不应期望发现我对更广阔的人类文化世界心怀敌意或冷漠。我承认我爱许多文化活动，我是一位娴熟的钢琴和管风琴演奏家，我读小说，几乎每天都读《华尔街日报》，爱大学美式足球比赛，也是一位律师（但目前处于歇业状态，因此不要打电话找我咨询法律问题），我也打高尔夫球（尽管我的差点不高，但你如果是一家很不错的高尔夫俱乐部会员，希望邀请我打上一场，我肯定欢迎你给我打电话）。读者能期望在本书中找到的，就是一种对文化活动积极的观点——虽然积极，但也有所保留。之所以有所保留，因为它努力遵循圣经的教导，就是人类文化事务是暂时的、有条件和注定要成为过去的事。主耶稣基督宣告的神的国度，并不是通过政治、商业、音乐或体育建造的。救赎并不是恢复人去实现亚当原初的任务，而是主耶稣基督亲自一次永远代表我们完成了亚当原初的任务。因此救赎并不是“再得着创造”，而是“得着再创造”。因此读者最能料到在本书中找到的，是一种尊崇主耶稣基督、他完全的救赎工作以及他存到永远国度的观点，这国度现在虽通过教会的事奉和生活推进，有一天要在完全的荣耀中显现，但却并不是靠我们自己人类文化的任何工作。这由基督宣告的国度在当今配得辩护，本书尽管卑微，但却正是在努力作出这种辩护。
This
book, in developing a contemporary and biblically-based two-kingdoms doctrine,
follows this Augustinian andReformation trajectory. Though I present an
approach to Christianity and culture that is different from
thetransformationist visions exemplified by neo-Calvinism, Wright, and McLaren,
readers should expect to find adefense of classic Christian doctrines such as
creation, the fall, and the resurrection within these pages. Likewise,readers
should not expect to find any hostility or indifference toward the broader
world of human culture. I confessto loving many cultural activities. I am a
proficient pianist and organist, read novels and The Wall Street Journalnearly
every day, love college football, am an attorney (though currently on inactive
status, so please don’t call forlegal advice), and play golf to a low handicap
(you certainly may call if you are a member of a nice club and wishto invite me
for a round). What readers can expect to find in this book is a positive view
of cultural activity—thougha positive view that is also reserved. It is
reserved because it seeks to follow Scripture’s teaching that the affairs ofhuman
culture are temporary, provisional, and bound to pass away. The kingdom of God
proclaimed by the LordJesus Christ is not built through politics, commerce,
music, or sports. Redemption does not consist in restoringpeople to fulfill
Adam’s original task, but consists in the Lord Jesus Christ himself fulfilling
Adam’s original taskonce and for all, on our behalf. Thus redemption is not
“creation regained” but “re-creation gained.” What readerscan expect to find in
this book most of all, therefore, is a high view of the Lord Jesus Christ, his
perfect redeemingwork, and his eternal kingdom—a kingdom advancing now through
the ministry and life of the church and one dayto be revealed in consummate
glory apart from any work of our own human culture.
简而言之，圣经要求我们重视受造界和文化活动，但也要求在基督天国的神圣事情与目前世界的普通事情之间作出一种区分。它要求在神行使护理之工、为全人类维系文化，与神荣耀地救赎一群选民、现在召聚他们进入一家教会、有一天要召聚他们进入新的受造界直到永永远远这二者之间作出分别。一些人确实落入一种没有根据的“二元论”，但对二元论的恐惧绝不可胜过我们作出清楚和必要的区分的能力。一些人确实有罪，倡导一种无神和不讲道德的“俗”的领域，但对一种无神的世俗主义的惧怕，不应让我们失去能力而拒绝讲一个由神命定的“一般性国度”，这国度是正当，却不是圣的。[43]两个国度的教义让我们既能断言受造界和文化是好的，又不至于使我们看不到至关重要的分别点。“两国论”其实是在帮助我们阐述整个圣经叙事。
In short, Scripture requires
a high view of creation and of cultural activity, but it also requires a
distinction between the holy things of Christ’s heavenly kingdom and the common
things of the present world. It requires a distinction between God’s
providential sustaining of human culture for the whole of the human race and
his glorious redemption of a chosen people that he has gathered into a church
now and will gather into the new creation for eternity. Some people indeed fall
into unwarranted “dualisms,” but dualism-phobia must not override our ability
to make clear and necessary distinctions. Some people indeed are guilty of
promoting a godless and amoral “secular” realm, but the fear of a godless
secularism should not eliminate our ability to speak of a divinely-ordained
common kingdom that is legitimate but not holy.41 The two-kingdoms doctrine
enables us to affirm the goodness of creation and culture without losing sight
of crucial distinctions. The two-kingdoms doctrine helps us to account for the
whole biblical story.
我在呈现这“两个国度”的异象时，盼望能鼓励普通基督徒——就是进行工作、学习、投票、养育儿女、帮助穷人、做生意、进行音乐创作、看电影、骑自行车、参与各种其他文化活动的普通基督徒，希望他们这样做的时候活出一种深思熟虑、讨神喜悦的生活。我盼望这本书能鼓励许多读者用更新的力量开展多样的文化活动，并深信这样的活动是好的，讨神喜悦的。对许多读者而言，我也盼望本书能解放他们脱离来自其他基督徒的好意却并不符合圣经的压力，这压力要求人“转化”他们的工作场所，或找到独一无二的“基督教方法”来完成日常的工作。对所有的读者而言，我盼望本书能帮助你们把心思聚焦在那比工作升职，或最近最高法院的判决远远重要得多的事情上，就是基督工作的全备性，教会宣教的任务，以及新天新地的盼望。
In
presenting this two-kingdoms vision, I hope to provide encouragement to
ordinary Christians—to ordinary Christians who work, study, vote, raise
families, help the poor, run businesses, make music, watch movies, ride bikes,
and engage in all sorts of other cultural activities, and who wish to live
thoughtful and God-pleasing lives in doing so. I hope that this book will be an
encouragement for many readers to take up their many cultural activities with
renewed vigor, being convinced that such activities are good and pleasing to
God. For many readers I also hope that this book will be liberating, freeing
you from well-meaning but nonbiblical pressure from other Christians to
“transform” your workplace or to find uniquely “Christian” ways of doing
ordinary tasks. For all readers I hope that this book will serve to focus your
hearts on things that are far more important than a promotion at work or the
most recent Supreme Court decision: the sufficiency of the work of Christ, the
missionary task of the church, and the hope of the new heaven and new earth.
三、本书梗概
The Plan of This Book
为了让读者初尝这“两国论”的滋味，了解它如何融入波澜壮阔的圣经历史，以及为什么它对基督徒的日常生活如此实际，我现在要简单描述本书的论证，以及它是如何在接下来几章里展现的。每次我们开始察验一种陌生观念，认识大画面会对我们有所帮助。因此在第一部分，我会把镜头调到最广角，通过保罗对横跨整个历史的那两位亚当的描述来看人类的文化这一问题。首先的亚当，当然就是创世记前几章描写的起初那人，我要在第二章关注他。神按他的形像造了亚当和夏娃，让他们完成一项任务：生养众多，管理全地。因此在历史开始的时候，神向人类颁布了一项文化任务，而且神把目标和奖赏摆在首先的亚当面前。如果亚当忠心顺服神的命令，完成这任务，神就要把他带进一个新的创造（新约圣经称为“那将来的世界”，或“新天新地”），远超亚当原初受造所进入的那愉悦和无罪世界。通过一个神圣盟约，亚当公义的文化工作要让他在这末世性的将来世界中有份。但亚当堕落犯罪，让当今的世界一头落入罪和悲惨的光景。
In
order to give readers an initial taste of what this two-kingdoms doctrine is,
how it fits into the grand sweep of biblical history, and why it is so
eminently practical for daily Christian life, I now briefly describe the
argument of this book and how it unfolds in the following chapters. Whenever we
begin to examine an unfamiliar idea, it is helpful to get a sense of the big
picture. Hence, in part 1, I set the camera lens at its widest possible angle,
looking at the question of human culture by means of Paul’s description of the
two Adams that stride across all of history. The first Adam is of course the
original human person described in the early chapters of Genesis, and I focus
upon him in chapter 2. God created Adam and Eve in his image and gave them a
task to accomplish: to be fruitful and multiply and to exercise dominion over
the earth. At the dawn of history, therefore, God gave a cultural task to the
human race. What is more, God set a goal and reward before the first Adam. If
he completed his cultural Introduction task through faithful obedience to God’s
commands, God would have brought Adam into a new creation (what the New
Testament calls the “world to come” or “the new heaven and new earth”) far
surpassing the delightful and sinless world into which Adam was originally
created. By a divine covenant, Adam’s righteous cultural labors would have
earned him a share in the eschatological worldto-come. Instead, Adam fell into
sin and plunged the present world into a state of sin and misery. The first
Adam failed terribly, but God sent a second and last Adam into the world, the
Lord Jesus Christ. Chapter 3 tells the main points of this wonderful biblical
story. Christ the last Adam not only took upon himself the penalty of the first
Adam’s sin, but also took upon himself the responsibility of fulfilling Adam’s
original task. Christ offered perfect obedience in this world to his Father,
and was exalted to his right hand as a result. The Lord Jesus, as a human
being—as the last Adam—has attained the original goal held out for Adam: a
glorified life ruling the world-to-come. Because Jesus has fulfilled the first
Adam’s commission, those who belong to Christ by faith are no longer given that
commission. Christians already possess eternal life and claim an everlasting
inheritance. God does not call them to engage in cultural labors so as to earn
their place in the world-to-come. We are not little Adams. Instead, God gives
us a share in the world-to-come as a gift of free grace in Christ and then
calls us to live obediently in this world as a grateful response. Our cultural
activities do not in any sense usher in the new creation. The new creation has
been earned and attained once and for all by Christ, the last Adam. Cultural
activity remains important for Christians, but it will come to an abrupt end,
along with this present world as a whole, when Christ returns and
cataclysmically ushers in the new heaven and new earth.
第一位亚当大大失败，但神派遣第二位、那末后的亚当进入世界，就是主耶稣基督。第三章讲的就是这奇妙圣经故事的要点。基督这末后的亚当不仅把对首先的亚当罪的刑罚取过来放在自己身上，而且也亲身承担并完成了亚当原初任务的责任。基督在这世界上向他的父献上完美的顺服，结果得以高升坐在父的右边。主耶稣作为一个人，作为末后的亚当，已经实现了为亚当设立的原初目标，就是得荣耀的生命，治理那将来的世界。因耶稣已完成第一位亚当的使命，神就不再向因着信属于基督的人颁布这使命。基督徒已经得着永生，有份于那直到永远的基业。神并没有呼召他们投入文化工作，以此赚取在那将来世界的地位。我们并不是一个个小亚当。神让我们在那将来的世界有份，这是在基督里白白的恩典，然后呼吁我们在这世界上过顺服的生活，以此感恩回应。我们的文化活动在任何意义上都不引入新的创造，这新的创造已经由基督这末后的亚当一次永远赚取获得。文化活动对基督徒来说仍很重要，但在基督再来，引入新天新地时，文化活动会连同整个当今世界一同戛然而止。
The
first Adam failed terribly, but God sent a second and last Adam into the world,
the Lord Jesus Christ. Chapter 3 tells the main points of this wonderful
biblical story. Christ the last Adam not only took upon himself the penalty of
the first Adam’s sin, but also took upon himself the responsibility of
fulfilling Adam’s original task. Christ offered perfect obedience in this world
to his Father, and was exalted to his right hand as a result. The Lord Jesus,
as a human being—as the last Adam—has attained the original goal held out for
Adam: a glorified life ruling the world-to-come. Because Jesus has fulfilled
the first Adam’s commission, those who belong to Christ by faith are no longer
given that commission. Christians already possess eternal life and claim an
everlasting inheritance. God does not call them to engage in cultural labors so
as to earn their place in the world-to-come. We are not little Adams. Instead,
God gives us a share in the world-to-come as a gift of free grace in Christ and
then calls us to live obediently in this world as a grateful response. Our
cultural activities do not in any sense usher in the new creation. The new
creation has been earned and attained once and for all by Christ, the last
Adam. Cultural activity remains important for Christians, but it will come to
an abrupt end, along with this present world as a whole, when Christ returns
and cataclysmically ushers in the new heaven and new earth.
在第一部分让人看到圣经故事中人类文化的这一大画面之后，第二部份继续查考同一个主题，但会更详细查考神百姓在亚当堕落和基督再来之间的经历。我在第四章要贯穿旧约圣经追溯这故事的发展。在人堕落犯罪之后，神立即让女人的后裔和蛇的后裔彼此为仇。不仅神应许一位救主克服堕落的影响，而且也命定，在因信属他的人和继续受撒但奴役的人之间将有一场根深蒂固的冲突。相信的人和不信的人，在对神、道德和永恒的基本看法和态度方面存在着一种根本的对立，这种对立在该隐和亚伯的故事中清楚显明。连同这对立，神也在这世界上命定一种共性的元素。在肉眼看来，信与不信的对立常常并不明显。相信的人和不信的人共同分享许多事情，在文化生活的许多领域一同工作（虽然他们在最重要的事情上有根本分歧）。在许多文化工作方面，不信的人甚至超越相信的人。对立和共性这双重现实，就是两个国度的起源。神在创世记开始的地方立了两个约，这两个国度就是通过这两个约建立起来的。神与挪亚立约，由此与全人类（也与整个受造界）建立约的关系，应许要保守例如繁衍和寻求公义这样的受造界文化活动，“一般性国度”就这样正式建立起来。与之形成对比的是，神与亚伯拉罕立约，由此与一群选民建立约的关系，赐予他们因信而来的永远的救恩，因此把他们与其余的人类分别出来，“救赎性国度”就这样正式建立。神的百姓因此蒙召在两个约中，就是在两个国度中生活。一方面他们尊重挪亚之约的条件，与不信的人一道从事不同的文化活动。另一方面，他们接受亚伯拉罕恩典之约的条件，紧紧抓住得救和在新创造中永远活着的应许，聚集成为有别于不信之世人的敬拜群体。亚伯拉罕和以色列人被掳巴比伦（而不是以色列在应许之地）的经历，特别体现出旧约圣经中这种两个国度的生活之道。
After
part 1 provides this big-picture view of human culture in the biblical story,
part 2 examines the same topic but with a more detailed examination of the
experience of God’s people between the fall of Adam and the second coming of
Christ. In chapter 4 I trace this story through the Old Testament. Immediately
after the fall into sin, God placed enmity between the seed of the woman and
Introduction the seed of Satan. Not only did God promise a Savior who would
overturn the effects of the fall, but he also decreed that there would be a
deep-seated conflict between those who belong to him by faith and those who
remain enslaved to Satan. A fundamental antithesis exists between believer and
unbeliever in their basic perspective and attitude toward God, morality, and
eternity, and this antithesis manifested itself clearly in the story of Cain
and Abel. But alongside this antithesis God also ordained an element of
commonality in the world. The antithesis between belief and unbelief would
often not be evident to the naked eye. Believers and unbelievers would share
many things in common and work together in many areas of cultural life (despite
their fundamental disagreements about the most important things). Unbelievers
would even surpass believers in many cultural pursuits. In this dual reality of
antithesis and commonality lies the origin of the two kingdoms. Early in
Genesis God established two covenants, by which the two kingdoms were formally
established. In his covenant with Noah God entered covenantal relationship with
the entire human race (and with the entire creation), promising to preserve its
cultural activities such as procreating and securing justice. This was the
formal establishment of the “common kingdom.” In his covenant with Abraham, in
contrast, God entered covenantal relationship with a chosen people, upon whom
he bestows eternal salvation by faith, thereby distinguishing them from the
rest of the human race. This was the formal establishment of the “redemptive
kingdom.” God’s people are thus called to live under both covenants—that is, in
two kingdoms. On the one hand, they respect the terms of the Noahic covenant as
they pursue a variety of cultural activities in common with unbelievers. On the
other hand, they embrace the terms of the Abrahamic covenant of grace as they
cling to the promises of salvation and eternal life in a new creation and as
they gather in worshiping communities distinguished from the unbelieving world.
The experiences of Abraham and of the Israelite exiles in Babylon (though not
of Israel in the Promised Land) especially exemplify the two-kingdoms way of
life in the Old Testament.
第五章延续讲述这故事在新约圣经中的展现。通过基督的降临和他的生平、死亡、复活及升天，神的应许成就了。这位末后的亚当除去了他百姓的罪，代替他们遵行神的律法（就如第一位亚当本应做的那样），进入那将来的世界，达至人原初的命定。他在地上事奉期间宣告他的国度降临，现在召聚他的百姓进入一个世界范围的教会，在当今的世代享受那国度的团契。因此新约圣经表明神的百姓是站在永恒的边缘，在新创造的前端。但新约圣经也把目前的时候说成是受苦的时候，使用了像“被掳的人”、“客旅”、“寄居”这样的说法描写基督徒，让人想起在亚伯拉罕和被掳巴比伦的日子。基督徒生活在两个国度之下，这两个国度各自受挪亚之约和亚伯拉罕之约规范。民事政府、家庭、经济方面的交往，以及许多其他文化制度在挪亚之约下继续存在，基督徒和非基督徒同样参与其中，在许多方面相互合作。基督再来时，这些制度和活动要突然和从根本上被终止。但基督徒特别属于教会——在亚伯拉罕那里创造的特别的约的群体，其在新约的彰显就是教会——通过教会，他们现在就是天上的国民。教会——当今世代神救赎的国度，有一种与众分别的成员身份、信仰、敬拜和道德伦理。当它的生活之道面对这世界的各种文化时，就彰显出一种“反文化”。教会等候基督再来，那是一个荣耀完满的日子，那时新娘要面对面见到她的新郎，被迎接进入羔羊的婚筵。
Chapter
5 continues to chart this story as it unfolds in the New Testament. Through the
coming of Christ and his life, death, resurrection, and ascension, the promises
of God came to fulfillment. The last Adam took away the sins of his people,
fulfilled God’s law in their place (as the first Adam should have done), and
entered into the world-to-come, attaining the original human destiny. He announced
the coming of his kingdom during his earthly ministry and is now gathering his
people into a worldwide church to enjoy the fellowship of that kingdom in the
present age. The New Testament thus presents God’s people as standing on the
very brink of eternity, at the cusp of the new creation. But it also speaks of
the present time as one of suffering and uses terms such as “exile,” “alien,”
and “sojourner” to describe Christians, thus recollecting the days of Abraham
and the Babylonian captivity. Christians live under two kingdoms, governed
respectively by the Noahic covenant and the Abrahamic covenant. Civil
governments, families, economic associations, and many other cultural
institutions continue to exist under the covenant with Noah, and Christians and
non-Christians alike participate in them and, in many respects, cooperate in
their activities. At Christ’s return these institutions and activities will
come to a sudden and radical end. Yet Christians belong especially to the
church, the New Testament manifestation of the special covenant community
created in Abraham. Through the church they are citizens of heaven even now.
This church—God’s redemptive kingdom in the present age—has a distinct
membership, faith, worship, and ethic. Its way of life displays a
counterculture to the cultures of this world. The church awaits the coming of
Christ as a day of glorious consummation, when the bride will see her
bridegroom face-to-face as she is ushered into the wedding banquet of the Lamb.
最后，我在第三部分转来看一些具体实际的问题，探索在两个国度活出基督徒人生的具体应用。首先，第六章表明教会是“救赎性国度”在当前的显明。我在此捍卫这一断言，就是教会的生活和事工，而不是“一般性国度”的文化生活和活动，才是基督徒生活的核心。教会特别通过它的敬拜和欢庆守主日，在当今世界上预先尝到新创造的滋味。在各方面，教会的文化都有别于“一般性国度”的文化。与“一般性国度”的各种制度不同，教会是依据一种饶恕的伦理生活，这伦理超越对公义的诉求；教会是依据一种慷慨的伦理生活，不受稀缺的经济资源约束；教会依据一种使命性的传福音，不胁迫人加入。教会办理“救赎性国度”的事务，并不践踏“一般性国度”制度的权威。与其他这些制度不同，教会的权柄唯独出于圣经。
Finally,
in part 3 I turn to some concrete, practical issues that explore the
implications of living the Christian life in two kingdoms. First, chapter 6
addresses the church as the present manifestation of the redemptive kingdom.
Here I defend the claim that the life and ministry of the church—rather than
the cultural life and activities of the common kingdom—stand at the heart of
the Christian life. Especially through its worship and celebration of the Lord’s
Introduction Day, the church experiences a foretaste of the new creation in the
present world. In all sorts of ways the church has a culture distinct from the
cultures of the common kingdom. Unlike the institutions of the common kingdom,
the church lives by an ethic of forgiveness that transcends the claims of
justice, by an ethic of generosity that defies the scarcity of economic
resources, and by a missionary evangelism that shuns coercion. The church
attends to the business of the redemptive kingdom and does not trample on the
authority of common kingdom institutions. Unlike these other institutions, its
authority derives from the Scriptures alone.
第七章作为最后一章继续讨论“两国论”对基督徒生活的实际应用。我反思三个重要和富有争议性的文化领域：教育、工作和政治。对于所有这些活动圣经都有教导，因此为基督徒提供了一种看待这些领域的正确视角，并为在当中的参与设立了清楚界限。但圣经只是从广泛方面论述这些问题。基督徒总是有义务遵守圣经对这些活动的教训，但在圣经沉默的地方，基督徒必须行使自己的智慧，在具体处境中作出敬虔的决定。另外，虽然教育、工作和政治是不同的活动，要求对它们作各自不同的分析，但却都涉及到在挪亚之约下的“一般性国度”的生活，要求基督徒在某种程度上与不信的人一同从事这些方面的工作。学习、工作和投票并不是独特的基督徒使命，而是共同的任务。在主观方面，基督徒应有别于不信的人：基督徒凡事凭对基督的信心，为要荣耀基督。但作为一种客观事物，“一般性国度”中的道德和卓越标准一般而言对相信的人和不信的人都是一样的：他们共同遵循这些标准，在挪亚之约中顺服神的权柄。
The
final chapter, chapter 7, continues this discussion of the practical
implications of the two-kingdoms doctrine for the Christian life. I reflect
upon three important and controversial areas of culture: education, work, and
politics. Scripture speaks about all of these activities and thus provides
Christians with a proper perspective on them and clear boundaries for
participating in them. But Scripture addresses these issues only in a broad and
general way. Christians are always obligated to follow Scripture’s instructions
about these activities, but where Scripture is silent Christians must exercise
their own wisdom to make godly decisions in concrete circumstances.
Furthermore, though education, work, and politics are distinct activities that
require their own separate analysis, they all involve the life of the common
kingdom under the Noahic covenant and require Christians, to some degree or
another, to work alongside unbelievers in pursuing them. Learning, working, and
voting are not uniquely Christian tasks, but common tasks. Christians should
always be distinguished from unbelievers subjectively: they do all things by
faith in Christ and for his glory. But as an objective matter, the standards of
morality and excellence in the common kingdom are ordinarily the same for
believers and unbelievers: they share these standards in common under God’s
authority in the covenant with Noah.
概括而言，这就是本书的梗概。本书叙述了神如何对待这世界，愿他藉此得荣耀。愿神的百姓在以智慧和卓越从事文化事业时得鼓励，更多地信靠基督全备的工作，在这邪恶的世代，在教会中预先尝到天国的滋味，因此而有极大的喜乐，并且内心迫切盼望一个新世代的破晓，那时基督再来，新天新地要完全荣耀地彰显。
That,
in summary, is the plan of this book. May God be honored in this account of his
ways of dealing with this world. May his people be encouraged, as they pursue
their cultural tasks with wisdom and excellence, ever more to trust in Christ’s
all-sufficient work, Introduction to revel in the church as a foretaste of the
kingdom of heaven in an evil age, and to look forward with eager hearts to the
dawn of a new age, when Christ returns and the new heaven and new earth are
revealed in all their glory.
[1] 本文是David
VanDrunen的专著Living in God’s
Two Kingdoms-a biblical vision for Christianity and culture一书的导言部分。——编者注
[2] 关于“文化”一词的说明：术语有时不易处理。我会在脚注中讨论了例如“转变”和“俗”这些内涵丰富的术语，它们有各种不同的含义，有不同的用法。我尽可能让这本书讲的是实质的观念，而非术语，因此很重要的就是，我要澄清我对某些可能引人误解的术语的用法。贯穿本书我使用的两个这种术语，就是“文化”和“文化的”。在广义上，“文化”指的是所有不同的人类活动和它们的产品，以及我们解释它们的方法和描述它们的语言。解释和语言，和产品本身一样，是文化至关重要的组成部分，因为同样的产品在不同的处境中可能发挥非常不一样的功能。按文化的这种广义含义，我们所做的一切，无论是高尚文化或通俗文化活动，还是像刷牙这样的平淡任务，实际上都是“文化的”。不仅民族、国家，并且社区、大学、运动协会、家庭、教会和各种各样其他事情都有各自的文化，而这些文化又常常是重叠的。我在一本像这样的书中，并不是以过分精准或专业的方式使用“文化”这术语。我用这说法首要来指人类参与的范围广阔的活动，如科学、艺术、经济活动等等。在本书副标题出现的“基督教与文化”这流行说法，只是用来指我们思想基督徒和教会应如何与人类文化这些广阔活动打交道，基督教信仰如何影响我们对这些活动的解释时出现的各种问题。
[3]
H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, New York: Harper, 1951, p.2.
[4] “转变”一词有不同含义，我认为基督徒应转变文化，意思就是他们要卓越地开展文化活动，正确诠释这些活动，以此对这世界产生一种有益的影响。但我在本书批判一种转变文化的观念，这种观念暗示基督徒应“救赎”文化，他们敬虔的文化产品要融入那新的创造。
[5] 关于支持这种历史主张的详细论证，请参考David VanDrunen, Natural Law and the Two
Kingdoms: A Study in the Development of Reformed Social Thought, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2010, chaps. 2-6. 我要向感兴趣的读者澄清一件事，就是我认为奥古斯丁的“两座城”与我在本书讨论的“两个国度”指的不是同样的事情。两者都是合乎圣经的概念，都应坚持，但它们描述的并不是相同的现实。简单来说，奥古斯丁在《上帝之城》中描写了两座城，一座由真信徒组成，终将得到永远的祝福，而另一座城由不信的人组成，注定要被永远定罪。每一个人都是一座城的国民，虽然这两座城在这当今世界必然有所交集。我写作的立场是改革宗思想，它理解这两个国度是神的国度。神治理万有，但用两种根本不同的方法治理这世界的事务。因此基督徒是两个“国度”、但只是一座“城”的国民。圣经所作的另一个重要区别，就是在“两个世代”之间的区别——这世代和那将来的世代，这在保罗书信中是一个重要主题。我认为保罗在两个世代之间所作的区分也有别于两个国度之间的区分，但它们是可比较的，因这两种区分都是正确的。两国论首要解释的是神治理这当今世界的双重方法，而两个世代的教义首要讲的，是在这世界和那将来世界之间末世论方面的区分与张力。两个国度都是正当和神所命定的（虽然在这世界被罪败坏），但保罗对“这世代”的阐述聚焦的是它邪恶和属魔鬼的特征，以及它悖逆神（例如见林后4:4；加1:4；弗2:2）。因此在罗马书 12:2，保罗劝勉基督徒不要效法这世代，他是从两个世代的角度思想问题；而在罗马书13:1-7，保罗劝勉基督徒顺服民事当局，看他们是神设立的神的官员，他是从两个国度的角度思考。
[6] 我在本书第二部分进一步阐述“巴比伦”这主题，其他近期部分通过圣经“巴比伦”这主题反思基督教与文化的作者，请见Richard John Neuhaus, American Babylon: Notes of
a Christian Exile, New York: Basic, 2009 and Jason J. Stellman, Dual Citizens:
Worship and Life between the Already and the Not Yet, Orlando: Reformation
Trust, 2009. 奥古斯丁很久之前也用过巴比伦这主题，例如见《上帝之城》，19.26。
[7] 见VanDrunen, Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms, 第七和第九章。我在这些章节中比这里更学术性详细讨论了新加尔文主义。
[8] 例如，请留意麦拉伦在Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and
a Revolution of Hope，Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2007, 第十五章表达了对赖特的感激。新加尔主义者最近几本著作也表达了对赖特的感激，例如Albert M. Wolters, Creation Regained: Biblical
Basics for a Reformational Worldview, 2d ed. ,Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005,
p.127; Craig G. Bartholomew and Michael W. Goheen, The Drama of Scripture:
Finding Our Place in the Biblical Story ,Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004,
pp.13, 21,197, 199. 以及Michael W. Goheen and Craig G. Bartholomew,
Living at the Crossroads: An Introduction to Christian Worldview, Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic, 2008, pp.4,107, 144。
[9]
Bartholomew and Goheen, Living at the Crossroads, p.16.
[10]
以下对沃尔特斯著作的引文出自这本书的初版：Albert M. Wolters, Creation Regained: Biblical
Basics for a Reformational Worldview, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985. Cornelius
Plantinga Jr., Engaging God’s
World: A Christian Vision of Faith, Learning, and Living, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2002。
[11]
Plantinga, Engaging God’s
World, xv. 普兰丁格围绕创造、堕落和救赎这些主题安排他著作的章节。也见Wolters, Creation
Regained, pp.10-11, 以及他的章节划分。
[12]
Plantinga, Engaging God’s
World, p.33. 在这一点上也请参考Wolters, Creation Regained, pp.37-41。
[13]
Wolters, Creation Regained, 11, pp.57-60.
[14]
Ibid.,pp.63-64.
[15]
Plantinga, Engaging God’s World, pp.109-13.
[16]
Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future ,Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979,
p.287.
[17]
Plantinga, Engaging God’s World, pp.137-38.
[18] 虽然“两个领域”可以很简单成为“两个国度”的同义词，沃尔特斯可能有类似看法，但读者应留意，沃尔特斯从未具体论述本书捍卫的那种两个国度的观点。
[19] 例如见Wolters, Creation Regained, pp.10-11, pp.53-58,
pp.65, 74; Plantinga, Engaging God’s World, pp.96,123; 以及 Bartholomew and Goheen, Living at the
Crossroads, pp.64-65, 135。
[20] 例如见Bartholomew and Goheen, Living at the Crossroads,
p.52。
[21] 同情保罗新观的重要著述包括，N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said: Was
Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997;
James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle，Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998; 以及N. T. Wright, Paul: In Fresh
Perspective,Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005. 批判保罗新观的重要著作有，Guy Prentiss Waters, Justification and the New
Perspectives on Paul: A Review and Response ,Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2004;以及Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on
Paul: The Lutheran Paul and His Critics ,Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004，中译本：魏斯特鸿，《保罗神学：新旧观》，麦种传道会。
[22] 例如见加尔文，《基督教要义》，3.19。也见David VanDrunen, “The Two Kingdoms and the Ordo Salutis: Life
beyond Judgment and the Question of a Dual Ethic,” Westminster Theological Journal 70, Fall 2008:
pp.207-24中的讨论。
[23]
N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the
Mission of the Church, New York: HarperOne, 2008, p.5.
[24]
Ibid., pp.15,17, 19, 80,91, 104–5, 148, 194.
[25]
Ibid., pp.18, 80, 88–91, 104.
[26]
Ibid., p.26.
[27]
Ibid., pp.26-27, 90, 192.
[28]
Ibid., pp.93-97.
[29]
Ibid., p.18.
[30]
Ibid., p.46.
[31]
Ibid., p.200, 202.
[32]
Ibid., p.193.
[33]
Ibid., pp.208-209.
[34]
Ibid., pp.193, 212-230.
[35]
两本对新兴基督教运动进行批判性描述和剖析的著作，就是David Wells, The Courage
to Be Protestant: Truth-lovers, Marketers, and Emergents in the Postmodern
World, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008, 魏尔斯，《勇守真道——后现代社会中热爱真理的教会、营销型教会及新兴教会》，改革宗翻译社；以及Kevin De Young and Ted
Kluck, Why We’re Not Emergent: By Two
Guys Who Should Be, Chicago: Moody, 2008.
[36]
McLaren, Everything Must Change, pp. 3-4, 18–19,
77-80，以及其他地方。
[37] Ibid., pp.81-83。
[38] 例如见上述著作整体第九章（具体72-73页）。这本书反复提到“转变”这说法。
[39]
Ibid., p.129.
[40]
Ibid., p.21.
[41]
Ibid., p.296.
[42]
请见VanDrunen,
Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms, 第二至三章的讨论。对于当中讨论的很重要的第一手资料来源，请见奥古斯丁《上帝之城》卷19，路德著名的专著，《世俗的权柄：人对其顺服要到什么程度》（Temporal Authority: To What Extent It Should
Be Obeyed），以及加尔文《基督教要义》3.19.15-16以及4.20.1。
[43] 使用“俗”（secular）这词形容一般性国度，这会是恰当的做法。“俗”不一定非要是一个不好的词不可。拉丁文saeculum这词意思很简单，就是“一个世代”，许多作者 （包括基督教作者）使用“俗”这说法指当今这世界的事务（与基督再来之后那将来世界的事务作比较）。虽然为了免遭误解，我在本书避免使用“俗”这词，但我认为，按此意义有限制地使用这词，可以对人有所帮助。
