顯示具有 Justin Holcomb 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 Justin Holcomb 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2017-11-16

「好星期五」好在哪裏?What’s So Good about GoodFriday?

 作者:Justin Holcomb   譯者:駱鴻銘

「好星期五」Good Friday是紀念耶穌受難和死亡的日子。既然這是個非常幽暗而淒慘的事件,我們為什麼還會稱它為「好」呢?
Why do we call Good Friday “good,” when it is such a dark and bleak event commemorating a day of suffering and death for Jesus?

對基督徒來說,「好星期五」是一年中特別重要的一個日子,因為它是在慶祝世界歷史上最重要的一個週末。自從耶穌受死並且復活之後,基督徒就一直在宣揚,耶穌的十字架和復活是宇宙萬有最具關鍵的轉捩點。保羅認為那是「第一要緊的事」,就是耶穌為我們的罪死了,而且埋葬了,而且在第三天復活了,而這一切是按照上帝在聖經裡一再應許的(林前十五3-4)。
For Christians, Good Friday is a crucial day of the year because it celebrates what we believe to be the most momentous weekend in the history of the world. Ever since Jesus died and was raised, Christians have proclaimed the cross and resurrection of Jesus to be the decisive turning point for all creation. Paul considered it to be “of first importance” that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and was raised to life on the third day, all in accordance with what God had promised all along in the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:3).

1Co 15:3-4   我當日所領受又傳給你們的:第一,就是基督照聖經所說,為我們的罪死了,  4   而且埋葬了;又照聖經所說,第三天復活了,

在「好星期五」這個日子裏,我們紀念耶穌甘願受十字架的苦,並死在十字架上,為我們的罪作了終極的獻祭(約壹四10)。接下來是復活節,榮耀地慶祝耶穌從死裏復活的日子,宣告祂勝過罪和死亡,並為所有因信而與祂聯合的人預先指出未來的復活(羅六5)。
On Good Friday we remember the day Jesus willingly suffered and died by crucifixion as the ultimate sacrifice for our sins (1 John 1:10). It is followed by Easter, the glorious celebration of the day Jesus was raised from the dead, heralding his victory over sin and death and pointing ahead to a future resurrection for all who are united to him by faith (Romans 6:5).

1Jn 4:10   不是我們愛神,乃是神愛我們,差祂的兒子為我們的罪作了挽回祭,這就是愛了。
Rom 6:5   我們若在祂死的形狀上與祂聯合,也要在祂復活的形狀上與祂聯合;

不過我們還是要問,為什麼要稱耶穌受死的那日為「好星期五」,而不是「壞星期五」或其他名稱呢?有些基督徒傳統接受了這種說法:例如,在德國,這天被人稱為「Karfreitag」,或譯為「悲慘的星期五」。事實上,在英文裏,「好」這個詞的來源有很多爭論:有些人認為它是從「上帝的星期五」(Gods Friday)這個古老名稱演變過來的。無論其來源為何,「好星期五」這個名稱是完全恰當的,因為雖然耶穌的受苦和受死非常可怕,但是它卻標誌著上帝拯救祂的子民脫離罪惡的計劃來到一個戲劇性的高峰。Still, why call the day of Jesus’ death “Good Friday” instead of “Bad Friday” or something similar? Some Christian traditions do take this approach: in German, for example, the day is called Karfreitag, or “Sorrowful Friday.” In English, in fact, the origin of the term “Good” is debated: some believe it developed from an older name, “God’s Friday.” Regardless of the origin, the name Good Friday is entirely appropriate because the suffering and death of Jesus, as terrible as it was, marked the dramatic culmination of God’s plan to save his people from their sins.

為了讓福音的好消息對我們產生意義,我們首先必須明白這個壞消息,即我們的處境是被上帝定罪的罪人。拯救的好消息只有在當我們明白我們是如何受奴役時,才會說得通。換一種說法就是,了解聖經裏律法和福音之間的區分是很重要的。我們首先需要律法,顯明我們的處境是多麼無望;然後耶穌恩典的福音臨到,釋放我們,把救恩帶給我們。In order for the good news of the gospel to have meaning for us, we first have to understand the bad news of our condition as sinful people under condemnation. The good news of deliverance only makes sense once we see how we are enslaved. Another way of saying this is that it is important to understand and distinguish between law and gospel in Scripture. We need the law first to show us how hopeless our condition is; then the gospel of Jesus’ grace comes and brings us relief and salvation.

同樣,好星期五是「好的」,是因為雖然那天很恐怖,如果我們想要領受復活節的喜樂,卻又是必須要為我們發生的。上帝對罪惡的怒氣必須被傾倒在耶穌身上,祂是完美祭物的代替品,好叫赦免和救恩可以被澆灌在萬民身上。如果沒有這個受苦的、憂傷的、在十字架上流血的可怕日子,上帝就無法成為「祂自己為義,也稱信耶穌的人為義」(羅三26)的那位。矛盾的是,這看似是邪惡橫行得勝的日子,實際上卻是在上帝拯救世人脫離捆綁的榮耀良善計劃裏,對邪惡的致命一擊。In the same way, Good Friday is good because as terrible as that day was, it had to happen for us to receive the joy of Easter. The wrath of God against sin had to be poured out on Jesus, the perfect sacrificial substitute, in order for forgiveness and salvation to be poured out to the nations. Without that awful day of suffering, sorrow, and shed blood at the cross, God could not be both “just and the justifier” of those who trust in Jesus (Romans 3:26). Paradoxically, the day that seemed to be the greatest triumph of evil was actually the deathblow in God’s gloriously good plan to redeem the world from bondage.

十字架是我們看見偉大的受苦和上帝的赦免匯聚一處之所。詩篇八十五篇第10節歌頌一個日子,在那日,「公義和平安彼此相親」。這事就發生在耶穌的十字架上,在這裏,上帝的要求,祂的公義,與祂的憐憫重疊在一起。我們領受了上帝的赦免、憐憫、和平,是因為耶穌甘願承擔上帝對我們的懲罰,這是上帝的公義對抗罪惡必然的後果。「因那擺在前面的喜樂」(來十二2),耶穌在好星期五忍受了十架,因祂知道這會通往祂的復活、我們的救恩,和上帝公義和平統治的開端。The cross is where we see the convergence of great suffering and God’s forgiveness. Psalms 85:10 sings of a day when “righteousness and peace” will “kiss each other.” The cross of Jesus is where that occurred, where God’s demands, his righteousness, coincided with his mercy. We receive divine forgiveness, mercy, and peace because Jesus willingly took our divine punishment, the result of God’s righteousness against sin. “For the joy set before him” (Hebrews 12:2) Jesus endured the cross on Good Friday, knowing it led to his resurrection, our salvation, and the beginning of God’s reign of righteousness and peace.

好星期五標誌出上帝的震怒與憐憫在十字架上相遇的日子。這就是為什麼好星期五是如此黑暗,卻又如此美好的原因。Good Friday marks the day when wrath and mercy met at the cross. Thats why Good Friday is so dark and so Good.

Justin Holcomb is Theologian in Residence at Mars Hill Church, where he also serves as Executive Director of Resurgence and the Leadership Development department. He is also Adjunct Professor of Theology and Philosophy at Reformed Theological Seminary.


2017-09-02

两个神学传统的故事:荷兰和苏格兰改革宗传统ATALE OF TWO THEOLOGIES: THE DUTCH AND SCOTTISH REFORMED TRADITIONS

作者:Justin Holcomb  译者:骆鸿铭

经常有人把改革宗神学定义为只是所谓的“加尔文五要点”:人的全然败坏,无条件的拣选,限定的救赎,不可抗拒的恩典,以及圣徒的坚忍。虽然强调神如何拯救罪人很有价值,但是它未能捕捉到改革宗思想传承的全部广度。
Too often, Reformed theology is defined merely by the so-called five points of Calvinism: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints. While this emphasis on how God saves sinners has value, it fails to capture the full breadth of the heritage of Reformed thought.

从加尔文的著作,产生了改革宗神学的两个主要流派:苏格兰加尔文主义(Scotish Calvinist),以及荷兰改革宗(Dutch Reformed)。苏格兰传统所特别强调的,是救恩的教义以及救恩的次序(ordo salutis, order of salvation)。而荷兰改革宗传统除了重视改革宗的救恩教义外,也强调世界观、文化参与和耶稣在生活所有领域的主权。让我们感到意外的是这两个支流在过去鲜少有互动。我们就来简单地看看这两个改革宗神学的传统。
There are two major streams of Reformed theology that developed out of the work of John Calvin: the Scottish Calvinist stream, and the Dutch Reformed stream. The Scottish tradition has a strong focus on doctrines of salvation and the ordo salutis (order of salvation). But another dimension is found in the Dutch Reformed tradition, which celebrates Reformed doctrines of salvation but also emphasizes worldviews, cultural engagement, and the lordship of Jesus over all aspects of life. Surprisingly, the two streams have interacted relatively rarely. Let’s take a short tour of the Scottish and Dutch Reformed theological traditions.

苏格兰改革宗传统
The Scottish Reformed Tradition

改革宗传统的苏格兰支流是从宗教改革直接诞生的。在宗教改革的早期,约翰·诺克斯(JOHN KNOX1514-1572)参与了苏格兰教会的改革;不过,他也因此遭到监禁,最后被放逐。在放逐时,他旅行到加尔文在瑞士日内瓦的基地。他倾心于预定论的教义,有些人甚至说他比加尔文更“加尔文主义”。诺克斯最终还是回到了苏格兰,并且成为苏格兰教会——长老会的起源——的领袖人物。
The Scottish branch of the Reformed tradition was immediately born out of the Reformation. In the early days of the Reformation, pastor-theologian John Knox (1514–1572) was a part of a group trying to reform the Scottish church; however, his involvement led to his imprisonment and eventual exile. While in exile, he traveled to John Calvin’s base of operations in Geneva, Switzerland. There, Knox became enamored with the doctrine of predestination and, some argue, more “Calvinist” than Calvin himself. Knox eventually returned and became the leading figure in the founding of the Church of Scotland, which is the origin of Presbyterianism.

苏格兰改革宗神学传统(包括英格兰的清教徒,例如理查·巴克斯特和约翰·欧文)在接下来的世代中,赢得了一个名声,就是大力地宣讲地狱的悲惨,深入教会会员的私人生活且严厉地施行教会惩戒(有如“道德的暴君”),并且压制艺术。美国的神学家,例如伟大的约拿单·爱德华兹也深受苏格兰改革宗神学和哲学的影响,而獲得类似的批评。虽然这些共同的批评中都有一些事实的成分,但是这些实践是在一个独特的文化处境中出现的,我们不能单单以此为标准来论断苏格兰改革宗传统。
Subsequent generations within the Scottish Reformed theological tradition (including English Puritans such as Richard Baxter and John Owen) gained a reputation for being pervasively gloomy preachers of hell, for exercising harsh church discipline while delving into the private lives of church members (i.e., of “moral tyranny”), and for suppressing the arts. American theologians such as the great Jonathan Edwards were also influenced by Scottish Reformed theology and philosophy and inherited some of these same critiques. While there is likely a bit of truth in each of the common criticisms, such practices arose out of unique cultural situations and should not be the only measures by which Scottish Reformed theology is judged.

 苏格兰改革宗教义和实际生活从来不是割裂的
The Reformed doctrine of the Scots was never separated from practical living.

17-18世纪时,预定、拣选、遗弃和救赎的范围,还有圣徒的坚忍,受到苏格兰农夫的极大的关注。虽然这些农夫对这些教义的关心起源于他们的领袖对这些教义的关注,但是加尔文救恩论的教义的确说到了教会会员所面对的实际和攸关生命的需要。
During the 17th and 18th centuries, the topics of predestination, election, reprobation, the extent of the atonement, and the perseverance of the saints gained the attention of the Scottish peasants. While the peasants’ concerns for these doctrines arose because of their leaders’ focus on them, the doctrines of Calvinist soteriology addressed practical and existential needs that church members faced.

虽然苏格兰改革宗神学在后来转趋比较严厉的加尔文主义形式,其原先的信条(1560年苏格兰信条)持守的是比较偏向宣教的教会本质和福音布道的神学焦点。苏格兰的改革宗教义和实际的生活从来不是割裂的。苏格兰改革宗教会把西敏信仰告白当作他们的教义标准(在圣经之下),并试着把这些伟大的神学真理应用在他们每天的生活当中。
While it is true that Scottish Reformed theology drifted into some heavier-handed forms of Calvinism, its original confession (the Scots Confession of 1560) upheld the missional nature of the church and the evangelistic focus of theology. The Reformed doctrine of the Scots was never separated from practical living. The Scots looked to the Westminster Confession of Faith as their doctrinal standard (underneath Scripture) and sought to implement those great theological truths into their everyday lives.

荷兰改革宗传统
The Dutch Reformed Tradition

加尔文主义在1560年代,宗教改革的第三波来到荷兰。荷兰的加尔文主义对早期改革宗信经和信条做出了一些重大的贡献:1561年代比利时信条为荷兰改革宗教会下了最初的定义;1563年的海德堡要理问答,成为荷兰和德国的改革宗之间的一道合一的桥梁;而1619年的多特大会成了改革宗教会的联合大会。
Calvinism arrived in the Netherlands in the third wave of the Reformation in the 1560s. Dutch Calvinism contributed some of the most important early Reformed creeds and confessions: the Belgic Confession of 1561 gave original definition to the Dutch Reformed Church, the Heidelberg Catechism of 1563 served as a bridge fostering unity between the Dutch and German Reformed, and the Canons of Dort in 1619 served as a Reformed ecumenical council.

过了一段时间之后,荷兰的改革宗教会堕落成为神学自由主义。当时,在19世纪末,新加尔文主义者如凯柏(ABRAHAM KUYPER),巴文克(HERMAN BAVINCK)和伯克富(LOUIS BERKOH)的著作,把荷兰教会从沉睡中唤醒,并且塑造了我们今日所知的荷兰改革宗神学学派(请留意日后的帖子,会介绍这些人物)。
Over time the Dutch Reformed Church drifted into theological liberalism. Then, in the late 19th century, the work of neo-Calvinists such as Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck, and Louis Berkhof awoke the Dutch church from slumber and shaped what is now known as the Dutch Reformed school of theology (stay tuned for more posts on each of these figures).

虽然荷兰改革宗思想和更广的改革宗传统有许多共同之处,但是有几个特点使它显出不同。DOUGLAS WILSON说的几句话,捕捉到了荷兰改革宗的思想:“全面的基督,全面的生活”(ALL OF CHRIST FOR ALL OF LIFE),以及凯柏著名的话:“对人类生存领域的每一寸,基督这位万有的主宰,莫不说:‘我的!’”。
While Dutch Reformed thought has much in common with the broader Reformed tradition, several features set it apart. Some of the best summaries of Dutch Reformed thought are captured in Douglas Wilson’s phrase, “All of Christ for all of life,” and in the famous words of Abraham Kuyper: “There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, ‘Mine!’”

基督徒当在生活的所有层面经历神的恩典
Christians are to experience the grace of God in all aspects of life.

凯柏坚持基督在所有生活中的主权,并敦促基督徒不要抛弃文化和社会中的一些领域,把它们当作是“世俗的”。他相信神在创造的不同领域里已经设立权柄的结构,当我们认识这些领域之间的范围,就可以帮助我们维系并且平衡社会中的公义和秩序。
Kuyper argued for the lordship of Christ over all of life and urged Christians not to dismiss certain fields of culture and society as “worldly.” He believed that God had established structures of authority in different spheres of creation, and recognizing the boundaries between these spheres helped maintain and balance justice and order in society.

根据凯柏的看法,神在地上的统治是透过祂的教会,信实地参与到文化当中。这个信念使得荷兰的神学家强调基督徒的文化行动。凯柏希望基督徒明白,每个世界观都有其独特的哲学前提,而基督教信仰也有一些前提假设,塑造了基督徒如何在生活的所有领域里行动。基于神绝对的主权,基督徒要在生活所有的领域经历神的恩典,不只是在教会的活动或崇拜服事中。
According to Kuyper, God’s rule on earth is brought about through the faithful cultural presence of his church. This belief led the Dutch theologians to emphasize cultural action on the part of Christians. Kuyper wanted Christians to understand that each worldview has its own unique philosophical assumptions, and that the Christian faith has assumptions that shape the way believers should act in every area of life. As a result of God’s absolute sovereignty, Christians are to experience the grace of God in all aspects of life, not just in church activities and worship services.

荷兰改革宗神学的最高点大概非伯克富的系统神学莫属了(我个人就是在17岁时读了伯克富,才接受改革宗神学的)。
The high point of Dutch Reformed theology is arguably Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology (full disclosure: I first came to Reformed theology through reading Berkhof when I was 17).

荷兰改革宗神学和美国的老普林斯顿神学学派(来自苏格兰的加尔文传统)共享了许多重要的基要真理,但是他们在一些领域有重大的差异。荷兰改革宗持守的信念是人们在宗教上不是中立的,不存在“客观”的理性能力。这意味着信徒和非信徒之间,没有共同的立场(COMMON GROUND)。这个世界也许包含了众多首尾一致(COHERENT)的世界观,而这就让护教学成为世界观之间的冲撞,而不只是在证据上的辩论。
Dutch Reformed theology shared important essentials with the Old Princeton school of theology (from the Scottish Calvinist tradition) in the United States, but they differed significantly in some areas. The Dutch held to the belief that people have no religiously neutral, “objective” rational faculty. This meant there was no common ground, necessarily, shared between believers and nonbelievers. The world could contain numerous coherent worldviews, and this made apologetics more a clash of worldviews than a debate over evidence.

(苏格兰支流的)普林斯顿强调圣经无误和命题真理的教义,而荷兰改革宗则强调圣灵在圣经里对圣经所作的见证的教义,来确认圣经的可信性。
While the (Scottish stream) Princetonians emphasized a doctrine of Scripture that focused on inerrancy and propositional truth, the Dutch Reformed stressed the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit’s witness to validate Scripture’s trustworthiness.

互补而不是矛盾
Complementary, Not Contradictory

表面看来,苏格兰和荷兰的改革宗教会在它们各自的强调上有如南辕北辙,但是很重要的是要看到他们各自的传统所处的文化环境实在有重大的不同。荷兰的神学家所面对的是教会屈服于19世纪的现代自由神学,并试图在美国殖民地找到一个文化的家。如此,他们强调基督在当时的许多意识形态中间有着最高的主权,还有他们对文化的审慎态度,是可以理解的。可以说,荷兰改革宗神学是宗教改革更广大原则的一个具体应用。
It may seem like the Scottish and Dutch streams of the Reformed church are miles apart in their emphases, but it is important to see that the cultural situations in which each of the traditions developed were significantly different. The Dutch theologians were facing a church giving in to modernist theological liberalism in the 19th century and trying to find a cultural home for themselves in their new settlements in the United States. As such, their emphases on the supreme reign of Christ over the ideologies of the day and their careful conception of culture are to be expected. In a way, Dutch Reformed theology was a specific application of the broad principles of the Reformation.

苏格兰和荷兰改革宗神学家关注的焦点都是塑造门徒
The Scottish and the Dutch Reformed theologians were focused on making disciples.

苏格兰改革宗关注的焦点更多是在宗教改革的主要教义,而不是他们在新的文化处境中的具体应用。此外,苏格兰改革宗的焦点也在于把宗教改革带到临近的区域,这解释了他们对宣教的强调。
The focus of the Scots was more on the primary doctrines of the Reformation than on their specific application to new cultural situations. Moreover, the Scottish Reformed focused on taking the initial Reformation to the surrounding regions, which explains their emphasis on missions.

苏格兰和荷兰改革宗教会并不像他们表面看来的有那么大的距离。他们共同享有改革宗的基本教义,虽然他们强调的是不同的层面。然而,即使在这些不同的焦点上,苏格兰和荷兰改革宗神学家都同样强调塑造门徒,并把福音带到他们周围的世界。两个传统都是今日改革宗运动的榜样。

The Scottish and Dutch Reformed churches are not as far apart as it may first appear. They shared the same basic Reformed doctrines, though they emphasized different aspects. Nevertheless, even in these different points of focus, both the Scottish and the Dutch Reformed theologians were focused on making disciples and bringing the gospel to bear on the world around them. Both traditions are examples for the Reformed movement today.