|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
中文下载
From J. I. Packer’s introduction to Luther’s Bondage of the Will:
摘自 J. I. 巴刻（J. I. Packer）为路德的《意志的捆绑》所作的引言：
Free will was no academic question to Luther; the whole Gospel of the grace of God, he held, was bound up with it, and stood or fell according to the way one decided it. . . .
对路德而言，自由意志绝非一个学术问题；他认为，神恩典的整个福音都与此紧密相连，并且福音的站立或跌倒取决于人们对这一问题的判定……
It is not the part of a true theologian, Luther holds, to be unconcerned, or to pretend to be unconcerned, when the Gospel is in danger. . . .
路德认为，当福音处于危险之中时，漠不关心或假装漠不关心，绝非真神学家的本分……
[T]he doctrine of The Bondage of the Will in particular was the cornerstone of the Gospel and the foundation of faith (40-41, emphasis added).
特别是《意志的捆绑》这一教义，乃是福音的房角石和信仰的根基（40-41页，强调为后加）。
In particular, the denial of free will was to Luther the foundation of the Biblical doctrine of grace, and a hearty endorsement of that denial was the first step for anyone who would understand the Gospel and come to faith in God.
特别是，对自由意志的否定，对路德而言是圣经恩典教义的根基，并且，衷心认可这一否定，是任何想要明白福音并对神产生信心之人的第一步。
The man who has not yet practically and experimentally learned the bondage of his will in sin has not yet comprehended any part of the Gospel (44-45).
凡没有在实践和经历上认识到自己在罪中意志受捆绑的人，就还没有领悟福音的任何部分（44-45页）。
Justification by faith alone is a truth that needs interpretation.
唯独因信称义是一个需要解释的真理。
The principle of sola fide [by faith alone] is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia [by grace alone] . . .
唯独信心 [sola fide] 的原则，除非被视为锚定在唯独恩典 [sola gratia] 这一更宽广的原则之中，否则就无法被正确理解……
for to rely on oneself for faith is not different in principle from relying on oneself for works (59).
因为依靠自己产生信心，在原则上与依靠自己产生行为没有什么不同（59页）。
The Bible teaches that faith itself is and has to be a gift of God, by grace, and not of self (Ephesians 2:8).
圣经教导说，信心本身是，且必须是神的恩赐，是出于恩典，而不是出于自己（以弗所书 2:8）。
It is safe to deduce that for Luther, any evangelist who advocates free will has not only “not yet comprehended any part of the Gospel,” but also that he has not yet preached the Gospel at all; his is a counterfeit gospel.
可以稳妥地推断，对路德而言，任何鼓吹自由意志的布道者不仅“还没有领悟福音的任何部分”，而且他根本就没有传讲福音；他的福音是伪造的福音。
Those who want to downplay doctrines, that is, truth, might agree with Erasmus.
那些想要淡化教义，即淡化真理的人，可能会同意伊拉斯姆（Erasmus）。
In a letter to Louvain, Erasmus testified of himself, “I for my part would prefer to be deceived in a good many things rather than to fight for the truth in so great a universal tumult” (35).
在给鲁汶（Louvain）的一封信中，伊拉斯姆自述道：“就我而言，我宁愿在许多事上受骗，也不愿在如此巨大的普遍骚乱中为真理而战”（35页）。
“Christianity, to Erasmus, was essentially morality.. . .
“对伊拉斯姆而言，基督教本质上是道德……
Erasmus recognizes no organic dependence of practice upon faith.
伊拉斯姆不承认实践与信心之间存在有机的依赖关系。
Peace in the Church was of more value than any doctrine” (43).
教会内的和平比任何教义都更有价值”（43页）。
Does this not sound remarkably like many neo-evangelical churches today–peace at the price of truth?
这听起来岂不与今天许多新福音派教会惊人地相似吗——即以真理为代价换取和平？
The opposite was true of Luther: “Christianity was to Luther a dogmatic religion, or it was nothing” (44).
路德则截然相反：“对路德而言，基督教若不是一种教义性的宗教，就什么都不是”（44页）。
Fundamental to upholding a doctrinal Christianity is the upholding of logic.
坚持教义性基督教的根本在于坚持逻辑。
If logic is ignored or denigrated, no doctrine can be known to be true or false.
如果逻辑被忽视或诋毁，就没有教义能被确知为真或假。
Luther was himself a rigorous logician.
路德本人就是一位严谨的逻辑学家。
In 1508, he lectured in Aristotelian logic at the University of Wittenberg (21).
1508年，他在维滕贝格大学（University of Wittenberg）讲授亚里士多德逻辑学（21页）。
Roland Bainton wrote of Luther, “Reason in the sense of logic he employed to the uttermost limits” (47).
罗兰·贝恩顿（Roland Bainton）在写到路德时说：“逻辑意义上的理性，他运用到了极致”（47页）。
At the Diet of Worms in 1521, Luther was ordered to recant his teachings on threat of excommunication.
在1521年的沃尔姆斯会议（Diet of Worms）上，路德被命令撤回他的教导，否则将面临逐出教会的威胁。
Luther thundered, “Unless I am convinced by Scriptures and plain reason [for Luther, this meant logic], my conscience is captive to the Word of God.
路德发出雷鸣般的回答：“除非圣经和清楚的理性 [对路德而言，这意味着逻辑] 说服我，否则我的良心受神的道束缚。
I cannot and I will not recant anything. Here I stand, I can do no other!”
我不能也不会撤回任何东西。我站在这里，我别无选择！”
Note for Sect. 107.—Two things should be noted regarding the Doctor’s response to the Diatribe at this point:
关于第107节的注释。——关于博士（指路德）此时对《论自由意志》（Diatribe）的回应，有两点需要注意：
That the Diatribe associates Damnation and Predestination to Damnation (or Reprobation) in such a way as to make the cause of the one necessarily to be the cause of the other.
即《论自由意志》将定罪与预定受刑（或遗弃）联系起来的方式，使得前者的原因必然成为后者的原因。
Thus, if Predestination to Damnation be absolute, and without a deserving as its cause, then the Diatribe will falsely allege that we speak of Damnation as being absolute and without any deserving cause.
因此，如果预定受刑是绝对的，且不以配得刑罚为原因，那么《论自由意志》就会错误地声称，我们所说的定罪也是绝对的，没有任何配得刑罚的原因。
Luther does not affirm that Damnation is absolute in the sense that men will be damned who do not deserve to be damned, but shows that even permitting the Diatribe’s wicked reasoning and lying accusations, it is still confounded by its own arguments, which reveal that all of Erasmus’ concerns are really man-centered, seeing he is willing that God should call that Good which is not, although he will not have God call that Evil which is not—both which are alike wicked, and neither of which is ever done by God, albeit his Predestination to Life and Predestination to Damnation be both of them absolute and in no way based on a foreseen deserving of anything in man or angel so predestinated.
路德并没有断言定罪是绝对的，好像那些不该受刑罚的人也会被定罪一样，而是表明，即使允许《论自由意志》那邪恶的推理和谎言的指控，它仍然被其自己的论点所驳倒，这揭示了伊拉斯姆所有的关注点实际上都是以人为中心的，鉴于他乐意让神称那非善的为善，却不愿让神称那非恶的为恶——这两者同样是邪恶的，且神绝不会做其中任何一件事，尽管祂预定得生命和预定受刑罚两者都是绝对的，绝非基于预见到被如此预定的人或天使有任何配得之处。
That in the refutation, Luther could have easily put off these arguments by the assertion used nowadays, that Predestination to Damnation is based on foreseen deserving of sin, however, Luther never brings in any such arguments, which, with other texts, lead one to conclude that Dr. Luther was an orthodox Supralapsarian with regard to the absoluteness and the order of the Decree.
在驳斥中，路德本可以轻易地用现今常用的主张来推脱这些论点，即预定受刑是基于预见到人配得罪责，然而，路德从未引入任何此类论点，这与其他文本一起，使人得出结论：关于神旨意的绝对性和次序，路德博士是一位正统的堕落前预定论者（Supralapsarian）。
In concluding the Introduction, Packer and Johnston make a stinging but accurate remark:
在结束引言时，巴刻和约翰斯顿做出了尖锐但准确的评论：
Much modern Protestantism would be neither owned nor even recognized by the pioneer Reformers.
许多现代新教既不会被改革宗先驱们所承认，甚至也不会被他们所认出。
The Bondage of the Will fairly sets before us what they believed about the salvation of lost mankind.
《意志的捆绑》公正地向我们展示了他们关于失丧人类救赎的信仰。
In light of it, we are forced to ask whether Protestant Christendom has not tragically sold its birthright between Luther’s day and our own.
鉴于此，我们被迫追问，新教基督教界在路德的时代和我们这时代之间，是否已经悲剧性地出卖了长子的名分。
Has not Protestantism today become more Erasmian [and Roman Catholic in theology] than Lutheran [and Reformed]?
今天的新教岂不是变得更像伊拉斯姆主义 [在神学上更像罗马天主教]，而不是路德宗 [和改革宗] 吗？
Do we not too often try to minimize and gloss over doctrinal differences for the sake of inter-party peace?
我们岂不是太常为了派系间的和平而试图缩小和粉饰教义上的分歧吗？
Are we innocent of the doctrinal indifferentism with which Luther charged Erasmus?
对于路德指控伊拉斯姆的那种教义冷漠主义，我们是清白的吗？
Do we still believe that doctrine matters [in particular, the doctrine of The Bondage of the Will]?
我们是否仍然相信教义至关重要 [特别是《意志的捆绑》这一教义]？
Or do we, with Erasmus, rate a deceptive appearance of unity as of more importance than truth? (59-60).
还是说，我们与伊拉斯姆一样，认为虚假的合一表象比真理更重要？（59-60页）。
To accept the principles which Martin Luther vindicates in The Bondage of the Will would certainly involve a mental and spiritual revolution for many Christians at the present time. . . .
接受马丁·路德在《意志的捆绑》中所维护的原则，对于当今许多基督徒来说，肯定会涉及一场思想和灵性的革命……
We are compelled to ask ourselves: If Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever–is any other position than Luther’s possible?
我们被迫问自己：如果耶稣基督昨日、今日、一直到永远是一样的——那么除了路德的立场，还有其他立场是可能的吗？
Surely no more important or far-reaching question confronts the church today (60-61).
想必，今天教会面临的问题中，没有比这更重要或更深远的了（60-61页）。
Here are some key quotes by Luther I found when reading through the book
以下是我在阅读这本书时发现的路德的一些关键引述
“For if man has lost his freedom, and is forced to serve sin, and cannot will good, what conclusion can more justly be drawn concerning him, than that he sins and wills evil necessarily?” Martin Luther BW pg. 149
“因为如果人已经失去了他的自由，并且被迫服侍罪，也不能立志行善，那么关于他，还能得出什么比这更公正的结论呢：即他是必然地犯罪和立志行恶？” 马丁·路德 《意志的捆绑》 149页
“…’if thou art willing’ is a verb in the subjunctive mood, which asserts nothing…a conditional statement asserts nothing indicatively.”
“……‘如果你愿意’是一个虚拟语气的动词，它不断言任何事情……一个条件陈述句不作任何陈述性的断言。”
“if thou art willing”, “if thou hear”, “if thou do” declare, not man’s ability, but his duty. pg 157
“如果你愿意”、“如果你听”、“如果你做”所宣告的，不是人的能力，而是他的责任。 157页
“the commandments are not given inappropriately or pointlessly; but in order that through them the proud, blind man may learn the plague of his impotence, should he try to do as he is commanded.” pg. 160
“诫命的颁布并非不恰当或无意义；而是为了让骄傲、瞎眼的人，若试图照着所吩咐的去行，便可藉此认识到自己无能为力的瘟疫。” 160页
Speaking to Erasmus, “Throughout your treatment you forget that you said that ‘free-will’ can do nothing without grace, and you prove that ‘free-will’ can do all things without grace!
对伊拉斯姆说，“在你的整个论述中，你忘记了你说过‘自由意志’没有恩典就不能做什么，而你却证明‘自由意志’没有恩典能做凡事！
Your inferences and analogies “For if man has lost his freedom, and is forced to serve sin, and cannot will good, what conclusion can more justly be drawn concerning him, than that he sins and wills evil necessarily?” Martin Luther BW pg. 149
你的推论和类比……“因为如果人已经失去了他的自由，并且被迫服侍罪，也不能立志行善，那么关于他，还能得出什么比这更公正的结论呢：即他是必然地犯罪和立志行恶？” 马丁·路德 《意志的捆绑》 149页
“Even grammarians and schoolboys on street corners know that nothing more is signified by verbs in the imperative mood than what ought to be done, and that what is done or can be done should be expressed by words in the indicative.
“甚至街角的语法学家和学童都知道，祈使语气的动词所表示的，无非是应当做什么，而已经做的或能做的事，应该用陈述语气的词来表达。
How is it that you theologians are twice as stupid as schoolboys, in that as soon as you get hold of a single imperative verb you infer an indicative meaning, as though the moment a thing is commanded it is done, or can be done? pg 159
你们这些神学家怎么比学童还要愚蠢两倍，以至于你们一抓住一个祈使动词，就推断出陈述的含义，好像一吩咐某事，这事就已经成就，或能被成就了一样？159页
“The passages of Scripture you cite are imperative; and they prove and establish nothing about the ability of man, but only lay down what is and what not to be done.” pg 161
“你引用的经文是祈使句；它们关于人的能力证明不了什么，也确立不了什么，只是规定了什么是当做的，什么是不当做的。” 161页
“Does it follow from: ‘turn ye’ that therefore you can turn?
“难道从：‘你们要回转’就能得出你们能回转吗？
Does it follow from “‘Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart’ (Deut 6.5) that therefore you can love with all your heart?
难道从‘你要尽心爱耶和华你的神’（申命记 6:5）就能得出你能尽心爱吗？
What do arguments of this kind prove, but the ‘free-will’ does not need the grace of God, but can do all things by its own power…
这类论证除了证明‘自由意志’不需要神的恩典，而能靠自己的力量做凡事以外，还能证明什么呢……
But it does not follow from this that man is converted by his own power, nor do the words say so; they simply say: “if thou wilt turn, telling man what he should do.
但这并不能由此得出人是靠自己的力量归正的，这些话也不是这个意思；它们只是说：“如果你愿意回转”，告诉人他应该做什么。
When he knows it, and sees that he cannot do it, he will ask whence he may find ability to do it…” 164
当他知道了这一点，并看出他做不到时，他就会询问从何处可以找到能力去做……” 164页
“By the law is the knowledge of sin’ [Rom 3:20], so the word of grace comes only to those who are distressed by a sense of sin and tempted to despair.” pg. 168
“‘因为律法本是叫人知罪’ [罗马书 3:20]，所以恩典的话语只临到那些被罪恶感所苦恼并受试探陷入绝望的人。” 168页
As to why some are touched by the law and others not, so that some receive and others scorn the offer of grace…[this is the] hidden will of God, Who, according to His own counsel, ordains such persons as He wills to receive and partake of the mercy preached and offered.” pg. 169
至于为什么有些人被律法触动而其他人没有，以致有些人接受而其他人蔑视恩典的提议……[这是] 神隐藏的旨意，祂照着祂自己的筹算，预定那些祂意欲的人去领受并有份于所传讲和提议的怜悯。” 169页
The “imperative or hypothetical passages, or wishes, by which is signified, not what we can do, or do do…but what we ought to do, and what is required of us, so that our impotence may be made known to us and the knowledge of sin may be given to us.” 174
那些“祈使或假设的段落，或愿望，并不是表示我们能做什么，或确实做了什么……而是表示我们应当做什么，以及对我们有什么要求，以便让我们知道我们的无能，并赐给我们对罪的认识。” 174页
God Incarnate says; ‘I would, and thou wouldst not.”
道成肉身的神说：“我愿意，只是你们不愿意。”
God Incarnate, I repeat, was sent for this purpose, to will, say, do, suffer and offer to all me, all that is necessary for salvation;
我重申，道成肉身的神是为了这个目的被差遣的，即愿意、言说、行事、受苦并向所有人提供救恩所必需的一切；
albeit He offends many who, being abandoned or hardened by God’s secret will of Majesty, do not receive Him thus willing, speaking, doing, and offering.
尽管祂冒犯了许多人，这些人被神威严的隐秘旨意所离弃或刚硬，因而没有接待这样意欲、言说、行事和施予的祂。
As John says: “The light shineth in the darkness, and the darkness com comprehendeth it not’ (John 1.5)
正如约翰所说：“光照在黑暗里，黑暗却不接受光”（约翰福音 1:5）
And again: “He came unto his own, and His own received Him not. (v. 11)”The law indicates the impotence of man and the saving power of God…”if any man will come after me’: ‘he that wills to save his life’; ‘if ye love me’; ‘if ye shall continue’.
又说：“祂到自己的地方来，自己的人倒不接待祂。（11节）”律法表明人的无能和神拯救的大能……“若有人要跟从我”；“凡要救自己生命的”；“你们若爱我”；“你们若常……”。
In sum, as I have said-let every occurrence of the conjunction ‘if’, and all imperative verbs, be collected together (so we may help the Diatribe…) [indicating that all commands to believe or follow Christ are conditional, not stating man’s ability]
总之，正如我所说的——把所有出现的连词“如果”，和所有的祈使动词都收集在一起（这样我们可以帮助《论自由意志》……）[表明所有相信或跟随基督的命令都是有条件的，并非陈述人的能力]
Let all the ‘free-will’ in the world do all it can with all its strength; it will never give rise to a single instance of ability to avoid being hardened if God does not give the Spirit, or of meriting mercy if it is left to its own strength.” p. 202
让世上所有的“自由意志”尽其所能，用尽全力；如果神不赐下圣灵，它永远无法产生一个能避免被刚硬的例子，或者如果任凭它靠自己的力量，它也无法产生一个配得怜悯的例子。” 202页
“omnipotence and foreknowledge of God, I repeat, utterly destroy the doctrine of ‘free-will’…
“我重申，神的全能和预知，彻底摧毁了‘自由意志’的教义……
doubtless it gives the greatest possible offense to common sense or natural reason, that God, Who is proclaimed as being full of mercy and goodness, and so on, should of His own mere will abandon, harden and damn men, as though He delighted in the sins and great eternal torments of such poor wretches.
毫无疑问，这给常识或自然理性带来了最大可能的冒犯，即那位被宣告为充满怜悯和良善等等的神，竟然单凭祂自己的旨意离弃、使人刚硬并定人死罪，好像祂喜爱罪恶和这些可怜之人的巨大永恒折磨一样。
it seems an iniquitous, cruel, intolerable thought to think of God; and it is this that has been such a stumbling block to so many great men down through the ages.
这样以此来思想神，似乎是一个不公正、残忍、不可容忍的想法；正是这一点，成为了历代以来许多伟人的绊脚石。
And who would not stumble at it?
谁不会在此跌倒呢？
I have stumbled at it myself more than once, down to the deepest pit of despair, so that I wished I had never been made a man.
我自己也不止一次在此跌倒，落入绝望的最深渊，以至于我曾希望自己从未被造为人。
(That was before I knew how health-giving that despair was, and how close to grace.)” Luther BW pg. 217
（那是在我知道那种绝望是多么有益于健康，以及离恩典有多近之前。）” 路德，《意志的捆绑》217页
“…it was not of the merits of Jacob or Esau, ‘but of Him that Calleth that it was said of Sara: the elder shall serve the younger’
“……这不在于雅各或以扫的功德，‘乃在于那呼召的主，如对撒拉所说的：将来大的要服侍小的’
Paul is discussing whether they attained to what was spoken of them by the power or merits of ‘free-will”; and he proves they they did not, but that Jacob attained what Esau did not solely by the grace of “Him that Calleth”224
保罗正在讨论，他们获得所说到关于他们的应许，是否是靠‘自由意志’的能力或功德；他证明他们不是，而是雅各获得了以扫没有获得的，这完全是靠‘那呼召的主’的恩典” 224页
Now, since on God’s own testimony, men are ‘flesh’, they can savour of nothing but the flesh; therefore ‘free-will can avail only to sin.
现在，既然根据神自己的见证，人是“肉体”，他们就只能体贴肉体；因此“自由意志”只能用于犯罪。
And if, while the Spirit of God is calling and teaching among them, they go from bad to worse, what could they do when left to themselves, without the Spirit of God?
如果当神的灵在他们中间呼召和教导时，他们尚且每况愈下，那么当他们被任凭自己，没有神的灵时，他们能做什么呢？
Your [Erasmus] observation that Moses is speaking of the men of that age is not to the point at all.
你 [伊拉斯姆] 观察说摩西是在讲那个时代的人，这根本没说到点子上。
The same is true of all men, for all are ‘flesh’; as Christ says, ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh’ (john 3:6)
这对所有人都是真实的，因为所有人都是“肉体”；正如基督所说：“从肉身生的，就是肉身”（约翰福音 3:6）
How grave a defect this is, He Himself there teaches, when he says: ‘Except a man be born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (v. 5)…
这缺陷是何等严重，祂自己在那里教导说：“人若不重生，就不能进神的国（5节）……”
I call a man ungodly if he is without the Spirit of God; for Scripture says that the Spirit is given to justify the ungodly.
如果一个人没有神的灵，我就称他不虔诚；因为圣经说，赐下圣灵是为了称不虔诚的人为义。
As Christ distinguished the Spirit from the flesh, saying: “that which is born of the flesh is flesh’, and adds that which is born of the flesh cannot enter the kingdom of God’, it obviously follows that whatever is flesh is ungodly, under God’s wrath, and a stranger to His kingdom.
正如基督将灵与肉体区分开来，说：“从肉身生的，就是肉身”，并补充说从肉身生的不能进神的国，显然由此可得，凡是肉体的就是不虔诚的，在神的震怒之下，并且是祂国度的局外人。
And if it is a stranger to God’s kingdom and Spirit, it follows of necessity that it is under the kingdom and spirit of Satan.
如果它是神国度和圣灵的局外人，必然得出的结论是，它是在撒但的国度和灵之下。
For there is no middle kingdom between the kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Satan, which are ever at war with each other. 241, 253
因为在神的国度与撒但的国度之间没有中间国度，这两个国度永远在彼此交战。241, 253页
“I say that man without the grace of God nonetheless remains the general omnipotence of God who effects, and moves and impels all things in a necessary, infallible course;
“我说，人在没有神恩典的情况下，仍然处于神普遍的全能之下，这全能以一种必然、无误的过程成就、移动和驱使万物；
but the effect of man’s being carried along is nothing–that is, avails nothing in God’s sight, nor is reckoned to be anything but sin. 265
但人被其带动的效果算不得什么——也就是说，在神眼中毫无功效，除了被算为罪之外，什么都不是。265页
“the Baptist’s word means that man can receive nothing unless given him from above; so that free-will is nothing!”
“施洗约翰的话意味着，若不是从天上赐给他的，人就不能领受什么；可见自由意志算不得什么！”
I say that man, before he is renewed into the new creation of the Spirit’s kingdom, does and endeavours nothing to prepare himself for that new creation and kingdom, and when he is re-created has does and endeavors nothing towards his perseverance in that kingdom;
我说，人在被更新进入圣灵国度的新创造之前，没有任何作为或努力来预备自己进入那新创造和国度，而当他被重新创造之后，他在那个国度里的坚忍也不是靠自己的作为和努力；
but the Spirit alone works both blessings in us, regenerating us, and preserving us when regenerate, without ourselves…” 268
而是圣灵独自在我们里面做成这两种福分，重生我们，并在我们重生后保守我们，都不靠我们自己……” 268页
“All the passages in the Holy Scriptures that mention assistance are they that do away with “free-will”, and these are countless…
“圣经中所有提到帮助的经文，都是废除‘自由意志’的，这些经文数不胜数……
For grace is needed, and the help of grace is given, because “free-will” can do nothing.” 270
因为需要恩典，且赐下恩典的帮助，是因为“自由意志”不能做什么。” 270页