直到國度降臨'Til Kingdom Come

作者：NICK BATZIG  譯者: 駱鴻銘

http://www.reformation21.org/bl…/2018/…/til-kingdom-come.php

https://www.facebook.com/peddrluo/posts/10156930040229653?__xts__[0]=68.ARDQZmXnuXx9qZOWQt4LpbrPrXnDInXgMd0W1-YV9n7Uwh_N5Z5y8AVybL1uAi8sHbhqYuOffmRw131GjIm6CYDb5YOzbo3R1Z8www7UZJFpuX4qArrKOA9WomvIadw8Ypn9eVx6JOk1S8S10QTOlSpGbp-v2u36GTR7pJQS5QdTbAev5VarHyc&__tn__=-R

最近圍繞「社會正義」的辯論似乎可以歸結為對「上帝的國」與「教會」之間關係，有著根本的分歧和誤解。許多人將這兩種聖經概念混為一談，以至於在「教會的使命」和「信徒在世上的活動」之間，沒有劃分出明確的界線。其他人則將它們對立起來，以至於使它們之間不再存有任何必要的關聯。魏司堅（Geerhardus Vos）在他所著的《改革教義學》的第五卷中，對於這兩種聖經概念的獨特性和彼此的關聯，提出了許多相當重要的觀點。

So much recent debate surrounding social justice seems to boil down to fundamental disagreements and misunderstandings about the relationship between the "Kingdom of God" and the "Church."  Many have conflated these two biblical concepts so as to lose the clear lines of demarcation regarding the mission of the church and the activities of believers in the world. Others have so pitted them against one another as to bifurcate any necessary correlation. In vol. 5 of his Reformed Dogmatics, Geerhardus Vos made a number of profoundly important points regarding both the distinctness and interconnectedness of these two biblical concepts when he wrote, 

「一方面，『上帝的國』是狹義的，『教會』則是更廣義的概念......另一方面，『上帝的國』或『天國』是一個比『教會』更廣義的概念。」（註1）

"On the one hand, 'kingdom of God' is the narrower, and 'church' the wider concept...On the other hand, the 'kingdom of God' or 'of heaven' is a broader concept than that of the church."1

對於「上帝的國」是比「教會」更為狹義的概念，魏司堅提到：

Concerning his observation about the "Kingdom of God" being a more narrow concept than the "Church," Vos noted,

「雖然教會既有『有形的』（visible）一面，也有『無形的』（invisible）一面，因此往往可以被視是一整個國家，但上帝的國在其各種意義上卻是無形的屬靈原則。若我們真屬於基督，降服在祂的至高權柄之下，靠著活潑的信心被塑造成祂的模樣，連同教會的許多成員，與祂的身體聯合在一起，那麼基督對我們的靈魂所行使的，就是祂的主權。教會就是由這些真正的成員和基督的臣民組成的聚集。它被稱為「天國」，乃是因為它有其中心，在天上有它的未來。聖約的一切屬靈益處都和它有關：公義、自由、和平、聖靈中的喜樂（參：羅十四17）。作為這種屬靈的實體，它乃是在人心裏，並不具有外在的形貌。按此意義來理解，天國就等於無形教會；但在新約的特殊處境中，因為基督宣講天國近了，即藉著祂的降臨，天國已經近了。祂是君王，藉著祂明確的自我啟示、藉著祂完成的工作，無形教會也獲得了前所未有的新榮耀，所以即使在這個國度中，最小的仍然比施洗約翰更大（太十一11）。」（註2）

"While the Church has both a visible and invisible side, and so can often be perceived of an entire nation, the kingdom of God in its various meanings is the invisible spiritual principle. It is the lordship Christ exercises over our souls if we truly belong to Him, our submission to his sovereign authority, our being conformed and joined by living faith to His body with its many members. It is the gathering of these true members and subjects of Christ. It is called the "kingdom of heaven" because it has its center and its future in heaven. All the spiritual benefits of the covenant are linked to it: righteousness, freedom, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit [cf. Rom 14:17]. As such a spiritual entity, it is within man and does not appear with an outward face. Understood in this sense, the kingdom of heaven equals the invisible church, but then in its New Testament particularity, for Christ preached that the kingdom of heaven had come near, namely, through His coming. He is the king, and through His clear self-revelation and through His completed work, the invisible church also receives a new glory that it did not have previously, so that even the least in this kingdom is still greater than John the Baptist [Matt 11:11]."2

關於堅持「上帝的國」是更廣義的概念，而「教會」是更狹義的，Vos解釋說：

With regard to the insistence that the "Kingdom of God" is the broader, and the "Church" the narrower concept, Vos explained,

「上帝的國......是如此呈現在我們眼前的：它是必須滲透一切的酵母，是必須長成大樹的一粒芥菜種，其枝幹要覆蓋生活的全部領域。顯然，這種事不會被視為和『教會』有關。除了教會的領域之外，還有其他的生活領域，但是這些領域都不會被排除在上帝的國度之外。它在科學、藝術，各種知識領域中都有其主張。但是教會並不會宣稱對這一切的主權。此國度的外表（有形教會）決不能承擔這些事情；國度的內在本質，新的存在狀態，本身必須滲透和淨化。教會將一切都納入其中，必須掌管一切，恰恰是羅馬天主教的錯誤。然後就出現了一種教會科學、一種教會藝術，一種教會政治。在那裏，上帝的國度與教會完全等同，並以絕對的形式立足在世上。根據我們的看法，事情並非如此。真基督徒首先屬於教會，並承認基督為王。但除此之外，他也承認基督在生命每個領域中的主權，卻沒有因此犯下把這些事物彼此混雜在一起的錯誤。舊約聖經的教會-國家，包涵了整個國家的生活，是這種無所不包的上帝國度的一個預表。」（註3）

"The Kingdom of God...is presented to us as leaven that must permeate everything, as a mustard seed that must grow into a tree that with its branches covers all of life. Plainly, such a thing may not be said of the concept 'church.' There are other spheres of life beside that of the church, but from none of those may the kingdom of God be excluded. It has its claim in science, in art, on every terrain. But the church may not lay claim to all that. The external side of the kingdom (the visible church) must not undertake these things; the internal essence of the kingdom, the new existence, must of itself permeate and purify. It is precisely the Roman Catholic error that the church takes everything into itself and must govern everything. Then there appears an ecclesiastical science, an ecclesiastical art, an ecclesiastical politics. There the kingdom of God is identical with the church and has been established on earth in an absolute form. According to us, it is otherwise. The true Christian belongs in the first place to the church, and in it acknowledges Christ as king. But besides that he also acknowledges the lordship of Christ in every other area of life, without thereby committing the error of mixing these things with each other. The Old Testament church-state, which comprehended the entire life of the nation, was a type of this all-encompassing kingdom of God."3

這些區分自然會得出某些結論，這些結論涉及到上帝所統治的、並且在祂的百姓和世上作王的這兩個領域，彼此之間複雜的關聯。魏司堅寫道：

These distinctions lead naturally to certain conclusions concerning the complex interrelatedness of these two spheres of God's rule and reign in His people and in the world. Vos wrote,

「若我們從第一個層面來比較有形教會和上帝的國度，那麼我們可以說前者是後者的表現和體現。

"If now one compares the visible church and the kingdom of God viewed from the first side, then one can say that the former is a manifestation and embodiment of the latter.

如果從第二個層面來比較有形教會和上帝的國度，那麼可以說前者是後者的工具。

If one compares the visible church and the kingdom of God viewed from the second side, then one can say that the former is an instrument of the latter.

如果我們看最終的結果，那麼我們必須說，教會和上帝的國度會重疊在一起。在天堂，生活將不再是分裂的。在那裏，有形教會和無形教會有著完美的重疊。與此同時，就現在而言，神的國必須藉由教會的特定形式來推進。」（註4）If one looks to the final outcome, then one must say that the church and kingdom of God will coincide. In heaven there will no longer be a division of life. There the visible and the invisible will coincide perfectly. Meanwhile, for now the kingdom of God must advance through the particular form of the church."4

這兩個概念的複雜性，使我們必須極為審慎地考慮它們的獨特性和彼此的關聯。只有當我們這樣作的時候，我們才能大有裨益地進行關於教會使命、社會正義、憐憫事工、個人與群體，神聖與世俗，以及無數相關事務的對話，這些是基督徒喜歡花大量時間在網上辯論的事。儘管這本身是一項艱鉅的任務，但它將證明是一項值得的努力，肯定會給教會中的其他成員帶來巨大的益處。

The complexity of these two concepts necessitates that we give the utmost care to our consideration of both their distinctness and interrelatedness. It is only as we do so that we will profitably enter into conversations about the mission of the church, social justice, mercy ministry, the individual and the corporate, the sacred and the secular, and the myriad of others associated matters about which Christians love to spend inordinate amounts of time debating online. Though a daunting task, in and of itself, it will prove a worthy endeavor sure to yield great benefit to fellow members in the church. 

註：

1. Vos, G. (2012-2016). Reformed Dogmatics. (R. B. Gaffin, Ed., A. Godbehere, R. van Ijken, D. van der Kraan, H. Boonstra, J. Pater, A. Janssen, ... K. Batteau, Trans.) (Vol. 5, pp. 8-9). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

2. Ibid., vol. 5, p. 8.

3. Ibid., p. 9

4. Ibid.

社會正義是一個福音議題嗎？Is Social Justice a GospelIssue?

作者：Kevin DeYoung   譯者: 駱鴻銘

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/social-justice-gospel-issue/

https://www.facebook.com/peddrluo/posts/10156929324374653?__xts__[0]=68.ARA0uOpV3LNnMvGo2T8A6VPLZQd5gNB_jl52pJWfgsLffbsLESjIEVXBimddVRjrvMsCJHJOSfsHRzpDIp4yFYfaXXJnHFoV8lk5W06kVL1vMJn31Oy2W7h04PmlOUiITdDCL2PNfmvIrOz4UUu0VDJmcn752_JNXuNAVg8oJQKWYb_WcicdYRY&__tn__=-R

https://plus.google.com/u/0/105106813742373627205/posts/Zne2Dc2DYgA

對這篇文章標題所提出的問題有一個直截了當的答案：看情況。

There is a simple, straightforward answer to the question posed in the title of this post: it depends.

社會正義是一個福音議題嗎？這取決於我們所謂的「社會正義」，和我們所說的「福音議題」究竟是什麼意思。

Is social justice a gospel issue? That depends on what we mean by “social justice” and what we mean by “gospel issue.”

什麼是社會正義？

What Is Social Justice?

我以前曾經寫到，社會正義是一個含糊的術語，對某些人來說是毫無爭論餘地的，但對其他人來說，卻會令人起疑。對一些基督徒來說，如果你不關心社會正義，那麼你就一定不關心種族主義、墮胎、性侵犯、性別不平等，或神的形象（imago dei）本身。相反，如果你在其他基督徒周圍為社會正義說好話，他們可能會認為你熱愛森林，討厭警察。這個語詞都沒有共同的涵義，或者至少沒有眾人一致同意的準確定義。

I’ve written before that social justice is a nebulous term, unassailable to some and arousing suspicion in others. For some Christians, if you aren’t into social justice, then you must not care about racism or abortion or sexual assault or inequality or the imago dei itself. Conversely, if you put in a good word for social justice around other Christians, they may assume you hug trees and hate police officers. The term has no shared meaning, or at least no precise definition we all agree on.

據我們所知，「社會正義」一詞可以追溯到十九世紀四〇年代，一位名叫塔帕雷利（Luigi Taparelli，1793-1862）的耶穌會哲學家首次使用這個詞。塔帕雷利是教皇權威和保守派天主教徒的堅定支持者，他認為社會不平等不是對正義的侵犯，而是正義的副產品，他認為這是對憲政體制的合理安排。塔帕雷利對「社會正義」這個詞的用法，與這個詞在當代日常對話中的用法，幾乎沒有類似之處。

As far as we know, the term “social justice” dates to the 1840s when it was first used by a Jesuit philosopher named Luigi Taparelli (1793-1862). Taparelli was a strong supporter of papal authority and a conservative Catholic who argued that social inequality is not a violation of justice but a byproduct of justice, which he understood to be the right ordering of constitutional arrangements. Taparelli’s use of “social justice” bears little resemblance to how the term is used in common conversation today.

在我們評估社會正義與福音之間的關聯之前，我們必須知道前者的涵義。如果「社會正義」的內涵包括提出具體政策，基督徒應該（或不應該）支持某個候選人，並就經濟、種族分歧、大規模監禁（mass incarceration）、移民改革，以及許多其他有爭議的議題得出明確的結論，那麼我們對於要把像社會正義這種在政治上具有規範意義的東西，和像福音這種具有普世救贖意義的東西關聯在一起，就應該要非常謹慎。

Before we can evaluate the connection between social justice and the gospel, we have to know what we mean by the former. If “social justice” entails specific policy proposals, certain candidates Christians should (or shouldn’t) support, and definite conclusions about economic and racial disparities, mass incarceration, immigration reform, and a host of other debatable topics, then we ought to be extremely cautious about linking something as politically prescriptive as social justice with something as universally salvific as the gospel.

當然，基督徒可以（也應該）對政策建案、候選人和任何有爭議的主題，按照聖經來建立我們的信念。我永遠不會想要把基督徒公民和基督徒思想排除在當今最棘手的問題之外。有些論點確實比其他論點更強。但我們必須區分好的和壞的論點，也要分辨基督徒的和非基督徒的立場。在右派這邊，我有時會聽見，如果你關心墮胎（按照聖經，這是一種罪），你就必須支持川普；而在左派這邊，我聽說如果你關心種族主義（按照聖經，這也是一種罪）你就永遠不可支持川普。儘管我對我們總統必然有我自己的看法，但教會不能僭越上帝所賦予的權力和權柄，來捆綁其成員的良心。最誠實的一些基督徒在一些立場或結論上，可以有不同的看法。

Of course, Christians can (and should) have biblically informed convictions about policy proposals, candidates, and any number of controversial subjects. I would never wish to shut out Christian citizens and Christian thinking from the thorniest problems of our day. Some arguments are better than others. But we must distinguish between good and bad arguments and Christian and non-Christians positions. On the right, I sometimes hear that if you care about abortion (which, according to the Bible, is a sin) you must support Trump, while from the left, I hear that if you care about racism (which, according to the Bible, is also a sin) you must never support Trump. While I certainly have my opinions about our President, the church must not go beyond its God-given authority and power in binding the consciences of her members to positions or conclusions that honest Christians can disagree on.

我對「社會正義」一詞，也對這個詞所蘊含的涵義，有我自己的擔憂。但是，如果我們追問一種更少受到文化控制和更符合聖經的理解呢？幾年前，我仔細研讀了聖經中主要幾段與正義有關的經文：利未記十九章、廿五章，以賽亞書第一章、五十八章，耶利米書廿二章，阿摩司書第五章，彌迦書六8，馬太福音廿五31～46，和路加福音第四章。我所得出的那不太令人興奮的結論是，我們不應該誇大或低估聖經對正義的看法。一方面，聖經記載了很多關於上帝眷顧窮人、被壓迫者、弱勢群體的事。也有很多警告，反對以殘忍和無禮的態度來對待無依無靠的人。另一方面，正義作為聖經的一個範疇，並不是說凡是我們認為對世界有益的事就一定是符合正義的。行公義意味著要遵守法治，表現公平，履行你的承諾，不偷竊，不詐騙，不收受賄賂，也不占弱者的便宜，只因為他們不知道如何阻止你，或沒有任何的人際關係來阻止你。

I have my concerns with the term “social justice” and with all that it connotes. But what if we press for a less culturally controlled and more biblically defined understanding? Several years ago, I worked my way through the major justice passages in the Bible: Leviticus 19, Leviticus 25, Isaiah 1, Isaiah 58, Jeremiah 22, Amos 5, Micah 6:8, Matthew 25:31-46, and Luke 4.  My less-than-exciting conclusion was that we should not oversell or undersell what the Bible says about justice. On the one hand, there is a lot in the Bible about God’s care for the poor, the oppressed, and the vulnerable. There are also plenty of warnings against treating the helpless with cruelty and disrespect. On the other hand, justice, as a biblical category, is not synonymous with anything and everything we feel would be good for the world. Doing justice means following the rule of law, showing impartiality, paying what you promised, not stealing, not swindling, not taking bribes, and not taking advantage of the weak because they are too uninformed or unconnected to stop you.

因此，為簡單起見，讓我們把聖經中的「社會正義」定義為「公平對待人，為公平的制度和結構努力，並看顧弱者和弱勢群體。」如果這就是我們的意思，那麼，社會正義是一個福音議題嗎？

So for simplicity sake, let’s take biblical “social justice” to mean something like “treating people equitably, working for systems and structures that are fair, and looking out for the weak and the vulnerable.” If that’s what we mean, is social justice a gospel issue?

什麼是福音議題？

What Is a Gospel Issue?

再次，我們必須定義我們的用語。如果「福音議題」意味著我們將好行為走私到「唯獨信心」的等式中，那麼很顯然，社會正義並不是福音議題。我們不是為了拯救自己，而救助弟兄中最小的一個。

Again, we have to define our terms. If “gospel issue” means we are smuggling good works into the sola fide side of the equation, then clearly social justice is not a gospel issue. We don’t save the least of the these in order to save ourselves.

同樣，如果「福音議題」的意思是「與宣告基督被釘十字架同等重要」，那麼問題的答案必須再次是：否。只有一件事是最重要的，根據保羅在哥林多前書十五章中的說法，就是基督照聖經所說，為我們的罪死了，並在第三天復活的信息。

Likewise, if “gospel issue” means “as important as the proclamation of Christ crucified” then the answer must again be no. There is only one thing that can be of first importance, and that, according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, is the message that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and was raised on the third day.

我會更進一步說：「福音議題」不應該是「你必須對我所熱衷的一切都充滿熱情」的簡寫。它也不應該是「建造國度」或「轉化文化」這兩個概念的同義詞。出於同樣的原因，傳教士必須小心，以免他們讓美國有線電視新聞網（CNN）和福克斯新聞（Fox News），更不用說Twitter和Facebook，為他們每週的講道事奉設定議程。如果我們這個時代的牧師任憑他對文化的關切，排擠掉他對重生、悔改、稱義的宣講，那麼這不會是在教會歷史中，「福音」（指文化福音）第一次變得比真正的福音更具社會性的時候。

I’ll go even further: “gospel issue” should not be shorthand for “you must be passionate about all the same things I’m passionate about.” Nor should it be synonymous with notions of “building the kingdom” or “transforming the culture.” By the same token, preachers must be careful lest they allow CNN and Fox News, not to mention Twitter and Facebook, to set the agenda for their weekly pulpit ministry. If pastors in our day let cultural concerns crowd out the preaching of new birth, repentance, and justification by faith alone, it wouldn’t be the first time in the church’s history that the “gospel” became more social than gospel.

然而，「福音議題」所指的，並不是這些事。倘若「福音議題」的意思是：「那些被福音所拯救的人所必須關注的」，或「『與福音保持同步』的真正意義，其中的一個層面」，或「若缺乏這些事實，你很可能沒有真正相信福音」，那麼社會正義肯定是一個福音議題。按照聖經的定義，社會正義是愛鄰舍如己的基本要件。這是遵守十誡第二塊石版的一部分。這是行「善」——也就是上帝所預備叫我們行的——的一部分（弗二10）。

And yet, “gospel issue” need not mean any of these things. If “gospel issue” means “a necessary concern of those who have been saved by the gospel” or “one aspect of what it means to keep in step with the gospel” or “realities without which you may not be truly believing the gospel,” then social justice is certainly a gospel issue. When biblically defined, social justice is part and parcel of loving our neighbor as ourselves. It’s part of keeping the second table of the Decalogue. It’s part of doing the good works God has prepared in advance for us to walk in (Eph. 2:10).

總結

Conclusion

正如在眾多的爭議中，我們必須更快地定義我們的用詞，而不是定義我們的對手。毫無疑問，其中有值得探索和揭露的真正分歧。但其中也可能有比一些人最初想像的更為一致的看法。

As in so many controversies, we must be quicker to define our terms than to define our opponents. No doubt, there are real disagreements worth exploring and exposing. But there also may be more agreement than some might initially imagine.

根據我們的定義，社會正義和福音可能相距甚遠，或它們也可以非常靠近，就如：愛神的，就必遵守祂的命令（約十四15）。

Depending on our definitions, social justice and the gospel may be miles apart, or they may be as close as loving God by obeying his commands (John 14:15).