Reforming the Church Service
1改革敬拜仪式
2论崇拜礼仪
作者：Michael S. Horton   1岑跃环译/王一校   2 Virginia Yip译
Reforming the Church Service Part 4 of a 6-part series onWorship
http://web.archive.org/web/19991009155116/www.alliancenet.org/radio/whi/commentaries/whi.com.msh.wor4.html原文
http://www.reformedbeginner.net/on-worship-4-liturgy/ 原译文1岑跃环译/王一校版
https://www.facebook.com/groups/462030323850206/posts/4097072803679255/2 Virginia Yip译版
https://www.facebook.com/groups/462030323850206聖經神學研究推廣小組
https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2017/01/blog-post_1.html原转载
 
 
"Liturgy." It sounds like "allergy," and that's perfect, because many Christians today have an allergy for liturgy. Actually, the idea's very basic: certain things should always be done in a worship service, other things shouldn't. And you need some set of criteria--a rationale, for what's in and what's not.
 
英文“礼仪”（liturgy）这个字，听起来很像是英文中的另一个字，“过敏”（allergy）。这个巧合也算是绝了，因为当下有许多基督徒，一听到“礼仪”这个词就会生发出一股过敏般的抵触感。其实，礼仪的意思不过是指：在崇拜过程中，有些事情是一定需要做的，而另外一些事是不应该出现在崇拜中的，仅此而已。而我们需要的是一些标准，即用来判断什么是属于该做、什么是属于不该做的理由。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
仪式”（liturgy）听起来很像是“过敏”（allergy）（在英文中两个单词的读音相近），这真是完美，因为许多现代基督徒对“仪式”过敏。但事实上仪式的意思就是，有些事情应该一直在崇拜中出现，而另一些事则不应该。所以，你需要有某些标准——某些基本原则：什么应该做、什么不应该。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
Every church has a liturgy. In the Bible churches and Baptist fellowships of my youth, the liturgy was pretty much the same Sunday to Sunday, and even fairly standard from church to church. You knew what to expect and had a pretty good idea of when to sit, stand, and reach for your hymnal or wallet.
 
每个教会的崇拜程序都有它的礼仪的。我小时候参加的那些圣经教会和浸信会的团契，每个主日的敬拜程序基本上都是很一致的，甚至教会与教会之间的程序都是相当规范的。在崇拜聚会中，你会知道下一步该做什么，你对什么时候该坐下、什么时候当起立、什么时候伸手去翻诗歌本、或者掏出钱包准备奉献等，基本上是有概念的。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
每个教会都有仪式。我小时候参加的那些圣经教会和浸信会，每个主日的仪式都很相似，甚至各教会之间都很像。你知道在崇拜中会做什么，并且非常清楚什么时候要坐下，起来，伸手去拿诗歌本或钱包（指奉献）。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
During my teen years, though, I spent some time in charismatic circles. Here, we used to ridicule the Baptists as "traditionalists" who stifled the Spirit by the church bulletin. Imagine what we thought of Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Lutherans! Goodness, they were really "dead traditionalists." And "dead" didn't refer to the doctrine, because it didn't matter whether a church was liberal or conservative. It could have been the most orthodox church in town, but if its style was not youthful and lively, it was "dead," plain and simple. Doctrine didn't decide death or life, the liturgy decided it. Isn't that ironic, that in our charismatic circles we were willing to divide churches over liturgy just as surely as we thought others had done! We were just as caught up in liturgy, by demanding a particular youth-oriented, guitar-strumming, hand-waving, informal style, that we ended up defining life and death in churches by our particular liturgical definitions.
 
不过我在十几岁的时候，在灵恩派的圈子里呆了一段时间。在那里，我们曾经用不屑一顾的口吻指那些浸信会的信徒是“守旧派”的，认为他们在主日崇拜中竟然使用打印好的周报，简直就是在扼杀圣灵的工作。试想想，如果连浸信会我们当时都这么看他们，那对长老会、圣公会、路德会，我们不知道该怎么想了。天呐！这些教会，大可被称为是“死到僵硬了的守旧派”吧！说他们“死”，并非是针对他们的教义而言，因为不管他们是自由派教会的还是保守派教会的（他们甚至可以是全城信仰最正统的教会），只要他们的敬拜风格不够青春活泼，那就是“死的”，就这么简单！我们觉得，判断一间教会是死的还是活的，不是他们所信奉的教义，而是他们所采用的礼拜仪式。够讽刺吧？在我们灵恩派圈子里，我们常常批评其他教会竟然会因为彼此的崇拜礼仪/形式不同而分裂教会。其实，我们自己也正正在干同样的事。我们乃是非常在乎自己的崇拜仪式的，我们的崇拜一定要求具备某种青春带有活力的格调、一定要有吉他伴奏、一定要举手挥手、一定不要正式规矩的风格，以致到头来，我们便不经意地以自己所认定的那种特定崇拜仪式来判定一个教会是活的还是死的了。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
但是，在十几岁的时候，我在灵恩派的圈子里呆了一段时间。在那里，我们曾经嘲讽浸信会信徒为“传统主义者”，认为他们是用教会报告单扼杀了圣灵的人。如果连浸信会都这样，可以想象一下我们对长老会、圣公会、路德会的看法。天呐！他们真是“该死的传统主义者”。我们所讲的“死”并不指教义，因为这不在乎教会是自由派，还是保守派。可能某间教会是方圆百里内最正统的，但如果它的风格不年轻活泼，那它就是“死的”，平淡无奇。教义神学并没有决定着教会的生死，礼拜仪式才是决定性的。这难道不是很讽刺吗？在我们灵恩派的圈子里，我们批判别人按仪式来区分教会，可我们自己也这么做。但我们其实也有自己的仪式，我们要求一定要以年轻人为导向、一定要弹奏吉他、一定要举起手、一定要非正式的风格。最终，我们都以自己所认定的某些特定仪式来判定教会的生死。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
Once we realize that we all have a liturgy--a philosophy of worship and a general set of criteria by which we judge it, we can begin to ask ourselves and each other, what then is a biblical liturgy? If God is the one who must be pleased with our worship, then he should decide--not the youth, nor the older folks, nor the unchurched or the churched. It's our job to find out how God wants to be worshipped. After all, he is the audience; it is he who must be pleased with our worship, for ultimately he is the Seeker to whom we must be sensitive (Jn. 4).
 
一旦我们意识到我们所有人都有一套自己的崇拜礼仪，即一套关于敬拜的哲学理念和一套判断什么该做、什么不该做的标准时，我们就可以开始问自己、或问他人，究竟符合圣经的崇拜礼仪是怎样的。如果在我们的崇拜聚会中，上帝才是那位该被取悦的主角，那么崇拜该如何进行，就应该由祂来决定才对，而不是由教会里年轻的、或老长的、或慕道的、或在教会中长大的人来决定。我们的责任就是，找出上帝要我们怎么敬拜祂。毕竟，祂才是我们敬拜的受众，祂才是我们的敬拜需要取悦的对象，因为，最终上帝才那位我们需要对之感受有所顾虑的“寻慕者 Seeker”（约翰福音四章）。（译注：在现今的英语世界中，许多福音派教会都在提倡教会的崇拜需要顾虑到“慕道友”的感受，即“seeker-sensitive”。福音派教会用把前来教会想认识基督教的人称为“慕道友 seekers”，乃反应出他们认为，是人在主动寻找上帝。而作者在这里巧妙地用来大写的 Seeker，将之用在上帝身上，就是想说，在崇拜中，做主动的乃是上帝，是上帝来寻找、招聚我们，而不是我们人主动去寻找祂）。（2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
一旦我们意识到我们都有一套仪式——我们都有一套敬拜的哲学理念和我们进行批判的标准。这样，我们就该问问自己和其他人，符合圣经的仪式是什么？如果上帝是在我们的敬拜中得荣耀的那位，那么应该是由他来决定，这不是由教会里的年轻人决定，也不是老年人决定，不是由去教会的人决定，也不是由那些不去教会的人来决定。我们的责任是去寻求上帝想要我们怎么敬拜祂。毕竟，祂是观众。祂是在我们的敬拜中得榮耀的。因为，神才是真正的“顾客”（Seeker），我们必须对神敏感（约4）。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
I remember, when I began attending Presbyterian and Reformed churches, how it was both foreign and familiar. My new theology told me that God was the center of attention, so seeing him held up in the service, from the call to worship to Word and Sacrament, to the Benediction, clicked for me. You see, before, I was attending Arminian churches whose human-centered theology shaped a human-centered liturgy. Endless autobiographies called "testimonies," tacky religious floor-shows, an interminable altar call begging folks to let God have his way, and a centrally-located choir with colorful robes framed a sermon of schmooze calculated to please me and make me want to go through this thing again next week. Now, of course, not all of the churches nor all of the services I can recall were as goofy as I'm describing here, but you get the picture.
 
我记得当我开始去长老会和改革宗的教会聚会时，不知怎的，他们的崇拜礼仪怎么就感觉既熟悉又陌生呢？我刚刚学到的神学告诉我，上帝才是我们需要关注的中心。当我在主日崇拜过程中，从宣召到证道，再到圣餐，一直到祝福，整个过程都看到上帝被高举起来时，我才恍然大悟我这刚学到的神学是什么意思。因为先前我是在信奉阿民念神学的教会聚会的，他们人本的神学也自然塑造了人本的敬拜仪式。在他们的崇拜聚会中，有说不完的被称为“见证”的个人生平故事；讲台上是一些表演水平不咋滴的福音短剧；还有那些没完没了的决志呼召，苦苦哀求会众给上帝一个在他们生命中做主掌权的机会；讲台正中间是穿着让人眼前一亮长袍的诗班；所听到的是那些想尽办法取悦我、盼望我下周还会再去教会聚会、献殷勤式的讲道。当然，不是所有的教会，也不是我所参加过的所有崇拜都如我上面描述得那么低俗拙劣，但你大致能看到我要讲的那副图画是怎样的。所以说，问题不是我们的崇拜要不要用礼仪，而是要用哪一种礼仪。若只是说“崇拜礼仪一定要够古老才行”，又或者说“崇拜礼仪一定要被年轻人接受才行”，那都是不够的，“判断我们敬拜的圣经标准是什么？”这才是我们唯一应该问的问题。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
我记得，当我开始参加长老会和改革宗教会时，那种感觉既熟悉又陌生。我刚刚接触的改革宗神学观告诉我，神才是关注的焦点，所以在主日崇拜中，从呼召到赞美，到圣道的宣讲，圣礼的执行，祝福祷告，都看见祂被高举，我才开始明白这一切的意义。你知道，我以前参加阿民念派的教会，那些以人为中心的神学很自然就塑造了以人为中心的仪式。无数被称为“见证”的个人自传，寒酸的宗教式助兴表演，没完没了的决志呼召祈求人给上帝让路，穿着五彩长袍的诗班站在舞台中央，一篇想尽办法取悦我的献殷勤式讲道，希望让我下周再过来重复同样的事。当然，不是所有的教会，也不是所有的崇拜都想我描述的这么轻浮，但你应该能明白我的意思。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
So, it's not whether liturgy, but which liturgy. It's not enough to say, "It should be old"; nor is it acceptable to judge it by how it appeals to the youth. What are the biblical criteria for judging our worship? That's the only question.
 
所以在此，我想提出七项指导原则，以助大家分析你们的崇拜，希望对大家有所帮助。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
所以，不是要不要仪式的问题，而是用哪一种仪式的问题。只是说“仪式是过时的”是不够的，用是否能够吸引年轻人作为判断标准也是不对的。衡量我们敬拜的圣经标准是什么呢？这应该是唯一的问题。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
So here I offer seven guidelines that you might find somewhat helpful in analyzing your worship. It may be something that you could take to your worship committee or pastor.
 
所以在此，我想提出七项指导原则，以助大家分析你们的崇拜，希望对大家有所帮助。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
在这里，我提供了七条指导原则帮助你分析崇拜。你也可以推荐这些指导原则给你的教会或牧师。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
1. It must conform to Scripture by preaching Law and Gospel, along with sermon and sacraments. The sermon isn't the only "preaching" of the morning. The entire service is worship and says a great deal about the church's view of God, Christ, salvation, etc. Is there a regular confession of sin and announcement of pardon? This is not only an ancient requirement of the Christian churches; it is part of the apostolic worship, as you find it in Acts chapter 2, for instance, and in Paul's letters.
 
1、崇拜礼仪本身必须合乎圣经，其中有对律法和对福音的宣讲。“礼仪”本身是具有宣讲信息的功用的，与讲道和施圣礼一样。主日崇拜中，并非只有证道的部分才有宣讲的功用，整个崇拜聚会都是属于敬拜，你从一间个教会的崇拜程序中可以看到这间教会的上帝观以及对基督、对救恩的看法。例如，在他们的礼仪中，有没有固定的认罪和宣赦的环节呢？这些环节，不仅是初期教会的敬拜礼仪传统，也是使徒时期崇拜礼仪的一部分，正如你在使徒行传第二章和保罗书信中所能找到的那样。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
1、崇拜仪式本身必须宣讲律法与福音，仪式本身有宣讲的功能，与圣道和圣礼同样。讲道不仅是崇拜当天唯一的宣讲。整场崇拜都是敬拜，传递着教会对上帝、基督、救赎的看法。仪式里是否有认罪悔改的祈祷和赦罪的宣告呢？这不仅是古代基督教会的要求，也是使徒崇拜的一部分。正如你在使徒行传第二章和保罗书信中看到那样。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
2. It must link the individual to the larger church body and not only to the church here and now, but to Christ's body throughout the world and throughout all ages. Is our worship uniquely American or determined by the "contemporary"? This isn't just a question of style, but of doctrine. We worship with the "cloud of witnesses" (Heb. 12) and the Psalms are full of the recounting of God's works with his people throughout history. We aren't individualists who are seeking a "worship experience" that's relevant to us, but baptized Christians who are in covenant with the "communion of saints" and "one holy, catholic, and apostolic church" (Apostle's Creed).
 
2、崇拜礼仪必须把每个个体与整体教会联系起来，不仅与你当下、本堂的教会联系起来，更是与世界各地、从古到今整个基督的身体联系起来。我们要问，我们的崇拜是否单单是美国式的（译注：或单单具有中国特色的）呢？或者特别具有现代敬拜风格的呢？敬拜不是一件单单关乎风格的事，而是关乎教义的事。我们是与“如同云彩般的见证人”（来12）一同敬拜的。在诗篇中，我们也读到诗人常常忆述上帝是怎么在祂历世历代的子民中工作的。我们不是以个人主义者的身份前来敬拜、各自寻求适合自己“崇拜体验”而已，而是一群受洗归入基督的基督徒，我们是在圣约中与“圣徒相通”、与“圣而公且延续了使徒传统之教会”（使徒信经）的信徒一同敬拜的。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
2、崇拜仪式必须把个人与更大的教会身体联系起来，不仅仅是此时此地的教会，更是那各地各方、各世各代的基督身体。我们的崇拜是否是美国独有的，当代思想决定的？这不仅是风格的问题，而是教义的问题。我们是与如同云彩般的见证人（来12）一同在敬拜的。诗篇中也充满了历史上神在祂子民身上工作的描述。我们不是寻求与适合自己“崇拜体验”的个人主义者，而是在“圣徒相通”与“圣而公之教会”（使徒信经）的约中受了洗的基督徒。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
3. It must be God-centered, not us-centered. God is the audience and we are the choir. Are the "professionals" up front the focus of attention? Are they entertaining us or are they leading us in corporately entertaining God? Where is the focus?
 
3、崇拜礼仪必须以上帝为中心，而不是以我们人为中心的。上帝是受众，我们全体会众都是诗班。我们要问，在崇拜过程中，那些站讲台上的“专业唱诗班”会不会不经意地成为了我们关注的焦点呢？他们是在娱乐我们，还是在带领我们一同来取乐上帝呢？我们把焦点放在了哪里？ （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
3、崇拜礼仪必须是以上帝为中心，而不是以我们为中心的。上帝是观众，我们是诗班。那些 在舞台上的“专业人士”是否成了崇拜的焦点？他们是在娱乐我们，还是带领我们在娱乐上帝呢？谁才是焦点？（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
4. It must worship the correct God correctly. The first three of the 10 Commandments concern our correct worship of the only true God. God is more concerned with true worship than with anything else. Even our salvation is a means to that end of bringing praise and glory to God's name. It isn't enough to worship the true God according to our own fancy; he must be worshipped in his own way, as Aaron's sons learned the hard way. When they wanted to offer an unauthorized fire in the temple, it was out of the best of motives, but God turned them to ash before Aaron himself. "Before man, I will show myself as holy," God declared. We must not trifle with God in the matter of worship.
 
4、崇拜礼仪必须运用正确地方式来敬拜正确的上帝。十诫的前三诫讲的，都是关于我们当如何正确地敬拜这位独一真神。上帝所在乎的，没有比人当如何正确地敬拜祂这件事更重要了。我们甚至可以说，连祂对我们的救赎，也不过是为了达到敬拜祂这一终极目的的过程而已。祂对人最终的目的，就是叫人晓得如何将赞美和荣耀归与祂的名。我们若只凭自己的想象或自己的心灵诚意来敬拜上帝是不够的，上帝只能按照祂自己所吩咐人的方式来接受人的敬拜。亚伦的儿子不正是在这件事上没有学好而为此付上了极大的代价吗？当他们试图在殿前献凡火时，乃出于最好的动机的，但上帝却在亚伦面前当场把他们烧成了灰烬。上帝宣告说，“在人面前，我要显为圣”。在敬拜上帝这件事上，我们绝不能轻忽随便，随己意而行。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
4、崇拜仪式必须正确地敬拜真正的上帝。十诫的前三诫关乎我们对独一真神的正确敬拜。上帝在乎正确的敬拜胜于其他任何事。甚至我们的救赎也为了将赞美和荣耀归给上帝的名。只凭自己的想象敬拜上帝是不够的。上帝必须按祂自己吩咐的方式受敬拜。亚伦的儿子们为此付了极大的代价。当他们想在圣殿（会幕）中献凡火的时候，即使是出于最好的动机，但上帝仍使他们在亚伦面前把他们烧灭。上帝说，“在众民面前，我要得圣洁”。在敬拜的世上，我们绝不能轻视上帝。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
5. It must emphasize and undergird Word and Sacrament as the central foci of worship. Is "fellowship" more important than the sermon and Holy Communion in our church?
 
5、崇拜礼仪必须强调且巩固圣道与圣礼，突出其在崇拜的中心焦点地位。我们要问自己，在我们教会聚会中，会不会把“团契相交”看得比讲道和圣餐更重要？ （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
5、崇拜仪式必须强调并巩固圣道与圣礼在崇拜的中心焦点地位。在我们的教会中，是不是“团契时间”变得比讲道和圣餐更重要？（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
6. It must be useable. In other words, we have to instruct people in anything that is unfamiliar. One reason people will say, "It's just rote repetition" of ancient liturgies is due to the laziness, apathy, or lack of awareness on the part of the minister in terms of explaining it all. We can't assume that each new generation understands what's going on.
 
6、崇拜礼仪必须好用、能用、方便使用才行。换句话说，如果礼仪中有会众不熟悉、不理解的部分，我们必须教导他们，让他们明白其中的含义。很多人对古教会流传下来的敬拜礼仪的看法乃是，“礼仪嘛，不过就是一些墨守成规、每周都要重复走过场的形式呗！”。他们之所以有这种观感，其原因就在于领会的圣职人员或是出于自身的懒惰、或是出于对会众对礼仪无知这件事无法感同身受、或者意识不到，以致于没有好好地、经常地向他们解释。我们不能假设每一个新世代的信徒都能够自然而然了解教会崇拜礼仪中每一个环节、每一个动作到底代表什么、有什么意义。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
6、崇拜仪式必须是方便使用的。换句话说，我们必须教导大家他们不熟悉的内容。很多人说“仪式只是死记硬背古代礼仪”的原因就是因为牧师在解释仪式上的懒惰、漠不关心和缺乏意识。我们不能假设每一个新世代都了解这些是怎么一回事。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）
 
 
7. It must communicate to contemporary men and women. The Reformation recovered congregational singing and participation. No longer left to the "professionals" (the choir, etc.), the entire congregation read the Scriptures in unison, prayed in unison, and sang in unison. But that meant that they had to have it in their own language, so the Reformation neither shirked its obligation to the past, nor to the present and the future.
 
7、崇拜礼仪必须对当代人有意义。宗教改革重新拾回了会众唱诗和会众参与的崇拜活动。崇拜不再是留给“专业人士”（如诗班等人）负责的事，而是全体会众的事，会众可以一同诵读圣经、一同参与祷告、一同和声歌唱。但这就意味着敬拜者必须用自己能懂的母语来敬拜了。所以，宗教改革既没有推脱对过去历史的义务、也没有忽略对但当下与未来历史的责任。 （2 Virginia Yip译版）
 
7、崇拜仪式必须能与当代人沟通。宗教改革恢复了会众的颂赞与参与。不再有“专业人士”（诗班等），而是全会众同声读经、同声祷告、同声唱诗。但是，这意味着他们必须用自己的语言。所以，宗教改革既不逃避对过去的义务、也不回避当代和未来的责任。（1岑跃环译/王一校版）

注：本文为Virginia Yip 叶老师为她的敬拜课程特别预备，是在中文原译稿上做出的修改或重译，为方便教学，中文题目也稍作了改动。

一校版）

 
路德的十架神学
Luthe's Theology of the Cross
作者：Carl R. Trueman 翻译：唐兴；校对：王一
https://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH05/10b.html
 http://www.reformedbeginner.net/luthers-theology-of-cross/
 
绝对没有人会想到，马丁·路德在1517年10月，为反对罗马天主教赎罪劵所发表的《九十五条论纲》（95 thesis），会引发宗教改革运动。这篇论纲的目的是要为当时的一场大学辩论提出一个论述的架构。路德是要对赎罪劵的实施提出修正，并非要废除它。他确实不是要为广泛蔓延的神学和教会改革提出改革事项。
No one could have expected that the Reformation would be launched by Martin Luther's Ninety-Five Theses against Indulgences in October 1517. The document itself simply proposed the framework for a university debate. Luther was arguing only for a revision of the practice of indulgences, not its abolition. He was certainly not offering an agenda for widespread theological and ecclesiastical reform.
 
其实，1517年9月4日，在《驳经院神学》的论述中，他曾提出更具争议性的议题——批判中世纪神学几个世纪以来所使用的方法。但这个论述在毫无争议下就通过了。确实如此，从人的角度看来，是因为许多特殊之社会、经济和政治因素的结合，才使得后来的九十五条提纲，成为宗教改革的导火线。
Indeed, he had already said much more controversial things in his Disputation against Scholastic Theology of September 4, 1517, in which he critiqued the whole way in which medieval theology had been done for centuries. That disputation, however, passed without a murmur. Indeed, humanly speaking, it was only the unique combination of external factors—social, economic, and political—that made the later disputation the spark that lit the Reformation fuse.
 
海德堡论纲
The Heidelberg Disputation
 
然而，导火线被点燃时，教会却犯了致命的错误——认为这是微不足道的地方性事件，而让路德所属的奥古斯丁社团来处理。社团决定要在1528年4月于海德堡召开会议，并且要路德发表一系列关于其神学的论纲，以供他的弟兄们评估。就是在这里，那平淡的九十五条论纲给予路德一个机会，可以清晰的阐述，他先前在9月份所发表关于经院神学的论述。
Once the fuse had been lit, however, the church made a fatal error: she allowed the Augustinian Order, to which Luther belonged, to deal with the problem as if it were a minor local difficulty. There was to be a meeting of the Order in Heidelberg in April 1518, and Luther was asked to present a series of theses outlining his theology, so that it could be assessed by his brethren. It was here, then, that the relatively bland Ninety-Five Theses gave Luther an important opportunity to articulate the theology that he had expressed in his September Disputation.
 
海德堡辩论有两个重要性：首先，辩论中现了另外一位宗教改革的巨人：马丁·布塞（Martin Bucer）——斯特拉斯堡（Strasbourg）的宗教改革家，晚年成为剑桥的神学教授。他不但知识渊博，並且对教会的前途独具慧眼。布塞对那时代的改教者颇具深远的影响力，不下于约翰·加尔文。1517年路德在海德堡的论述，使他首次感受到改教的思想。然而，他对路德向教会流行的经院神学，所作的攻击感到惊讶时，却忽略了路德论述的神学中心思想。也就是海德堡辩论的第二个重要性——十字架的神学。
The Heidelberg Disputation is significant for two things. First, there was at least one other future Reformation giant present. This was Martin Bucer, the Reformer of Strasbourg, who would end his days as professor of divinity at Cambridge. A man of vast intellect and wide ecumenical vision, Bucer was to have a profound influence on a generation of Reformers, not least John Calvin. And his first taste of Reformation thinking was provided by Luther at Heidelberg in 1517. Yet, while Bucer left the disputation marveling at how Luther had attacked what the church had become, he missed the theological core of what Luther was saying. This is the second point of importance: the theology of the cross.
 
十架神学
The Theology of the Cross
 
路德在辩论结尾时，提出了一些的议题（以路德独特的方式），这些议题看起来似乎荒谬的，至少是很难以琢磨：
Toward the end of the disputation, Luther offered some theses which seem (in typical Luther fashion) nonsensical, or at least obscure:
 
第19条、任何人，若把神不可见之事看作是可被参透如同实际之事（罗1：20），都不配称为神 学家。 第20条、然而，透过苦难和十字架来理解神可见且显明之事的人，才配称为神学家。 第21条、荣耀神学的神学家以善为恶，以恶为善。十架神学的神学家则以言之以实。 第22条、把神所做的不可见之事看为是人能参透的，这种智慧是完全傲慢、盲目、刚硬。路德，海德堡论纲
19. That person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the invisible things of God as though they were clearly perceptible in those things which have actually happened [Rom. 1:20].
 
这些陈述实际上包含了路德神学的中心思想，如果领悟到他所用的那些难懂的词汇所要表明的意思时，它们不但照明了路德神学教义的内容，并且清楚的指出他认为神学家所应该具有的思想模式。他的确把保罗在哥林多前书中，具爆炸性的十字架论述，发展成为一个完整的神学议题。
These statements actually encapsulate the heart of Luther's theology, and a good grasp of what he means by the obscure terms and phrases they contain sheds light not just on the doctrinal content of his theology, but also on the very way that he believed theologians should think. Indeed, he is taking Paul's explosive argument from 1 Corinthians and developing it into a full theological agenda.
 
路德论述的中心思想，认为人不应该推测神的本性，如何预见祂要向哪些人启示祂自己。因此，他把神的自我启示看作是一切神学的共通原则。可能连历史上所有的异端都会同意这一点，因为不论是自然的、理性的、文化的，或其他的神学，都预先假设了神启示的存在。
At the heart of his argument is his notion that human beings should not speculate about who God is or how he acts in advance of actually seeing whom he has revealed himself to be. Thus, Luther sees God's revelation of himself as axiomatic to all theology. Now, there probably is not a heretic in history who would not agree with that, because all theology presupposes the revelation of God, whether in nature, human reason, culture, or whatever.
 
但是，路德对启示的定义是狭义的。神在道成肉身中向人启示出祂对人的怜悯——当祂在人类血肉之体中启示祂自己时，其启示的最高峰，乃发生在各各他的十字架上。路德有时候把基督钉十字架称为是“神的背”，其意思是——神的作为与人的理性是互相矛盾的。
Luther, however, had a dramatically restrictive view of revelation. God revealed himself as merciful to humanity in the Incarnation, when he manifested himself in human flesh, and the supreme moment of that revelation was on the cross at Calvary. Indeed, Luther sometimes referred enigmatically to Christ crucified as "God's backside"—the point at which God appeared to be the very contradiction of all that one might reasonably have anticipated him to be.
 
这样，“荣耀神学的神学家”乃是根据人的理性对神的期望（神像什么样子）来建造他们对神的认识。结果，他们却使神看起来像他们自己。然而，“十架神学的神学家”则以被钉十字架的基督为基础，来认识神的自我启示。
The "theologians of glory," therefore, are those who build their theology in the light of what they expect God to be like—and, surprise, surprise, they make God to look something like themselves. The "theologians of the cross," however, are those who build their theology in the light of God's own revelation of himself in Christ hanging on the cross.
 
含义
Implications
 
这种立场具有革命性的含义。首先，路德要求所有神学的词汇，都要因着对十字架的认识而被修正。以“能力”一词为例，当荣耀神学的神学家在圣经中读到神的大能，或使用此名词时，他们会认为神的大能与人的力量类似；把想象中最大的能力无限扩大，来理解神的大能。然而，从十字架的角度来理解，这样的解读与神的大能之真义是完全相反的。神的大能，是在十字架的软弱中彰显，因为正是在耶稣看似被邪恶力量和败坏的属地权势打败的时候，他显明了神的大能——耶稣征服了死亡，战胜了所有邪恶的力量。所以，当基督徒讲到神的大能，或是教会和基督徒的能力时，都应当根据十字架的意义来理解——隐藏在软弱下的能力。
The implications of this position are revolutionary. For a start, Luther is demanding that the entire theological vocabulary be revised in light of the cross. Take for example the word power. When theologians of glory read about divine power in the Bible, or use the term in their own theology, they assume that it is analogous to human power. They suppose that they can arrive at an understanding of divine power by magnifying to an infinite degree the most powerful thing of which they can think. In light of the cross, however, this understanding of divine power is the very opposite of what divine power is all about. Divine power is revealed in the weakness of the cross, for it is in his apparent defeat at the hands of evil powers and corrupt earthly authorities that Jesus shows his divine power in the conquest of death and of all the powers of evil. So when a Christian talks about divine power, or even about church or Christian power, it is to be conceived of in terms of the cross—power hidden in the form of weakness.
 
对路德而言，同样思考模式必须被应用在其他的神学用语上。举例来说，神的智慧是在愚拙的十字架上被显明出来。谁能够发明这种愚拙的想法——神取了人的肉身，並且代替罪人死于可怕的苦难；为了要洁净罪人，神自己担当了他们的罪；为了要兴起有新生命的子民，祂自己却顺服至死？我们可以继续以同样的看法来理解其他的名词：生命，祝福，圣洁，和公义。每一个名词都必须按照十字架的真理加以重新思考。这些都是重要的神学观念；人很容易就把他自己本身的印象植入其中；这些神学观念都必须被放在十字架的亮光下，再被重新铸造。
For Luther, the same procedure must be applied to other theological terms. For example, God's wisdom is demonstrated in the foolishness of the cross. Who would have thought up the foolish idea of God taking human flesh in order to die a horrendous death on behalf of sinners who had deliberately defied him, or God making sinners pure by himself becoming sin for them, or God himself raising up a people to newness of life by himself submitting to death? We could go on, looking at such terms as life, blessing, holiness, and righteousness. Every single one must be reconceived in the light of the cross. All are important theological concepts; all are susceptible to human beings casting them in their own image; and all must be recast in the light of the cross.
 
这样的洞察力（是路德思想的要素之一），赋予其神学一种内在的逻辑性和统一性。以路德对称义的理解为例，神宣告信徒是义人，不是藉着人原有的和本质上的义（任何靠信徒本身所成就或取得的），而是基于一种外来的义（alien righteousness）——就是基督的义，这义是在信徒以外的义。难道这不奇怪、不寻常，但却是神十字架的奇妙逻辑吗？人的确是不义的，的确是被罪污染的，却被神宣告为圣洁和义的！这样的真理，是人理性的逻辑所无法理解，但按照十字架的逻辑，却是十分合理的。
This insight is one of the factors in Luther's thinking that gives his theology an inner logic and coherence. Take, for example, his understanding of justification, whereby God declares the believer to be righteous in his sight, not by virtue of any intrinsic righteousness (anything that the believer has done or acquired), but on the basis of an alien righteousness, the righteousness of Christ that remains external to the believer. Is this not typical of the strange but wonderful logic of the God of the cross? The person who is really unrighteous, really mired in sin, is actually declared by God to be pure and righteous! Such a truth is incomprehensible to human logic, but makes perfect sense in light of the logic of the cross.
 
神爱那些不可爱和不义的人，是在他们有任何爱神的倾向之先，这又如何解释呢？对于荣耀神学的神学家们而言，他们认为神，就像他们自己和其他的人一样，只回应那些可爱良善的人，或是那些赢得他们好感的人。但是，十字架的真理告诉我们，神却非如此。与人的理性相反，神并不要求其所爱的对象先爱祂；祂在先的爱会创造爱，並且没有任何预设条件。耶稣被钉十字架的丑陋残忍的一幕，却启示出神令人惊奇、出乎意料之外的温柔和美丽。
And what of the idea of a God who comes down and loves the unlovely and the unrighteous before the objects of his love have any inclination to love him or do good? Such is incomprehensible to the theologians of glory, who assume that God is like them, like other human beings, and thus only responds to those who are intrinsically attractive or good, or who first earn his favor in some way. But the cross shows that God is not like that: against every assumption that human beings might make about who God is and how he acts, he requires no prior loveliness in the objects of his love; rather, his prior love creates that loveliness without laying down preconditions. Such a God is revealed with amazing and unexpected tenderness and beauty in the ugly and violent drama of the cross.
 
基督徒伦理的关键
The Key to Christian Ethics and Experience
 
路德没有把十架神学局限于神客观的启示上，而视其为理解基督徒伦理和生活的关键。两者共同的根基是信心：对不信的人，十字架是荒唐无意义的；从表面上看，它是被神咒诅的人受击打污秽的死亡。不信的心对十字架的理解是——希腊人认为它是愚拙的，犹太人认为它是上帝的刑罚（完全取决于你认为罪是智力上的傲慢，还是道德上的自义）。唯有被信心开启的心思，才能认识到十字架的真实意义。神的启示隐藏于外在的形体中。信心是神所赐的礼物，不是人类心智本身的能力。
Luther does not restrict the theology of the cross to an objective revelation of God. He also sees it as the key to understanding Christian ethics and experience. Foundational to both is the role of faith: to the eyes of unbelief, the cross is nonsense; it is what it seems to be—the crushing, filthy death of a man cursed by God. That is how the unbelieving mind interprets the cross—foolishness to Greeks and an offence to Jews, depending on whether your chosen sin is intellectual arrogance or moral self-righteousness. To the eyes opened by faith, however, the cross is seen as it really is. God is revealed in the hiddenness of the external form. And faith is understood to be a gift of God, not a power inherent in the human mind itself.
 
这种信心的原则让信徒了解到他应该如何去生活。基督是大君王和大祭司，信徒藉着与祂联合，也是君王和祭司。事实上，君王和祭司在信徒身上所扮演的角色，就如同基督一般：借着受苦和自我牺牲服事他人。信徒借着做每个人的仆人，成为所有事物的君王；信徒藉着顺服于所有人之下而全然自由。正如基督藉着在十字架上的死，彰显了祂的王权和大能；信徒为他人的益处而无条件的舍己。我们应该像小基督一般对待我们的邻舍，这样做，会使我们认识作为神儿女的真实意义。
This principle of faith then allows the believer to understand how he or she is to behave. United to Christ, the great king and priest, the believer too is both a king and a priest. But these offices are not excuses for lording it over others. In fact, kingship and priesthood are to be enacted in the believer as they are in Christ—through suffering and self-sacrifice in the service of others. The believer is king of everything by being a servant of everyone; the believer is completely free by being subject to all. As Christ demonstrated his kingship and power by death on the cross, so the believer does so by giving himself or herself unconditionally to the aid of others. We are to be, as Luther puts it, little Christs to our neighbors, for in so doing we find our true identity as children of God.
 
这样的论述是具有爆炸力的，它为基督徒权柄下了一个全新的定义。举例而言，长老并非那些使用权力欺压他人，用地位、财富或学位来强化自己意见的人。真正的基督徒长老是奉献他整个生命来服事他人的人。而这种服事是痛苦、困难和卑微的。然而，他这样正彰显了如基督般的权柄——就是基督自己藉着祂肉身的生命，以及在各各他的十字架上所彰显出来的权柄。
This argument is explosive, giving a whole new understanding of Christian authority. Elders, for example, are not to be those renowned for throwing their weight around, for badgering others, and for using their position or wealth or credentials to enforce their own opinions. No, the truly Christian elder is the one who devotes his whole life to the painful, inconvenient, and humiliating service of others, for in so doing he demonstrates Christlike authority, the kind of authority that Christ himself demonstrated throughout his incarnate life and supremely on the cross at Calvary.
 
借着苦难得祝福
Great Blessings through Great Suffering
 
十架神学对信徒的意义并不止于此。神也按照十字架的模式，来处理和对待藉着信心与基督联合的信徒。简言之，就是苦难越大祝福越大。
The implications of the theology of the cross for the believer do not stop there. The cross is paradigmatic for how God will deal with believers who are united to Christ by faith. In short, great blessing will come through great suffering.
 
生活在富裕西方的人，很难接受这样的观念。举例来说，许多年前我在某教会教导这个主题，我指出十字架不只是讲到关于代赎，更讲到神如何对待和处理祂所爱的人。聚会结束后，有人反驳我，认为路德的十架神学忽略了十字架和复活，是代表着咒诅被逆转的开始，因此我们应该期待祝福。专注在受苦和软弱上，就等於忽视基督的职事在末世的重要性。
This point is hard for those of us in the affluent West to swallow. For example, some years ago I lectured at a church gathering on this topic and pointed out that the cross was not simply an atonement, but a revelation of how God deals with those whom he loves. I was challenged afterwards by an individual who said that Luther's theology of the cross did not give enough weight to the fact that the cross and resurrection marked the start of the reversal of the curse, and that great blessings should thus be expected; to focus on suffering and weakness was therefore to miss the eschatological significance of Christ's ministry.
 
当然，此人未能彻底地运用路德的十架神学。其所言虽然对，却未能按照十字架来理解。是的，路德会同意咒诅的逆转，但这逆转被显明出来，是因为良善完全颠覆了邪恶。如果基督的十字架，这一人类历史最邪恶的行为，能够与神的旨意一致，并且成为击败邪恶的力量，那么其他的恶也会被颠覆来称为善的源泉。
Of course, this individual had failed to apply Luther's theology of the cross as thoroughly as he should have done. All that he said was true, but he failed to understand what he was saying in light of the cross. Yes, Luther would agree, the curse is being rolled back, but that rollback is demonstrated by the fact that, thanks to the cross, evil is now utterly subverted in the cause of good. If the cross of Christ, the most evil act in human history, can be in line with God's will and be the source of the decisive defeat of the very evil that caused it, then any other evil can also be subverted to the cause of good.
 
不仅如此，如果基督的死是一种祝福，那么信徒所经历的任何邪恶，都也可以成为祝福。咒诅的确被逆转，祝福的确要流溢；但谁能宣告这些祝福，必须与富裕的美国人所热望和期待的，互相吻合呢？对路德而言，十字架教导我们基督是地上最受祝福的人；基督藉着十字架启示祂所受的祝福，正出于祂的受苦和死亡。如果那是神对待祂的爱子的方法，那些藉着信心与基督联合的人，难道有任何权利有不同的期待吗？
More than that, if the death of Christ is mysteriously a blessing, then any evil that the believer experiences can be a blessing too. Yes, the curse is reversed; yes, blessings will flow; but who declared that these blessings have to be in accordance with the aspirations and expectations of affluent America? The lesson of the cross for Luther is that the most blessed person upon earth, Jesus Christ himself, was revealed as blessed precisely in his suffering and death. And if that is the way that God deals with his beloved son, have those who are united to him by faith any right to expect anything different?
 
有些人，像《坏事发生在好人身上》的犹太拉比作者：哈罗德•库希那（Harold Kushner），对邪恶的看法与路德不同。但是，路德会说，这些事的确会发生，因为这是神对信徒的祝福。神是藉着祂在信徒心中奇妙的工作（与我们所期待的相反）来成就祂的善工；祂的确会藉着明显的咒诅，来达到其祝福的目的。
This casts the problem of evil in a somewhat different light for Luther than, say, for Harold Kushner, the rabbi who wrote When Bad Things Happen to Good People. They happen, Luther would say, because that is how God blesses them. God accomplishes his work in the believer by doing his alien work (the opposite of what we expect); he really blesses by apparently cursing.
 
的确，当我们领悟到，历史上最大的罪恶——基督的死，是出于三一真神玄妙深奥的旨意，但却未使神与道德的罪有所关联时，就解决了那个古老的问题：免除全能的神对邪恶的责任。邪恶的问题不在于要找到它的出处，因为它没有被启示出来。在十字架的时刻，邪恶清楚地被良善全然的推翻毁灭了。是基督的十字架，使罗马书八章28节就成为真实的：神若能使极大的邪恶，逆转成为极大的祝福；祂就更能使那些玷污人类历史的罪恶（从个人的不幸到跨国的大灾难），得以转变达到祂良善的目的。
Indeed, when it is grasped that the death of Christ, the greatest crime in history, was itself willed in a deep and mysterious way by the triune God, yet without involving God in any kind of moral guilt, we see the solution to the age-old problem of absolving an all-powerful God of responsibility for evil. The answer to the problem of evil does not lie in trying to establish its point of origin, for that is simply not revealed to us. Rather, in the moment of the cross, it becomes clear that evil is utterly subverted for good. Romans 8:28 is true because of the cross of Christ: if God can take the greatest of evils and turn it to the greatest of goods, then how much more can he take the lesser evils which litter human history, from individual tragedies to international disasters, and turn them to his good purpose as well.
 
路德的十字架神学极其丰富，无法在一篇文章中详述，但是我相信，藉着以上简单的描述，在思想哥林多前书时，会认识到外貌和事实之间的巨大反差。这种反差遍布在圣经中，且被马丁路德有力地汇集起来，使我们可以挖掘到这种神学思想丰富的矿脉。这是神学的金矿，是对于感觉主义、成功神学，以及过分属世之末世观的解毒剂。十字架不只是神为我们赎罪的地方；它也是一个深奥的启示：告诉我们祂是什么样的神，祂如何对祂所创造的万物施行祂的作为。
Luther's theology of the cross is too rich to be covered adequately in a single article, but I hope that my brief sketch above will indicate the rich vein of theological reflection which can be mined by those who reflect upon 1 Corinthians 1 and upon the dramatic antitheses between appearance and reality that are scattered throughout Scripture and marshaled with such force by Martin Luther. An antidote to sentimentality, prosperity doctrine, and an excessively worldly eschatology, this is theological gold dust. The cross is not simply the point at which God atones for sin; it is also a profound revelation of who God is and how he acts toward his creation.

愿你国降临：改革宗无千禧年末世论

作者：Kim Riddlebarge     译者/校对：林歌/王一

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vsP11ipMu051HENYiv8uOg

毫无疑问，一个基督徒如何理解他在世界里的角色，一定会受到他对末世和基督再来的观点巨大影响。那些消极看待未来，只把世界当成圣经所预言的上帝用来彰显祂公义忿怒的地方的人，就会把他们的周遭世界看作一个邪恶之地，等待着毁灭和审判。因此，这个世界和居住其中的不信者也是邪恶的，最终必要灭亡。但是，那些积极面对世界的人就会把世界看作一个剧场，上帝要在当中不断地将祂的救赎作为扩展到生活的每一个领域，包括政治的和社会的层面。所以，在基督再来之前，将世界基督化就成了教会的主要任务，而投身于社会的革新运动也成了真敬虔的试金石。这两方面看法都在今天的美国福音派中非常流行。

不必在沉船上擦拭乐器

受时代论（Dispensationalism）以及灾前被提论（pre-tribulational rapture）影响，有人相信所有的信徒都会在七年大灾难之前被提。根据这个说法，教会在世界上主要任务就是传福音，因为世界很快就会因为敌基督兴起以及大碗与号角的审判来临，而陷入在极大的邪恶之下。教会的使命，就像挪亚一样，正是要从那将来的大灾难中，拯救许多失丧的灵魂。在这个体系中，实际隐藏了对生态治理、社会公益和政治参与的蔑视，以及对呼召或天职的教义方面的明显弱化。呼召，或者说天职，是上帝赋予每一个人的神圣职责，是要在每日普通的“世俗”行为中，为建造高尚的文化（虽然是非救赎性的）作出贡献。在这一体系中，全时间的基督教侍奉以及其他与传福音有关的工作被赋予了极高的价值。同时也生成了一种基督教亚文化，试图把基督徒隔离于末世不断增长的世俗和邪恶。反正，上帝的国绝不会以任何方式出现，直到千禧年基督在地上施行有形统治。上帝之国是绝对的将来时，等到主降临时一起到来。

船并没有下沉

近来，福音派对他们上个世纪那种乐观的后千禧年末世论（Post-Millennialism）重新有了兴趣。

因为美国基要派更为接受前千禧年论（Pre-Millennialism），有人并不愿意被贴上后千禧年论者的标签，讽刺的是，他们当中的许多人却在其基督教处世观里，表现出了实质上的后千禧年论。他们将基督徒在世界上的角色看成完全教会化和基督教化的，目标是通过一切基督徒可用的手段，无论是政治、文化、还是经济，达成政府、文化和社会的总体基督化。

他们认为，色情文学、强制堕胎之类的各种社会邪恶，都应当尽可能地被根除。不管是消极的彻夜祷告，还是更为激进地堵住堕胎诊所的大门，教会都总是应当使用各种可能的手段，去达成这些目标。借由教会之国在地上的行动，上帝之国也将不断发展。这种末世论，关注的是以提升社会道德来预备基督再来。因祂的来临近了，持这种乐观态度的人会自问，我们的主将要回来的，是怎样一个道德败坏的世界？我们是否真的已经尽力为之？我们当怎样在这地建造上帝的国呢？我们的努力能否引进我们主的再来？

诚然，这两种观点都有许多正确的地方，但他们同样也都有很多错误之处。圣经已经清楚地教导了上帝之国已经来临了（太3:2，可1:15，路11:20，太12:28），我们怎么能像时代论者那样轻松地将它否认？同时我也要问：“我们所谈论的究竟是谁的国？作为个人信徒的我，又扮演着怎样的角色？教会，基督的身体，和这个国又有怎样的关系？”圣经也已经宣称，这个国不是政治性的，甚至也不属于这个世界（约18:36）。这个国度不在乎吃喝，只在乎公义和圣灵中的喜乐（罗14:17）。我该如何面对保罗（帖后2）和约翰（启20）所预言的，在基督再临审判世界之前，必有背道与大灾难？

如果你有过类似的问题，不必感到泄气，因为历世历代的基督徒们对于信徒如何处世的问题，已经有了长期而艰难的思考。通过回归历史的和圣经中的末世论（从五世纪至今，为更正教与天主教所共持），这些问题在一定程度上已经有了解答。

船虽下沉，但还要擦拭乐器

这种历史性末世论（通常称为无千禧年论 Amillennialism，或者现千禧年论）很好的对救赎和创造作出区分。简单来说，这教义是说上帝创造的世界本是好的，但因亚当的堕落，整个世界就臣服在虚空之下（罗8:20）。保罗在罗马书第八章中写下了伟大的应许：当基督再临之时，这个世界将得到救赎（8:21）。因此，世界之所以存在罪恶，是因为有罪的人在世界上生活，而并非因为物质世界本身是邪恶的。当圣经每一次提到将来这世界的毁灭时，总是紧接着宣告这个世界将在新天新地中被重造（彼后3:10-13）。

因此，当基督徒去看待诸如人类的普世尊严（因为上帝是按照他自己的形象造男造女）、公共事务的参与、婚姻制度与家庭的神圣性、地球自然资源的生态治理、呼召与职业的重要性以及文化建造等各个方面话题时，应从创造的教义开始着手，看到这一切都是好的，都是上帝创造的一部分。基督徒参与到这一切活动中是好的，也是必要的。因此，基督徒不仅不该恨恶世界，反倒要竭力追求充分的参与到整个受造界。我们必须谨记，对末世盼望中最首要的方面是上帝会亲自救赎和恢复这个世界，这样的期待也赐给基督徒盼望，有那么一天，一切都会回到正轨。因此，对于基督徒参与到上帝的创造这一点，我们拥有基于圣经的乐观主义。

然而，从圣经和这种传统的末世论来看，还有一个很重要的方面需要我们留意。基督徒知道，在历史上，亚当代表全人类堕落了。所以，基督徒必须认识到这是一个在亚当里堕落的世界。因此，除了基于圣经的乐观主义之外，我们必须认识到基于圣经的现实主义，那就是这个世界已经与罪的现实存在与严重性捆绑在一起。从此园中长了杂草，额头出了汗水，女人有了生产之苦，世界出现了战争和战争的风声。若没有基督，所爱之人也将灭亡。基督徒必须意识到，每个人心深处都埋藏着极大的邪恶，这一事实更导致了万物的运转都脱离了轨道，它们都存留在悲哀之下。各处遍及了死亡、罪恶和物质的朽坏。因着堕落的人性，我们需要不断去遏制人心的邪恶，修理朽坏的东西，对抗不公的社会。基督徒并不仅仅参与教会性的工作，例如去传福音等，他们同样要履行在创造中所赋予的职责，发挥他们为盐为光的作用来遏制邪恶。

基督徒不是最终的悲观主义者。虽然他们对人性感到悲观，明白不论他们如何努力、如何正义去与邪恶斗争，他们都不能也不会得胜，但是他们知道当耶稣基督再来时，他会将他的子民从死亡中复活，并且复兴万事。耶稣基督的确要再来，他的确会复兴万事。人类历史的终局已是定数，因此，我们不必成为末世悲观主义者，即使我们现实的面对罪和人类的境况。他的国度必要降临，祂的旨意必被要成就！

不过圣经也说，基督徒是在世界上而不属世界的。我们应当要把自己当做客旅，等待着万有在基督里的成全。我们最终的家在新天新地，而不是如今所知的现世。我们之所以这样说，是因为受造界本身不能受敬拜，它只是创造主上帝的见证。即使在堕落的处境当中，世界仍然强有力地见证着一个事实：终有一天，上帝要在耶稣基督里来恢复更新万有。因此，我们可以从圣经正确的得知，作为基督徒，参与到世界中很重要，我们也当乐观地看待作为基督徒的日常责任。

但我们也必须明白，我们的任何努力都无法加速上帝国度与全新的、得蒙救赎的受造界的到来。圣经只把这任务交给那位创造主、救赎主，在他再来之时完成。所以，这个世界也好，在堕落的人性中征服邪恶也罢，都不是我们终久委身的对象。从泰姬陵到金字塔，从埃及法老到华盛顿特区，所有伟大的文化奇观和伟大的世界帝国都会在片刻间化作尘埃。

即使如此，上帝仍然决定，我们在这个世界上的行动和祷告的确对历史的进程造成了影响，压制罪恶、促进邻舍的益处、在不断增长的邪恶之中服侍，为上帝所用给人们带去救赎。从我们的角度来看，我们的参与的确使世界发生改变。我们可以参与宣教，对这世界宣讲福音。在有限的程度上，当我们等待主再临的过程中，我们也可以看到不义的事被纠正，无家可归的人们得到食物和衣服，对土地的破坏践踏被停止。因此，我们对这个世界和人类境况有了现实的评价。知道我们的主将要再来使万物复兴，他也应许我们在这世上的行动能够带来改变。

另外一个理解这种末世论的重要切入点是如何认识上帝之国的本质。我们要清楚，我们热切地祈求降临的这个国度不是我们的，也不是我们的努力所带来的。每逢我们谈论上帝的国，都要明白这是上帝的法则，是上帝的统治。这个国度是由上帝扩展，由上帝建立，由上帝掌管。然而，上帝却乐意在他国度不可抗拒的前行中使用我们这些属他的子民。

因此，这个国度不是一个地缘政治性或国家性的实体（比如以色列的民族国家），也不是一场以某个圣城或建筑物为中心的运动，更不是某个特定的职分或宗派。尽管如此，我们也不要忘记，圣经宣告说这个国度是真实的、强大的国，最终要在预定的日子征服上帝的一切仇敌（林前15:23-28）。在攻无不克的上帝之国与末期前不断增长的邪恶之间，基督徒们必须保持张力的平衡。

宗教改革的历史性末世论有一个很有帮助的概念，即“已然而未然”。圣经宣告，上帝的国度已经降临了，我们正活在这国度的恩光照耀之下。也就是说，我们拥有了国度的“已然”。这国度如今继续不断推进。但这国度是属灵的国度，不占据地理上的实际位置，没有地址，也不发布任何政治或社会法令，更不接受权欲熏心者而换取其支持而提供的社会和政治权力。

这个国度的本质以及其不断的推进，会激怒现今世代的邪恶。虽然有形的罪恶现在还没有被完全摧毁，但这天必会来到，就是我们的主再临此地，审判活人死人的那一刻。

所以，我们热切地等待着我们主的来到，为一切的邪恶和苦难画上一个最终的句号，创造新天新地，把我们朽坏的身体改变为主复活之躯的荣耀形状。这是我们所切慕的“未然”，主为此也特意教导我们如此祷告：“愿你国降临，愿你旨意成就。”那个国度已经降临，那个国度正在降临，未来的一天它要完全降临，那时基督将要再来取得在他所赎全地上的王权，亲自在宝座上施行一切的统治、权威和能力之时，那时所有的眼泪都被擦去、所有的黑夜也都过去。到那日，我们身为基督徒为主和他的国度而做的工作与侍奉也终于可以结束，我们将进入永恒的安息，那是我们今生已经拥有却只能预尝的美好。

金·里德巴格博士（Dr. Kim Riddlebarger），加州阿纳海姆市Christ Reformed Church主任牧师；White House Inn 电台节目主持人之一；著有 A Case For Amillennialism，The Man of Sin: Uncovering the Truth About the Antichrist 等书。

改革宗信仰基础21：成圣Basics of the Reformed Faith:Sanctification

作者： Kim Riddlebarger  译/校对者：寇正华/王一

https://wscal.edu/blog/basics-of-the-reformed-faith-sanctification

http://www.reformedbeginner.net/basics21-sanctification/

我们必须先明白称义是什么意思，才有可能讨论成圣。成圣是罪的旧习（我们所说的“残留的罪”）逐渐衰弱，以及新的本性（通过重生给了我们）逐渐加强的一生的过程。为什么会这样？这同样的信心行动不仅使我们与基督联合，使得他的善功归算给我们，并且因此提供了上帝宣判我们“无罪”的基础，而且开始了一生的成圣过程。在这过程中，我们的罪习开始衰弱，新的神圣情感开始增长，并且我们开始遵守（但是微弱地）不是一些而是上帝诫命的全部。换句话说，每一个称义的罪人也是成圣的。

事实上，我们将我们的信心投靠基督的时候，我们所有的罪（过去、现在和未来）都被赦免了。通过使我们称义的相同的信心行动，基督的义变成我们的，使得我们现在依靠被钉十字架的耶稣基督的顺服，这顺服在我们信他时也成了我们的。由于我们通过信心的工具（并且不是通过我们自己的好行为）而接收的基督的善功，我们被称义，因此我们的良心脱离了害怕、恐怖和畏惧。既然我们不会因为害怕当我们失败时上帝会惩罚我们而无力，我们发现我们自己自由地遵守上帝的律法，不是为了赚得更大的义，也不是要变得“更圣洁”。而是因为我们已经被算为“义”，并且我们在上帝面前的永恒地位已经被基督的主动和被动顺服解决了，所以我们遵守上帝律法并且行善。在某种程度上，这就是成圣的意思。

圣经关于成圣的教导是相当广泛的。根据保罗，与罪恶争战是正常的基督徒生活（罗7:14-25）。事实上，我们当中最圣洁的可能是那些最与罪恶争战的人。肉体的果实（如保罗在加5:19-21中描述的）渐渐开始减少，同时圣灵的果实（v22-23）自发地开始出现在我们的生命中。不是与罪恶的争战，而是对上帝的事情的冷淡以及对我们个人罪恶的漠视是出问题的真正标记。

新人（曾在罪中死去，但如今在基督里活着）不再是罪的奴隶。旧的本性（肉体）已经与基督同钉十字架并且在洗礼中与他同埋（参见罗6:1-7）。新人（重生的本性）通过基督复活的能力而活着，并且具有与肉体完全不同的方向。新的本性相信上帝的应许，它通过信来拥抱基督，它恨恶罪，而且它渴望取悦神。这就是为什么通过福音宣讲而被召并且开始相信基督（通过圣灵的工作）的每一个人不仅通过信心的工具而被称义，而且具有反映新本性的新的欲望和情感。

这就是为什么成圣是“我们已经被称义”这一次而完全的宣告的必然结果。无论何时一个人唯独本乎恩典、唯独藉着信心并且唯独因着基督而被宣称为义但之后继续活在对罪的漠视而不与之争战时，某些地方出问题了。没有一个称义的罪人会仍旧漠视他们的行为，也没有一个称义的罪人会继续在罪中，如同他们在被称义之前所行的。

在新生中，我们与基督一同活着，并且先前罪恶掌控我们的权势已经被打破。但是残余的罪（我们的神学家称为罪习）留在我们里面，直到我们死去。关于这个事实，罗马书7:14-25和加拉太书5:17是非常清楚的。新的本性必须与每个基督徒的三大仇敌争战：世界（非基督徒的思想和行动方式）、肉体（在我们之内的罪恶欲望）和魔鬼（关于上帝的谎言和假话）。这就是为什么与罪恶争战是称义和新生的必然结果。可悲的是，这样的争战已经导致许多人质疑他们与上帝的关系，事实上，与罪恶争战是上帝在工作、塑造我们并且使我们效法他爱子的模样的确切的标记。

在罗马书6:6中，保罗将我们说成是先前作罪恶奴仆的人。但是一旦脱离我们的奴役，我们就挣扎着停止像奴隶一样思考和行动，并且我们挣扎着开始活像我们所是的自由的人。这挣扎将不会产生像基督徒完美主义者所教导的胜过生活中所有罪恶的胜利。但是罪恶的权势被打破就使得成圣和转变必然开始。然而，罪习（残余的罪）将随着我们，直到我们死去或我们的主再来（无论哪个先来）。

这就是为什么你不能成功地像某些基督徒试图所做的那样争辩说，一个人可以“接受基督为他们的救主”，但在一个较晚的时间（所谓的“主权争论”）之前却不以他为他们生命中的主。如果你凭着信心信靠耶稣基督，你就已经与基督同钉十字架，与基督同埋葬，并且现在与基督一同活着。在新约中没有双重基督徒这样的事情，就是有些人接受基督为救主但不以他为主，也没有被圣灵内住却不受圣灵的洗的人，也没有得救但尚未成圣的人。

因此，当我们每天向罪死并且活出一个全新的生命时，我们将与罪恶争战。然而，尽管这争战造成了一些困难，我们的成圣是确切和确实的标记，表明我们是属基督的，他已经在我们里面开始动了善工，就一定会看到成全的日子（腓1:6）。这就是成圣的意思。

Basics of the Reformed Faith: Sanctification

Kim Riddlebarger

It is not until we understand what it means to be justified, that we are in any position to discuss sanctification, which is that life-long process through which the old habit of sin (what we call “indwelling sin”) is progressively weakened and the new nature (given us by virtue of regeneration) is progressively strengthened. Why is this the case? The same act of faith which unites us to Christ so that his merits are imputed to us and thereby provides the basis upon which God pronounces us “not guilty,” also begins the life-long process of sanctification, in which our sinful habits begin to weaken, new Godly affections begin to grow, and we begin to obey (however, feebly), not some, but all of God’s commandments. To put it yet another way, every justified sinner is also being sanctified.

In fact, the moment we place our trust in Jesus Christ, all of our sins (past, present, and future) are forgiven. Through that same act of faith which justifies us, Christ’s righteousness becomes ours so that we now rely on the obedience of Jesus Christ crucified which is ours when we believe in him. Because we are justified by the merits of Jesus Christ which we receive through the means of faith (and not through our own good works), our consciences are freed from fear, terror, and dread. Since we are not paralyzed by the fear that God will punish us when we fail, we find ourselves free to obey the law of God, not to earn greater righteousness, nor to become “holier.” Rather, we obey the law of God and do good works because we have already been reckoned as “righteous” and our eternal standing before God has already been settled by the active and passive obedience of Jesus Christ. This is what it means, in part, to be sanctified.

The biblical teaching about sanctification is quite extensive. According to Paul, this struggle with sin is the normal Christian life (Romans 7:14-25). In fact, the holiest among us may be those struggling with sin the most. The fruit of the flesh (as depicted by Paul in Galatians 5:19-21) gradually begin to diminish, while the fruit of the Spirit (v. 22-23) spontaneously begin to appear in our lives. It is not the struggle with sin, but apathy to the things of God and indifference to our personal sins which are the real signs of trouble.

The new man (who was dead in sin, but is now alive in Christ) is no longer a slave to sin. The old nature (the flesh) has been crucified with Christ and buried with him in baptism (cf. Romans 6:1-7). The new man (the regenerate nature) comes alive through the resurrection power of Christ and has an entirely different orientation than the flesh. The new nature believes God’s promises, it embraces Christ through faith, it hates sin, and it desires to please God. This is why everyone who is called through the preaching of the gospel and who then comes to faith in Christ (through the operations of the Holy Spirit) is not only justified through the means of faith, but also has a new set of desires and affections which reflect the new nature.

This is why sanctification is the necessary consequence of the once-and-for-all declaration that we have been justified. Whenever someone claims to be justified by grace alone, through faith alone, on account of Christ alone but then continues to live in indifference to sin without struggling against it, something is wrong. No justified sinner can remain indifferent about their conduct nor continue on in sin as they did before they were justified.

In the new birth we are made alive with Christ and the power which sin formerly held over us is broken. But indwelling sin (what our theologians call the habitus of sin) remains in us until we die. Romans 7:14-25 and Galatians 5:17 are very clear about this fact. The new nature must struggle against the three enemies of every Christian: the world (the non-Christian way of thinking and doing), the flesh (the sinful desires within us) and the devil (lies and falsehoods about God). This is why the struggle with sin is the necessary fruit of justification and the new birth. Sadly, this struggle has led many to question their relationship with God, when, in fact, the struggle with sin is the sure sign that God is at work, molding us, and conforming us into the image of his dear son.

In Romans 6:6, Paul speaks of us as people who were formerly slaves to sin. But once freed from our slavery, we struggle to stop thinking and acting as slaves, and we struggle to start living like the free men and women that we are. The struggle will not produce victory over all sin in this life as Christian perfectionists teach. But the power of sin is broken so that sanctification and transformation necessarily begin. And yet, the habit of sin (indwelling sin) will remain with us until we die or our Lord returns, whichever comes first.

This is why you cannot successfully argue, as certain Christians attempt to do, that someone can “accept Jesus as their Savior,” but not make him Lord over their lives until a later time (the so-called “Lordship controversy”). If you trust in Jesus Christ through faith, you have been crucified with Christ, buried with Christ, and are now alive with Christ. There is no such thing in the New Testament as a two-tiered Christian life, in which there are people who accept Christ as Savior but have not yet made him Lord, nor are there people who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit but not yet baptized by the Spirit, nor are there people who are saved, but not yet sanctified.

Therefore, as we die to sin and rise to newness of life on a daily basis, we will struggle with sin. But despite the difficulties which this struggle creates, our sanctification is a sure and certain sign that we are Christ’s and that he who has begun a good work in us, will indeed see it through to the day of completion (Philippians 1:6). And this is what it means to be sanctified. 

改革宗信仰基础19：拣选Basics of the Reformed Faith:Election

作者：Kim Riddlebarger  译/校对者：寇正华/王一

https://wscal.edu/blog/basics-of-the-reformed-faith-election

http://www.reformedbeginner.net/basics19-election/

美国人在民主的环境长大，我们坚持“一人一票”的原则。我们很容易（而且几乎是自然的）将这个原则转移到我们对救恩的理解。很容易假定，上帝应该给每个人去天堂的机会，那么如果有人下地狱实际上就是由于他拒绝上帝的恩赐而将自己送至地狱。这十分符合民主式的思维，因为每个个体都被授予资格和权力来决定自己的生活方式。如果在美国政治中是这样，那么在罪人得救的时候这应该也是正确的，难道不是吗？不是的。圣经不允许我们以这样乐观的方式来理解人类从罪恶中得救赎。

由于亚当的罪，我们生来都是罪人，我们的本性是有罪的，我们的选择是有罪的。并且因为亚当在伊甸园中的反叛行为，我们生来就有罪。圣经将这说成是死在罪中（弗2:1），意味着我们不愿意也不能做任何事情来拯救自己。因为我们死在罪中，我们甚至不能向着上帝采取首先的步骤，一些基督徒错误地认为我们应该能做到（约6:44）。通常听到基督徒以一般的、非具体的以及医学的术语来描述上帝的恩典，例如“恩典就像一种药，如果我们愿意接受，就能使我们来到基督面前”，或者“恩典是一个救生圈，我们必须抓住并且紧紧抱住，否则我们将在我们的罪中淹死”。

我们的问题不在于我们是灵性上生病的，不在于被我们的罪稍微地损伤，或者我们是道德上软弱的。我们的问题要比这更糟糕。圣经说我们死在罪中。死人不会，而且也不能来到神面前。上帝必须在我们死在罪中的时候就近我们，然后使我们与基督徒一同活过来（参见弗2:1-10）。这是我们找到上帝拯救恩典的要点的所在。当我们如此不配这样的救恩，并且对于我们的困境完全不能做任何事情时，上帝做了一切必要的以拯救我们脱离我们的罪恶。民主的预设不能简单地应用到罪和恩典的事情上。在这里，人类的困境和上帝的主权恩典是适当的范畴。上帝必须自始至终地拯救我们，因为我们不能做任何事情来拯救自己。

任何人能够对耶稣产生信心的唯一原因，就是在创立世界以前，上帝选择在基督里拯救我们（弗1:4）。圣经说，上帝这样做是基于他自己主权的美意和旨意——换句话说，理由只有他自己知道，但与上帝的圣洁和公义完全相符。当论述这个主题时，保罗毫不含糊地将其说出来。“因爱我们，（上帝）就按着自己意旨所喜悦的，预定我们藉着耶稣基督得儿子的名分，使他荣耀的恩典得着称赞。这恩典是他在爱子里所赐给我们的。我们藉这爱子的血（在基督里）得蒙救赎，过犯得以赦免，乃是照他丰富的恩典。这恩典是神用诸般智慧聪明，充充足足赏给我们的，都是照着他自己所预定的美意，叫我们知道他旨意的奥秘；要照所安排的，在日期满足的时候，使天上地上一切所有的，都在基督里面同归于一”（弗1:5-10）。上帝在基督里拣选我们，并且他这样做的理由只有他自己知道。但他却拣选我们。

这里的关键点是，除非上帝选择在基督里拯救我们，否则我们没有一个会得救！上帝不会像通常所说的那样，俯视时间走廊并且看谁将会以及谁将不会信靠基督。如果情况是那样，则上帝的拣选将是对人类行动（接受基督的决定）的回应，这对于在死在罪中的人来说是不能实行的。那些没有被拣选的人就留在他们在亚当里的初始境况中，在上帝的咒诅和公义的定罪中。那些未被拣选的人并非仿佛被不公平地对待一样。相反，他们将根据神的公义而不是上帝在基督里拯救的怜悯来处理。未被拣选的人将得到他们真正应得的。如果神没有在基督里拣选我们，我们得到我们真正应得的。

圣经非常清楚，上帝的拣选是基于他的美意和旨意，拣选是“在基督里”（意思是，所有信靠基督的都是在基督里被拣选的），并且上帝提供耶稣基督的善功（通过他的受苦和顺服）来救那些被上帝拣选的人脱离罪的罪责和权势。通过耶稣基督的救赎工作，在圣灵的大能中并通过圣灵的大能施行在我们身上，上帝所选择拯救的人将被拯救。这是我们找到唯独恩典（sola gratia）的意义的所在。

在爱里，上帝预定我们在基督里从我们的罪的罪责和权势中被赎回。

Basics of the Reformed Faith: Election

Kim Riddlebarger

As Americans raised in a democratic republic, we cling tenaciously to the principle “one person, one vote.” It is very easy (and almost natural) to carry over this principle to our understanding of the doctrine of salvation. It is easy to simply assume that God should give everyone a chance to go to heaven, and if people refuse God’s gracious offer, then people, in effect, send themselves to hell by refusing God’s gracious gift. This makes perfect sense on democratic presuppositions because in the political sphere each individual is assumed to be entitled and empowered to determine their own course in life. And if this is true in American political life, then it should be true when it comes to the salvation of sinner. Right? Well, no. The Bible does not allow us to understand humanity’s redemption from sin in such rosy terms.

Because of Adam’s sin, we are all sinners by nature and by choice, and we are born guilty for Adam’s act of rebellion in Eden. The Bible speaks of this as being dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1), meaning we are unwilling and unable to do anything to save ourselves. Because we are dead in sin, we cannot even take those first steps toward God that some Christians mistakenly think we should be able to make (John 6:44). It is common to hear Christians describe God’s grace in generic, non-specific and medicinal terms such as, “grace is like a medicine which, if we are willing to take it, enables us to come to Christ,” or that “grace is a life-ring which we must grab and cling, or we will drown in our sins.”

Our problem is not that we are spiritually sick, somewhat impaired by our sin, or that we are morally weak. It is much worse than that. The Bible says we are dead in sin. Dead people do not, and indeed cannot, come to God. God must come to us while we are dead in sin, and then make us alive with Christ (cf. Ephesians 2:1-10). This is where we find the very heart of God’s saving grace. God does everything necessary to save us from our sins, when we are so unworthy of such salvation, and completely unable to do anything about our predicament. Democratic presuppositions simply don’t apply to matters of sin and grace. Humanity’s plight and God’s sovereign grace are the proper categories here. From beginning to end God must save us because we are unable to do anything to save ourselves.

The only reason why any one of us presently trusts in Jesus to save us from our sins is because God chose to save us in Jesus Christ from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). God did so, Scripture says, based upon his own sovereign good pleasure and purpose–in other words, for reasons known only to himself, but fully consistent with God’s holiness and justice. When addressing this very subject, Paul spells this out in no uncertain terms. “In love, [God] predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In [Jesus] we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth” (Ephesians 1:3-7). God chooses us in Jesus Christ, and he does so for reasons known only to himself. But he chooses us nonetheless.

The critical point here is that unless God chose to save us in Jesus Christ, not one of us would be saved! God did not look down the corridors of time and see who would and who would not trust in Christ as is commonly argued. If that were the case, then God’s election would be a response to a human action (a decision to accept Christ) which people who are dead in sin cannot perform. Those not chosen are left in their original condition in Adam, under God’s curse and just condemnation. It is not as though those not chosen are treated unfairly. Rather, they will be dealt with according to divine justice, not God’s saving mercy in Christ. Those not chosen will get what they truly deserve. They we get what we truly deserve, had God not chosen us in Christ.

The Bible is very clear that God’s election is based upon the good pleasure and purpose of God, that election is “in Christ” (which means that all those who trust in Christ were chosen in Christ), and that God provides the merits of Jesus Christ (through his suffering and obedience) to save those whom God has chosen, from both the guilt and power of sin. Those whom God chooses to save will be saved by the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, which is applied to us in and through the power of the Holy Spirit. This is where we find the meaning of sola gratia (grace alone).

In love, God predestined us in Jesus Christ to be redeemed from the guilt and power of our sin.