|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
Denney’s greatest contribution to theological literature is in his robust defence of the penal character of the atonement.
丹尼对神学文献的最大贡献在于他对赎罪刑罚性质的有力辩护。
中文下载
First expressed in his Studies in Theology, it found its fullest expression in his 1902 work The Death of Christ (London, Hodder and Stoughton, often reprinted).
首先在他的《神学研究》中表达，在他1902年的作品《基督之死》（伦敦，霍德与斯托顿出版社，多次重印）中得到最充分的表达。
The Atonement and the Modern Mind.
《赎罪与现代思维》。
Denney insists that the death of Christ cannot be understood unless it is seen as a death for sin, as Christ bearing the penalty in the place of those he came to save.
丹尼坚持认为，基督之死不能被理解，除非将其视为为罪而死，即基督代替祂来拯救的人承受刑罚。
THE first edition of The Death of Christ appeared in 1902.
《基督之死》第一版于1902年出版。
It contained the first six of the nine chapters in this book, and its purpose was to explain, in the light of modern historical study, the place held by the death of Christ in the New Testament, and the interpretation put upon it by the apostolic writers.
它包含了这本书九章中的前六章，其目的是根据现代历史研究，解释基督之死在新约中所占的地位，以及使徒作者对此的诠释。
In its motive, the work was as much evangelical as theological.
在其动机上，这部作品既是福音性的，也是神学性的。
Assuming that the New Testament presents us with what must be in some sense the norm of Christianity, the writer was convinced that the death of Christ has not in the common Christian mind the place to which its centrality in the New Testament entitles it.
假设新约为我们呈现了在某种意义上必须是基督教准则的内容，作者确信基督之死在一般基督徒心中没有占据其在新约中的中心地位所应得的位置。
Two assumptions must be made by any one who writes on the death of Christ in the New Testament.
任何写关于新约中基督之死的人都必须作出两个假设。
The first is, that there is such a thing as a New Testament; and the second, that the death of Christ is a subject which has a real place and importance in it.
第一个是，确实存在新约这样一个事物；第二个是，基督之死是在其中具有真实地位和重要性的主题。
The first may be said to be the more important of the two, for the denial of it carries with it the denial of the other.
第一个可以说是两者中更重要的，因为对它的否认带来对另一个的否认。
At the present moment there is a strong tendency in certain quarters to depreciate the idea of a New Testament in the sense in which it has rightly or wrongly been established in the Church.
目前在某些方面有强烈的倾向，要贬低新约概念，即在教会中正确或错误地建立的那种意义上的新约。
It is pointed out that the books which compose our New Testament are in no real sense a unity.
有人指出，构成我们新约的各卷书在真正意义上并不是一个整体。
They were not written with a view to forming the volume in which we now find them, nor with any view of being related to each other at all.
它们写作时并未考虑形成我们现在发现它们所在的卷册，也没有考虑彼此之间的任何关联。
At first, indeed, they had no such relation.
事实上，起初它们确实没有这样的关系。
They are merely the chief fragments that have survived from a primitive Christian literature which must have been indefinitely larger, not to say richer.
它们仅仅是从原始基督教文献中幸存下来的主要片段，而那些文献必定规模无限更大，更不用说更丰富。
The unity which they now possess, and in virtue of which they constitute the New Testament, does not belong to them inherently; it is factitious; it is the artificial, and to a considerable extent the illusive result of the action of the Church in bestowing upon them canonical authority.
它们现在所拥有的统一性，以及凭借这种统一性构成新约，并不是它们固有的；它是人为的；它是教会赋予它们正典权威行动的人造的，在很大程度上是虚幻的结果。
The age to which they historically belong is an age at which the Church had no ‘New Testament, ‘ and hence what is called New Testament theology is an exhibition of the manner in which Christians thought before a New Testament existed.
它们在历史上所属的时代是教会没有”新约”的时代，因此所谓的新约神学是对新约存在之前基督徒思考方式的展示。
As a self- contradictory thing, therefore, it ought to be abolished.
因此，作为一个自相矛盾的东西，它应当被废除。
The ‘dogma’ of the New Testament, and the factitious unity which it has created, ought to be superseded, and instead of New Testament theology we should aim at a history of primitive Christian thought and life.
新约的”教条”，以及它所创造的人为统一性，应当被取代，我们应当以原始基督教思想和生活史为目标，而不是新约神学。
It would not be necessary for the purposes of such a history to make any assumptions as to the unity of the ‘New Testament’ books; but though they would not form a holy island in the sea of history, they would gain in life and reality in proportion as the dogmatic tie which binds them to each other was broken, and their living relations to the general phenomena of history revealed.
为了这样一部历史的目的，不需要对”新约”各卷书的统一性作任何假设；但是，虽然它们不会在历史海洋中形成一个神圣岛屿，它们会随着将它们彼此结合的教条纽带的断裂，以及它们与历史一般现象的活生生关系的显露，而在生命力和现实性上有所增益。
There is not only some plausibility in this but some truth: all I am concerned to point out here is that it is not the whole truth, and possibly not the main truth.
这不仅有一定的合理性，而且有一定的真理：我在这里所关心指出的是，这不是全部真理，可能也不是主要真理。
The unity which belongs to the books of the New Testament, whatever be its value, is certainly not fortuitous.
属于新约各卷书的统一性，无论其价值如何，绝非偶然。
The books did not come together by chance.
这些书不是偶然聚集在一起的。
They are not held together simply by the art of the bookbinder.
它们不是简单地由装订工的技艺结合在一起的。
It would be truer to say that they gravitated toward each other in the course of the first century of the Church’s life, and imposed their unity on the Christian mind, than that the Church imposed on them by statute — for when ‘dogma’ is used in the abstract sense which contrasts it with fact or history, this is what it means — a unity to which they were inwardly strange.
更准确地说，它们在教会生活的第一个世纪中相互吸引，并将它们的统一性强加给基督徒的思想，而不是教会通过法令——因为当”教条”在与事实或历史相对的抽象意义上使用时，这就是它的含义——将它们内在陌生的统一性强加给它们。
That they are at one in some essential respects is obvious.
它们在某些基本方面是一致的，这是显而易见的。
They have at least unity of subject, they are all concerned with Jesus Christ, and with the manifestation of God’s redeeming love to men in Him.
它们至少有主题的统一性，它们都关注耶稣基督，以及上帝在祂里面向人类显明的救赎之爱。
There is even a sense in which we may say there is unity of authorship; for all the books of the New Testament are works of faith.
甚至在某种意义上我们可以说有作者身份的统一性；因为新约的所有书卷都是信心的作品。
Whether the unity goes further, and if so how far, are questions not to be settled beforehand.
统一性是否更进一步，如果是的话到什么程度，这些问题不能预先解决。
It may extend to modes of thought, to fundamental beliefs or convictions, in regard to Christ and the meaning of His presence and work in the world.
它可能延伸到思维模式，到基本信仰或信念，关于基督以及祂在世界上的存在和工作的意义。
It is not assumed here that it does, but neither is it assumed that it does not.
这里不假设它如此，但也不假设它不如此。
It is not assumed, with regard to the particular subject before us, that in the different New Testament writings we shall find independent, divergent, or inconsistent interpretations of Christ’s death.
关于我们面前的特定主题，不假设在不同的新约著作中我们会发现对基督之死的独立、分歧或不一致的诠释。
The result of an unprejudiced investigation may be to show that on this subject the various writings which go to make up our New Testament are profoundly at one, and even that their oneness on this subject, a oneness not imposed nor artificial, but essential and inherent, justifies against the criticism referred to above the common Christian estimate of the New Testament as a whole.
一个无偏见调查的结果可能显示，在这个主题上，构成我们新约的各种著作深度一致，甚至它们在这个主题上的一致性——一种非强加的、非人为的，而是本质的、固有的一致性——为对抗上述批评而为基督徒对新约整体的普遍评价提供了辩护。
Without entering on abstract or general grounds into a discussion in which no abstract or general conclusion can be reached, it may be permitted to say, in starting, that in the region with which the New Testament deals we should be on our guard against pressing too strongly some current distinctions which, within their limits, are real enough, but which, if carried beyond their limits, make everything in the New Testament unintelligible.
不在抽象或一般基础上进入一个无法达到抽象或一般结论的讨论，在开始时可以说，在新约所涉及的领域中，我们应当警惕过分强调一些当前的区别，这些区别在其限度内是足够真实的，但如果超出其限度，就会使新约中的一切变得不可理解。
The most important of these is the distinction of historical and dogmatic, or of historito- religious and dogmatico- religious.
其中最重要的是历史与教条的区别，或历史宗教与教条宗教的区别。
If the distinction between historical and dogmatic is pressed, it runs back into the distinction between thing and meaning, or between fact and theory; and this, as we shall have occasion to see, is a distinction which it is impossible to press.
如果强调历史与教条之间的区别，它就会回到事物与意义之间的区别，或事实与理论之间的区别；正如我们将有机会看到的，这是一个不可能强调的区别。
There is a point at which the two sides in such contrast pass into each other.
在这种对比中，两方面在某一点上会互相转化。
He who does not see the meaning does not see the thing; or to use the more imposing words, he who refuses to take a ‘dogmatic’ view proves by doing so that he falls short of a completely ‘historical’ one.
不看到意义的人就看不到事物；或者用更庄重的话说，拒绝采取”教条”观点的人通过这样做证明他未能达到完全”历史”的观点。
The same kind of consideration has sometimes to be applied to the distinction of Biblical, or ‘New Testament’ and ‘systematic’ theology.
同样的考虑有时必须应用于圣经或”新约”神学与”系统”神学的区别。
Biblical or New Testament theology deals with the thoughts, or the mode of thinking, of the various New Testament writers; systematic theology is the independent construction of Christianity as a whole in the mind of a later thinker.
圣经或新约神学处理各新约作者的思想或思维模式；系统神学是后来思想家心中对基督教整体的独立建构。
Here again there is a broad and valid distinction, but not an absolute one.
这里又有一个广泛而有效的区别，但不是绝对的。
It is the Christian thinking of the first century in the one case, and of the twentieth, let us say, in the other; but in both cases there is Christianity and there is thinking, and if there is truth in either there is bound to be a place at which the distinction disappears.
一种情况是第一世纪的基督教思维，另一种情况是二十世纪的，可以这么说；但在两种情况下都有基督教和思维，如果其中任何一个有真理，就必然有一个区别消失的地方。
It does not follow from the distinction, with the inevitable limitations, that nothing in the New Testament can be accepted by a modern mind simply as it stands.
从这种区别及其不可避免的局限性，并不意味着新约中的任何内容都不能被现代思维简单地按原样接受。
It does not follow that nothing in St. Paul or St. John — nothing in their interpretation of the death of Jesus, for example — has attained the character of finality.
这并不意味着保罗或约翰的任何内容——例如，他们对耶稣之死的诠释中的任何内容——都没有达到最终性的特征。
There may be something which has.
可能有某些内容已经达到。
The thing to be dealt with is one, and the mind, through the centuries, is one, and even in the first century it may have struck to a final truth which the twentieth will not transcend.
要处理的事物是一个，通过各个世纪的心智是一个，即使在第一世纪它也可能触及了二十世纪不会超越的最终真理。
Certainly we cannot deny this beforehand on the ground that Biblical theology is one thing and Systematic or Philosophical theology another.
当然，我们不能基于圣经神学是一回事，系统或哲学神学是另一回事的理由而事先否认这一点。
They may be taught in separate rooms in a theological school, but, except to the pedant or the dilettante, the distinction between them is a vanishing one.
它们可能在神学院的不同房间里教授，但是，除了对书呆子或业余爱好者来说，它们之间的区别是消失的。
And the same may be said, finally, about the distinction of matter and form.
最后，关于内容和形式的区别也可以这样说。
There is such a distinction it is possible to put the same matter in different forms.
存在这样的区别，可以将同样的内容以不同的形式表达。
But it does not follow that the form in which a truth or an experience is put by a New Testament writer is always unequal to the matter, or that the matter must always be fused again and cast into a new mold before it can be appropriated by us.
但这并不意味着新约作者表达真理或经历的形式总是不等于内容，或者内容必须总是重新融化并铸入新模式才能被我们接受。
The higher the reality with which we deal, the less the distinction of matter and form holds.
我们所处理的现实越高，内容和形式的区别就越不成立。
If Christianity brings us into contact with the ultimate truth and reality, we may find that the ‘form’ into which it was cast at first is more essential to the matter than we had supposed.
如果基督教使我们接触最终的真理和现实，我们可能发现它最初被铸造的”形式”比我们原先想象的对内容更加重要。
Just as it would be a rash act to venture to extract the matter of Lycidas, and to exhibit it in a more adequate form, it may be a rash act to venture to tell us what St. Paul or St. John meant in a form more equal to the meaning than the apostles themselves could supply.
正如冒险提取《利西达斯》的内容并以更充分的形式展示它是鲁莽的行为一样，冒险以比使徒们自己所能提供的更符合意义的形式告诉我们保罗或约翰的意思，可能也是鲁莽的行为。
It is not necessary to say that it would be, but only that it may be.
不必说它会是，只是说它可能是。
The mind seems to gain freedom and lucidity by working with such distinctions, but if we forget that they are our own distinctions, and that in the real world, in the very nature of things, a point is reached sooner or later at which they disappear, we are certain to be led astray.
心智似乎通过使用这些区别获得自由和清晰，但如果我们忘记它们是我们自己的区别，而在现实世界中，在事物的本质中，迟早会达到它们消失的点，我们肯定会被误导。
I do not argue against drawing them or using them, but against making them so absolute that in the long- run one of them must cease to be true, and forfeit all its rights in favor of the other.
我不反对画出或使用它们，而是反对使它们如此绝对，以致长远来看其中一个必须停止为真，并放弃其所有权利以支持另一个。
The chief use, for instance, to which many writers put them is to appeal to the historical against the dogmatic; the historical is employed to drive the dogmatic from the field.
例如，许多作者使用它们的主要目的是诉诸历史对抗教条；历史被用来将教条从领域中驱逐出去。
To do the reverse would of course be as bad, and my object in these introductory remarks is to deprecate both mistakes.
做相反的事当然同样糟糕，我在这些介绍性评论中的目的是反对这两种错误。
It does not matter, outside the class- room, whether an interpretation is called historical or dogmatic, historico- religious or dogmatico- religious; it does not matter whether we put it under the head of Biblical or of philosophical theology; what we want to know is whether it is true.
在课堂之外，一个诠释是否被称为历史的或教条的，历史宗教的或教条宗教的，这并不重要；我们将它归入圣经神学还是哲学神学的范畴也不重要；我们想知道的是它是否真实。
In the truth such distinctions are apt to disappear.
在真理中，这些区别往往会消失。
Without assuming, therefore, the dogmatic unity of the New Testament, either in its representation of Christianity as a whole, or of the death of Christ in particular, we need not feel precluded from approaching it with a presumption that it will exhibit some kind of coherence.
因此，不假设新约的教条统一性，无论是在其对基督教整体的表述上，还是特别在基督之死上，我们不必觉得被阻止以它会表现出某种连贯性的假设来接近它。
Granting that the Church canonized the books, consciously or unconsciously, it did not canonize them for nothing.
承认教会有意识或无意识地将这些书正典化，它正典化它们并非毫无理由。
It must have felt that they really represented and therefore safeguarded the Christian faith, and as the Church of the early days was acutely conscious of the distinction between what did and what did not belong to Christianity, it must have had some sense at least of a consistency in its Christian Scriptures.
它必须感到它们真正代表并因此保障了基督教信仰，由于早期教会敏锐地意识到属于基督教和不属于基督教的区别，它至少必须对其基督教圣经的一致性有某种感觉。
They did not represent for it two gospels or ten, but one.
对它来说，它们代表的不是两个或十个福音，而是一个。
The view Christians took of the books they valued was instinctively dogmatic without ceasing to be historical; or perhaps we may say, with a lively sense of their historical relations the Church had an instinctive feeling of the dogmatic import of the books in its New Testament.
基督徒对他们珍视的书卷的看法在本能上是教条的，而不失其历史性；或者我们可以说，对其历史关系有敏锐感觉的教会对其新约中书卷的教条含义有本能的感觉。
It is in this attitude, which is not blind to either side of the distinction, yet does not let either annul the other, that we ought to approach the study of New Testament problems.
我们应当以这种态度来接近新约问题的研究，这种态度对区别的任何一方都不盲目，但也不让任何一方取消另一方。
It is hardly necessary to prove that in the New Testament the death of Christ is a real subject.
几乎不需要证明在新约中基督之死是一个真实的主题。
It is distinctly present to the mind of New Testament writers, and they have much to say upon it.
它明确地存在于新约作者的心中，他们对此有很多话要说。
It is treated by them as a subject of central and permanent importance to the Christian faith, and it is incredible that it should have filled the place it does fill in the New Testament had it ever been regarded as of trifling consequence for the understanding, the acceptance, or the preaching of the Gospel.
它被他们视为对基督教信仰具有核心和永久重要性的主题，如果它曾经被认为对理解、接受或传讲福音具有微不足道的后果，那么它在新约中占据现在的地位是不可思议的。
As little is it necessary to say that in using the expression ‘the death of Christ, ‘ we are not speaking of a thing, but of an experience.
同样不必要说，在使用”基督之死”这个表达时，我们说的不是一个事物，而是一个经历。
Whether we view it as action or as passion, whatever enters into personality has the significance and the worth of personality.
无论我们将其视为行动还是受难，凡是进入位格的都具有位格的意义和价值。
The death of Christ in the New Testament is the death of one who is alive for evermore.
新约中基督之死是那位永远活着者的死。
To every New Testament writer Christ is the Lord, the living and exalted Lord, and it is impossible for them to think of His death except as an experience the result or virtue of which is perpetuated in His risen life.
对每一位新约作者来说，基督都是主，活着的和被高举的主，他们不可能不将祂的死视为其结果或功效在祂复活生命中延续的经历。
Nevertheless, Christ died.
尽管如此，基督死了。
His death is in some sense the center and consummation of His work.
祂的死在某种意义上是祂工作的中心和完成。
It is because of it that His risen life is the hope which it is to sinful men; and it needs no apology, therefore, if one who thinks that it has less than its proper place in preaching and in theology endeavors to bring out as simply as possible its place and meaning in the New Testament.
正是因为它，祂的复活生命才是对有罪之人的盼望；因此，如果一个认为它在传道和神学中没有占据其应有地位的人努力尽可能简单地阐明它在新约中的地位和意义，这不需要辩解。
If our religion is to be Christian in any sense of the term which history will justify, it can never afford to ignore what, to say the least of it, is the primary confession of Christian faith.
如果我们的宗教要在历史所能证明的任何意义上成为基督教，它绝不能忽视至少可以说是基督教信仰的主要告白。
The starting- point in our investigation must be the life and teaching of Jesus Himself.
我们调查的起点必须是耶稣本身的生活和教导。
For this we shall depend in the first instance on the synoptic gospels.
为此，我们首先将依赖符类福音。
Next will come an examination of primitive Christian teaching as it bears on our subject.
接下来将检查与我们主题相关的原始基督教教导。
For this we can only make use of the early chapters in Acts, and with a reserve, which will be explained at the proper place, of the First Epistle of Peter.
为此，我们只能使用使徒行传的早期章节，并有所保留地使用彼得前书，这种保留将在适当的地方解释。
It will then be necessary to go into greater detail, in proportion as we have more material at command, in regard to the teaching of St. Paul.
然后有必要更详细地研究保罗的教导，因为我们有更多的材料可以利用。
Of all New Testament writers he is the one who has most deliberately and continually reflected on Christ’s death; if there is a conscious theology of it anywhere it is with him.
在所有新约作者中，他是最刻意和持续地思考基督之死的人；如果在任何地方有对此的自觉神学，那就是在他那里。
A study of the epistle to the Hebrews and of the Johannine writings — Apocalypse, Gospel, and Epistle — will bring the subject proper to a close; but I shall venture to add, in a concluding chapter, some reflections on the importance of the New Testament conception of Christ’s death alike to the evangelist and the theologian.
对希伯来书和约翰著作——启示录、福音书和书信——的研究将结束这个主题；但我将冒险在结论章节中添加一些关于新约基督之死概念对传福音者和神学家的重要性的思考。
As typical instances of this mode of thought, reference may be made to Wrede’s Ueber Aufgabe und Methode der sogenannten neutestamentlichen Theologie, and G. Kruger’s Das Dogma vom Neuen Testament.
作为这种思维模式的典型实例，可以参考弗雷德(Wrede)的《关于所谓新约神学的任务和方法》，以及G. 克吕格尔(G. Kruger)的《新约教条》。
This, of course, does not exclude the idea that the native vigor of Christianity was shown in its power to assimilate as well as to reject extraneous matter.
这当然不排除基督教的本土活力表现在其同化和排斥外来事物的能力上的想法。
Dr. Denney laid great stress upon Christ’s physical sufferings.
丹尼博士非常强调基督的身体痛苦。
He emphasized the substitutionary nature of His sacrifice and expounded its effects to the believer with evangelical zeal.
他强调祂献祭的替代性质，并以福音热忱阐述其对信徒的果效。
Such was his aversion to the teachings of certain mystics on the subject of the Atonement that he avoided all identification with mystical belief.
他对某些神秘主义者关于赎罪主题的教导如此厌恶，以致避免与神秘主义信仰的任何认同。
In spite of this, his work on the death of Christ remains one of the most definitive discussions produced to date.
尽管如此，他关于基督之死的作品仍然是迄今产生的最权威的讨论之一。
—Cyril J. Barber, professor of biblical studies, Talbot Theological Seminary
——西里尔·J·巴伯(Cyril J. Barber)，塔尔博特神学院圣经研究教授
Table of Contents
目录
Preface
序言
Foreword
前言
Introduction
引言
Detailed Contents – Outline Of Study
详细内容 – 研究大纲
Chapter 1 : The Synoptic Gospels.
第一章：符类福音
Chapter 2 : The Earliest Christian Preaching
第二章：最早的基督教传道
Chapter 3: The Epistles Of St. Paul
第三章：保罗书信
Chapter 4 : The Epistle To The Hebrews.
第四章：希伯来书
Chapter 5 : The Johannine Writings.
第五章：约翰著作
Chapter 6 : The Importance of the Death of Christ in Preaching and in Theology
第六章：基督之死在传道和神学中的重要性
Chapter 7 : The Atonement And The Modern Mind.
第七章：赎罪与现代思维
Chapter 8 : Sin And The Divine Reaction Against It
第八章：罪与上帝对它的反应
Chapter 9 : Christ And Man In The Atonement
第九章：赎罪中的基督与人