郁金香與改革宗神學：聖徒永蒙保守TULIP and Reformed Theology:Perseverance of the Saints

作者: R.C. Sproul   譯者: Maria Marta 

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-perseverance-saints/

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/9LE8WZjk8iG

在寫給腓立比人的信中，保羅說道，「那在你們心裡動了善工的必成全這工」（腓一6）。上帝在我們的靈魂裡所開始的，祂定意要完成，這就是上帝的應許。因此，改革宗神學關於聖徒永蒙保守的古舊公理是：倘若你擁有信心--------也就是說，倘若你擁有真信心，並且處於得救恩典的狀態--------便永遠不會失去它。倘若你失去它，那麽就證明你從來沒有這種信心。

我們知道，許多人作出信仰宣告，之後轉離和否認，或放棄這些信仰宣告。 使徒約翰指出有一些人離開了門徒，他說他們「從我們中間離去，這就表明他們是不屬於我們的」（約壹二19；《聖經新譯本》）。 當然，在離開之前，他們外表上與門徒在一起。 他們作了對外的信仰宣告，但耶穌明確表示，即使一個人非擁有他所宣信的，他亦可能做到這一點。耶穌說：「這人民用嘴唇尊敬我，心卻遠離我」（太十五8；《聖經新譯本》）。耶穌在登山寶訓結束時甚至警告，到了最後一天，許多人會來對祂說：「『主啊，主啊！難道我們沒有奉你的名講道，奉你的名趕鬼，奉你的名行過許多神蹟嗎？』但我必向他們聲明：『我從來不認識你們；你們這些作惡的人，離開我去吧！』」（太七23；《聖經新譯本》）。耶穌並不是說：「我認識你一段時間，之後你出了差錯，背叛我。不是，你從來就不是我的無形教會的一分子。」上帝揀選的整全目的是要把祂的子民安全地帶上天堂，故此，祂所開始的，祂應許必定成全。祂不僅開始基督徒的生活，而且作為成聖者、定罪者、幫助者的聖靈與我們同在，以確保我們永蒙保守。

我想強調，這種信心的忍耐並非依靠我們的力量。即使我們在重生之後，仍會陷入罪中，甚至是嚴重的罪。我們說，一個基督徒有可能經歷非常嚴重的跌倒，故此我們談論倒退、道德過失等話題。除了褻瀆聖靈的罪外，我想不出有哪些罪，是一個真歸信的基督徒不能觸犯的。

例如，我們注意舊約中的大衛的例子。大衛無疑是一個合上帝心意的人。他當然也是一個重生的人。他有上帝的靈住在裡面。他對上帝的事情表現出深切的熱情和無比的熱愛。然而這個人不僅犯奸淫，而且還參與一場陰謀，讓他情人的丈夫被殺於戰爭-------這是真正的參與謀殺。這是嚴重的罪。雖然我們看到大衛因先知拿單的說話而深切悔改，但關鍵是大衛跌倒了，他重重地跌倒了。

使徒保羅警告我們對自己的屬靈能力要保持清醒，防止自我膨脹。他說：「所以，那自以為站得穩的，應當謹慎，免得跌倒」（林前十12）。我們確實使自己陷入情節非常嚴重的活動。使徒彼得，甚至在預先得到警告後，仍然拒絕耶穌基督，發誓說自己從來不認識主-------公開背叛耶穌。他對自己的主犯了不忠之罪。當他被警告可能出現這種情況時，彼得說它決不會發生。耶穌說，「西門，西門，撒但設法要得著你們，好篩你們像篩麥子一樣；但我已經為你祈求，叫你的信心不至失掉。你回頭的時候，要堅固你的弟兄。」（路廿二31）。彼得跌倒了，但他回轉。他得到恢復。他跌倒是一時的。這就是為什麽我們說，真基督徒可能有劇烈和嚴重的跌倒，但決不會全然、最終從恩典中失落。

我認為「聖徒的堅忍」這小標語會引起危險性的誤導。它暗示恒忍是某些也許我們本身能夠做的事。我相信聖徒們必定恒忍信心，並且那些蒙上帝有效呼召，被聖靈的大能重生的人，會堅忍到底。然而，他們的恒忍並非因為他們如此殷勤地聽從上帝。我們之所以持續在信心當中，我們能給出的唯一理由是我們蒙保守。所以我更喜歡用「聖徒永蒙保守」一詞，因為我們保持在恩典狀態的過程是由上帝來完成。我對自己蒙保守的信心非基於自己堅忍的能力。我的信心基於基督的大能，祂以其恩典和代禱的大能來支撐我。祂將把我們安全地帶回天家。

参看：

信徒永蒙保守

——從聖經看「一次得救，永遠得救」

文/呂沛淵

http://biblerc.org/media/brc/2017/articles/document/LukeLu20170111revised.pdf

https://plus.google.com/u/0/105106813742373627205/posts/HNXdpbZxW7F

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2017/02/httpbiblerc.html

TULIP and Reformed Theology: Perseverance of the Saints

FROM R.C. Sproul

Writing to the Philippians, Paul says, “He who has begun a good work in you will perfect it to the end” (Phil. 1:6). Therein is the promise of God that what He starts in our souls, He intends to finish. So the old axiom in Reformed theology about the perseverance of the saints is this: If you have it—that is, if you have genuine faith and are in a state of saving grace—you will never lose it. If you lose it, you never had it.

We know that many people make professions of faith, then turn away and repudiate or recant those professions. The Apostle John notes that there were those who left the company of the disciples, and he says of them, “Those who went out from us were never really with us” (1 John 2:19). Of course, they were with the disciples in terms of outward appearances before they departed. They had made an outward profession of faith, and Jesus makes it clear that it is possible for a person to do this even when he doesn’t possess what he’s professing. Jesus says, “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me” (Matt. 15:8). Jesus even warns at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that at the last day, many will come to Him, saying: “Lord, Lord, didn’t we do this in your name? Didn’t we do that in your name?” He will send them away, saying: “Depart from Me, you workers of iniquity. I never knew you” (Matthew 7:23). He will not say: “I knew you for a season and then you went sour and betrayed Me. No, you never were part of My invisible church.” The whole purpose of God’s election is to bring His people safely to heaven; therefore, what He starts He promises to finish. He not only initiates the Christian life, but the Holy Spirit is with us as the sanctifier, the convictor, and the helper to ensure our preservation.

Tweet this

TRUE CHRISTIANS CAN HAVE RADICAL AND SERIOUS FALLS BUT NEVER TOTAL AND FINAL FALLS FROM GRACE. —R.C. SPROUL

I want to stress that this endurance in the faith does not rest on our strength. Even after we’re regenerated, we still lapse into sin, even serious sin. We say that it is possible for a Christian to experience a very serious fall, we talk about backsliding, we talk about moral lapses, and so on. I can’t think of any sin, other than blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, that a truly converted Christian is not capable of committing.

We look, for example, at the model of David in the Old Testament. David was surely a man after God’s own heart. He was certainly a regenerate man. He had the Spirit of God in Him. He had a profound and passionate love for the things of God. Yet this man not only committed adultery but also was involved in a conspiracy to have his lover’s husband killed in war—which was really conspiracy to murder. That’s serious business. Even though we see the serious level of repentance to which David was brought as a result of the words of the prophet Nathan to him, the point is that David fell, and he fell seriously.

The apostle Paul warns us against having a puffed-up view of our own spiritual strength. He says, “Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). We do fall into very serious activities. The Apostle Peter, even after being forewarned, rejected Christ, swearing that he never knew Him—a public betrayal of Jesus. He committed treason against His Lord. When he was being warned of this eventuality, Peter said it would never happen. Jesus said, “Simon, Simon, Satan would have you and sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you, so that when you turn, strengthen the brothers” (Luke 22:31).Peter fell, but he returned. He was restored. His fall was for a season. That’s why we say that true Christians can have radical and serious falls but never total and final falls from grace.

I think this little catchphrase, perseverance of the saints, is dangerously misleading. It suggests that the perseverance is something that we do, perhaps in and of ourselves. I believe that saints do persevere in faith, and that those who have been effectually called by God and have been reborn by the power of the Holy Spirit endure to the end. However, they persevere not because they are so diligent in making use of the mercies of God. The only reason we can give why any of us continue on in the faith is because we have been preserved. So I prefer the term the preservation of the saints, because the process by which we are kept in a state of grace is something that is accomplished by God. My confidence in my preservation is not in my ability to persevere. My confidence rests in the power of Christ to sustain me with His grace and by the power of His intercession. He is going to bring us safely home.

郁金香與改革宗神學：不可抗拒的恩典TULIP and Reformed Theology:Irresistible Grace

作者: R.C. Sproul  譯者: Maria Marta 

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-irresistible-grace/

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/bd5HcWQcdTA

在歷史性的改革宗思想中，有一觀念是重生先於信心。我們也相信重生是神恩獨作(monergistic)。現在神恩獨作是屬於生澀難明，炫耀智慧高深的一類詞語。從本質上說，它是指稱為再生或重生的神聖運作是上帝獨自完成的工作。erg是一種勞動單位，一種工作單位。能量（energy）一詞源於這種概念。字首mono就是「一」（one）的意思，因此神恩獨作是指「獨一作工」的意思。這意味著，在人內心的重生工作是唯獨靠著上帝運用其大能而作的事-----不是百分之五十祂的大能，百分之五十人的能力，或者百分之九十九祂的大能，百分之一人的能力。乃是百分之一百上帝的工作。祂，唯獨祂，有能力改變靈魂與人內心的傾向，帶給我們信心。

此外，當上帝在靈魂裡施行恩典時，祂帶來祂計劃要實現的效果。上帝創造你時，祂使你存在。你並沒有幫助祂完成祂的工作。正是祂至高主權的工作帶給你生物生命。同樣，正是祂的工作，和唯獨祂的工作，帶你進入再生和重新被造的狀態。因此，我們稱這種工作為不可抗拒的恩典。這是恩典的行動。正是恩典帶來上帝想要的效果。倘若，事實上，我們死在罪孽和過犯之中，倘若，事實上，我們的意志被我們肉體的情欲捆綁，為了獲得拯救，我們需要從中釋放出來，歸根結底，救恩必定是上帝在我們裡面，為我們所作的事，而非我們以任何方式，為自己而做的事。

然而，不可抗拒的概念使人聯想到人不可能抗拒上帝的恩典。可是，人類的歷史卻是無情地抗拒上帝的甘甜恩典的歷史。不可抗拒的恩典並非指上帝的恩典不能抗拒。事實上，我們能夠抗拒上帝的恩典，我們的確抗拒上帝的恩典。不可抗拒的概念是指上帝的恩典是如此的有能力，以致於它能克服我們抗拒的本性。並非是聖靈違背人的意志，把又踢又叫的人硬拽到基督的面前。聖靈改變我們意志的傾向和性情，因此我們先前不願意，而現在願意，並且更加願意擁抱基督。事實上，我們不是被硬拽到，而是奔跑到基督的面前，我們欣然擁抱祂，因為聖靈改變我們的心。它們不再是石心，對上帝的命令和福音的邀請無動於衷。當上帝使我們成為新造的人時，祂融化我們內心的剛硬。聖靈使我們從靈性的死亡中復活過來，以致我們來到基督的面前，是因為我們想要來到的基督的面前。我們之所以想要來到基督的面前，是因為上帝已經在我們的靈魂裡作了恩典之工。沒有恩典之工，我們決不會渴望來到基督的面前。這就是我們說重生先於信心的原因。

使用不可抗拒的恩典一詞，我遇到點麻煩，非因我不相信這項經典的教義，而是因為這一名詞誤導了許多人。因此，我更喜歡用「有效的恩典」一詞，因為上帝的不可抗拒的恩典帶來上帝計劃要實現的效果。

在下一篇文章，我們將思考郁金香（TULIP）中的P，即聖徒永蒙保守（perseverance of the saints）。

TULIP and Reformed Theology: Irresistible Grace

FROM R.C. Sproul

In historic Reformation thought, the notion is this: regeneration precedes faith. We also believe that regeneration is monergistic. Now that’s a three-dollar word. It means essentially that the divine operation called rebirth or regeneration is the work of God alone. An erg is a unit of labor, a unit of work. The word energy comes from that idea. The prefix mono- means “one.” So monergism means “one working.” It means that the work of regeneration in the human heart is something that God does by His power alone—not by 50 percent His power and 50 percent man’s power, or even 99 percent His power and 1 percent man’s power. It is 100 percent the work of God. He, and He alone, has the power to change the disposition of the soul and the human heart to bring us to faith.

In addition, when He exercises this grace in the soul, He brings about the effect that He intends to bring about. When God created you, He brought you into existence. You didn’t help Him. It was His sovereign work that brought you to life biologically. Likewise, it is His work, and His alone, that brings you into the state of rebirth and of renewed creation. Hence, we call this irresistible grace. It’s grace that works. It’s grace that brings about what God wants it to bring about. If, indeed, we are dead in sins and trespasses, if, indeed, our wills are held captive by the lusts of our flesh and we need to be liberated from our flesh in order to be saved, then in the final analysis, salvation must be something that God does in us and for us, not something that we in any way do for ourselves.

Tweet this

GOD’S GRACE IS SO POWERFUL THAT IT HAS THE CAPACITY TO OVERCOME OUR NATURAL RESISTANCE TO IT. —R.C. SPROUL

However, the idea of irresistibility conjures up the idea that one cannot possibly offer any resistance to the grace of God. However, the history of the human race is the history of relentless resistance to the sweetness of the grace of God. Irresistible grace does not mean that God’s grace is incapable of being resisted. Indeed, we are capable of resisting God’s grace, and we do resist it. The idea is that God’s grace is so powerful that it has the capacity to overcome our natural resistance to it. It is not that the Holy Spirit drags people kicking and screaming to Christ against their wills. The Holy Spirit changes the inclination and disposition of our wills, so that whereas we were previously unwilling to embrace Christ, now we are willing, and more than willing. Indeed, we aren’t dragged to Christ, we run to Christ, and we embrace Him joyfully because the Spirit has changed our hearts. They are no longer hearts of stone that are impervious to the commands of God and to the invitations of the gospel. God melts the hardness of our hearts when He makes us new creatures. The Holy Spirit resurrects us from spiritual death, so that we come to Christ because we want to come to Christ. The reason we want to come to Christ is because God has already done a work of grace in our souls. Without that work, we would never have any desire to come to Christ. That’s why we say that regeneration precedes faith.

I have a little bit of a problem using the term irresistible grace, not because I don’t believe this classical doctrine, but because it is misleading to many people. Therefore, I prefer the term effectual grace, because the irresistible grace of God effects what God intends it to effect.

In the final post, we will conclude by considering the P in TULIP, perseverance of the saints.

揀選 Election

摘錄自《神學論綱（神學命題）》THESES THEOLOGICAE

(TheologicalPropositions)，R. Scott Clark 著/唐興譯

https://plus.google.com/u/2/105106813742373627205/posts/AThXZTMgtcr

http://rscottclark.org/2012/09/theses-theologicae-theological-propositions-3/

http://peddrluo.blog.163.com/blog/static/194801312200872611250485/

https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2016/12/theses-theologicae-theologicalpropositi.html

摘錄自《神學論綱（神學命題）》THESES THEOLOGICAE
(TheologicalPropositions)，R. Scott Clark 著/唐興譯

12. 揀選是屬於我們救恩順序的上層結構，它的本身不屬於救贖的施行。
Election is the superstructure of our ordo salutis, but not itself the application of redemption.

13. 雖然揀選和預定對歸正神學來說是重要的，但是它們並非是歸正神學充分的條件，因為也有許多神學家們都這樣教導，但卻非是屬於歸正的。
Though election and predestination are essential to Reformed theology they are not in themselves sufficient conditions for Reformed theology since many theologians have held and taught them without being Reformed.

14. 揀選和預定最好是作為結論的認知（a posteriori），用來說明一個人為何會信。歸正神學並不是從揀選和預定教義為前題（a priori）所推論得出的。
Election and predestination are best used a posteriori to explain how one came to faith. Reformed theology is not deduced a priori from the doctrines of election and predestination.

15. 因此，一般而言，我們不從揀選來說明救恩，我們從在基督裏的「得救的信心」來說明揀選。
Therefore, typically, we do not reason from election to our salvation, but we reason from our saving faith in Christ to our election.

鏈接

http://rscottclark.org/2012/09/theses-theologicae-theological-propositions-3/

http://peddrluo.blog.163.com/blog/static/194801312200872611250485

/https://yibaniba.blogspot.com/2016/12/theses-theologicae-theologicalpropositi.html

郁金香與改革宗神學：無條件的揀選TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election

作者: R.C. Sproul 譯者: Maria Marta

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-unconditional-election/

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/WE5tK2L7GRD

改革宗的揀選觀，稱為無條件的揀選，意思是指上帝並沒有預見我們的行為或條件, 這些行為或條件促使祂拯救我們。相反，揀選取決於上帝主權的決定，祂拯救祂樂意拯救的人。

在羅馬書，我們找到就這一難明的概念而展開的討論。羅馬書第九章10–13節（《圣經新譯本》）寫道：「不但如此，利百加也是這樣：既然從一個人，就是從我們的祖宗以撒懷了孕，雙生子還沒有生下來，善惡也沒有行出來（為要堅定　神揀選人的旨意，不是由於行為，而是由於那呼召者），　神就對她說：『將來大的要服事小的。』正如經上所記的：『我愛雅各，卻惡以掃。』」 使徒保羅在這裏解釋揀選的教義。雖然保羅在羅馬書第八章重點論述了這項教義，但在這裏他回顧猶太人的過去，以雙胞胎雅各和以掃出生的相關情況為例，來說明揀選的教義。按古代社會習俗，長子繼承遺產或家長的祝福。然而，在這對雙胞胎的案例中，上帝反轉處理，賜祝福給幼子，而不是長子。使徒在這裏作詳細分析的關鍵是，上帝不僅在雙胞胎出生之前作出這個決定，而且祂這樣做，並沒有考慮雙胞胎將會做的任何事-----不管善惡，為的是要堅定祂揀選人的旨意。因此，我們的救恩並不取決於我們，而是完全取決於上帝恩慈，主權性的決定。

這並非指不管人是否相信，上帝都會拯救他們。上帝定旨救恩是有一些條件的，其中很重要的一個是個人對基督的信靠。然而，這是一個稱義的條件，揀選的教義是另一回事。當我們談論無條件的揀選時，我們是在揀選教義本身非常狹窄的範圍內談論。（譯按：揀選是屬於我們救恩順序的上層結構，它的本身不屬於救贖的施行。[註]）

那麽，上帝基於什麽揀選拯救某些人呢？是以一些可預見的選民的反應、回應、或活動為根據嗎？許多相信揀選教義或預定論的人是這樣認為的。他們相信，上帝在永恒的過去從時間的長廊往下俯視，祂提前知道誰將會對福音的邀請說是（願意接受），誰將會說不，在預先知道誰將會滿足救恩的條件-------即在表達信心或相信基督的基礎上-------祂揀選拯救他們。這是有條件的揀選，這意味著上帝預見一些人滿足條件，在此基礎上分配祂的揀選恩典。

無條件的揀選是另一個我認為也許會引起一點誤導的詞語，所以我寧願用「主權的揀選」這一詞。如果上帝主權揀選贈予其恩典給一些罪人，拒絕給予其他的罪人，在這裏有什麼不公義嗎？那些沒有收到這份恩賜的人，他們要接受一些不配得到的後果嗎？當然不是。如果上帝任憑這些罪人滅亡，祂不公正地對待他們嗎？當然不是。一組人接受恩典，而另一組人接受公義。沒有人受到不公義的對待。保羅預先提出這一抗議：「上帝不公平嗎？」（羅九14a） 他以他所能聚集到的，最堅定的語氣回答。我更喜歡翻譯為「上帝禁止」（第14b節）（譯按：聖經欽定版）。然後他繼續詳述這一回答：「因為他對摩西說：『我要憐憫誰，就憐憫誰；我要恩待誰，就恩待誰。』」（15節）。在這裏使徒提醒他的讀者摩西在數世紀前的宣布；即，上帝有神聖的權利在何時或何地實施行政赦免。祂從一開始就說，「我要憐憫誰，就憐憫誰」，並不是对那些滿足條件的人，而是那些祂樂意賜予其恩福的人。

在下一篇文章，我們將思考郁金香（TULIP）中的L，即限定的救赎

（limited atonement）。

[註]
摘錄自《神學論綱（神學命題）》THESES THEOLOGICAE
(TheologicalPropositions)R. Scott Clark著/唐興譯

TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election

FROM R.C. Sproul

The Reformed view of election, known as unconditional election, means that God does not foresee an action or condition on our part that induces Him to save us. Rather, election rests on God’s sovereign decision to save whomever He is pleased to save.

In the book of Romans, we find a discussion of this difficult concept. Romans 9:10–13 reads: “And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—she was told, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ As it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’” Here the Apostle Paul is giving his exposition of the doctrine of election. He deals with it significantly in Romans 8, but here he illustrates his teaching of the doctrine of election by going back into the past of the Jewish people and looking at the circumstances surrounding the birth of twins—Jacob and Esau. In the ancient world, it was customary for the firstborn son to receive the inheritance or the patriarchal blessing. However, in the case of these twins, God reversed the process and gave the blessing not to the elder but to the younger. The point that the Apostle labors here is that God not only makes this decision prior to the twins’ births, He does it without a view to anything they would do, either good or evil, so that the purposes of God might stand. Therefore, our salvation does not rest on us; it rests solely on the gracious, sovereign decision of God.

Tweet this

GOD DOES NOT FORESEE AN ACTION OR CONDITION ON OUR PART THAT INDUCES HIM TO SAVE US. —R.C. SPROUL

This doesn’t mean that God will save people whether they come to faith or not. There are conditions that God decrees for salvation, not the least of which is putting one’s personal trust in Christ. However, that is a condition for justification, and the doctrine of election is something else. When we’re talking about unconditional election, we’re talking in a very narrow confine of the doctrine of election itself.

So, then, on what basis does God elect to save certain people? Is it on the basis of some foreseen reaction, response, or activity of the elect? Many people who have a doctrine of election or predestination look at it this way. They believe that in eternity past God looked down through the corridors of time and He knew in advance who would say yes to the offer of the gospel and who would say no. On the basis of this prior knowledge of those who will meet the condition for salvation—that is, expressing faith or belief in Christ—He elects to save them. This is conditional election, which means that God distributes His electing grace on the basis of some foreseen condition that human beings meet themselves.

Unconditional election is another term that I think can be a bit misleading, so I prefer to use the term sovereign election. If God chooses sovereignly to bestow His grace on some sinners and withhold His grace from other sinners, is there any violation of justice in this? Do those who do not receive this gift receive something they do not deserve? Of course not. If God allows these sinners to perish, is He treating them unjustly? Of course not. One group receives grace; the other receives justice. No one receives injustice. Paul anticipates this protest: “Is there injustice on God’s part?” (Rom. 9:14a). He answers it with the most emphatic response he can muster. I prefer the translation, “God forbid” (v. 14b). Then he goes on to amplify this response: “For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion’” (v. 15). Here the Apostle is reminding his reader of what Moses declared centuries before; namely, that it is God’s divine right to execute clemency when and where He desires. He says from the beginning, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.” It is not on those who meet some conditions, but on those whom He is pleased to bestow the benefit.

In the next post, we will consider the L in TULIP, limited atonement.

郁金香與改革宗神學：全然敗壞TULIP and Reformed Theology: Total Depravity
作者: R.C. Sproul 譯者: Maria Marta

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-total-depravity/

https://plus.google.com/u/1/106695469993489516884/posts/P4goD8g3k4P

全然敗壞的教義反映了改革宗的原罪觀。原罪一詞在流行領域經常被人誤解。有些人以為「原罪」必定是指第一個罪--------我們在自己的生活中以不同的方式覆制最初所犯的那件罪，即亞當和夏娃第一次犯的罪。但這並不是教會歷史上所指的原罪的意思。相反，原罪的教義定義人類因第一個罪而所要承受的後果。

事實上，歷史上每一間擁有信經或認信告白的教會都同意，人類身上發生非常嚴重的事情，起因是第一個罪-------這第一個罪導致原罪。也就是說，由於亞當和夏娃犯罪，整個人類都墮落了，自墮落以來，作為人類，我們的本性受到邪惡力量的影響。大衛在舊約中宣稱，「哦，上帝，我是在罪孽裡生的，在我母親懷胎的時候就有了罪」（詩五十一5）。他不是說他母親生孩子是有罪的，也不是說他一出生就做了壞事。相反，他承認人類墮落的狀態------這種狀態是他父母的經驗的一部分，他自己把這這種狀態帶到這個世界。因此，原罪與人類墮落的本性有關。這個觀念是：不是因為犯罪才成為罪人，而是因為我們是罪人，所以會犯罪。

在改革宗的傳統中，全然敗壞並不是指徹底敗壞。我們經常使用全然作為絕對或完全的同義詞，所以全然墮落的概念使人聯想到一個觀念：每個人都壞到他真正可能壞的地步。你可能會想到如阿道夫希特勒（Adolf Hitler）這樣的歷史惡魔，說這個人身上絕對沒有值得救贖的美德，但我懷疑他對他的母親有一些感情。像希特勒那樣邪惡，我們仍可以從多方面設想，他可能甚至比實際上更邪惡。因此，全然敗壞的觀念並不是指所有人類都壞到真正可能達到的極限。它是指墮落是如此嚴重，以致於它影響了整個人。墮落占領和支配我們的本性，影響了我們的身體；這就是我們會生病，死亡的原因。墮落影響了我們的心、我們的思想，虽然我們仍然有思考能力，但聖經說我們的心思變得昏昧、動搖。人的意志不再處於道德力量的原始狀態。根據新約，現在我們的意志受到捆綁。我們被自己內心的邪惡和欲望束縛。我們的身體、思想、意志、靈魂------甚至全人------都受到罪的勢力的影響。

我喜歡用我喜愛的名稱來代替「全然敗壞」這一詞，它就是徹底敗壞。諷刺的是，徹底一詞源於拉丁文的「根」，即adix,，可以翻譯為根或核心。徹底一詞與滲透到事物的核心有關。它不是指表面的次要或膚淺。改革的觀點是，墮落的影響擴展或滲透到我們生存的核心。就連英語單詞的核心實際上也來自拉丁詞cor，意思是「心」。也就是說，罪來自我們的內心。從聖經的角度來看，這意味著罪來自我們生存的核心或中心。

因此，我們要效法基督模樣的要求，不僅是要作一些小調整或行為修改，而且更是要在內部作全面的更新。我們需要被重生，被重新創造，並藉著聖靈的大能加速進行。藉著聖靈改變核心，心，是一個人能夠脫離這種徹底敗壞狀態的唯一途徑。然而，甚至這種改變也不能立刻戰勝罪。我們期待在天堂上我們的罪得到徹底消除，并進入榮耀的狀態。


在下一篇文章，我們將思考郁金香（TULIP）中考慮U，即即無條件的揀選（unconditional election）

。

TULIP and Reformed Theology: Total Depravity

FROM R.C. Sproul

The doctrine of total depravity reflects the Reformed viewpoint of original sin. That term—original sin—is often misunderstood in the popular arena. Some people assume that the term original sin must refer to the first sin—the original transgression that we’ve all copied in many different ways in our own lives, that is, the first sin of Adam and Eve. But that’s not what original sin has referred to historically in the church. Rather, the doctrine of original sin defines the consequences to the human race because of that first sin.

Virtually every church historically that has a creed or a confession has agreed that something very serious happened to the human race as a result of the first sin—that first sin resulted in original sin. That is, as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, the entire human race fell, and our nature as human beings since the fall has been influenced by the power of evil. As David declared in the Old Testament, “Oh, God, I was born in sin, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps. 51:5). He was not saying that it was sinful for his mother to have borne children; neither was he saying that he had done something evil by being born. Rather, he was acknowledging the human condition of fallenness—that condition that was part of the experience of his parents, a condition that he himself brought into this world. Therefore, original sin has to do with the fallen nature of mankind. The idea is that we are not sinners because we sin, but that we sin because we are sinners.

In the Reformed tradition, total depravity does not mean utter depravity. We often use the term total as a synonym for utter or for completely, so the notion of total depravity conjures up the idea that every human being is as bad as that person could possibly be. You might think of an archfiend of history such as Adolf Hitler and say there was absolutely no redeeming virtue in the man, but I suspect that he had some affection for his mother. As wicked as Hitler was, we can still conceive of ways in which he could have been even more wicked than he actually was. So the idea of totalin total depravity doesn’t mean that all human beings are as wicked as they can possibly be. It means that the fall was so serious that it affects the whole person. The fallenness that captures and grips our human nature affects our bodies; that’s why we become ill and die. It affects our minds and our thinking; we still have the capacity to think, but the Bible says the mind has become darkened and weakened. The will of man is no longer in its pristine state of moral power. The will, according to the New Testament, is now in bondage. We are enslaved to the evil impulses and desires of our hearts. The body, the mind, the will, the spirit—indeed, the whole person—have been infected by the power of sin.

I like to replace the term total depravity with my favorite designation, which is radical corruption. Ironically, the word radical has its roots in the Latin word for “root,” which is radix, and it can be translated root or core. The term radical has to do with something that permeates to the core of a thing. It’s not something that is tangential or superficial, lying on the surface. The Reformed view is that the effects of the fall extend or penetrate to the core of our being. Even the English word core actually comes from the Latin word cor, which means “heart.” That is, our sin is something that comes from our hearts. In biblical terms, that means it’s from the core or very center of our existence.

So what is required for us to be conformed to the image of Christ is not simply some small adjustments or behavioral modifications, but nothing less than renovation from the inside. We need to be regenerated, to be made over again, to be quickened by the power of the Spirit. The only way in which a person can escape this radical situation is by the Holy Spirit’s changing the core, the heart. However, even that change does not instantly vanquish sin. The complete elimination of sin awaits our glorification in heaven.

In the next post, we’ll consider the U in TULIP, unconditional election.

郁金香與改革宗神學：前言TULIP and Reformed Theology:An Introduction

作者: R.C. Sproul   譯者: Maria Marta 

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-introduction/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/cimp17oAGT1

朝聖者乘坐五月花號（Mayflower）在新英格蘭海岸登陸之後幾年，荷蘭爆發了一場爭議，蔓延到整個歐洲，乃至世界各地。這場爭議始於致力加爾文主義教學的荷蘭大學神學院。那裡的一些教授就揀選、預定教義的相關議題開始第二次思考。由於這場神學爭議在全國各地蔓延，所以它擾亂了當日的教會和神學家。最後，召開了一場會議。這些議題在會議中得到處理，某些人的觀點被否決，其中包括叫亞米念的人的觀點。

領導這場反對正統改革宗神學運動的團體被稱為抗辯派(Remonstrants)。他們被稱為抗辯派的原因，是因為他們對他們自己神學遺產內的某些教義表示異議或提出抗議。從根本上來講，有五項教義是爭議的核心。這場爭論的結果，是這五項核心神學議題成為聞名後世的「加爾文主義五要點」。現在它們以首字母合成詞TULIP（郁金香）而為人所知，這合成詞是總結有爭論的五項教義的一種聰明的方法。五要點，如為首字母TULIP（郁金香）合成目的所陳述的那樣：全然敗壞（total depravity）、無條件揀選（unconditional election）、限定的救赎

（limited atonement）、不可抗拒的恩典（irresistible grace）、聖徒永蒙保守（perseverance of the saints）。

我提及這一歷史事件的原因是因為，僅僅根據這五項教義來理解改革神學的本質，是一個嚴重的錯誤，改革宗信仰包括其他神學要素和教會的認信告白。然而，這些是改革神學的五個爭議要點，它們是那些被普遍認為有別於特別的認信告白的爭議。在接下來的五篇文章中，我們將花一些時間來查看這些加爾文主義五要點，如在首字母合成詞TULIP（郁金香中）所拼寫的。

TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction

FROM R.C. Sproul

Just a few years before the Pilgrims landed on the shores of New England in the Mayflower, a controversy erupted in the Netherlands and spread throughout Europe and then around the world. It began within the theological faculty of a Dutch institution that was committed to Calvinistic teaching. Some of the professors there began to have second thoughts about issues relating to the doctrines of election and predestination. As this theological controversy spread across the country, it upset the church and theologians of the day. Finally, a synod was convened. Issues were squared away and the views of certain people were rejected, including those of a man by the name of Jacobus Arminius.

The group that led the movement against orthodox Reformed theology was called the Remonstrants. They were called the Remonstrants because they were remonstrating or protesting against certain doctrines within their own theological heritage. There were basically five doctrines that were the core of the controversy. As a result of this debate, these five core theological issues became known in subsequent generations as the “five points of Calvinism.” They are now known through the very popular acrostic TULIP, which is a clever way to sum up the five articles that were in dispute. The five points, as they are stated in order to form the acrostic TULIP, are: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.

I mention this historical event because it would be a serious mistake to understand the essence of Reformed theology simply in light of these five doctrines—the Reformed faith involves many other elements of theological and ecclesiastical confession. However, these are the five controversial points of Reformed theology, and they are the ones that are popularly seen as distinctive to this particular confession. Over the next five posts, we are going to spend some time looking at these five points of Calvinism as they are spelled out in the acrostic TULIP.