是可憎的，然而又是美麗的Obscene,yet Beautiful
作者: 史普羅(R.C. Sproul)
譯者: 喬蘭山以妲
如果這個星球上有什麼事是太高、太聖潔，以至於我們不能理解，那就是基督的受難------祂的死，以及祂被父神離棄，如果不是神的話將它的含義擺在我們面前，我們一定完全不敢講起它，在這一節𥚃，我想將焦點放在聖經對基督十字架之死的解釋上。
If
any event that has transpired on this planet is too high and too holy for us to
comprehend, it is the passion of Christ—His death, His atonement, and His
forsakenness by the Father. We would be totally intimidated to speak of it at
all were it not for the fact that God in His Word has set before us the
revelation of its meaning. In this section, I want to focus on the biblical
interpretation of Christ’s death on the cross.
不論何時我們討論一個歷史事件，我們都會檢驗事實，有時候爭論真實發生的是什麼，說的是什麼，觀察到的是什麼。然而，我們一致認同事實（或一致不認同之後），仍要面對一個我們所能提出的最重要的問題：這個事件的意義是什麼？
Any
time we discuss a historical event, we review the facts, and sometimes we argue
about what really took place, what was said, what was observed. However, once
we agree on the facts (or agree to disagree), we are still left with the most
important question we can ask: What is the meaning of the event?
基督的見證者們跌到在各各地，那些眼見祂被交給羅馬人的人，那些看見祂被釘十字架的人，對這件事有不同的理解。有些人認為他們只是在看一個罪犯受刑；大祭司該亞法說耶穌的死是為了眾百姓的益處，他視耶穌的受難為政治緩和的需要；一個看見耶穌怎麼死的百夫長呼叫到：「這真是神的兒子了！」（太廿七54）；彼拉多，與耶穌同釘十字架的兩個強盜------似乎每個人對十字架的含義都有著不同理解。
The
people who witnessed Christ stumbling toward Golgotha, who saw Him delivered to
the Romans, and who watched His crucifixion, understood the significance of
this event in a variety of ways. There were those present who thought that they
were viewing the just execution of a criminal. Caiaphas, the high priest, said
that Christ’s death was expedient and that He had to die for the good of the
nation. He saw the crucifixion as an act of political appeasement. A centurion
who watched how Jesus died said, “Truly this was the Son of God!” (Matt.
27:54). Pontius Pilate, the two thieves who were crucified next to
Jesus—everyone, it seems, had a different understanding of what the cross
signified.
兩千年來，十字架一直是一個熱門的神學主題。如果我們詳細考察當今各種神學學派與思潮，就會發現對於十字架上真實發生了什麼，存在大量爭競的理論。有些說它是犧牲之愛的最高寫照，另一些說它是存在主義勇氣的至高之舉，仍舊還有些人說它是宇宙性的救贖作為。爭論綿延不休。
The
cross has been a favorite theme of theological speculation for two thousand
years. If we would peruse the various theological schools of thought today, we
would find a multitude of competing theories as to what really happened on the
cross. Some say it was the supreme illustration of sacrificial love. Others say
it was the supreme act of existential courage, while still others say it was a
cosmic act of redemption. The dispute
goes on.
然而，我們不僅有聖經對這些事實的記載------主要在福音書中，還有神對這些事件的解釋------主要在使徒書信𥚃。在加拉太書三章13節，保羅討論十字架的意義時，以一節經文總結整章的教導：「基督既為我們受了咒詛，就贖我們脫離律法的咒詛；因為經上記著『凡掛在木頭上都是被咒詛的。』」
However,
we have not only the record of the events in the Scriptures, primarily in the
Gospels, but we also have God’s interpretation of those events, primarily in
the Epistles. In Galatians 3:13, Paul discusses the meaning of the cross,
summarizing the entire teaching of the chapter in a single verse: “Christ
redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is
written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.’”
咒詛這一概念對於有知識的猶太人而言非常直白易懂，但在我們這個時代卻帶有一種額外之音。對我們來說，「咒詛」這個概念總是摻雜著某種迷信。當我們聽到咒詛這個詞時，我想到的是《寶林歷險記》（The Perils of Pauline)中的油罐哈利，當英雄從他手𥚃救出女英雄時，他說：「咒詛再次失敗」。有些人也許想到行伏都巫術（voodoo)的原始部落，一個作為替身的娃娃被針紮滿，作為對仇敵施加的咒詛。我們也許會想到好萊塢恐怖電影埃及盜墓者𥚃面的文森特·普萊斯和貝拉·盧格思所受的咒詛。在我們今天的時代，咒詛被視為屬於迷信範疇的某種東西。
This
curse motif would have been understood clearly by a knowledgeable Jew in the
ancient world, but in our day it has a foreign sound to it. To us, the very
concept of “curse” smacks of something superstitious. When I hear the word
curse, I think of Oil Can Harry in The Perils of Pauline, who says, “Curses,
foiled again” when the hero saves the heroine from his clutches. Someone else
may think of the behavior of primitive tribes who practice voodoo, in which
tiny replica dolls are punctured by pins as a curse is put on an enemy. We may
think of the curse of the mummy’s tomb in Hollywood horror movies with Vincent
Price and Bela Lugosi. A curse in our day and age is considered something that
belongs in the realm of superstition.
在聖經的語境下，咒詛有著完全不同的含義。在舊約中，咒詛指的是神否定性的審判，它是祝福這個詞的反義詞和對立面。咒詛的根源可以追溯到神與以色列立約時在申命記頒布的律法，如果沒有處罰，約就不叫約，約一定具備關於守約的賞賜和背約處罰的條款。神對祂的百姓說：「看哪，我今日將祝福與咒詛的話都陳明在你們面前。 你們若聽從耶和華你們神的誡命，就是我今日所吩咐你們的，就必蒙福。 你們若不聽從耶和華你們神的誡命，偏離我今日所吩咐你們的道，去侍奉你們素來所不認識的別神，就必受禍。」（申十一26-28） 咒詛是神對不順服之人施以的審判，因為他們幹犯祂聖潔的律法。
In
biblical categories, a curse has quite a different meaning. In the Old
Testament, the curse refers to the negative judgment of God. It is the antonym,
the opposite, of the word blessing. Its roots go back to accounts of the giving
of the law in the book of Deuteronomy when the covenant was established with
Israel. There was no covenant without sanctions attached to it, provisions for
reward for those who kept the terms of the covenant and punishment for those
who violated it. God said to His people, “See, I am setting before you today a
blessing and a curse—the blessing if you obey the commands of the Lord your God
that I am giving you today; the curse if you disobey the commands of the Lord
your God and turn from the way that I command you today by following other gods
which you have not known” (Deut. 11:26–28, NIV). The curse is the judgment of
God on disobedience, on violations of His holy law.
我們可以透過觀察咒詛是如何與它的反面相對來更完全地理解咒詛的含義。有福（blessed)這個詞在希伯來文中常常有著明確的定義，在舊約中，人與神的團契在伊甸園𥚃被打破以後，人仍然可以與神有著近似的關係，但有一點絕對的禁止，那就是沒有人可以見神的面。面對面見神這一幸福特權。只留給我們救恩終極、完全的實現，這是我們擁有的盼望，有朝一日我們可以直接瞻仰神的面。我們仍舊處在這一禁令下：「人見我的面不能存活」（出卅20）。然而，猶太人一直有這樣的盼望，希望有一日這一對墮落之人的處罰可以除去。希伯來文的祝福是這樣的：
The
meaning of the curse may be grasped more fully by viewing it in contrast with
its opposite. The word blessed is often defined in Hebrew terms quite
concretely. In the Old Testament, after fellowship with God was violated in
Eden, people could still have a proximate relationship with God, but there was
one absolute prohibition. No one was allowed to look into the face of God. That
privilege, the beatific vision, was reserved for the final fulfillment of our
redemption. This is the hope that we have, that someday we will be able to gaze
unveiled directly into the face of God. We are still under the mandate, “man
shall not see [God] and live” (Ex. 33:20). It was always the Jewish hope,
however, that someday this punishment for the fall of man would be removed. The Hebrew benediction illustrates this:
「願耶和華賜福給你，保護你！願耶和華使他的臉光照你，賜恩給你！願耶和華向你仰臉，賜你平安！民六24-26）
The
Lord bless you and keep you; The Lord make his face to shine upon you and be
gracious to you; The Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.
(Num. 6:24–26)
這是希伯來文的平行文體，三句話說的是同一件事：願神賜福給你，願神使祂的臉光照你，願神向你仰臉，以色列人確切無疑地理解蒙福的含義：蒙福就是能夠見神的面，人只能在相對程度上享受祝福；人離終極的面對面關係越近，人就越蒙福。相反，人離與神面對面的關係越遠，咒詛就越大。因此對比之下，舊約中神的咒詛指的是從神面前徹底被逐出，處在完成的咒詛下，甚至遠遠瞥一眼神的面都不可能。處在完全的咒詛下，甚至連雅威的臉發出的萬丈光輝中一縷光線的折射都不可能見到。被咒詛就是進入絕對的黑暗之地，完全遠離神的面。
This
is an example of Hebrew parallelism. Each of the three stanzas says the same thing:
May the Lord bless; may the Lord make His face shine; may the Lord lift up His
countenance upon you. The Israelite understood blessedness concretely: to be
blessed was to be able to behold the face of God. One could enjoy the blessing
only in relative degrees: the closer one got to the ultimate face-to-face
relationship, the more blessed he was. Conversely, the farther removed from
that face-to-face relationship, the greater the curse. So by contrast, in the
Old Testament the curse of God involved being removed from His presence
altogether. The full curse precluded a glimpse, even at a distance, of the
light of His countenance. It forbade even the refracted glory of one ray of the
beaming light radiating from the face of Yahweh. To be cursed was to enter the
place of absolute darkness outside the presence of God.
這一象徵貫穿整個以色列史，延伸到猶太人的敬拜中。它被應用在會幕的位置上，聚會的會幕象徵著神住在祂百姓中間的應許，神命令十二支派的人按指定的位置支搭帳篷，環繞著社群的中心，就是會幕，雅威的居所。只有大祭司才能進入會幕的中心至聖所，而且一年才有一次，就是在贖罪日。即便到那時，他也只能在漫長的沐浴和潔淨禮之後才能進入至聖所。神住在祂的百姓中間，但是他們不能進入會幕的至聖所，即那象徵神居所的地方。
This
symbolism was carried out through the history of Israel and extended to the
liturgy of the Jewish people. It applied to the position of the tabernacle, the
tent of meeting, which was designed to symbolize the promise that God would be
in the midst of His people. God ordained that the people would pitch their tents
by tribes in such a way that they were gathered around the central point of the
community, where stood the tabernacle, the dwelling place of Yahweh. Only the
high priest was permitted to enter into the midst of the tabernacle, the Holy
of Holies, and only once a year, on the Day of Atonement. Even then, he could
enter the sacred place only after lengthy ablutions and cleansing rites. God
was in the midst of His people, but they could not enter the inner sanctum of
the tabernacle, which symbolized His dwelling place.
贖罪日的敬拜儀式涉及兩個動物，一只羊和一只替罪羊，祭司將羔羊為百姓的罪獻上祭壇，又取來替罪羊，將自己的手按在其上，象徵著民族的罪歸到羊的背上。替罪羊立刻被放到曠野，即那荒無人煙之地，到完全遠離神面的外面的黑暗中去。替罪羊受到了咒詛，被從活人之地剪除，從神的面驅逐。
On
the Day of Atonement, two animals were involved in the liturgical ceremonies, a
lamb and a scapegoat. The priest sacrificed the lamb on the altar for the sins
of the people. The priest also took the scapegoat and placed his hands on it,
symbolizing the transfer of the sins of the nation to the back of the goat.
Immediately the scapegoat was driven outside the camp into the wilderness, that
barren place of remote desolation—to the outer darkness away from any proximity
to the presence of God. The scapegoat received the curse. He was cut off from
the land of the living, cut off from the presence of God.
為了領會基督之死的意義，我們必須轉向新約聖經。約翰以這話開始約翰福音：「太初有道，道與神同在，道就是神。」世紀以來三位一體的奧秘困擾著我們的理性，我們知道在某種意義上聖父與聖子是一，祂們又有分別，祂們處在獨特的關係中。約翰以一個詞解釋那關係：同在；道與神同在。實際上，約翰是在說聖父與聖子有著面對面的關係，正是父禁止於猶太人的那種關係。舊約的猶太人可以到會幕𥚃與神「同在」（希臘文sun, 指著位於一群人中間），但是沒有人可以面對面地與神同在（希臘文pros, 指面對面意義上的同在）。
In
order to grasp the significance of this action as it relates to Christ’s death,
we must turn to the New Testament. John begins his Gospel by writing, “In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The
mystery of the Trinity has puzzled our minds for centuries. We know that there
is a sense in which the Father and the Son are one, yet they are to be
distinguished, and they exist in a unique relationship. The relationship, as
John explained it, is described by the word with. The Word was with God.
Literally, John was saying that Father and Son have a face-to-face
relationship, precisely the type of relationship Jews were denied with the
Father. The Old Testament Jew could go into the tabernacle and be “with” (Greek
sun, meaning “with” in the sense of present in a group) God, but no one could
ever be face to face with (Greek pros, meaning “with” in a face-to-face sense)
God.
耶穌與父神的關係代表著終極意義上的蒙福，這關係的缺失代表著咒詛的本質------我們查看十字架的受難時，牢記這一點很重要。當我們讀到耶穌受難的敘事時，有些事顯得特別特出。舊約教導我們，祂自己的百姓將祂交給外邦人，就是那些聖約之外的外族人。耶穌在猶太權柄前受審之後，被送到羅馬人那裏受審。祂沒有被以猶太人的方式處死------以石頭打死，因為那時的歷史環境排除了這個選項，如果死刑是羅馬官員宣判，那麼就必須由羅馬政府執行，因此也就必須按羅馬的處刑方式。耶穌是在營外死在外邦人手中，這一事實意義重大：祂的死是在耶路撒冷以外，衪被帶到各各地。所有這一切的活動編織在一起，都是指向替罪羊承受咒詛這一圖景的重演。
When
we examine the crucifixion, it is important for us to remember that Jesus’
relationship with the Father represents the ultimate in blessedness and that
its absence was the essence of the curse. When we read the narrative of the
passion of Jesus, certain things stand out. The Old Testament teaches us that
His own people delivered Him to the Gentiles, to strangers and foreigners to
the covenant. After His trial before the Jewish authorities, He was sent to the
Romans for judgment. He was not executed by the Jewish method of stoning, for
the circumstances of world history at that time precluded that option. When
capital punishment was exercised under the Roman occupation, it had to be done
by the Roman courts, so execution had to be by the Roman method of crucifixion.
It is significant that Jesus was killed at the hands of the Gentiles outside
the camp. His death took place outside the city of Jerusalem; He was taken to
Golgotha. All of these activities, when woven together, indicate the
reenactment of the drama of the scapegoat who received the curse.
保羅告訴我們，在申命記律法中，凡是掛在木頭上的都是被神咒詛的，這個咒詛並不一定加諸在那些被石頭打死的人身上。耶穌被掛在木頭上，立時滿足了舊約對神審判描述的所有細節，新約將耶穌的死視為隔離之舉，甚過視為勇氣或愛之舉，盡管祂的死也可以描繪這些事物，當然，這也是一件宇宙性的事件，是代贖的死，是為了我們的泳緣故傾倒在基督身上的咒詛。
Paul
tells us that in the Deuteronomic law, the curse of God is on anyone who hangs
from a tree, a curse not necessarily given to those who suffer death by
stoning. Jesus hangs on a tree, fulfilling in minute detail all of the Old
Testament provisions for the execution of divine judgment. The New Testament
sees the death of Jesus as more than an isolated act or illustration of courage
or love, though His death may illustrate those things. Rather, it is a cosmic
event, an atoning death; it is a curse that is poured out on Christ for us.
瑞士神學家（Karl Barth)說整個新約最重要的詞就是希臘小詞huper 。huper
這個詞的意思很簡單：「在……的位置上」。耶穌的死是在我們的位置上，祂為了你我承擔律法的咒詛，耶穌自己以多種方式表達這一點：「我為羊捨命……沒有人奪我的命去，是我自己捨的。」（約十15，18）：「因為人子來並不是要受人的服侍，乃是要服侍人，並且要捨命做多人的贖價。」（可十45）這些新約經文強調了替代的概念。
The
Swiss theologian Karl Barth said that the most important word in the whole New
Testament is the little Greek word huper. The word huper means simply “in
behalf of.” The death of Jesus is in behalf of us. He takes the curse of the
law for me and for you. Jesus Himself said it in many different ways: “I lay down
my life for the sheep … No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own
accord” (John 10:15, 18); “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served,
but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45, NIV). These New Testament images underscore the concept of
substitution.
我曾作過一次關於新舊約的演講，演講中間，當我說到耶穌基督的死時，一個人從房間後面跳起來，變得非常憤怒，從房間後面大喊道；「那太粗鄙可憎了！」驚訝之後，我重整思緒回答到：「這是我聽過的描述十字架最好的兩個形容詞。」
I
once delivered a public lecture on the relationship between the old and new
covenants. In the middle of my lecture, a man jumped up in the back of the
room. He became outraged when I suggested that Jesus Christ’s death was an
atoning death, a substitutionary death on behalf of other people. He shouted
from the back of the room, “That’s primitive and obscene!” After I got over my
surprise and collected my thoughts, I replied, “Those are the two best
descriptive words I have heard to characterize the cross.
還有什麼更粗鄙呢？如此血腥的法令，它所包含的所有劇情與慣例，都引起粗鄙禁忌的聯想。它是如此簡單，以至於連最沒文化、思維最簡單的人都能理解。神為我們提供了一條並不僅僅局限於智力精英的救贖之路，相反，它是如此愚昧，如此殘忍，以至於最粗鄙的人都能理解；同時又是如此莊嚴，以至於最聰明的神學家也感到驚愕。
What
could be more primitive? A bloody enactment like this, with all the drama and
ritual, is reminiscent of primitive taboos. It is so simple that even the most
uneducated, the most simpleminded person, can understand it. God provides a way
of redemption for us that is not limited to an intellectual elite but is so
crass, so crude, that the primitive person can comprehend it, and, at the same
time, so sublime that it brings consternation to the most brilliant
theologians.
我尤其喜歡第二個詞，可憎。它是最適合的詞，因為基督的十字架是人類歷史上最可憎的事件。耶穌基督成了一個可憎之物，祂在十字架上的時刻，全世界的罪都被歸到衪身上。就好像被歸到替罪羊身上一樣。殺人犯的可憎，妓女的可憎，綁匪的可憎，誹謗者的可憎，所有那些嚴重得罪人的可憎之罪，在那一刻都歸到一個人身上。一旦基督接受這一點，祂就成了罪的化身，成了可憎的絕對樣本。
I
particularly liked the second word, obscene. It is a most appropriate word because
the cross of Christ was the most obscene event in human history. Jesus Christ
became an obscenity. The moment that He was on the cross, the sin of the world
was imputed to Him as it was to the scapegoat. The obscenity of the murderer,
the obscenity of the prostitute, the obscenity of the kidnapper, the obscenity
of the slanderer, the obscenity of all those sins, as they violate people in
this world, were at one moment focused on one man. Once Christ embraced that,
He became the incarnation of sin, the absolute paragon of obscenity.
在某種意義上，十字架的基督是世界歷史上最骯髒可恥的人；在祂自己以及在祂裡面，衪則是全無瑕疵的羔羊------無罪、完美、威嚴。然而藉著歸算，人類暴行的所有骯臟都歸到祂一個人身上。
There
is a sense in which Christ on the cross was the most filthy and grotesque
person in the history of the world. In and of Himself, He was a lamb without
blemish—sinless, perfect, and majestic. But by imputation, all of the ugliness
of human violence was concentrated on His person.
一旦罪歸在耶穌身上，神就咀詛了祂。當律法的咒詛被傾倒耶穌身上時，衪經歷了人類編年史上從未有過的痛苦。我曾聽過有關十字架酷刑的講道，包括手如何被釘釘子，掛在十字架上，以及十字架的那些殘酷的方方面面。我相信它們都是真實的，十字架的確是一種殘酷的死刑，但是世界歷史上千千萬萬的人經歷過十字架酷刑的痛苦，但只有一個人體會過神完全的咒詛之苦。當祂體會這種痛苦時，祂呼喊道：「我的神，我的神，為什麼離棄我？」（可十五34）。有些人說祂只是在引用詩篇廿二篇，有些人則說祂被痛苦折磨得失去理智，不知道發生了什麼。然後神的確離棄了祂，那是代贖的重心所在，沒有離棄就沒有咒詛。在時間和空間的那個交匯點上，神向衪的兒子轉過身。
Once
sin was concentrated on Jesus, God cursed Him. When the curse of the law was
poured out on Jesus, He experienced pain that had never been suffered in the
annals of history. I have heard graphic sermons about the excruciating pain of
the nails in the hands, of hanging on a cross, and of the torturous dimensions
of crucifixion. I am sure that they are all accurate and that it was a dreadful
way to be executed, but thousands of people in world history have undergone the
excruciating pain of crucifixion. Only one man has ever felt the pain of the
fullness of the unmitigated curse of God on Him. When He felt it, He cried out,
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34, NIV). Some say He did
that simply to quote Psalm 22. Others say He was disoriented by His pain and
didn’t understand what was happening. God certainly did forsake Him. That is
the whole point of the atonement. Without forsakenness, there is no curse. God,
at that moment in space and time, turned His back on His Son.
耶穌享有與父神同在（pros) 關係的親密在那一刻破裂了（在祂的人性中）。在那一刻，神連光也遮蔽了，聖經告訴我們，世界被黑暗籠罩，神自己見證了那一刻的哀慟。耶穌被離棄了，祂被咒詛，並且祂感受到了。受難（passion)這個詞的意思是「感覺」（feeling), 在被離棄的時刻𥚃，我懷疑祂是否還能感受到手𥚃的釘子和額上的荊棘。祂從父面前被剪除。這是可憎的，然而又是美麗的，因為因著它，我們有一日可以享受以色列完全的祝福，我們將沒有遮掩地瞻仰神榮耀的面光。
The
intimacy of the pros relationship that Jesus experienced with the Father was
ruptured (in His human nature). At that moment God turned out the lights. The
Bible tells us that the world was encompassed with darkness, God Himself
bearing witness to the trauma of the hour. Jesus was forsaken, He was cursed,
and He felt it. The word passion means “feeling.” In the midst of His
forsakenness, I doubt He was even aware of the nails in His hands or the thorns
in His brow. He was cut off from the Father. It was obscene, yet it was beautiful,
because by it we can someday experience the fullness of the benediction of
Israel. We will look unveiled into the light of the countenance of God.
This
excerpt is from Who Is Jesus? by R.C. Sproul. Download all 28 Crucial Questions
ebooks for free here.
