不要以正统信仰自夸《转贴》

xm0755

不要以正统信仰自夸

陶恕 著 王梁素雅 译

　　历代以来，基督教信仰绝少是纯全的。除了基督和那些被圣灵充满的使徒外，在历世历代中，没有某一位信徒或某一宗派的信徒能对所有真理都有纯全的认识。

　　一位伟大的圣徒曾说过，真理是如此浩瀚威严，没有人可以完全拥有它，只能有赖全体得救被赎的信徒，一齐把它发掘出来。

　　感谢神，真光曾明亮地照耀列国和万民，使千万人都在这光中朝着天家走去。可是，不管信徒内心如何单纯、一生如何顺服，没有人可以不受自己灵性本质上的各种限制，而能直接从神宝座那儿领受这真理的亮光。人手中的一块泥土受到搓揉后，本质上虽仍旧是泥土，却已加上人的手印。同样，神的真道经过人心思上的领会后，仍旧是真理，但免不了添上人的意念。被动的心思不能接受真理，必须对真理有主动的反应，它才能进入人心。因此，真理在经过人心思上的接受后，总有或多或少的改变。

　　神的光照进人心，自然会受了一些反射，就如光线通过棱镜折射一般。人的罪性、气质、偏见、教育背景、文化影响、当时风尚等等，都会叫人的心偏离焦点，扭曲了内心所看见的影像。

　　当然我所指的，仅限于神学性的和宗教性的真理。这些真理能保存多少纯正的内涵，就要看当时当地持守这信仰的人之道德水平怎样，以及一般教会对信仰的实践如何了。但属灵的真理--即圣灵向人心灵直接启示的真理--却永远不变。不管对象是谁，圣灵向人的启示永远是一样的，绝对不受因时而异的仪式和教条或当时的宗教风气所影响。圣灵将基督荣耀华美的光辉照射人心，人心内顿时对神产生敬畏，在毫无阻隔的情况下得着光照。卫斯理（Wesley）和华滋（Watts）在神学理论上的意见虽然大相迳庭，但他们爱唱同一首敬拜的诗歌，也可以同心高唱。纵然两人因在神学观点上的分歧，从而对真理的认识并不一致，但在圣灵感动下，他们仍能同心敬拜神。

　　不同时代的人都有不同的方式来解释基督教教义。十九世纪时，在美国四处游行传道的宣教师大异于马丁路德或中古时期的修士，甚至和初期教会的教父亦大不相同。四世纪时，在尼西亚（Nicea）为了辩证真道而召开会议的主教们，当然亦有异于在二十世纪初期，同样为了要辨明真理而起来驳斥那些批评家的圣经学者和圣徒。

　　神学跟哲学一样，易受当代的趋势所左右。中古时代的基督教教师，致力攻击尘世的虚荣和人肉身内在的败坏。早期的美国教会，则着重强调地狱和阴间的教义；当时一些受欢迎的传道人不厌其烦地描述地狱的可怕，其详尽深入，比圣经所记载的有过之而无不及。在较为近代的教会里，讲章和圣诗的主题又回到神是爱的真理上，神对世人的大爱就成为当时福音派所著重的主题了。

　　目前我们又处于另一个过渡时期。清楚认定教会去向的人是有福的；不管神学风气如何转变，有两件事却是我们可以确定的：第一，神一定会按时兴起祂的见证人，总有人会持守神的真道，就是那受圣灵感动而写下来的信条。救恩的真理绝不会完全向人隐藏起来，清心的人和心灵痛悔的人都可随时找到基督，蒙祂救赎。第二，圣灵是正统信仰的保卫者，祂总会向心里柔和谦卑和信靠神的人说同样的话。蒙光照的心一定会与其他同蒙光照的人同心领受真理。我们最怕使圣灵担忧，以致祂不能向我们说话，撇下我们任由自己的智慧所操纵。难怪基督教圈子内充斥了一大堆学者，却少了敬畏神的圣徒。教会里有大批能运用逻辑学，会说高言大智，与对手激辩的卫道之士，却没有先知和颂赞的信徒。这就有如一丛灌木，虽经过细心修剪和栽植，但灌木丛中却没有燃烧荆棘的火。

　　真理永恒不变，但形式、重点或演绎方法却是变幻无常的。叫人欣慰的，是基督能切合不同种族与年龄的人之需要。在世界任何一个角落里，不管当地的信条重点或宗教习惯如何相异，只要人肯放下成见，毫无保留地信靠祂，祂就必赐下生命与亮光。圣灵从来不会对与基督有关的争辩作见证，但对于宣告基督的被钉、受死、埋葬、复活、现今且升到至高者的右边等真理，圣灵总是亲自作证。

　　总括来说，我们不能自认已经拥有全部真理，更不要自信永远无差错，反倒要存敬畏的心，在主被钉的脚前俯伏，承认祂是真理，以顺服祂的命令来荣耀祂。

（本文摘自《午夜的复兴》）

http://www.wellsofgrace.com/others/tozer/traditional.htm

Ichthys

Let’s Be Humble About Our Orthodoxy
by AW Tozer

Christianity is rarely found pure. Apart from Christ and His inspired apostles probably no believer or company of believers in the history of the world has ever held the truth in total purity.

One great saint believed that the truth is so vast and mighty that no one is capable of taking it all in, and that it requires the whole company of ransomed souls properly to reflect the whole body of revealed truth.

The light has shone upon men and nations, and (God be praised) it has shone with sufficient clarity to enable millions to travel home in its glow; but no believer, however pure his heart or however obedient his life, has ever been able to receive it as it shines from the Throne unmodified by his own mental stuff. As a lump of clay when grasped by the human hand remains clay but cannot escape the imprint of the hand, so the truth of God when grasped by the human mind remains truth but bears upon it the image of the mind that grasps it. Truth cannot enter a passive mind. It must be received into the mind by an active mental response, and the act of receiving it tends to alter it to a greater or less degree.

As the sun’s rays are bent when passing through a prism, so has the light of God been bent when passing through the hearts of men. Sin, temperament, prejudice, early education, cultural influences, prevailing vogues: all have worked to throw the eyes of the heart out of focus and distort the inward vision.

Of course I refer here to theological and religious truth. How pure this truth is in any place at any given time is revealed by the moral standards of those who hold the truth and by religious practices among the churches generally. Spiritual truth (by which I mean the disclosures of the Holy Spirit to the human spirit) is always the same. The Spirit always says the same thing to whomsoever He speaks and altogether without regard to passing doctrinal emphases or theological vogues. He flashes the beauty of Christ upon the wondering heart, and the awed spirit receives it with a minimum of interference. Wesley and Waifs were worlds apart in their theology, but they could and did love and sing the same hymns of pure worship and adoration. The Spirit united them to worship even though their respective views of truth separated them doctrinally.

Each age has interpreted Christianity after its own fashion. The religion of the barnstorming American revivalists of the nineteenth century was certainly something different from that of Luther or the medieval mystics or the apostolic fathers. The bishops who met at Nicea in the fourth century to defend the faith of Christ from the attack of the Arians surely differed radically from the scholars and saints who stood to defend that same faith from the attack of the higher critics in the early twentieth century.


Theology has a tendency to run to modes just as does philosophy. The Christian teachers of the Middle Ages bore down hard upon the vanity of life and the innate wickedness of the body. In the early days of America the prevailing doctrine was hell, and the popular preachers of those times revealed more details about that terrible place than were known to the inspired writers of the Scriptures. In more recent times it was discovered again that God is love, and the love of God for mankind became the chief theme of sermon and song throughout the evangelical world.

Right now we are in another period of transition, and blessed is the man that knows where we are going. Whatever direction the theological wind may set there are two things of which we may be certain:

One is that God will not leave Himself without a witness. There will always be some who hold the creed of Christ, the inspired outline of Christian doctrine. Saving truth will never be completely hidden from the sight of men. The poor in spirit, the penitent will always find Christ close at hand ready to save them. The other is that the Holy Spirit is the true conservator of orthodoxy and will invariably say the same thing to meek and trusting souls. Illuminated hearts are sure to agree at the point where the light falls.
Our only real danger is that we may grieve the blessed Spirit into silence and so be left to the mercy of our intellects. Then we shall have Christian scholars in abundance but we’ll be short on adoring saints. We’ll have defenders of the faith who can overawe their opponents with their logic and their learning, but we’ll be without prophets and mystics and hymnists. We’ll have the bush, pruned and trimmed and properly cultivated, but in the bush there will be no fire. Truth is forever the same, but modes and emphases and interpretations vary. It is a cheering thought that Christ can adapt Himself to any race or age or people. He will give life and light to any man or woman anywhere in the world regardless of doctrinal emphasis or prevailing religious customs, provided that man or woman takes Him as He is and trusts Him without reservation. The Spirit never bears witness to an argument about Christ, but He never fails to witness to a proclamation of Christ crucified, dead and buried, and now ascended to the right hand of the Majesty on high.

The conclusion of the matter is that we should not assume that we have all the truth and that we are mistaken in nothing. Rather we should kneel in adoration before the pierced feet of Him who is the Truth and honor Him by humble obedience to His words.

山楂片

感谢分享！

Ichthys

标题 Let's Be Humble About Our Orthodoxy 应该直译为“让我们对我们的正统信仰谦卑”，意思是不要因我们有正统信仰而骄傲。这比“不要以正统信仰自夸”好，这句常是那些反对正统信仰，认为什么是正统没有标准的人所使用的。

后面，除了耶稣和祂的使徒之外no believer or company of believers in the history of the world has ever held the truth in total purity，应该翻译成“没有哪个信徒或这信徒团体”，不要翻译成“没有某一位信徒或某一宗派的信徒”，故意提出宗派这个中国基督徒最不屑的词来。

这样和文章题目呼应，简单的两个翻译处理就把某个宗派自以为是，自命正统的形象暗示出来了，呵呵。

xm0755

nandeht 发表于 2014-11-21 18:58
Let’s Be Humble About Our Orthodoxy
by AW Tozer

谢谢！