The History of Christian Doctrines–Section 24 基督教教义史–第24讲。

主讲:林慈信牧师_校对:刘加立弟兄_文字:Cherry姐妹

我们上一讲开始了宗教改革时期的三一论。我们说从加尔文一直到第二瑞士信仰告白,就表达出当时正统的三一论。基本上没有什么重大的、新的贡献。除了加尔文认为圣子的位格上的生存形态是源自父,但是他认为神是自存的,自己就是神。接下来还是在讲宗教改革时期的苏西尼派者和阿米念派者论三位一体。

In the sixteen century 在16世纪,就是宗教改革时期的the Soconians declared the doctrine of three Persons possessing a common essence, to be contrary to reason,苏西尼派者宣告,三个位格拥有同一个神的本质,这个教义是有违反理性的,and attempted to refute it on the basis of the passages  quoted by the Arians, cf above, p 89.他们尝试根据亚流派所用过的经文,来反驳三个位格同一神性这个教义。But they even went beyond the Arians但是他们比亚流派再进一步 in denying the pre-existence of the Son他们更加的否认圣子是先存的and holding that Christ, as to His essential nature, was simply a man,他们坚称说:基督至于祂本质上的本性,仅仅是一个人,though He possessed a peculiar a fullness of the Spirit,可是祂特别的有着一种特殊的圣灵的充满, had special knowledge of God,有对上帝特别的认识,and at His attention和当祂升天的时候received dominion over all things.就领受了统管万物的统治权。They defined the Holy Spirit as a ‘virtue or energy flowing from God to men’.他们对圣灵的定义,是圣灵是 “一种的能源或者能力,从上帝流到人们中”。In  their conception of God they were the forerunners of the present day Unitarians and Modernists.在他们的对神的概念上,他们是现代的Unitarians and Modernists,就是独神论和自由派,或是现代派神学的先驱,他们是现代的Unitarians ,就是不承认三位一体的独神论和自由派神学家的先驱。

In some quarters在某一些的圈子,subordinationism again came to the fore-ground.再一次的有着从属说的浮现。Some of the Arminians有些阿米念主义者(Episcopius, Curcellaeus, and Limborch),(这些阿米念主义的神学家,伊皮斯科皮乌斯,可希拉斯,林宝),while believing that all three Persons shared in the divine nature, 他们一方面虽然相信三个位格都共有神的本性,有神性,yet ascribed a certain pre-eminence to the Father over the other Persons in order,dignity, and power of domination.可是他们又认为父神有某一种的更高的尊贵,就是比较子和灵来说,在秩序上、在尊严上、还有在统治权上是比圣子、圣灵更尊贵的。In their estimation根据他们的估计believe the equality of rank was almost sure to lead to Tritheism.她们认为假如相信在等级上三个位格是同等的话,肯定会导致三神论。

 

3.THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY AFTER THE PERIOD OF REFORMATION

宗教改革时期之后的三一神论

Clarke on the Trinity克拉克论三位一体

In England Samuel Clarke, court preacher to queen Anne,  published a work on the Trinity in 1712,在英格兰1712年,撒母耳.克拉克,他是安娜女皇的宫廷的牧师,出版了一本《论三位一体》的著作,in which he approached the Arian view of subordination.他差不多等于宣告亚流派的从属论。He speaks of the Father as the supreme and only God, the sole origin of all being, power, and authority.他论到父上帝说:父上帝是至高的、唯一神,是一切的存有(就是生命)、能力和权柄的唯一的来源。Alongside of Him there existed from the beginning a second divine Person called the Son,在父神旁边,从开始就存在着一个第二个有神性的位格,被称为子,who derives His being and all His attributes from the Father,圣子的存有和他一切的属性都源自父上帝,not by a mere necessity of nature这个不是因为本质上的必然性, but by an act of the Father’s optional will.乃是因为父上帝的一种选择性的旨意所意旨的,这是父上帝的选择性地意旨一个的行动所导致的。He refuses to here commit himself on the question, whether the Son was begotten from the essence of the Father, or was made out of nothing;他拒绝明确的说明圣子是否从圣父的本质而生的,还是说从无被造的,and whether He existed from our eternity or only before all worlds.还有他也拒绝明说究竟圣子是从永恒一直是存在的呢?还是只是在诸世界被造之前而已,换言之,这个诸世界被造之前就不等于说永恒。Alongside there two there is a third Person,在这两个位格旁边还有第三个位格,who derives His essence from the Father though the Son.这个第三个位格的本质是从父借着子所衍生的。He is subordinate to the Son both by nature and by the will of Father .祂是从属于圣子的,就是比圣子更低的,在本质上是如此,也是因为父上帝的旨意是如此。这是克拉克。

下面要讲新英格兰神学。New England theologians on the Trinity.什么叫新英格兰神学呢?New England theology也被称为新港神学, New Haven新港就是耶鲁大学之所在地,今天还是叫新港的。新英格兰神学就是在爱德华兹之后,他的学生和他的学生的学生的神学,他们在神学上都出错误的。Some of the New England theologians criticized the doctrine of eternal generation.一部分的新英格兰神学家批判了圣子是在永恒里受生这一项的教义。Emmons这一位的新英格兰神学家,恩门斯,even call it eternal nonsense,甚至乎圣子在永恒受生为永恒的废话,and Moses Stuart 另外就是司徒多Stuart ,Moses Stuart declared that the expression was a palpable contradiction of language,圣子在永恒受生这个表述,明显的是语言上的矛盾,and that their most distinguished theologians, for forty years past, had declared against it. 而在他以前的最著名的神学家都已经反对过这个教义。He himself dislike it,他自己也非常不喜欢这个教义,because he regarded it as contrary to the proper equality of the Father and the Son.因为他认为这个教义是违反了圣父与圣子正确的同等的。The following words seem to express his view:下面可能是可以表达,司徒多的观点的说法: ‘Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are words which designate the distinctions of the Godhead as manifested to us in the economy of redemption,父、子、圣灵这些字是指在救赎计划里面,所彰显出的神格里面的区别和区分, and are not intended to mark the eternal relations of the Godhead as they are in themselves’.圣父、圣子、圣灵不是用来作为指标是这三个位格他们本身在神格里面永恒里的关系的。

未经同意,请勿擅自在其它网站或平台转载和刊登课程的逐字稿;课程的逐字稿的版权归「中华展望」,禁止复印出版等商业用途。

ccnci.org中华展望圣约学院[email protected](PayPal)

Modern views of the Trinity 现代时期的三一观

Sabellian interpretations of the Trinity are found in Emanuel Swedenborg,在这个瑞典保1688-1772。的著作中,我们会读到撒伯流派的对三一神论的诠释,who denied the essential Trinity瑞典保是否认本质上的三位一体的,and said 他这样说,that what we call Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is simply a distinction in the eternal God-man,assuming human flesh in the Son, and operating through the Holy Spirit;父、子、圣灵只不过是一种的区分,首先是在这个永恒的神人中,然后,他在圣子中取了人的肉体;第三、这个永恒的神人又借着圣灵运行; in Schleimacher,另外,就是施莱马赫,施莱马赫是谁呢?就是康德之后,从1790开始写书的第一位的自由派神学家,施莱马赫,who says that他这样说的,God in Himself as the unknown unity underlying all things is the Father,上帝自己作为在万物背后的不能认识一,一、二、三的一,上帝自己作为在万物背后的不能、不可知的一,就是圣父,God as coming into conscious personality in man, and especially in Jesus Christ,is the Son,神来到人的有意识的人格中,特别在基耶稣基督里,进入到人有意识的人格就是圣子,and God as the life of the risen Christ in the Church, is the Holy Spirit;上帝身为在教会里面复活的基督的生命就是圣灵,就是完全把上帝非位格化的; and in Hegel,  Dorner, and others who adopt a somewhat similar view.还有黑格尔、杜涅尔,还有其他的人,他们都采取类似的观点的。In Ritschl在黎策尔and in many Modernists of the present day 还有很多当今的自由派主义者,the view of Paul of Samosata reappears.那个撒摩撒他的保罗的看法又再次地浮现出来,参考前面第三世纪初的撒摩撒他保罗的看法。

三位一体论结束,我们现在进入到基督论。

THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST

第一章I. The Christological Controversies基督论的论战

Connection of Christological and Trinitarian problem.首先我们看基督论与三一真神论的难题之间的关系。The Christological problem can be approached from the side of the theology proper and from the side of soteriology.基督论的问题可以从神论本身的角度来考虑,或者从救赎论这一边来考虑的。Though the early Church Fathers

did not lose sight of the soteriological bearings of the doctrine of Christ, 虽然,早期教父们没有忽略到救赎论如何影响基督论,they did not make these prominent in their main discussions. 在他们主要的讨论中呢,并没有把这些考虑放在显著的地位。换言之,基督必然是怎么基督才能够做一位怎么样的救主,这个不是没有,但是不是很显著的讨论。Breathing the air of the trinitarian controversies, 他们所呼吸的是三一真神论的争辩的空气,it was but natural that they should approach the study of Christ from the side of theology proper. 所以很自然的他们是从神论这个角度来进入到对基督论的研究的。The decision to which the trinitarian controversy led, namely, that Christ as the Son of God is consubstantial With the Father and therefore very God, immediately gave birth to the question of the relation between the divine and the human nature in Christ. 三一真神论的争辩的结果,就是教会决定相信,基督作为上帝的儿子与圣父是同质的,因此基督真实的是神。这个的决定马上就导致一个问题,

就是那么在基督里的神性与人性之间有着怎么的关系呢?The early Christological controversies do not present a very edifying spectacle 最早的基督论的争辩,整个情景是不造就人的,The passions were too much in evidence, 有太多人的激情,unworthy intrigues often played and important part, 还有不值得赞扬的诡诈,也扮演他们的角色,and even violence occasionally made its appearance. 甚至乎出现暴力的场面。It might seem that such an atmosphere could only be productive of error, 我们可能认为这种的氛围只可能产生错误的信念,and yet these controversies led to a formulation of the doctrine of the Person of Christ that is still regarded as standard in the present day.可是,这些的争辩所导致的一种的基督的位格的教义的论说到今天为止还是被认为是标准的。The Holy Spirit was guiding the Church, 圣灵在引导教会,often through shame and confusion,往往是走过羞耻跟混乱的处境,into the clear atmosphere of the truth.进入到真理的清楚的氛围里。Some claim that the Church attempted too much when it tried to define a mystery which from the nature of the case transcends all definition. 有人宣称教会在这方面试图要成就太大的事情了,因为他想要做的,是要为一个奥秘做定义,而奥秘本质上就是超越任何的人可以给的定义的。

下面是伯克富的回应。It should be borne in mind, however, 可是我们必须记得,that the early Church did not claim to be able to penetrate to the depths of this great doctrine, 早期教会并没有宣称能够渗透这个伟大的教义基督论的深处,and did not pretend to give a solution of the problem of the incarnation in the formula of Chalcedon.在迦克顿信经里也没有自称是为“道成肉身”这个难题提出一个解决方案的。It merely sought to guard the truth against the errors of the theorizers, 教会仅仅尝试去维护真理,防止一些错误的理论,and to give a formulation of it which would ward off various, palpably unscriptural, constructions of the truth.而且对真理的论说,要拦阻各种很明显不符合圣经对真理的说法。

The Church was in quest of a conception of Christ that would do justice to the following points: 教会当时追求着一种对基督的概念,要对下面四方面都公平考虑:(a) His true and proper deity; 第一,基督真正的神性和正确的神性;(b) His true and proper humanity; B.基督真正的和正确的人性。(c) the union of deity and humanity in one person; 在一个位格里面神性和人性的联合;and (d) the proper distinction of deity from humanity in the one person.在一个位格里面,神性和人性正确的区别,这四方面都要考虑到,不然的基督论是有所缺欠的。

这里我们读到这个基督论的前面的一个引言,因为早期教会为了三一神论争辩,所以很自然,基督论就讨论到那么圣子,特别是道成肉身的圣子,祂的神性与人性之间的关系是什么呢?虽然人的激情甚至乎诡诈都有份。但是呢,圣灵还是引导教会说出一个正确的基督论。因为我们要考虑到基督真的是神、真的是人,神性人性在一个位格是联合的,最后神性与人性却有所不同。

我们下一次继续讲完这个引言之后呢,就进入到第一段:基督论的争辩的第一个阶段。第一个阶段里面又分为三派。这三派就包括涅斯多留,就是传到中国唐朝的景教这一派。我们下次继续。

提示:逐字稿文字只限于个人和教会私下学习交流,目的是造就教会和教会负责带领、讲道的同工们;未经同意,请勿擅自在其它网站或平台转载和刊登课程的逐字稿;课程的逐字稿和图片的版权归「中华展望」,禁止复印出版等商业用途。当文字和录音不符时,以录音为准。愿上帝赐福文字编辑和校对的肢体来雅正!若是有修改的地方、奉献支持或是其他任何问题请使用以下邮件方式联系我们。网络圣约ccnci.org中华展望圣约学院 [email protected](PayPal)