顯示具有 印記 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 印記 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2022-05-22

 
印記與憑據 以弗所書 1:13-14

聖經歸正教會主日證道|以弗所書系列|2/6/2022|呂沛淵牧師
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmvW54jF97o
 
前言: 使徒保羅在1:11-12宣告神的主權旨意預定萬事、照著他旨意計畫行作萬事,使我們得益處(11:36; 8:28)1:13-14繼續說明這益處,就是天上屬靈的福氣(1:3): 聽見真理的道,就是使罪人得救的福音,因信基督而受了聖靈印記,有了得基業的憑據,保證了我們將來完全得贖。保羅以「我們所受的印記、所得的憑據」說明我們是神的產業,最終必定完全得贖。最後以「使他的榮耀得著稱讚」(1:14)作為結語,因為這是我們得著一切恩福的總目的。如此,總結了1:3-14的頌讚,真是扣人心弦,感恩不已。
 
. 在基督裡,你們也聽見真理的道
 
1. 原文在1:13起始是「在他裡面,你們也…」,1:12最後一句是「在基督裡」,所以「他」指主基督,「你們」指讀者。對照1:3-12,幾乎每一節都是論到「我們」,1:13說「你們」,1:14回到「我們」。對照1:15-21,你們與我們交替使用,可以說當保羅將自己與讀者(以弗所眾聖徒,1:2)共論時,就用「我們」;當他針對讀者時就用「你們」。然而,在第二與三章,特別注意強調「你們」是外邦人信徒(例如2:11; 3:1),以弗所是外邦教會;外邦人與猶太人在主基督裡,同蒙一恩召、成為同一基業,合為一體,這是以弗所書的核心信息。
 
2. 「你們既聽見真理的道,就是那叫你們得救的福音」,「你們既…」原文作「在他裡面,你們也…」,此處特別強調以弗所的外邦信徒,也與保羅和猶太信徒一樣,聽見福音而得救。在基督裡,外邦人和猶太人都蒙了拯救。次序是「先是猶太人,後是希利尼人」(1:16; 2:9-11)。使徒行傳的記載顯明: 福音從耶路撒冷、猶太全地、撒瑪利亞,直到地極(1:8)
 
3. 「真理的道」the word of truth,就是神的道(6:17),主的道就是真理(17:17),是真實的道理(林後6:7; 提後2:15),是救世的道、福音的道(13:26; 15:7),是基督的道理(西3:16),生命之道(2:16; 約壹1:1)。「真理」在以弗所書出現六次(1:13; 4:21, 24, 25實話; 5:9誠實; 6:14), 4:21說「學了他的真理」,原文作「真理是在耶穌裡」as the truth is in Jesus,恩典和真理都是從他來的(1:17),他就是真理(14:6),他是道成了肉身,充充滿滿的有恩典有真理(1:14)
 
4. 這「真理的道」就是「叫你們得救的福音」the Gospel of your salvation,平行經文歌羅西書1:5說「福音真理的道」the word of the truth of the Gospel。福音是真理的道,父神用真理的道重生了我們,使我們得救(1:18; 彼前1:23)。保羅當年傳福音到以弗所,使他們聽見真理的道,信了福音而得救(18:19-20:20)。福音的傳講是必須的,因為人未曾聽見主基督,怎能信他呢? 信道是從聽道而來的,聽道是從基督的話來的(10:14-17)。福音是神的大能,要救一切相信的(1:16)
 
. 在基督裡,你們受了印記
 
1. 「你們也信了基督,既然信他」原文作「在他裡面,你們也信了」also believing,「就受了所應許的聖靈為印記」you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,「受了印記」是主動詞,「信」是分詞,與主動詞是合在一起,表示二者是不能分開的同一事件,所以譯作「既然信了,就受了印記」,關鍵是「在基督裡信了且受了印記」,不是後來才受了印記。所以,保羅問那在以弗所的十二門徒:「你們信的時候,受了聖靈沒有」(19:2),真正悔改信主的人,必是已經領受了聖靈(2:38; 林前12:13),蒙了聖靈重生的,必同時悔改信主(1:12-13; 3:5-8)
 
2.「受了所應許的聖靈為印記」是指甚麼意思呢? 4:30回應此真理,說不可叫神的聖靈擔憂,因為我們是受了他的印記,等候得贖的日子來到。「受印記」表示主人在屬他的產業上加印,打上記號,證明這是專屬於他的,有他的權柄保證。此字名詞譯作「印證,印」(4:11; 林前9:2; 提後2:19)。啟示錄中多次使用此字,例如5-7章。舊約中,神與亞伯拉罕立約的記號是割禮,作為因信稱義的印證(4:11)。新約的印記是在信徒心中有聖靈的內住同在(36:26-27; 37:1-14)。這是摩西的禱告,與先知約珥的預言(11:29; 2:28-32)。神的兒女每一位都得到聖靈的同在與澆灌,這是舊約先知書預言的主題(例如賽32:15; 44:3; 39:29; 12:10)
 
3. 主基督在受難前夕逾越節晚上的「樓上講論」(13-16),清楚說明「所應許的聖靈」在神子民生命中的工作。主基督受死復活和升天之後,在五旬節應驗實現了(2:28-36)。神的兒女必領受父神所應許的聖靈 (24:49; 1:4-5; 2:38)。這也是給外邦人的應許,藉著信靠主基督而得著所應許的聖靈(3:14),使我們得著神兒女的名分(4:4-7),所以我們靠著聖靈呼叫阿爸父,聖靈作為印記,同證我們是神的兒女(8:14-17)。林前12:13說,無論是猶太人外邦人,我們都從這位聖靈受洗,成主基督身體的一分子。這是每位真信徒所領受的內在印記,而外在的洗禮作為聖約的記號(4:5; 6:3-6; 西2:11-12)
 
4. 我們受了聖靈的印記,見證我們已經得著的名分與福分,然而不僅如此,這「印記」也保證了將來我們完全得贖。羅8:23說,「我們這有聖靈初結果子的」first fruits是指我們已經得著聖靈內住、引導,將來必得著莊稼豐收full harvest。林後1:21-22說「那在基督裡堅固我們和你們,並且膏我們的,就是神。他又用印印了我們,並賜聖靈在我們心裡作憑據」,膏、印、憑據,這三幅圖畫中有「印、憑據」重現在弗1:13-14中。弗1:13論述這「已經」already層面,1:14繼續說明那「尚未」not yet層面是確定實現的,因為有這印記做為保證和憑據。
 
. 我們得基業的憑據
 
1.「這聖靈是我們得基業的憑據」the guarantee of our inheritance,基業見1:11「我們成了基業,得了基業」(1:18; 20:32)。「憑據」原文作「質」deposit, pledge, guarantee,其舊約背景見創38:17-20,出現三次,譯作「當頭」,作為抵押保證。新約經文出現三次: 林後1:22; 5:5; 1:14, 希臘文意義是作質保證,譯作「憑據」。現代希臘文以此字來稱訂婚戒指。我們受了聖靈,作為屬神子民的印記,這是已經的事實,更是作為我們完全得著豐盛基業的憑據保證。這豐盛基業的榮耀是超過我們現今所能想像的,為我們存留在天上的(林前2:9; 彼前1:4)
 
2. 我們得著神所應許我們的一切恩福,都是在基督裡賜給我們的,藉著他成為實在的,是藉著聖靈作為「憑據」在我們心裡(1:3; 林後1:22)。正如買房產的「頭款」down payment,保證了你已經開始享受此產業。也如同果樹的「初熟果子」first fruits (8:23),你已經開始享用,且保證了以後結的果子,都是如此的品質。林後5:5-10更是說明了,父神培植我們是他的基業,他賜給我們聖靈作憑據,使我們在今生雖嘆息勞苦,然而時常坦然無懼,願意離世與主同在。所以我們行事為人,是憑著信心,不是憑著眼見,因為有這「憑據」。因此,我們立了志向,要得主的喜悅。
 
3.「直等到 神之民〔民原文作產業〕被贖」,原文作「直等到產業得贖」unto redemption of possession。「被贖」在此是指最終的得蒙救贖,我們在等候得贖的日子來到(4:30; 21:28; 8:23)。對照我們已經得蒙救贖(1:7),今日我們是活在末世,在「已經得贖」與「尚未完全得贖」之間。既然我們是靠著聖靈得生,所以是靠著聖靈行事為人(5:25), 他是我們的憑據。
 
4.「神之民」原文作產業,我們蒙父神揀選成為屬他的子民,所以是神的產業(1:11, 18)。「產業」指得著擁有(帖前5:9; 帖後2:14; 10:39),此字動詞意思是買、獲得(20:28),神的教會是愛子用自己的寶血所買贖來的(1:7)。彼前2:9「屬神的子民」原文作「作為產業的子民」people for possession。所以,和合本在1:14意譯為「神之民」。彼前2:9是引用出19:5; 43:20-21,說明是神揀選我們,特特作自己的子民(4:20; 7:6-8; 14:2; 26:18; 74:2; 135:4),瑪3:17「萬軍之主耶和華說,在我所定的日子,他們必屬我,特特歸我」,這在主基督裡應驗實現了,多2:14「特作自己的子民」for his special possession,此字是1:14; 彼前2:9的同義字,都是根據舊約眾多經文的豐富啟示,就是「以馬內利」: 在主基督裡, 神作我們的神,我們作他的子民(17:7; 21:3)
 
結論: 使他的榮耀得著稱讚
 
1. 聖靈在神子民生命中所作的,是印記,是憑據,目的是使神的子民得著最終的完全得贖,「使他的榮耀得著稱讚」unto the praise of His glory,這1:14的結語是指父神最終得著完全的頌讚,是強調「尚未,必要成就」層面。對照
1:12同一片語,是指在我們這首先在主基督裡有盼望的人身上,開始得著稱讚,是強調「已經,且繼續進行」層面。而1:6「使他恩典的榮耀得著稱讚」,是永恆裡的目的,已經開實現(1:12),最終必完全實現(1:14)
 
2. 1:3-14的重複三次的refrain副歌(主題曲)「使他恩典的榮耀得著稱讚」,奇妙敘述神是三位一體的真神,解釋聖父在基督裡,藉著聖靈所賜給我們的天上各樣屬靈福氣,是如何實現的(1:3; 2:18-22)
(1) 聖父預定計畫the origin: 3-6節,創立世界之前的揀選,預定選民得兒子名分,使我們在他面前成為聖潔,無有瑕疵;
(2) 聖子執行作成the accomplishment: 7-12節,十字架上流出寶血救贖,使選民的過犯得以赦免,成了基業,得了基業;
(3) 聖靈實施運行the application: 13-14節,使選民受了印記,作為得基業的憑據,保守選民最終完全得贖。
 
3. 我們是全然墮落,死在罪惡之中的罪人,要成為在光明中永蒙保守的聖徒,必須是三一真神的救贖大工: 聖父的主權揀選,聖子的確定贖罪,聖靈的有效恩召,缺一不可。這是救恩金三角的由來: 聖父的預定揀選是準則,聖子在處境中作成救贖,聖靈實施在我們身上,改變我們的內心。
 
4. 1:3-14是全書的根基,也是我們福音信仰與生活的核心,更是我們一切感恩禱告的根基與框架,1:15說「因此」展開了保羅為眾聖徒的感恩與禱告。頌讚應當在感恩與祈求之前。所以我們當和保羅一同頌讚:「願頌讚歸與父神,在主基督裡,賜給我們在聖靈中的各樣福氣」。聖哉、聖哉、聖哉,可稱頌的榮耀三一真神,配得天使和我們的敬拜,直到永永遠遠。
 
問題討論:
1.「真理的道」是指甚麼? 與「叫人得救的福音」有何關聯? 你能舉出經文證明麼? 聽見真理的道,才能悔改信福音,原因何在? 如何能使人聽見真理的道呢?
2. 「所應許的聖靈」是指舊約的應許,你能說明所應許的是甚麼? 有哪些經文證明? 主耶穌也說到所應許的聖靈來臨,你能舉出經文來說明麼?
3. 「印記」是甚麼意思? 聖靈是我們所受的印記,原因何在? 有哪些經文證明? 他也是我們得基業的憑據,這憑據是指甚麼? 對你我的生命生活,有何重大意義?
4.「直等到神之民被贖」是甚麼意思? 子民原文作「產業」,你能舉出有關經文來解釋其意義麼? 彼前2:9; 2:4應驗哪些舊約經文? 對你而言,哪一經文感觸較深?
5.「使他(恩典)的榮耀得著稱讚」三次出現在1:3-14,你能說明各自強調的重點,有何異同? 這對於你現今的生命生活,有何關聯? 你當反省改進的有哪些方面?
6. 1:3-14的三次主題曲,也解釋了三一真神的奇妙救恩如何臨到你我生命中,你能說明三位格的工作麼? 頌讚三一真神的拯救,是我們感恩和祈求的根基框架,你當如改進你的禱告生活?
 

2018-07-28


我們所說的聖禮、記號、印記是什麽意思?WhatDo We Mean By Sacrament, Sign, And Seal?

作者: R. SCOTT CLARK     譯者:   Maria Marta

改革宗教會和改革宗神學家即那些在改革宗信仰告白諸如法蘭西信條〔French Co nfession, 1559〕、蘇格蘭信條〔Scots Confession, 1560〕、比利時信條〔Belgic Confession, 1561〕、海德堡問答〔Heidelberg Catechism, 1563〕、第二瑞士信條〔Helvetic Confession, Second, 1566、多特信經〔Canons of the Synod of Dort, 1619〕、西敏信仰標準〔Westminster Confession, 1647〕範圍內認信和教導的人常提到洗禮和聖餐是「聖禮」是「記號」和「印記」。最近HB的讀者Barrett來信,請求我們對這些詞語作簡明扼要的解釋。

聖禮

聖禮一詞廣泛使用於各種基督教傳統,但對一些福音派的人而言,它是一個與羅馬天主教和錯誤的洗禮、聖餐觀有關聯的詞。我們的英語單詞聖禮「聖禮」(sacrament)源自拉丁軍事術語sacramentum,是向皇帝宣誓效忠的軍人誓言。希臘文新約聖經中的奧秘( mystery)在聖經拉丁文譯本中常常被翻譯為sacramentum。早期教會通常將洗禮和聖餐描述為「基督教的奧秘」。在13世紀,即中世紀開始正式教導有7個聖禮,奧秘在聖餐中是指聖餐元素轉化為基督真實的身體和血。一些福音派人士擔憂,聖禮一詞帶有涵義(關聯意義),顯示洗禮和聖餐是以魔法方式施行(具有魔法能力),因為羅馬天主教的聖餐觀教導聖禮(他們承認7個聖禮)能把恩典給予領受者,無論何時施行聖禮,它們本身都能產生效果(ex opere operato,因功生效)。因此,在福音派陣營的部分地區使用「法例」(ordinance)一詞來取代聖禮。

確實,羅馬天主教在我們的主設立的兩個聖禮(洗禮和聖餐)上添加了五個假聖禮,並且在關於如何施行的問題上抱持錯誤的觀點。 然而,改革宗教會使用聖禮這詞,並不是羅馬天主教所指的意思。在海德堡教理問答中,我們這樣定義聖禮:

六十六問:聖禮是什麽?
「聖禮是聖潔的、可見的標志和印記。上帝設立聖禮,藉著聖禮的施行,祂可以更完全地向我們宣布並印證福音的應許,即祂因基督一次在十字架上所完成的犧牲,白白地把赦罪和永生賜給我們。」

我們認信,我們的主在新約只設立兩個聖禮:洗禮和主的晚餐(或聖餐)。 我們將它們定義為「記號」和「印記」。接下來我們會明白它們的含義,但最重要的是要知道,我們否認羅馬天主教的觀點:聖禮必然賜新生命(例如,洗禮使人重生)或藉著施行就能產生效果,或聖餐的元素轉化為基督的身體和血(神學上稱為變質説Transubstantiation)。生效的動詞(operative verb)在我們的定義中是一個宣講的字(a preaching word):宣佈。 他們說。 他們宣佈。能力不在於做,而是在於說。

我們該如何處理聖禮一詞?假如我們思考片刻,我們很快就發現,祈禱一詞也有同樣的問題,因為在祈禱是什麽,向誰祈禱,祈禱的目的等問題上,我們與羅馬天主教有著截然不同的觀念。那麽,我們就應該放棄祈禱這個詞嗎?不應該的,因為這是定義的問題。可能有人論證說,聖經常常使用禱告一詞,卻沒有提到聖禮一詞。的確如此,但翻譯為「法例」(ordinance)的字 (但六7;六15)  在聖經中並非用來描述洗禮和聖餐的。因此,是否使用傳統術語是個謹慎與自由的問題。為了減輕混亂,一些認信的長老會和改革宗教會,特別是在美國南部,有時說洗禮和聖餐是法例。

在某些傳統中(特別是羅馬天主教傳統),有一種誘惑,那就是把聖禮與聖禮所證明的基督及其恩福混淆。這是一項巨大的錯謬,因為我們尋求將聖禮轉變成基督或拯救的那一刻,它們就不再是聖禮了。 根據定義,聖禮不是它所證明的事物。 基督不是聖禮,聖禮也不是基督。

有些人在回應中,將聖禮(或法例)與基督及其恩福切底分開,他們單單談論領受人,受洗人做了什麽,或領聖餐者做了什麽和正在做什麽。用這種方式談論聖禮也是個錯誤。在聖禮的施行中,信徒不是表演的明星,基督才是。聖禮證明祂為我們作成的一切。祂賺得我們的救贖。祂潔凈我們,賜給我們新生命。祂透過祂的聖靈奧秘地用祂自己來餵養我們。

記號

當我們說記號,我們的意思是指洗禮和聖餐指向某人和某事。它們指向基督所作成的事,並說明與證明祂福音的應許。 它們是基督為祂所有子民(選民)作成的事的記號,是他們所相信的真實事件的記號。 在基督來臨之前,記號的作用是真實的,現在,在祂升天之後依然是真實的。我們的主在伊甸園賜下兩個記號,即生命樹和死亡樹(分別善惡的樹)。在創世記二章17節,上帝說園中各樣樹上的果子,你可以隨意吃,但我們吃分別善惡樹上的果子那一天「必定死」。上帝的說話使它變成一棵死亡樹。 它們是聖禮的一種。 它們指向一個超越本身的實相。 它們清楚表明應許。

在救贖歷史時期,還有其他的聖禮記號,將人一直帶領到基督來臨的事件上。從某種意義上說,獻祭系統就是聖典,因為它表明一個無辜的替代者必須來代替選民受死。割禮是上帝在創世記十七章設立(命定)的,目的是要表明上帝必定會按祂的主權,滿有恩慈地將新心和新生命賜給祂的選民。它也應許救主將要來實現創世記三章15節的應許,即那一位後裔甚至不惜犧牲自己的生命來壓碎蛇。逾越節(出埃及記十二章)是一個聖禮,表明上帝的羔羊要來除去世人的罪(約一29),並教導我們,我們需要「吃他的肉,喝他的血」(約六53),好叫我們有永生。 紅海是一個聖禮,曠野的嗎哪也是一個聖禮。 我們知道這點,是因為使徒保羅在哥林多前書十章1-4節告訴我們的。

沒有一個聖禮是以魔法方式施行的。沒有一個人因為受割禮、過紅海(洗禮)、吃逾越節 (或別的節期) 的筵席、或在曠野吃嗎哪 (主的晚餐) 而獲得新生命。聖禮總是記號,指向基督和祂的恩福,我們唯獨藉著信心------聖靈所賜的恩賜(弗二8-10) ------領受基督和祂的恩福。在新約,那實體,即基督已經到來。隨著祂的死,舊預表 (說明; 林前十; 來八5) 和預示 (西二17; 來八5;十1) 就結束了,被不流血的記號和洗禮、聖餐這兩個聖禮取代。

印記

在古代世界,通信既困難又緩慢。 即使最強大的國王也必需依靠那些可能無法前往目的地的信使与外界聯繫。一旦抵達到目的地,信使必須證明所傳送的文書的真實性。 這就是印記的作用。 將融化的蠟滴在文書的封口邊緣,蓋上圖章戒指,籍此表明文書不是偽造的。現在我們仍然以不同的方式做這件事。我們的貨幣標有線條和標記,旨在表明它的真實性。我們的駕照也有蓋印。重要的文件(如證書、結婚證、出生證) 上仍然有(浮凸的) 蓋印,為的是表明它們的真實性。而在古代世界則用蠟封印。

印記不能創造實體。印記證明其他人所做的事的真實性。若一個從未上過學的人在清倉拍賣中找到一張文憑,但擁有文憑也不能使他成為一個畢業生。封印的文件不具魔法能力,但它是對人的應許,唯獨依靠恩典,唯獨藉著信心,人就能擁有文件所證明的內容。 洗禮和聖餐是對信徒的保證:主已賜給信徒新生命和真信心,聖禮所宣告和所應許的對信徒而言都是真實的(會實現)。

因此,在海德堡教理問答中,我們說洗禮是印記:

六十九問:洗禮怎樣表明並印證基督在十字架上一次獻上的犧牲,使你得益呢?
回答:「乃是這樣:基督指定了這外在的水洗,並加上祂的應許,使我因祂的寶血和聖靈,得以洗凈靈魂一切汙穢,即所有罪惡,恰如通常用水洗去身體的汙穢一般。」

聖禮叫人看見福音。 我們需要看得見的應許和保證,因為我們是罪人,我們的信心軟弱,常常動搖。 所以,我們對信徒說(信徒的資格是必須的),就如你可被水清洗是确实無疑的,基督和祂的靈潔凈你一樣是確實無疑的。洗禮不能潔凈你們,而是基督透過祂的靈潔凈你們,洗禮則證明這是千真萬確的。

聖餐也是如此。海德堡教理問答七十五問:
聖餐怎樣向你表明並印證你與基督在十字架上一次完成的犧牲及其一切恩惠有份呢?

回答:「乃是這樣:基督已經吩咐我和眾信徒吃這擘開的餅,喝這杯,為的是記念祂;並且賜給以下的應許:首先,祂的身體在十字架上為我而舍,為我破碎,祂的寶血為我而流,正如我親眼看見主的餅為我擘開,主的杯遞給我一樣確實;其次,祂那被釘的身體和流出的寶血,餵養我的靈魂,直到永生,正如我從牧師的手裏接受,並親嘗主的餅和杯,作為基督的身體和寶血的標記一般確實。」

我們從聖經得知基督設立(命定,因此是法例)洗禮和聖餐。像洗禮那樣,聖餐也叫人看見福音:基督順服、死亡、被埋葬、復活,升天坐在父上帝右邊,為我們代求。好消息是,因著恩典,我們白白地得蒙拯救,在基督裏,唯獨藉著信心,我們白白地得稱為義。在我們領受聖餐時,基督對信徒說:你們屬於我。我是替你們贖罪的替代者。你的罪確實被除去。你確實得到新生命,我透過我的靈正在你們裏面作工,更新你,使你有基督的形象。聖餐的元素沒有發生任何方式的改變,基督奧秘地用祂真實的身體和血餵養我們,就如在最後的晚餐中祂使門徒得到滿足那樣。聖餐對信徒說:這是真實的,對你來說也是真實的。它不是葬禮,也不僅僅是記念。它是奇妙、奧秘、歡樂的宴席,信徒與我們復活的主一起進餐。毫無疑問我們領受這些元素,毫無疑問我們吃聖餐時,再次得到保證,我們是祂肉中的肉,骨中的骨(海德堡教理问答七十六)。

聖禮、記號、印記不是魔法,也不是純粹的記念,而是上帝賜給祂的寄居子民的奇妙恩賜,這些恩賜將我們指向基督、祂的恩福、對信徒的應許,正如我們得潔凈是真實的,正如我們吃這餅和喝這杯是真實的,我們屬於基督,基督也屬於我們也同樣是真實的。


What Do We Mean By Sacrament, Sign, And Seal?
by R. SCOTT CLARK

The Reformed churches and Reformed theologians (i.e., those who confess and teach within the bounds of the Reformed confessions, e.g., the French Confession (1559), the Scots Confession (1560), the Belgic Confession (1561), the Heidelberg Catechism (1563), the Second Helvetic Confession (1566), the Canons of Dort (1619), the Westminster Standards (1646–48), speak about baptism and the Lord’s Supper as “holy sacraments” and as “signs” and “seals.” Recently HB reader Barrett wrote to ask for a brief, simple explanation of these terms.

Sacrament

The word sacrament is widely used by a variety of Christian traditions but for some evangelicals it is a word that is associated with Romanism and a false view of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.Our English word sacrament is derived from the Latin military term, sacramentum, which was a military oath of loyalty. In the Latin translations of Scripture where the New Testament uses the term mystery the Latin text often uses the word sacramentum. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper were often described by the early church as “Christian mysteries.” In the 13th century, the medieval began to teach officially that there are 7 sacraments and that in the Lord’s Supper the mystery is that the elements are transformed into the actual body and blood of Christ. The concern for some evangelicals is that the word sacrament carries with it a connotation (an associated meaning) that signals that baptism and the supper work by magic because the Roman communion teaches that the sacraments (they confess 7 sacraments) necessarily confer grace upon the recipient because they work whenever they are used (ex opere operato). Thus, in some parts of the evangelical world the term “ordinance” is used instead.

It is true that Rome has added five false sacraments to the two instituted by our Lord (baptism and the supper) and that she has a false view of how they work. When the Reformed churches use the word sacrament, however, we do not mean by what Rome means. In the Heidelberg Catechism we define sacrament this way:

66. What are the Sacraments?

The Sacraments are visible holy signs and seals appointed of God for this end, that by the use thereof He may the more fully declare and seal to us the promise of the Gospel: namely, that of free grace, He grants us the forgiveness of sins and everlasting life for the sake of the one sacrifice of Christ accomplished on the cross.

We confess that, in the New Testament, our Lord instituted only two sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper (or holy communion). We define them as “signs” and “seals.” We will get to what that means in a moment but the most important thing to know here is that we deny the Roman view that sacraments necessarily give new life (e.g., baptismal regeneration) or that “by the working it is worked” or that the elements of the Lord’s Supper are transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ (transubstantiation). The operative verb in our definition is a preaching word: declare. They speak. They announce. Their power lies not in doing but saying.

What should we do with the word sacrament? Should we think about this for a moment we soon see that we might have the same problem with the word prayer since Rome has a very different notion of what prayer is, to whom we pray, and to what end. Should we give up the word prayer? We do not because it is a matter of definition. One might argue that prayer is used in Scripture whereas sacrament is not. That is certainly true but the word translated as ordinance (Dan 6:7; 6:15) is not used in Scripture to describe baptism and the supper. So whether to use the traditional term is a matter of prudence and liberty. To alleviate the confusion, some confessional Presbyterian and Reformed churches, particularly in the southern US sometimes speak of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as ordinances.

In some traditions (especially in Rome) there has been a temptation to confuse the sacraments for the things to which they testify: Christ and his benefits. That is a great mistake because the moment we seek to turn the sacraments into Christ or into salvation, then they are no longer sacraments. By definition, a sacrament is not the things to which testifies. Christ is not a sacrament and no sacrament is Christ.

In reaction, some have come to talk about sacraments in a way that so utterly divorces the sacraments (or ordinances) from Christ and his benefits that they come really only to speak about the recipient, what the baptized person has done or what the communicant (the person receiving the Lord’s Supper) has done or is doing. This is also a mistake. In the administration of the sacraments, the believer is not the star of the show, Christ is. They testify to what he done for us. He has earned our salvation. He has washed us with new life. He is feeding us mysteriously, by his Holy Spirit, with himself.

Sign

When we say sign we mean that baptism and the supper point to someone and something. They point to what Christ has done. They illustrate and testify to his gospel promises. They are signs of what he has done for all his people (elect) and what is true of all those who believe. This was true before Christ came and it remains true now after his ascension. In the garden our Lord gave two signs, a tree of life and a tree of death (the tree of the knowledge of good and evil). In Genesis 2:17 God said that we were free to eat from any tree in the garden but the day we ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, “you shall surely die.” That makes it a tree of death. They were sacraments of a kind. They pointed beyond themselves to realities. They illustrated promises.

There were other signs sacraments in the period of redemptive history leading up to the coming of Christ. In a sense the sacrificial system was sacramental insofar as it illustrated that an innocent substitute had to come to die in the place of the elect. Circumcision was instituted (ordained) by the Lord in Genesis 17 in order to signify the necessity of a new heart and new life sovereignly, graciously given by the Lord to his elect. It also promised the coming Savior who would fulfill the promise made in Genesis 3:15 that a the Seed would come to crush the serpent even at the cost of his own life. The Passover (Exod 12) was a sacrament illustrating the coming of the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29) and teaching us that we needed to “eat his flesh and drink his blood” (John 6:53) that we might have eternal life. The Red Sea was a sacrament as was the manna in the wilderness. We know this because the Apostle Paul says so in 1 Corinthians 10:1–4.

None of these worked by magic. No one was ever given new life by virtue of being circumcised or going through the Red Sea (baptism) or by eating the Passover (or any other feast) or by eating manna in the wilderness (the Lord’s Supper). Sacraments are always signs, pointing to Christ and his benefits and we receive Christ and his benefits through faith alone, which is the gift of the Holy Spirit (Eph 2:8–10). In the New Testament the reality came: Christ. With his death the old types (illustrations; 1 Cor 10:6; Heb 8:5) and foreshadows (Col 2:17; Heb 8:5; 10:1) ended and were replaced by the bloodless signs and sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

Seal

In the ancient world communication was difficult and slow. Even the most powerful kings had to rely on messengers who might not make it to the destination. Once there they had to prove that a communication was authentic. That is what a seal did. It was a bit of wax melted on to a document and marked with a signet ring thus showing that it was not a forgery. We still do this in various ways. Our currency has lines and marks designed to show that it authentic. Our driver’s licenses have the same things. Important documents (e.g., diplomas, marriage certificates, birth certificates) still have a mark impressed (embossed) into them to show that they are authentic. So it was in the ancient world with a wax seal.

The seal does not create a reality. It testifies to the truth of what has already been done by someone else. Should a person never attend school but find a diploma at a rummage sale, possession of the diploma would not make that person a graduate. A sealed document is not magic but it is a promise to the person who, by grace alone, through faith alone, has what the document testifies. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are guarantees to the believer, one to whom the Lord has already given new life and true faith, that what the sacraments declare and promise really are true for the believer.

So, in the Heidelberg Catechism we talk about baptism as a seal this way:

69. How is it signified and sealed to you in Holy Baptism, that you have part in the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross?

Thus: that Christ instituted this outward washing with water and joined therewith this promise: that I am washed with His blood and Spirit from the pollution of my soul, that is, from all my sins, as certainly as I am washed outwardly with water, whereby commonly the filthiness of the body is taken away.

The sacraments are the gospel made visible. We need the these visible promises and guarantees because we are sinners and our faith is sometimes weak. We waver. So, we say to the believer (this qualification is essential), that just as surely as you were washed with water, that is how certain it is that you were cleansed by Christ and by his Spirit. Baptism does not do this. Christ does it by his Spirit but baptism testifies to the believer that it is really true.

The same is true of the Lord’s Supper. Heidelberg 75 says:

75. How is it signified and sealed to you in the Holy Supper, that you do partake of the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross and all His benefits?

Thus: that Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat of this broken bread and to drink of this cup in remembrance of Him, and has joined therewith these promises: First, that His body was offered and broken on the cross for me and His blood shed for me, as certainly as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup communicated to me; and further, that with His crucified body and shed blood He Himself feeds and nourishes my soul to everlasting life, as certainly as I receive from the hand of the minister and taste with my mouth the bread and cup of the Lord, which are given me as certain tokens of the body and blood of Christ.

We know from Scripture that Christ instituted (ordained, hence ordinance) the baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Like baptism, the supper is a visible presentation of the gospel: Christ obeyed, died, was buried, raised, and is ascended to the right hand of the Father where he intercedes for us. The good news is that we have been saved freely, by grace, that we are accepted (justified) freely, through faith alone, in Christ alone. When we receive the Lord’s Supper Christ says to the believer: you are mine. I was your atoning substitute. Your sins really have been wiped away. You really have been given new life and I am working in you now by my Spirit to renew you into my image. Mysteriously, not by changing the elements in any way, Jesus is feeding us with his true body and blood just as he fed the disciples at the last supper. The supper says to the believer: it is really true and it is true for you. It is not just a memory nor is it a funeral. It is a wonderful, mysterious, happy feast in which believers commune together with our risen Lord. As surely as we receive the elements and surely as we eat we are reassured that we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone (HC 76).

Sacraments, signs, and seals are not magic nor are they mere memories but they are wonderful gifts from God for his sojourning people that point us to Christ and his benefits and promise to believers that just as we were washed and just as we eat the bread and drink the wine, so truly are we Christ’s and he our.

2017-01-12

预表论(TYPOLOGY)(腊:typos,「印记」)

摘自圣经新辞典

  这是一种陈述圣经救恩历史的方法,让某些较早的阶段显为较后阶段的先现,或让某些较后阶段显为早期阶段的重演或应验。(诚之按:预表法可以说是一种解释圣经的方法,是为了辨识出救赎历史中所出现之类似事件[例如以色列人出埃及的经历,和教会的经历]、人物[例如亚当与基督]或物件[例如地上的帐幕/圣殿和天上的圣殿]之间的有机关系。这是新约作者解释旧约的人物、事件、物件常用的方法。)

Ⅰ 旧约

  在旧约中,有两个原型时代一再以预表方式表明出来,分别是创世和出埃及的时日,旧约把出埃及一事视为一个新的创造,或至少是最初创造活动的重复。在太初驾驭狂澜,说「你只可到这里,不可越过」(创一9-10;伯卅八8-11)的那一位,在出埃及的事件中,显出同样的能力,止住了芦苇海的水(出十四21-29)。当创造主克服*拉哈伯与大龙(伯廿六12-13)的传说用来媲美祂在出埃及的胜利时(诗七十四12-14,八十九8-10),创造与出埃及的对应尤获强调(拉哈伯与大龙在远古时象征混沌)。拉哈伯成为了埃及的预表(参:赛卅7),而大龙(利未安单)则是法老的「预表」(参:结廿九3)。

  圣经作者把以色列从被掳到巴比伦后回归和重建的经历,描绘为一个新的创造,和一次新的出埃及事件。创世记一章及二章中,用来形容创造主的创世奇工的动词(来:ba{ra{~ya{s]ar, `a{s*a^),被应用在祂重建掳民的行为上(参:赛四十三7,在这里,三个动词同时出现)。创世时大龙的预表,早已被用来描绘耶和华在出埃及的胜利,现在也被用来形容这新的胜利。百姓呼求耶和华「兴起」(膀臂)……像古时的年日兴起一样」(那时祂「砍碎拉哈伯,刺透大龙」)(赛五十一9),他们此刻是呼吁神在这新的处境中,重复祂在创世和以色列人出埃及时的伟大作为。倘若在出埃及时祂藉「在沧海中开道,在大水中开路」(赛四十三16)来拯救祂的子民,那么当那些被掳归回的人从水中经过的时候,祂会与他们同在(赛四十三2),祂必「在旷野开道路,在沙漠开江河」(赛四十三19)。正如出埃及的一代,日间由云柱带领,夜间由火柱引路,而当后面有危险威胁时,云柱和火柱又会绕到他们的后边;同样,回归者也得到应许:「耶和华必在你们前头行,以色列的神必作你们的后盾」(赛五十二12)。对于后来的世代而言,他们就像祖先一样,真正体验到「耶和华引导他们经过沙漠,他们并不干渴,祂为他们使水从盘石而流」(赛四十八21)。

  用预表论的字眼来说,以前一系列的事件构成后来事件的「预表」(type);后者则是前者的「对范」(antitype)(预表之本体)。或者我们可以说,救恩历史中接连不断的时期,揭示出神的工作有重复出现的模式,而新约的作者们相信,这个模式在他们的时代已最终明确地体现了。

Ⅱ 新约

  奥古斯丁的精辟句概述了新旧约之间的预表关系:「新约藏卧于旧约;旧约显立于新约」。在新约中,基督徒的救赎是神伟大工作的高峰,是祂在旧约的「典型」伟大工作的「对范」。基督徒的救恩被视为一次新的创造、新的出埃及,和从被掳中新的重建。

a. 新的创造

  「那吩咐光从黑暗里照出来的神,已经照在我们心里,叫我们得知神荣耀的光显在耶稣基督的面上」(林后四6)。也许第四卷福音书提供了创世预表论一个最清楚的例证,其开端──「太初……」──即与创世记起首的话相和应:在上古叫万物成形的神的道,现在成了肉身,开始一个新的创造。保罗说那些「在基督里」的人成为了「新造的人」(林后五17;加六15)。保罗和那在拔摩海岛上见异象者同样认为,基督救赎的工作扭转了始祖堕落所带来的咒诅(罗八19-21;启廿二1-5)。福音建立了「新天新地,有义居在其中」(彼后三13;参:启廿一1)。

b. 新的出埃及

  出埃及的预表尤其遍布于新约中。马太似乎认为耶稣的孩提时代重演了以色列早期的经历,即下到埃及,然后又返上来(太二15)。约翰则藉他的福音书的先后次序及其他事件,暗示基督是逾越节羔羊的对范(参:约十九1436)。彼得的说法也大致一样(彼前一19),而保罗则更清楚阐明这思想:因为「我们逾越节的羔羊基督已经被杀献祭了」,所以祂的子民应该用「诚实真正的无酵饼」来庆祝随后的这节期(林前五7-8)。正如以色列人经过芦苇海,照样基督徒也受洗归入基督;正如以色列人从天上得饼、从盘石得水,照样基督徒也有他们独特的「灵食灵饮」(林前十1-4)。正如出埃及的一代,虽然得到各样福气,却仍因为不信及不服从而要死在旷野,不得进入应许之地;同样,新约圣经劝勉基督徒要接受警戒,免得失足跌倒(林前十5-12;参:来三7-13;犹5)。因为这些事发生在以色列人身上,是要「作为鉴戒(typiko{s),并且写在经上,正是警戒我们这末世的人」(林前十11)。这预表具有浓厚的道德和劝喻的重点。

c. 新的重建

  「福音」(euangelion)这词及其同词源的字词,大概由新约作者取材自赛四十-六十六里出现的「好信息」一词;「好信息」在该处是指神引导被掳的人归回,重建锡安一事(赛四十9,参五十二7,六十一1)。旧约没有任何其他一段先知的宣讲为福音的见证经文(testimonia)提供了这样丰富的「情节」:从赛四十3的「声音」,到赛四十二-五十三的仆人的工作,一直至赛六十五17和六十六22的新天新地。

d. 预表的人物

  在罗五14,亚当被称为「那以后要来之人(即基督,末后的亚当)的预像(typos)」。作为旧创造之首,亚当显然是基督──新创造之首──的一个对比。按保罗的说法,所有人类若不是「在亚当里」──在他里面「众人都死了」,就是「在基督里」──在祂里面众人都要「复活」(林前十五22)。

  再没有其他旧约人物明显地被称为新约基督的预像,但他们在相比或对照之下,或多或少预示了基督:作为先知的摩西(徒三22-23,七37),作为大祭司的亚伦(来五4-5),作为君王的大卫(徒十三22)。希伯来书的作者从诗一一○4处得到暗示,看出麦基洗德是基督祭司身分的一个特别恰当的对比(来五610,六20起)。他也暗示旷野会幕里的设备和祭礼可能包含预表的意义,不过这意义所涉及的是旧体系与基督所引进的新体系之间的分别,而不是二者的相似处。只有参照对范,才可以体会预表的适切性。

Ⅲ 圣经以后的发展

  使徒时代以后开始了一个更自由发挥的基督教预表论的纪元。来自第二世纪上半叶的《巴拿巴书》和游斯丁(Justin)的《与特拉浮的对话》(Dialogue with Trypho)都显示,若没有释经上的制约,以预表方法解释旧约事件可以去到怎样的地步。这样的释经导致在基督徒眼中,旧约的主要价值在于它是以图画预示基督及其工作的书,这些图画是藉文字及可见的艺术呈现的。令人印象最深刻的艺术样本也许是查特勒(Chartres)大教堂,这里北面的雕塑和窗子上描绘了许多旧约的故事,和教堂南面的雕塑和窗子上所描绘的新约故事互相对应。例如,以撒背负木柴成为了基督背负十架的类比,约瑟以二十块银子被卖一事成为了基督以三十块银子被卖的对比等等。这样一来,整本旧约变为基督教故事的预告,而所根据的原则却不是圣经作者所认许的。

  倘若有人要在今天复兴中世纪早期的做法,那些在当时自然而自发的东西就往往会变得矫揉造作。那么,「倘若我们要按恰当的意思援引圣经,并把基督教教义建立在一个较稳固的基础上,而不是建基于机灵解谜者的私人判断上,便须马上为预表方法的合法应用建立一套可行的标准,从而使圣经神学的路较为畅顺」(G. W. H. Lampe, Theology 56, 1953,页208)。

  书目:A. Jukes, The Law of the Offerings, 1854;同作者,Types of Genesis, 1858; P. Fairbairn, The Typology of Scripture 6, 1880; C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 1952; H. H. Rowley, The Unity of the Bible, 1953; G. W. H. Lampe and K. J. Woollcombe, Essays on Typology, 1957; S. H. Hooke, Alpha and Omega, 1961; D. Daube, The Exodus Pattern in the Bible, 1963; A. T. Hanson, Jesus Christ in the Old Testament, 1965; G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2, 1965,页319-409; F. F. Bruce, This is That, 1968;同作者,The Time is Fulfilled, 1978; J. W. Drane, EQ 50,1978,页195-210

F.F.B.