系統神學緒論(周必克) - 第02講 神學是甚麼(下)

此系列只有簡體字幕並只能在本台線上收看
本課程是2020清教徒改革宗神學院的序幕講座

0:00 – 2:53
We’re looking now at theology as a spiritual discipline.
現在讓我們來把神學作為一門屬靈學科來思想。
And academic education has, of course, great value.
雖然學術教育具有重大的價值，
But love for academics, merely for its own sake,
但是保羅告訴我們，這種單純因為學術而產生的熱愛，
Paul tells us, can destroy your soul.
可以摧毀我們的靈魂。

Hence he writes to Timothy, what I just read,
他因此寫信給提摩太，就是我們剛剛讀到的，
“study to shew thyself approved unto God,
“你當竭力在神面前得蒙喜悅，
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
做無愧的工人，
rightly dividing the word of truth.”
按著正意分解真理的道。”

So the calling of a theologian, demands diligence, hard labor,
因此，一位蒙召的神學家需要勤奮努力，
in order to properly interpret and apply God’s Word.
才能正確詮釋與應用上帝的話語。
So the ultimate aim, also of academic theology,
因此，他的終極目標，也是學術神學的終極目標
is the high goal of pleasing God.
是討上帝的喜悅。

When Jesus taught in Jerusalem,
當耶穌在耶路撒冷教導人的時候，
the Jews marveled at his teaching.
猶太人對他的教導感到十分稀奇。
Because Jesus was not educated in the rabbinic schools, John 7:15.
因為耶穌從未在拉比學院受過專業的教育，約翰福音7章15節。
And you remember what Jesus replied in verses 16 through 18,
你們還記得耶穌在16節到18節中所做出的回應嗎？
“my doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
“我的教訓不是我自己的，乃是那差我來者的。
If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine,
人若立誌遵著他的旨意行，就必曉得這教訓或是出於神，
whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
或是我憑著自己說的。
He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory:
人憑著自己說，是求自己的榮耀；
but he that seeketh his glory that sent him,
唯有求那差他來者的榮耀，
the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.”
這人是真的，在他心裏沒有不義。”
So we can draw a parallel here,
所以我們在這裏可以做一個比較，
as God the Son came with supernatural revelation from God the Father,
因為是聖子從聖父那裏帶來了超自然的啟示，
no man could discover these truth by rational deduction,
所以沒有人可以憑藉理性推測、
or by empirical observation.
或通過經驗觀察來發現這些真理。
But God had to reveal them through Christ.
上帝必須親自通過基督來啟示它們。
So we can learn from that
因此我們可以從中學到，
that true theology is more than intellectual enterprise,
真正的神學絕不僅僅是一份腦力工作，
it comes through the revelation of God’s Word,
它借由上帝所啟示的話語而產生，
and it requires submission in mind
它要求神學家在理智與心靈上都順服
and in heart of the theologian to God’s Word, and God’s will,
上帝的話語與旨意，也要求神學家
and a conscious pursuit of God’s glory in doing theology.
在從事神學的過程中有意識地去尋求上帝的榮耀。
Now that is extremely important.
這一點極其重要。

2:53 – 5:47
And if you grasp that and live that out,
如果你能夠理解這一點並將它活出來，
no teacher in this seminary will ever have to say to you,
這間神學院中不會有任何一位老師
about any paper you propose to do, so what?
在你提出論文思路時對你說：“那又怎麼樣？”
Because if you’re really pursuing God’s glory,
因為若你真的追求上帝的榮耀，
every subject you pick will be something
你所選擇的每一個主題
that will be glorifying to Him.
都是為了榮耀祂的。
And what often happens,
而當人們僅僅為了神學而從事神學時，
when people do theology for its own sake,
經常會發生的事情是，
is you find them giving in to some trivial esoteric hairsplitting subject
他們會屈服於一些對教會沒有真正益處、微不足道、
that really doesn’t have profit for the church,
艱深又吹毛求疵的問題，
and therefore it doesn’t really serve God’s glory.
這樣的做法也並非在真正地為上帝的榮耀服侍。
So with these introductory comments, then,
那麼藉著這些引言，
I want to take a closer look now with you at the nature of theology,
現在我想與你們一起更深入地探討神學的本質，
particularly in light of a spiritual nature
特別是鑒於它作為福音啟示的結果，
as the effect of Gospel revelation.
去查考它在屬靈上有何屬性。
So we’re moving now to part D, I – D on the outline:
現在我們來看大綱上的第一點的D部分：
a more focused and extensive definition of theology.
對神學更明確、全面的定義。
And then today we want to look at how you classify theology:
然後我們今天還要查考如何對神學進行分類：
is it a science, is it a wisdom, or is it both?
它究竟是一門科學，還是一種智慧，或是兩者都有？
And we will look at orientation of theology,
之後我們要查考神學的定向
and pre-modern development,
和它在近代的發展，希望最後我們還有時間，
and hopefully we’ll get a quick summary of the loci.
能很快地對神學的主題做個總結。
So the goal today is to make it to section two: who does theology?
所以今天的目標是能夠講完第一部分，
And maybe we’ll even start that section.
也許還能開始講第二部分：誰來從事神學？

So our preliminary definition of theology, last week, you recall,
你們是否還記得上週我們所講的神學的初步定義，
was the study of God in His relationship to the world.
即神學是關於上帝及其與世界的關係的研究。
And since we’re speaking about the theology of human beings,
既然我們所談論的是人類所從事的神學，
we can fine tune that now, and say,
我們便可以對這個定義進行稍微的調整，
theology is especially the study of God
即神學是關於上帝
in His relationship with human beings.
及其與人類的關係的研究。
So the aim of theology, for human beings,
因此，對於人而言，神學的目標是
is God Himself, through the mediation of Christ.
神學的目標是藉著中保基督與上帝有連接。
Paul, after revealing all these religious privileges
保羅在回顧了他作為一個敬虔的猶太人
and attainments as a pious Jew, said, yea doubtless,
所取得的宗教特權與成就後，說，
and I count all things but loss for the excellency
不但如此，我也將萬事當做有損的，
of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord:
因我以認識我主基督耶穌為至寶；
for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,
我為他已經丟棄萬事，看做糞土，
and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, Philippians 3:8.
為要得著基督。腓立比書3章8節。
So it’s this excellency of knowing Christ,
因此，正是以認識基督為至寶、
and the Triune God through Christ,
以通過基督認識三位一體的上帝為至寶，
that ought to drive Christian theology.
才激勵著基督教神學的發展。

5:50 – 8:51
So in treating Christian doctrine, Augustine,
因此，在探討基督教教義時，奧古斯丁說，
therefore said that the true objects of our happiness,
我們幸福的真正目標，
are “the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
是“聖父、聖子與聖靈，
who are at the same time the Trinity, one Being, supreme above all.
也就是三位一體的上帝，三個位格同一本質，至高無上。”
And in God alone may we rest with satisfaction for His own sake,
唯獨在上帝裏面，我們才能因祂本身的緣故“滿足地得以安息”；
all other things are means to be used to gain God.”
而其他所有的一切都是用來認識上帝的方法。
William Ames put it this way, theology is the doctrine of living to God.
威廉·阿穆斯這樣說，神學是向上帝而活的教義。
You can’t get much simpler than that, can you?
我們再也找不到比這更簡單的說法了，不是嗎？
Living unto the Lord is, of course,
當然，向上帝而活
in turn the great result of Christ’s saving work.
反過來又是基督救贖之工的偉大成果。
And Paul declares that everywhere: Romans 6:10 and 11,
保羅在他的書信中常提到這一點：如羅馬書6章10節、11節，
2 Corinthians 5:15, and Galatians 2:20, just a few examples.
哥林多後書5章15節、加拉太書2章20節，等等。
So Ames goes on to explain what he means
阿穆斯對自己所說的
by “theology is the doctrine of living to God”,
“神學是向上帝而活的教義”
when he says this, men live to God
這樣解釋道：當人們的生活是按照上帝的旨意、
when they live in accord with the will of God,
為著上帝的榮耀、並有上帝在他們身上動工時，
to the glory of God, with God working in them.
他們就是在向上帝而活。
And theology is the doctrine of living to God,
神學是向上帝而活的教義，
and when do you live to God?
那麼你什麼時候在為上帝而活呢？
When you live in accord, number one, with the will of God;
第一，當你按照上帝的旨意生活時；
number two, when you live to the glory of God;
第二，當你為著上帝的榮耀而活時；
number three, when you live with God working in you.
第三，當你帶著上帝在你身上的作工而活時。
So theology in good Puritan language,
所以，若用清教徒的話、
Westminster Shorter Catechism language,
用威斯敏斯特小教理問答中的話來說，
aims at the fulfillment of man’s created purpose,
神學旨在實現人類被造之本來目的：
to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.
即榮耀上帝，並以祂為樂，直到永遠。

To glorify God and to enjoy Him forever
遵循上帝的旨意、靠著上帝的恩典，
in obeying God’s will, by God’s grace.
來榮耀上帝並以祂為樂，直到永遠。
So when we study theology as sons and daughters of Adam,
因此，雖然我們是作為亞當的後代在研究神學，
we don’t study like pure Adam in the garden,
但是我們無法像在伊甸園中的亞當那樣純潔無罪，
but we study as fallen sinners.
而是作為墮落的罪人來研究。
We study as fallen sinners in need of salvation and restoration.
我們是作為需要拯救和恢復的墮落的罪人來研究神學。
So our relationship to God
所以我們與上帝的關係
is not like Adam’s pre-fall relationship to God,
並非像亞當在墮落前與上帝的關係那樣，
because theology now is the study of God
因為現在的神學研究，對上帝的研究，
with a view toward the reconciliation of God in sinners,
是因為我們這一群罪人
God in us through Christ.
要藉著中保基督與上帝和好。

8:57 – 11:47
And Paul, of course, takes that into account everywhere in his writings,
當然，保羅在他所寫的書信中處處都在強調這一點，
perhaps the best quote is 2 Timothy 3:15,
也許最好的例子就是提摩太后書3章15節，
when he says the Holy Scriptures are what, well they’re not just there
他沒有說聖經是為了讓我們與上帝的關係
to keep your relationship pure with God as Adam was pre-fall.
像墮落前的亞當與上帝的關係那樣純潔。
But notice how he puts it, the Holy Scriptures are able
意他是怎麼說的，
to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
這聖經能使你因信基督耶穌有得救的智慧。
John Owen puts it this way,
約翰·歐文這樣寫道，
evangelical theology has been instituted by God in order that
上帝設立福音派神學，是為了
sinners may once again enjoy communion with God Himself,
讓罪人再次享受與上帝祂自己 – 就是那至聖者 –
the all Holy One.
的交通的美好。
The ultimate and true theology, therefore, is the celebration
因此，真正神學的最終目的，
of the praise of God, of His glory and grace,
是罪人在永恒的救恩中
in the eternal salvation of sinners.
對上帝及其榮耀與恩典的讚美。
Furthermore, because we are alienated from God by sin,
此外，作為因罪惡本性與上帝隔絕的罪人，
by nature, we can only really do theology
我們唯獨靠著上帝滿有恩典的啟示
by means of God’s gracious revelation.
才能從事神學研究。
Johannes Polyander offers a comprehensive definition of theology
約翰內斯·坡裏安德爾在萊頓的《更純粹神學概要》
in the Leiden Synopsis of a Purer Theology,
– 一部有名的著作，現在也有英譯本了–
a famous work that’s now available in English.
一書中給出了一個對神學的全面定義，
“We define Theology as the knowledge or wisdom
“我們將神學定義為，
of the divine matters that God has revealed to people in this world
上帝通過受先知聖靈啟發的、傳講祂話語的牧者，
through ministers of his word inspired by the prophetic Spirit,
在世界上向人類啟示有關神聖事物的知識或智慧，
and that he has adapted to their capability,
並且，上帝已經根據人的能力範圍
to lead them to knowledge of the truth
調整了這些知識與智慧，以之引導人們認識真理，
which accords with godliness and renders them wise
這真理合乎敬虔的道理，並能使他們不僅有自己得救的智慧，
unto their own salvation and God’s eternal glory.”
還有為上帝的永恒榮耀而活的智慧。”
Now that’s a mouthful.
這個定義有點長。
But you see all the different things that we’ve been hinting at,
但是你們可以看到，我們之前所提及的一切
are all coming together at this definition.
都在這個定義中集中在了一起。
“We define theology as the knowledge or wisdom
“我們將神學定義為，
of the divine matters that God has revealed to people in this world
上帝通過受先知聖靈啟發的、傳講祂話語的牧者，
through ministers of his word inspired by the prophetic Spirit,
在世界上向人類啟示有關神聖事物的知識或智慧，
and that he has adapted to their capability,
並且，上帝已經根據人的能力範圍
to lead them to the knowledge of the truth
調整了這些知識與智慧，以之引導人們認識真理，
which accords with godliness, rendering them wise
這真理合乎敬虔的道理，並能使他們不僅有自己得救的智慧，
unto their own salvation and God’s eternal glory.”
還有為上帝的永恒榮耀而活的智慧。”

11:50 – 14:18
Now when you see that on paper, that’s a pretty good definition.
當我們在讀書時讀到這個定義時，這是一個非常好的定義。
If you were to preach,
但是如果我們要在講道中用它，
it’s too long for people to grasp.
這對於會眾而言太長了，不好掌握。
Then I would go to Johannes Wollebius,
若是講道，我會使用約翰內斯·荷列比烏的定義，
who’s got a better shorter one.
對會眾而言更短、更好一些：
“Christian theology is the doctrine concerning God,
“基督教神學是關於上帝的教義，
as he is known and worshiped for his glory and for our salvation.”
人們因祂的榮耀和賜下的救恩而認識祂、敬拜祂。”
That’s about as simple as you can make it.
這大約是我們能給出的最簡潔的定義了。
“Christian theology is the doctrine concerning God,
“基督教神學是關於上帝的教義，
as he is known and worshiped for his glory and for our salvation.”
人們因祂的榮耀和賜下的救恩而認識祂、敬拜祂。”
You can find this, by the way, there’s a little section of Wollebius
順便提一下，你可以在這本少有人知的《改革宗教義》一書中
translated in a fairly rare book called Reformed Dogmatics,
找到一小部分荷列比烏的寫作，這個定義就在第29頁上。
edited and translated by John Beardslee, on page 29.
這本書是約翰·比爾茲利編輯和翻譯的。
Now that raises the question, when we classify theology,
那麼這就提出了一個問題，就是當我們對神學進行分類時、
when we begin to look at its consensual parts and so on,
當我們開始查考它有共識的、諸如此類的部分時，
do we see it as a science,
我們是將它視為一門科學、
or do we just attribute it to heavenly wisdom?
還是把它歸於從天上來的智慧？
To put it another way, when Polyander defined theology
換句話說，當坡裏安德爾定義神學時，
in that longer definition I just gave you,
就是我剛剛給你們的那個長一點的定義，
as “the knowledge or wisdom” of divine truth,
他將神學定義為關於上帝真理的“知識或者智慧”，
“scientiam” or “sapientiam”,
拉丁語是“scientiam”（知識）或者“sapientiam”（智慧），
he touched upon a long standing debate
他觸及到了一個由來已久的爭論，
about the classification of theology,
內容是關於神學的分類的：
whether it is a science or wisdom.
即神學究竟是科學還是智慧。
Now part of this debate
產生這場爭論的部分原因是
is the difficulty of understanding the terms,
在於理解“智慧”和“科學”
science and wisdom.
這兩個術語有難度。
So some of it can be semantics.
所以，可以說這個爭論有一部分是與語義相關的。
In English, “science” is not merely the study of physical laws,
在英語中，“科學”指的不僅僅是對物理定律的研究，
cause their effects can be measured and tested in a laboratory.
我們在實驗室中就可以測量與測試它們的作用和結果。
But it really means “knowledge”, “scientia” in Latin,
但“科學”實際上指的是“知識”，拉丁語為“scientia”，
that is the recognition or perception of that which is real or true.
即對真實或正確的事物的認識或見解。

14:19 – 17:15
Scientia, the recognition or perception of that which is real or true.
科學，對真實或正確的事物的認識或見解。
As an academic field, science then refers to the discipline pursuit
科學作為一個學術領域，它指的是一個學者群體
in communication of knowledge, as part of a community of scholars.
對知識的追求和傳播。
Now in the Bible,
在聖經中，
knowledge and wisdom are used in parallel with each other,
“知識”與“智慧”是相互並行使用的，
sometimes with a respect to technical scale in a trade,
有時候指的是一門行業中的技術技能，
you think of Exodus 31:3.
我們可以想到出埃及記31章3節。
Or, particularly in Proverbs,
又或者指一種能夠過上敬虔、蒙福的生活的能力，
of the ability to live a godly and blessedly wise life, Proverbs 1:7,
特別是在箴言中，比如箴言1章7節，
the beginning of knowledge really is the fear of the Lord,
敬畏耶和華是知識的開端，
the beginning of wisdom.
是智慧的開端。
So it seems it’s best to say that in biblical usage, wisdom,
因此，最好的說法似乎是，聖經中的“智慧”，
in Hebrew “khokmah”, and Greek “sophia”,
（希伯來語是“khokmah”，希臘語是“sophia”）
refers to skill or competency,
指的是技術或者能力，
sometimes in this specific trade or field, yes,
有時指在某個特定行業或者領域的技術或能力，
but more generally in one’s whole approach to life.
但更廣泛地說，是指一個人的整個生活方式。
So knowledge refers to an accurate perception,
因此，“知識”指的是對某些現實的
faithful recognition of some reality,
準確見解和可靠認識，
often with a sense of acquaintance,
通常具有熟悉感、經曆感，
an experience that forms a relationship
這種經曆感會讓認知者與被認知對象之間
between the knower and the object of knowledge.
形成某種聯繫。
Biblical wisdom includes that, includes knowledge,
聖經中的“智慧”包括知識，
but it’s in a sense broader than knowledge.
但在某種程度上又比知識更廣泛。
It encompasses the holistic ability to live skillfully and joyfully
它包含了從這種知識中所獲得的一種整體的能力，
for the glory of God, out of that knowledge,
將這個知識應用到我們的整個生活方式中，
applying that knowledge to my whole way of life.
能夠為上帝的榮耀靈巧而喜樂地生活，
That’s why you can say of some people, can’t you,
這就是為什麼我們可以說，有一些人有很多的知識，
they’ve got a lot of knowledge, but they don’t have mature wisdom.
卻沒有成熟的智慧，難道不是嗎？
Now we all get a feel of what that means.
現在我們都能稍稍明白一點這句話的意思了。

17:15 – 21:02
And we know people like that,
我們都認識這樣的人，
and sometimes we are afraid we are like that,
如果我們有一點自知之明，
if you have a little bit of self-knowledge.
恐怕我們就知道，有時候我們自己也是這樣。
So the discussion of whether theology is science or wisdom,
希臘哲學家亞裏士多德對這些術語給出了他的經典定義，
is both clarified and complicated by the classical definitions
他的定義一方面使得“神學究竟是科學還是智慧”的討論
of those terms given by the Greek philosopher Aristotle.
更加清晰，另一方面也使之更加複雜。
Aristotle distinguished between five habits of the mind.
亞裏士多德對人的五種思維習慣進行了區分。
He called them art, science, prudence, wisdom and understanding.
他稱它們為技藝、知識、明智、智慧和理智。
And these distinctions gained notoriety by being taken up
而這個理論因著被一些中世紀神學家所接受而得名，
by a number of medieval theologians,
這些神學家中最著名的一位，
mostly famously, Thomas Aquinas.
就是托馬斯·阿奎那。
Art refers to skill and making useful things；
技藝指的是技能、或製造有用的東西；
science to the knowledge of demonstrably proven certain truth;
知識指的是某些被明確證實的真理知識；
prudence to discerning the best way
明智，指的是一個人能夠
of attaining one’s highest good;
分辨、分析使自己獲得最大益處的最佳方式；
wisdom, to knowledge of the highest divine principles
智慧，指的是有關神聖至高原則的知識，
with all their implications for life;
以及如何將它們應用到生活中；
and understanding refers, then, to the intelligence of fundamental assumptions
而理智，指的是基本設想的才智，
that are presupposed by human reasoning.
這些基本設想是由人類的理性所預設的。

Now Augustine takes this kinds of principles and distinguishes
奧古斯丁採用了這類的原則，
wisdom as pertaining to the contemplation of eternal invisible realities.
認為智慧與永恒、無形的現實有關，
Whereas knowledge, for Augustine anyway,
（而對奧古斯丁而言）
pertains to the understanding of historical visible events.
知識則與對可見的曆史事件的理解有關。
Wisdom pertains to the contemplation of eternal invisible realities.
智慧與永恒、無形的現實有關。
Knowledge pertains to the understanding of historical visible events,
知識與對可見的曆史事件的理解有關，
usually events that involve human action and interaction
這些事件通常會涉及人類的行為與交流。
So for Augustine, given his definition you see,
我們可以看到，根據奧古斯丁的定義，
theology almost exclusively pertains to wisdom.
神學幾乎完全是屬於智慧的範疇的。
However, Augustine acknowledges both wisdom and knowledge
但奧古斯丁同時也承認，
have a part to play in theology,
智慧和知識都在神學中起了一定的作用，
because the eternal Son of God entered into human history in the incarnation,
因為上帝永恒的兒子就是通過道成肉身進入人類曆史的，
and so it does relate to the things of the here and now in this life.
因此神學確實與今生的時間與空間有關聯。

21:05 – 24:44
Now given all this background and all this debate,
考慮到所有的這些背景和所有的爭論，
it seems best today to look at it and say:
似乎最好的說法是：
theology involves both science or knowledge, and wisdom.
神學既涉及科學（知識）又涉及智慧。
We need to keep thinking in terms of “science” as “knowledge”, okay?
我們需要知道這裏的“科學”指的是“知識”，
Don’t think of it as what a modern man thinks of science.
不要按照現代的概念來理解“科學”這個詞。
As a science, it seeks true knowledge
正如威斯敏斯特信仰告白中的清教徒所說，
by the interpretation of God’s revelation
神學作為一門科學，是通過詮釋上帝的啟示
and logical inferences from it,
並從中得出邏輯推理
say the Puritans in the Westminster standards,
來尋求真正的知識的，
logical necessary consequences from that revelation.
這個邏輯推理是從上帝啟示所產生的合理、必然的結果。
So Thomas Aquinas said, sacred doctrine is a science,
因此托馬斯·阿奎那說，神聖的教義是一門科學，
sacred science is established on principles revealed by God.
神聖的科學則建立在上帝所啟示的原則之上。
But when you take that knowledge and its logical inferences,
然而，當你接受了這一知識和它的合理推論，
and you use it as principles from which to guide your whole way of life,
並將它作為原則來指導你的整個生活方式，
the way you spend your time, the way you think,
例如你如何使用時間、如何思考問題，
your whole demeanor of life, then you enter into the realm of wisdom.
和你在生活中的所有行為，那麼你就進入了智慧的範疇。
So Thomas Aquinas goes on to say, this doctrine then, therefore,
托馬斯·阿奎那藉著說，因此，
is wisdom above all human wisdom,
這個教義是高於一切人類智慧的智慧，
and so sacred doctrine is particularly called wisdom,
所以神聖的教義尤其應該被稱為智慧，
because it guides your whole way of life.
因為它是在指導你的整個生命方式。
Now John Owen favors the idea
約翰·歐文因著罪人重生的這個概念，
that theology is primarily spiritual wisdom,
更傾向於認為
and he gleans that from the idea of the rebirth of the sinner.
神學主要是屬靈的智慧。
That’s a gift of the Holy Spirit working among men, and that gift
罪人重生是一種恩典，是聖靈在人身上動工，
has unique property of making men wise
而這一恩典具有一種獨特的屬性，
in the mysteries of the Gospel.
能夠使人在福音的奧秘中變得有智慧。
So he says, therefore we shall say that
所以歐文說，因為這一點，我們就應該說
theology is primarily spiritual wisdom.
神學主要是屬靈的智慧。
He’s got a whole group of proof text.
他還引用了許多經文來支持這一觀點。
If you wanna look up Owen here
如果你想進一步查看歐文在這一點上的看法，
much more than I can give you in this class,
因為我在課堂上只能說這麼多，
go to his Biblical Theology, page 641, 6.6.
可以讀他的《聖經神學》(641頁，第6大點裏的6小點。）
Owen utterly rejects the classification of theology as an academic science,
歐文完全拒絕將神學分類為一門學術科學，
but he does so because he’s thinking that knowledge then
但是他之所以這樣做，是因為他認為知識只是
just reasons from known facts and draws up its own conclusion.
根據已知的事實來作出判斷，並提出它自己的結論。
And he sees it as divorce from the wisdom of the word of God.
他認為知識是與上帝話語的智慧相分離的。
And of course then we would agree with him.
如果在這樣的條件下，我們當然會與他的觀點一致。
But there’s no reason, especially when you read the book of Proverbs,
但是我們沒有理由 – 特別是在讀箴言書的時候 –
we would say, to take knowledge and say,
在擁有知識的情況下，卻說，
you can’t use knowledge in the service of the Lord.
我們不能用知識來服侍主。
The subject of knowledge to the Scripture, it’s just like wisdom.
在聖經裏，知識就如同智慧一般。
So knowledge is part of theology, we would argue.
所以我們認為，知識是神學的一部分。
But Owen was making more of an antithesis between knowledge
而歐文將知識與智慧這樣對立起來，
and wisdom, I’m afraid, than the book of Proverbs does.
恐怕並非箴言書想要表達的意思。

24:44 – 27:10
Now Francis Turretin argued that theology really does not
弗朗西斯·圖倫丁認為，
exactly fit any of Aristotle’s categories of knowledge, for two reasons.
神學並不完全符合亞裏士多德對知識的分類，原因有二。
First because, it involves all of them in one package
首先，神學囊括了這所有的五點，
and you can’t separate them into five categories neatly like this.
我們不能將之整齊劃一地分為五個類別。
And secondly, because this whole package is not a product
其次，神學並不是人類理性的產物，
of human reasoning as Aristotle would be inclined to say,
（雖然亞裏士多德可能是這樣認為的）
but of supernatural divine revelation.
而是上帝超自然啟示的產物。
But after he says all of that in some length,
但在說了這許多之後，
Turretin then gives his “however”.
圖倫丁扭轉了話鋒，說“然而”，
However, wisdom is the most analogous of these five categories,
然而，這五個類別中的智慧與神學研究最為相似，
to doing theology, and approaches most nearly the nature of theology.
也最接近它的本質。
Because theology is treating “the knowledge of things most excellent,”
因為神學探討的是“最奇妙事物的知識”，
such as God and our eternal happiness, and he says
例如上帝，例如我們的永恒幸福，他說，
it “is an architectonic system commanding and directing all the others”.
神學“是一個掌管與引導所有其他事物的知識體係”。
So what you keep coming back to is,
我已經帶著你們簡單地瞭解了教會曆史中的一些方面，
I have walked you through some aspects of church history,
而我們反複回到的觀點是，
is that wisdom kind of stands above everything,
智慧高於一切，
wisdom is kind of an entire, today we would call it a “worldview”.
智慧是一個整體，今天我們會將之稱為“世界觀”。
But that worldview is governed by knowledge as well,
而這一世界觀也會受到聖經中所啟示的
facts, truth, objective truth revealed in the Scriptures,
知識、事實和客觀真理的製約，
which helps us establish a worldview wisdom outlook.
這些都有助於我們建立一種世界觀性的智慧觀。
And when we do theology, we need this combination.
在我們從事神學研究的時候，我們需要這樣的結合。
You see, we need knowledge, we need things that are factual,
我們需要知識，我們需要基於上帝話語之上的事實，
based on God’s Word, but we need the divine wisdom
但是我們也需要從上帝而來的、關於這些知識的智慧，
of these things so that we can have a global worldwide view,
以便我們能夠擁有全球性的世界觀，
by which we know God, by which we serve God,
並借此在我們生命的每個方面
in every area of our lives.
認識上帝、服侍上帝。

27:12 – 29:56
Now that brings us full cycle, then,
這就又將我們帶回了這節課最開始所講到的、
to where I began with Ames’ definition.
阿穆斯對神學的定義。
Now you understand Ames.
現在你就能夠理解阿穆斯所說的了。
Theology, he puts it as simple as you can be,
他的定義已然是最簡單的了：
is the doctrine of living to God.
神學就是向上帝而活的教義。
So Ames is saying, I’m not denying knowledge,
阿穆斯要表達的意思是，我並不否認知識，
but I’m saying like Turretin is saying, like Owen is saying,
但正如圖倫丁所說，正如歐文所說，
like all the really godly thinkers of ages past have said,
正如過去所有那些敬虔的思想家們所說的那樣，
wisdom is the capstone here, this is really what governs things.
智慧才是那壓頂石，是真正製約這一切的。
So you can be a great theologian in terms of knowledge,
所以，一個人可能在知識層面上算是一位偉大的神學家，
but you are really not a great theologian
但如果他沒有把神學應用到生命的每個方面去發展智慧，
if you don’t apply it to every area of your life and develop wisdom.
他其實並不是一位真正的偉大神學家。
All right, so Ames in conclusion then,
好，我過一會兒就回答問題。
and I’ll take questions in a moment, explains,
所以阿穆斯總結說，
“it is called doctrine, not to separate it from
“神學被稱為教義，不是要將它
understanding, knowledge, wisdom, art, or prudence,”
與理智、知識、智慧、技藝或明智區別開來，”
Notice he brings in Aristotle’s categories,
意他在這裏提到了亞裏士多德的分類，
“for these go with every exact discipline,
“因為這些與每一個確切的學科都有關聯，
and most of all with theology.”
最為相關的就是神學。”
So he’s saying, Aristotle, you’ve mentioned the right things.
所以他的意思是，亞裏士多德所提到的這些都是對的事情。
Let me read it again.
讓我再讀一遍阿穆斯的話。
“It is called doctrine, not to separate it from
“神學被稱為教義，不是要將它
understanding, knowledge, wisdom, art, or prudence,
與理智、知識、智慧、技藝或明智區別開來，
for these go with every exact discipline,
“因為這些與每一個確切的學科都有關聯，
and most of all with theology.
最為相關的就是神學。
But to mark it as a discipline
而是要將它定位為一門學科，
which derives not from nature and human inquiry like other sciences,
但是與其他從自然或人類探究中所產生的學科不一樣，
but from divine revelation and appointment.”
它來自上帝的啟示與命定。”
So now you can grasp all these when you look at all of history
所以現在當你回顧所有的曆史時，你就能明白這一切，
and you are saying, this is what they are all getting at.
你會發現，原來這是他們所有人想要表達的。
And when you do theology, you need something more than knowledge.
當你從事神學研究時，你所需要的不僅僅是知識。
You don’t disparage knowledge, as Brakel said, knowledge is a soil
你不能貶低知識，正如佈雷克所說，
in which the seed of saving faith is planted and grows,
知識是種植得救信心種子的一片土壤，
and by which you develop wisdom.
也是讓我們發展智慧的土壤。
So you can anticipate a question maybe on your exam,
所以，或許考試中會出現這樣一道題：
is theology a science or a wisdom?
神學是科學還是智慧？
And now you know, that is not just an easy question to answer,
現在你們知道了，這個問題並非那麼容易解答。
it has got a history.
它有它的曆史淵源。
But that history is rich to know, and once you know the history,
但是要知道這段曆史很豐富，當你瞭解了這段曆史，
you go back now and you read Proverbs,
再回頭讀箴言中，
and when the wise man says, come son,
智者說，來，我兒，
I’ll teach you understanding,
我要教導你知識，
and while I’m teaching you understanding, I’ll give you wisdom.
當我教導你知識的時候，我就會給你智慧。
You get a much deeper understanding of things like this
你就能夠對這樣的經文有更深入的理解，
and how valuable they are.
更看到它們的價值。

29: 56 – 32:08
I think we had a question in the back and one over here,
我記得後面有位同學有問題，然後這邊有一個。
you were first, I think.
我記得你是第一個。
Did you raise your hand, Mike?
邁克，你舉手了嗎？
Yeah. I thought you were,
哦，我還以為你舉手了。
you were just scratching your head maybe. Sherif.
可能你只是在撓頭。謝裏夫。
Student: I need to ask about the difference between wisdom and
學生：我想再問問關於智慧和知識之間的區別。
knowledge again. Wisdom is the application of the knowledge,
我們是否可以簡單地
can we say this briefly?
將智慧說成是對知識的應用？
Beeke: I wish it were that simple.
周必克教授：我也希望可以這麼簡單。
I guess if I was teaching a high school class,
如果我的教學對像是一些高中生，
I would probably say that. But I think what they are saying
我可能會這樣說。但是我覺得
is it’s something more than application.
這些神學家們想要表達的思想是，智慧不僅僅是應用。
You can have application of knowledge on one particular thing,
你可以將知識應用到某個特定的事情上，
so okay I’m gonna apply my knowledge this way.
“好，我要這樣來應用我的知識。”
But what you hear all these writers saying is,
但是我所引用的這些作者們所說的是，
it’s a whole way of life knowledge,
智慧是一種體現整個生命方式的知識，
it’s not just application of knowledge,
它不單單是應用知識、
application of knowledge, application of knowledge.
應用知識和應用知識。
But it’s a garnering of a way of life, a way of living,
而是一種生命方式、生活方式，
a worldview that applies knowledge.
和一種應用知識的世界觀的彙集。
So principally you are right, but don’t piecemeal it,
所以基本來說，你是對的，但是不要將它碎片化，
make it a worldview.
它是一種世界觀。
Student: [student question unclear]
學生：[聽不清楚學生的問題]
Beeke: Absolutely. You can’t get wisdom just by your own nature,
周必克教師：正是如此。我們僅憑本性是無法獲得智慧的，
the Holy Spirit has to come and illuminate.
我們必須要聖靈來光照我們。
We’ll be talking about the spiritual on this shortly.
我們之後也很快就會探討到這一主題的屬靈層面。
But the Holy Spirit has to come and illuminate the Word for you.
是的，聖靈必須要來光照我們，使我們明白上帝的話語。
Student: How can this be connected to the wisdom? Because I didn’t see
學生：這一點是如何與智慧聯繫起來的呢？因為我看不出
any divine aspect in the difference between wisdom and knowledge.
在智慧和知識的區別中有什麼與上帝相關的內容。
Beeke: It’s coming, okay?
周必克教授：我們之後就會講到了，好嗎？
There is a divine aspect and I’m getting to that.
確實是與上帝相關的，我會講到這一點。
I am breaking it down at different chunks. Yeah, we’ll get there.
我只是把這些內容分成了不同的板塊。我們會講到那裏的。

32:10 – 35:37
Student: I think David in Psalm 119:99,
學生：我想起大衛在詩篇第119篇99節中
he stated that distinction between wisdom and knowledge.
談到了智慧與知識的區別。
And he said, I have more wisdom than all my peoples,
他說，我比我的師傅更通達，
for thy testimony, in another word,
因我思想你的法度。換句話說，
the way I experience knowledge, are my meditation, I live by that.
“你的法度”是我經曆知識的方式，是我生活的準則。
Beeke: Yeah, good. Thank you.
周必克教授：是的，非常好。謝謝你。
Psalm 119:99. That’s a good one, yeah.
詩篇119篇99節。這是一個很好的例子。
All right, let’s move then to the orientation of knowledge.
好，接下來我們要講神學的定向。
Is it theoretical or is it practical?
神學是理論性的還是實踐性的？
A related question to the “knowledge wisdom” question
一個與“是知識還是智慧”相關的問題是，
is whether theology is a theoretical or practical discipline.
神學是一門理論性學科、還是一門實踐性學科？
That is, does it aim at contemplation alone,
弗朗西斯·圖倫丁這樣問道，它的目標“只是思考”，還是
or in its very nature and by itself, says Francis Turretin,
還是“它的本質、它本身？
does it go forth into practice?
都是在往實踐這個方向去”？
And he then goes on to say, absolutely, absolutely.
他接著回答說，當然要往實踐的方向去。
Theology is both theoretical and practical, though its focus may appear
神學既是理論性的，又是實踐性的，
to be upon knowing God and his works, and thus be more theoretical.
但是它更強調認識上帝以及祂的作為，因此它更具有理論性。
If theology were merely theoretical, Turretin says,
圖倫丁說，如果神學僅僅是理論上的，
then we would cut off theology from daily life.
那麼它就與我們的日常生活毫無關聯。
On the other hand, if theology were merely practical,
而另一方面，如果神學僅僅是實踐上的，
we’d take the first step towards throwing away more abstract doctrines
那麼我們就會丟棄一些更偏抽象的教義，
like the Trinity and predestination.
例如三位一體、預定論，等等。
Hence, theology must involve knowledge.
因此，神學中必須有知識。
Now in the contemporary evangelical church,
在今天的當代福音派教會中，
too many Christians today think that
太多的基督徒都認為
we must choose between dead orthodoxy
我們必須在毫無生命力的基督教正統
and anti-intellectual activism or moralism,
與反智激進主義或道德主義之間做一個抉擇。
as Gordon Clark said [Correction: David Clark].
正如戈登·克拉克所說（更正：大衛·克拉克）。
Dead orthodoxy on the one hand,
一邊是毫無生命力的基督教正統，
or anti-intellectual activism or moralism on the other.
另一邊是反智激進主義或道德主義。
So as a result, many Christians zealously pursue holiness,
所以結果就是，許多基督徒熱心地追求聖潔，
evangelism, social and political causes, missions,
傳福音，為社會、政治事業奮鬥，熱心宣教，
but are disengaged from or suspicious of intellectual reflection,
卻脫離思想上的反思，或對之持懷疑態度，將學術棄置，
abandoning the academy to the wicked and the unbelieving.
將學術棄置，把它留給惡人和不信主的人。
The upshot, says Clark, is that evangelical theology is alienated
克拉克說，這樣的結局就是，福音派神學
not only from the academically oriented university,
不僅與學術型大學疏遠，
but also from a pragmatically oriented church.
也與實踐性教會疏遠了。
So if we sever theological contemplation from practical action,
因此，如果我們使神學思考與實踐活動分離開來，
we destroy the church’s ability to develop
那麼我們就破壞了教會在智慧的廣度與深度上
the breadth and depth of wisdom
發展的能力，而這能力是我們在整個生命中
necessary to glorify God in our whole way of life.
來榮耀上帝所必需的。

35:39 – 38:00
Now it’s the Holy Spirit then, who engages our heads, our hearts and our hands
聖靈將我們的頭腦、心靈與實踐結合在一起，
in developing this whole man, holistic wisdom approach.
來發展我們全人的整體智慧觀。
And that makes us humble in our theology before God,
這就使得我們在神學研究中謙卑在上帝的面前，
knowing that we can’t give it to ourselves,
因為我們知道神學不是我們給自己的，
but knowing that the Holy Spirit does it and works in us.
而是聖靈賜給我們的，並且祂在我們裏面動工。
So then we don’t glory in any of our wisdom.
這樣，我們的任何智慧都不會讓我們沾沾自喜。
So the truly wise man is the person who realizes his dependency
所以，一個真正有智慧的人能夠看到他自己對聖靈的倚靠，
on the Holy Spirit, and therefore does not glory in his own wisdom.
因此，他不會為自己的智慧而驕傲。
Jeremiah 9:23 puts it this way, “thus saith the Lord,
耶利米書9章23節這樣說，“耶和華如此說：
Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom,
‘智慧人不要因他的智慧誇口，
neither let the mighty man glory in his might,
勇士不要因他的勇力誇口，
let not the rich man glory in his riches:
財主不要因他的財物誇口。
but let him that glorieth glory in this,
誇口的卻因他有聰明，
that he understandeth and knoweth,”
認識我，’”
remember “knoweth” is an intimate term in both Hebrew and Greek,
要記得“認識”這一詞在希伯來語和希臘語中
personal knowing, “that he understandeth and knoweth me,
都表達一種關繫上的親密、個人的認識，
that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness,
“‘認識我是耶和華，又知道我喜悅在世上施行慈愛、
judgment, and righteousness, in the earth:
公平和公義，以此誇口。’
for in these things I delight, saith the Lord.”
這是耶和華說的。”
In fact, knowing God, understanding God and knowing the living God,
事實上，認識上帝、瞭解祂、這位永生的上帝，
is precisely what sets Christianity apart from false gods and idols of men,
正是基督教與人造的假神和假偶像不同的地方，
as Jeremiah 10 is so clear in stressing for us.
正如耶利米書第10章中清晰強調的那樣。
So when you know God and when you have wisdom that
因此，當你認識上帝，
the Holy Spirit is working together with your spirit,
並因聖靈在你靈裏動工而擁有智慧時，
you might call it the whole process of sanctification
這也可以被稱作是你“成聖”的過程，
which you are involved and the Spirit’s involved.
你和聖靈都在這一過程中有所參與。
That kind of knowledge, then, demands action.
這樣的知識，需要我們付諸於實際行動。
You can not help but actively glorify God when you know God
當我們認識上帝、順服聖靈帶領、任祂開啟靈裏智慧時，
and are subject to this Spirit’s guidance of developing wisdom in you.
我們便會情不自禁地、主動地去讚美、榮耀上帝。

38:00 – 40:30
And so Jeremiah concludes this section in which he talks about
所以，耶利米總結這一部分說，
the difference between worshiping the true God and false gods,
敬拜真神與敬拜假神之間是有區別的，
Jeremiah 10:7 says, but who would not fear thee, O King of nations?
耶利米書10章7節說，“萬國的王啊，誰不敬畏你？
For to thee doth it appertain.
敬畏你本是合宜的。”
And that’s why when you read various texts in the Bible
這就是為什麼，當你在聖經中多次讀到談及敬虔之人的經文時，
about the godly men, for example, Micah, what is it, Micah 6:8 I think,
比如彌迦書6章8節，
you know, thou knowest O man, what thou must do.
“世人哪，耶和華已指示你何為善。”
Wisdom isn’t just a meditated wisdom, it’s a doing thing,
你會看到智慧不僅僅是思想上的，它也是實踐性的。
and it makes you humble and it makes you active for your neighbor,
智慧使我們謙卑，使我們去行動、去幫助我們的鄰舍，
and it makes you judge the cause of the poor and needy,
讓我們為困苦窮乏之人伸冤辯屈，
as Jeremiah 22 says.
就如耶利米書22章中所說的那樣。
Interesting text in Jeremiah 22:16:
耶利米書22章16節是一節很值得我們關的經文：
“the wise man judgeth the cause of the poor and needy; then it was
“他為困苦和窮乏人申冤，那時就得了福樂，
well with him: was not this to know me? saith the Lord.”
認識我不在乎此嗎？這是耶和華說的。”
So that leads Turretin to conclude,
於是圖倫丁就做出這樣的結論：
that “the knowledge and worship of God are connected together
“對上帝的認識與敬拜…… 是不可分割地聯結在一起的，
inseparably, like the sun, the light and the heat.
就如同太陽、光和熱一樣不可分離。
So neither can that knowledge of God be true,”
因此，對上帝的認識一定要與實踐結合
he concludes, “unless it be attended by practice.
才是真實的。
Nor can that practice be right and saving
而此實踐也必須要有知識的引導
which is not directed by knowledge.”
才可能是正確的、有救恩功效的。”
So theory and practice, theology is both theoretical and practical,
所以，神學既是理論性的，也是實踐性的，
because it orients us toward God and leads to God,
因為它使我們面向上帝，將我們引向上帝，
and teaches of God.
也教導我們有關上帝的知識。
And that all culminates in John 17:3:
而這一切都在約翰福音17章3節中體現得淋漓盡致：
“this is life eternal, that they might know thee,
“認識你獨一的真神，
the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”
並且認識你所差來的耶穌基督，這就是永生。”
So in this intimate knowing then,
所以我們想要表達的意思時，
what we’re saying is that head, heart and hands,
在對上帝的這種親密認識中，我們的頭腦、心靈和實踐，
the whole man is involved as a gracious sanctifying work
我們整個人都參與到了聖靈使我們成聖的作工中，
of the Holy Spirit molds us to become wise from scriptural knowledge.
祂塑造我們，讓我們因聖經知識而變得有智慧。

40:34 – 43:20
Now theology then develops in this context.
而神學就是在這樣的背景下發展起來的。
The Bible itself is not a book of systematic theology.
聖經本身並非是一本係統神學的書。
The Bible, as you know, is composed of many literary genres
如你所知，聖經中有許多不同的文學體裁，
that work together to form the whole man in the image of God,
這些文學體裁共同攜手、按照上帝的形象來塑造一個
in communion with God in the church.
在教會中與上帝交通的完全人。
The Bible does contain systematic theological texts however.
但是，聖經中確實有係統神學的經文。
Paul’s epistle to the Romans is probably the classical one.
保羅所寫的羅馬書可能是最經典的一個例子。
And so Christians began the work of developing a theology
因此，在使徒時代結束後不久，
from Scripture very soon after the apostolic age ended.
基督徒便開始從聖經中發展神學。
And they did so initially for two reasons.
起初，有兩個原因促使他們這樣做：
First, because God had granted the fullness
首先，因為上帝已經藉著耶穌基督
of His revelation through Jesus Christ.
賜下了全備的啟示。
Now that you had all 66 books of the Holy Scriptures,
所以現在我們已經有了聖經全部的66卷書，
and the church desire to explore the meaning and implications
而教會也渴望去探索這“聖靈的藏書館”（一位清教徒的叫法）
of this, one Puritan called, library of the Holy Ghost.
的含義與意義。
And so interest of people who were true believers was there,
而上帝真正的子民渴望知道
what is the Bible really saying about this subject in this totality,
聖經對這個主題的整體教導實際是什麼、
about that subject in its totality. And that very question
對那個主題的整體教導是什麼。正是這一問題，
is really the seabed for what we call today systematic theology.
為我們今天稱之為係統神學的學科奠定了基礎。
But secondly, and perhaps even more importantly,
其次，這可能也是更重要的，
is that Satan attacked the church early on with false teaching.
就是撒旦很早就開始用虛假的教導來攻擊教會。
1 Timothy 4, 1 John 2, many places.
提摩太前書第4章，約翰一書第2章，還有許多其他的經文。
And the pressure of controversy, a false doctrine,
而爭議所帶來的壓力、虛假教義的出現、
and false way of living, unbiblical wisdom, or anti-wisdom,
虛假生活方式的出現、不符合聖經的學識以及反智主義的出現，
required God’s people to define and to defend the truth.
都要求上帝的子民來定義和捍衛真理。

And so, the very very core of systematic theology
因此，在教會曆史中，
crystalized very early in church history, in the rule of faith,
係統神學的核心很早就在信仰準則中成形。
as our forefathers call it, the “regula fidei”,
我們的先輩稱之為“信仰準則”，
the rule of faith, which is, of course,
所用的拉丁語是“regula fidei”，
the short statements of dogmatic beliefs that
這裏指的當然就在曆經一段時間後
became the Apostles’ Creed over a period of time.
形成的《使徒信經》中的那些簡短的教條。
And most of those articles were added one by one.
而《使徒信經》中的條款大多是逐一添加的，
As controversy arose, they added a few more.
是隨著爭議的出現而逐漸增加的。

43:24 – 46:44
An early attempt to develop the theology of this Creed or the basis of
早期嚐試以係統的方式來
the Creed that was developed at that point – the Creed was not
來發展《使徒信經》神學、
completed at this point in a systematic manner – was written by Origen,
或其神學基礎的人是俄利根，
his dates are proximately 185 to 254,
他的年代大約是公元後185年至254年，
so we are talking here third century.
即第三世紀。
He wrote a book called On First Principles,
他寫了一本書，名叫《教義大綱》。
he’s a prolific writer, he’s a somewhat eccentric Bible commentator,
他是一位多產作家，但他寫的聖經釋書有一些古怪。
and I don’t think you’d be overly enthralled with his theology,
我猜想你們應該不會特別被他的神學所吸引，
but it was a first attempt.
但無論如何，這是曆史上的第一次嚐試。
Then in the next century, Lactantius, 240 to 320,
然後下一個世紀，拉克坦提烏斯出現了，公元後240年至320年
wrote a book somewhat more developed called, Divine Institutes,
他寫了一本發展更為成熟的書，叫做《神學要義》，
which was, at the same time, a refutation of paganism
它既是一本反對異教信仰的書，
as well as an exposition of Christian theology,
也是一本闡述基督教神學的書。
so kind of systematics and apologetics,
所以這本著作結合了係統神學和護教學，
or rather polemics would be better, combined.
或者更確切地說，結合了係統神學和辯惑學。
Cyril of Jerusalem, 310 to 386,
然後是耶路撒冷的濟利祿，公元後310年至386年，
so now we are dipping into the fourth century,
（現在我們進入到了第四世紀）
then wrote Catechetical Lectures,
他寫了一本名為《教理教導》的書，
which was an exposition of the Apostles’ Creed.
是對《使徒信經》的進一步闡述。
So taking the core dogmas and then enlarging them
他所做的，是將核心教條放到教義和神學的領域中，
into the area of doctrine and theology.
對其進行進一步的詳述。
Augustine also, at the end of the fourth century,
奧古斯丁也在第四世紀末寫了一本
wrote a short commentary on the Creed, and then wrote
關於《使徒信經》的簡短釋書。
a systematic summary of Christian faith, hope and love,
然後他還寫了一本對基督教中信、望、愛的係統總結的書，
used as the organizing principle of his what we would now call
以之作為他《論信望愛》一書的結構大綱，
systematic theology, in the book called the Enchiridion,
（現在我們認為這本書就是他的係統神學著作）
which simply means “handbook”, “handbook of truth”.
這本書名的意思就是“手冊”，“真理的手冊”。
And it combined that with also some exposition of the Lord’s prayer.
這本書中同時還融入了一些對主禱文的闡述。
And what you find, is this pattern of Apostles’ Creed,
你們會看到這樣一種模式：《使徒信經》，
Lord’s prayer, and then later on, in the next century forward
主禱文，然後從下個世紀開始（一直到中世紀）
through the middle ages, also Ten Commandments.
還會加入十誡。
Apostles’ Creed, Lord’s prayer, Ten Commandments,
《使徒信經》，主禱文，十誡，
became the three major catechetical tools of instructing the church.
成為了指導教會的三大主要教導工具。

46:44 – 49:10
And for many, this became the organizing principle
對許多人而言，
for a kind of systematic theology.
這個模式就是某種係統神學的結構大綱。
Apostles’ Creed, Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments.
使徒信經，主禱文和十誡。
Now in the medieval period, Peter Lombard, 1096 to 1160,
在中世紀時期，彼得·倫巴德（公元後1096至1160年）
gathered material from a large number of writers,
收集了大量作家的資料，
particularly leaning on Augustine,
特別是奧古斯丁的著作，然後他將它們整合成了
into a systematic treatise of four books, called Sentences.
一套四卷的係統神學著作，名為《箴言四書》。
And in terms of really writing a formal full fledged systematic theology,
如果要說真正完整的係統神學著作，
as we would call it today,
就是我們今天所說的這類正式全面的係統神學，
this is probably the first major effort at that time.
這本《箴言四書》很有可能是當時的第一次重大嚐試。
It’s organized around four sections:
倫巴德將此書內容分為四個部分：
Trinity, Creation, Incarnation, and the Sacraments.
三位一體、創造、道成肉身和聖禮。
So you notice, even now by the middle ages,
所以我們可以看到，即使到了中世紀，
there are still not a work that grasps all the various doctrines
也仍然沒有任何一部神學著作
that are now traditionally treated in systematic theology,
能夠包含今天的係統神學中一般會有的所有教義，
there’s still big holes here,
在這個方面仍然有很大的缺失，
like you see nothing here about Eschatology, for example.
例如，你在這裏並沒有看到任何關於末世論的東西。
The Sentences, however, becomes a standard textbook
但是，《箴言四書》成為了
for later theological students.
後世神學生的標準教科書。
And if you were a pretty able theologian,
若一個人是12、13世紀末的
say in the late 12th century, 13th century,
一位頗有能力的神學家、
and you were a professor somewhere teaching students,
在他需要教授學生時，
you would probably use the Sentences as your major textbook
他很有可能會使用《箴言四書》作為他的主要教材，
and give lectures on that, expounding it further.
他的講課也會圍繞著這本書，對其進行進一步的闡述。
And that’s why you have a number of, not famous books,
這就是為什麼，我們會看到這些針對倫巴德《箴言四書》的釋書，
but a number of books of commentaries on Lombard’s Sentences,
雖然這些書並不是很有名，
they’re really lectures from professors and from their theological students.
但它們其實是當時的學生們記錄下來的教授的講課內容。

49:11 – 51:37
And taking Lombard’s idea, but then developing it
托馬斯·阿奎那採用了倫巴德的方法，
much more exhaustively was, of course, Thomas Aquinas,
卻將係統神學發展得更為徹底，
who is really the first major full fledged systematic theologian
通過一部包含多卷書的《神學大全》，
in his famous Summa Theologica, a multi-volume work,
他實際上成為了第一個主要的、全備的係統神學家。
which is a remarkable blend of systematic theology
這本《神學大全》帶有亞裏士多德的傾向，
with historical theology, and mix throughout
將係統神學、曆史神學與哲學神學
is a kind of philosophical theology as well, that is Aristotelian.
奇妙地融合成為了一體。
Well, Aquinas’ systematic theology has been a major work,
阿奎那的係統神學是一部非常重要的著作，
the reformers refer to it. Even though he defended the Roman Catholics
改教家也常參考它。雖然阿奎那在書中為羅馬天主教傳統辯護，
churches’ distinctives, there still is a lot to learn from Thomas Aquinas
但我們仍然能夠從托馬斯·阿奎那和他參與發展的經院方法中
and the scholastic method that he was involved in developing.
學習到許多有價值的東西。
You know, some theologians today even would say,
你們知道嗎，今天甚至有些神學家會說，
you can’t really be a great theologian of the Reformation
如果一個人不讀托馬斯·阿奎那，他就不可能真的成為
without reading Thomas Aquinas,
一位研究宗教改革的偉大神學家。
I don’t know if I would embrace that fully.
我並不完全讚同這句話，
But certainly, you don’t have to read the whole thing, it’s huge.
但是很顯然，如果一個人想要從事任何實質性的神學研究，
But you need to be familiar with what Thomas was saying and the
他需要熟悉托馬斯所寫的內容、以及他所使用的方法。
approaches he used if you were gonna do any theology of substance.
但你不需要讀這整部作品，它的內容太多。
Now lesser known than Thomas, Thomas is like the medieval, well,
托馬斯在天主教的地位，就像加爾文的《基督教要義》
he is to Roman Catholic theology what John Calvin’s Institutes would be
在改革宗神學中的地位一樣。但接下來出現
to Reformed systematic theology. But in the next century,
在下一個世紀的曆史中的這位，沒有托馬斯那麼有名。
Bonaventure wrote a major commentary on Lombard’s work,
他就是聖文德，他寫了一部詳細闡述倫巴德著作的釋書，
and then summarized it in his Breviloquium.
在他的《神學概要》一書中對其進行了總結。
I don’t know how to pronounce this very well,
（我不太會讀這個詞。）
but Breviloquium, and that’s Bonaventure.
聖文德的《神學概要》。

51:41 – 54:44
Alright, then comes the Reformation.
好，接下來就是宗教改革時期。
Martin Luther never writes a systematic theology,
雖然馬丁·路德有時會在他所寫的信條中
although he does summarizes doctrines
總結他所認信的教義
sometimes in confessional statements,
（最著名的就是他的《大教理問答》），
the most famous being his large catechism.
但是他從沒有寫過一部係統神學著作。
But his right hand man, Philip Melanchthon,
他有一位得力助手菲利普·墨蘭頓，
who is really his able confidant in terms of theology,
而其實菲利普在神學上與路德旗鼓相當，
and they often spoke together about theological issues.
他們也經常一起討論神學方面的問題。
In some ways, Philip had more of a systematic theological mind
在某種程度上，菲利普比路德更有係統神學思想，
than Luther did, so did Calvin. But he wrote Loci Communes,
加爾文也更有係統神學思想。
which became very well known, quite famous.
墨蘭頓有一部非常有名的著作，叫《羅馬書概要》。
That’s Philip Melanchthon,
菲利普·墨蘭頓是這樣寫的，
and everybody spells his name wrong,
好像每個人都會把他的名字拚寫錯，
because of all these two “h”es here,
因為這裏有兩個“h”字母，
it doesn’t look right at first to many people,
很多人第一眼都覺得這個名字的拚寫不太對，
but once you are used to it, it’s fine.
但是習慣了就好了。
I assure you that’s the right spelling.
我向你保證他的名字就是這樣拚寫的。
And this served the early reformers quite well
這本書遵循保羅寫給羅馬人書信的模式，
as a summary of their faith, following the pattern of Paul’s epistle to the Romans.
對早期的改教家們有巨大的幫助。
Now the title means “common places”,
《羅馬書概要》這本書的書名意為“共同之處”，
“Loci” becomes a standard term for “places” or “topics”,
“loci”這個詞是神學中描述“地方”或“主題”的標準術語。
we would say “topics” today in a theological system.
就是今天我們在神學係統中所說的“主題”。
When it comes, however, to reformed systematic theology,
但對改革宗係統神學而言，
then the first is, well the father of the reformed faith really is Zwingli,
改革宗信仰之父實際上是慈運理，
Ulrich Zwingli. And he wrote a book called
烏利希·慈運理。他寫了一本書，
A Commentary on True and False Religion,
名為《論真假宗教》，
which became a kind of systematic theology.
這本書可以說是一本係統神學著作。
Now, Zwingli’s work was soon dwarfed by two others that followed.
但是慈運理的著作在後來出現的兩個人面前，
And because of Zwingli’s premature death
顯得相形見絀，
while he was still flowering as a theologian,
因為非常出人意料的是，當慈運理還在神學上日漸成熟時，
when he died suddenly in the battle in 1531, I believe.
他就過早地死於1531年的戰鬥中。
What had been called “Zwinglianism”, and some scholars,
當時被人們稱為“慈運理主義”的神學，
they just study Zwingli would still call it “Zwinglianism”,
（今天有一些隻研究慈運理的學者，仍然會說“慈運理主義”）
soon became swallowed up by Calvin and Bullinger,
很快就被加爾文和布林格的神學給淹沒了。
and became known as the reformed faith.
人們將加爾文和布林格的神學稱為改革宗神學。
And later on, against Calvin’s wishes,
之後，一些人在違背加爾文本人意願的情況下，
some people began to call it “Calvinism”.
開始將這樣的神學稱為“加爾文主義”。

54:44 – 56:57
And the reason, when we think of reformed faith,
而之所以當我們想到改革宗信仰時，
we think more of Calvinism than Zwinglianism,
我們更多是想到加爾文主義、而非慈運理主義，
is not because Zwingli was not the first father of the reformed faith,
並不是因為慈運理不是改革宗信仰之父。
He was.
他確實是改革宗信仰之父。
It’s just that, unlike most movements,
只是，與大多數運動不同的是，
the second major leader Calvin kind of dwarfed Zwingli.
第二位主要的帶領者加爾文超越了慈運理的影響。
I am not saying Zwingli would not have matched Calvin
如果慈運理能夠倖免於難、在神學上日益成熟，
if he’d been spared and grown in years.
我覺得他也有可能與加爾文旗鼓相當。
Zwingli was a very good theologian,
慈運理是一位非常優秀的神學家，但是顯而易見，
but Calvin, of course, lived longer and became a staple figure.
加爾文在世時間更長，成為了改革宗神學的主要人物。
What most people don’t realize, is that in church history,
許多人不知道的是，
secondary figures, by the way, are called “epigones”,
教會曆史並不善待那些
and church history is not kind to “epigones”.
被稱為“追隨者”的次要人物們。

Usually the guy who spearheads a movement becomes the famous guy
通常情況下，帶領某個運動中的那個人最為著名，
and all the rest of the guys are almost forgotten,
而所有其他人幾乎都會被人們遺忘，
or just a little bit of work is done on them.
頂多只是對他們有一些少量的研究。
And what’s happening right now in 21st century scholarly world,
但是在今天21世紀的學術界中，
is that finally we are discovering some of the “epigones”,
我們逐漸挖掘出了一些所謂的“追隨者”們，
and starting to talk about them.
並開始研究他們。
But it’s just astonishing, isn’t it?
這實在是令人驚訝，難道不是嗎？
We just translated Theodore Beza, who’s Calvin’s successor,
我們剛剛翻譯了伯撒的著作，
outlasting Calvin by 41 years,
他是加爾文的繼任者，比加爾文長壽41年之久，
was the father of the whole Reformation movement
他是整個歐洲的改教運動之父，
all around Europe, he was the old Patriarch.
他是元老級的人物。
You couldn’t have got a guy more famous than Theodore Beza.
我們不可能找到一個比伯撒更有名的人了。
And we just translated, for the very first time in English,
但是，我們才剛譯出了他關於聖餐的書，
his book on the Lord’s Supper. I mean, it’s crazy.
這是這本書的第一個英譯本。這太不可思議了。
Why wasn’t that done hundreds of years ago?
幾百年前就應該有人翻譯這本書了。
But that’s just the way it is with “epigones”.
但是對於這些“追隨者”而言，這就是他們的遭遇。
At the time, Peter Martyr, Heinrich Bullinger, Martin Bucer,
當時，彼得·馬特、海因裏希·布林格、馬丁·布瑟、
John Calvin, were about equally famous all throughout Europe,
約翰·加爾文等人在歐洲的知名程度相當，
ministering at different places, corresponding with each other.
他們在不同的地方服侍，彼此也常常相互通信。

56:57 – 59:25
Do you know that there are, my figures may not be exactly right,
你們知道嗎（我的數據不一定正確
cause I am doing this off the top of my head,
我只是憑記憶想到的），
but I think there’s 11,000 extend letters from or to Calvin,
我記得如果我們把加爾文和路德與別人往來的信件加在一起，
and from or to Luther, combined.
總量一共是一萬一千封。
And Heinrich Bullinger did something like 15,000,
但海因裏希·布林格一個人
just he alone corresponding with other people.
與別人往來的信件總量就達到了大概一萬五千封。
So some scholars have been arguing lately, for this reason
所以，因著這一點，再加上其他的種種因素，
and many others, that actually Heinrich Bullinger
一些學者最近一直在討論，海因裏希·布林格其實更像
was more of a leader in 16th century Reformation
16世紀宗教改革的帶領者。
and kept things more together than Calvin.
比起加爾文，他處理事情更為周到。
Calvin, sometimes was a little bit irascible,
加爾文有時有一點急躁，
sometimes push things a little bit far.
在處理事情上有時會不那麼恰當。
And Bullinger was the irenic fellow
但是布林格是一個溫和的、人人都信任、
who everybody trusted for advice
人人都願意向他徵求意見的人。
and tried to keep things together, find the middle road
他努力在事情上處處周到，走中間路線，
and became actually more influenced than Calvin.
他在當時的影響力實際上超越了加爾文。
Sometimes Calvin leaned on Bullinger for advice.
加爾文有時也要依靠布林格，向他尋求建議。
Now you may know that already, or you may not.
你可能已經聽說過這一點，又或者沒聽過。
But I almost promise you,
但是我幾乎可以向你保證，
not more than one person in your congregation will know that.
你教會的會眾中沒有人知道這一點。
And that’s the injustice of church history,
這就是教會曆史的不公正之處，
it tends to take one person, elevating him to the top
它把一個人的地位提升到頂點，
and make everyone else around him the “epigones”.
卻使這個人周圍的所有其他人都變成了“追隨者”。
And it’s unfair.
這是不公正的。
And hopefully we can do more to rectify that in the future.
但願以後我們可以更多地糾正這一點。
Now why do I tell you all this?
我講這些的目的，
So that you understand the statement I am about to make right now.
是為了讓你們明白我接下來要說的這句話，
John Calvin wrote his Institutes, the first edition
約翰·加爾文在他26歲時
when he was 26 years old,
寫出了《基督教要義》的第一版，
and you looked at that and you say,
當你聽到這個，你可能會說，
you have got to be kidding me, I mean, how’s that possible?
開玩笑的吧，這怎麼可能？！
And he gets converted when he is what, in his early twenties.
更況且他是二十多歲才信的主。
I mean, he’s only been a Christian for about two or three years.
也就是說，26歲的加爾文才剛信主兩三年的時間。
I think in our consistory, we would say he’s a novice.
我所在教會的長執會可能會說，他還是一個初信者。
He’s writing this book called the Institutes?
他居然能寫這本名為《基督教要義》的書？
Now take it with a grain of salt, however.
我想說的是，我們需要對這一點持有一些保留態度。
It was a very good book, I don’t wanna minimize that,
這確實是一本非常好的書，我絲毫沒有想要貶低它的意思。
but what most people forget to tell you,
但是大多數人忘了告訴你，
is that it had only six chapters.
《基督教要義》的第一版中只有六章的內容。
And the final edition of the Institutes had 80 chapters.
（而最後一版有八十多章）
It was only a couple of hundred pages.
這第一版只有薄薄幾百頁。

59:25 – 01:04:21
A good book, it showed Calvin’s clear mind,
它確實是一本好書，
it showed his lawyer like thinking. He’s great.
顯示了加爾文律師般的清晰思維。他非常優秀。
So it’s a good book on certain subjects of systematic theology,
但是這本好書，隻涉及到了係統神學的某些主題，
but it really wasn’t a full systematic theology.
它並非是一部完整的係統神學著作。
Then came out four different editions
後來，加爾文又出版了四個版本的《基督教要義》，
and in fact he was still revising his book,
事實上他一直不斷地在改進他的這本書。
in 1559 comes out the major edition of 80 some chapters.
終於在1559年，在他去世前的五年，
1559, five years before he dies.
他出版了這本十分重要的、有著八十多章的版本。
That is a mature Calvin, and that set, which now of course
最後的這個版本所呈現的，是一個在神學上成熟的加爾文。
is in two volumes, at least in the Battles McNeill edition,
這部含有兩冊書的《基督教要義》（Battles McNeill版本）
becomes this standard work in systematic theology.
成為了係統神學的一部權威著作。
However, Heinrich Bullinger writes The Decades,
但是海因裏希·布林格也寫了一本書，叫《講道集》，
five groups of ten sermons, fifty sermons in all,
其中收錄了他的五組講道，一共五十篇。在這部著作中，
in which he moves through systematics much like Calvin,
布林格就像加爾文一樣，在係統神學中自由穿梭。
but guess what, no polemics, no apologetics, all positive instructions,
但是你們猜怎麼著？你讀不到辯惑、讀不到護教，
just like Bullinger’s character.
整本書都是正面積極的教導，正如布林格的性格一樣。
And this book, which we republished about six years ago,
我們改教傳統圖書出版社大約在六年前重新出版了這本書，
they are out of print already, in two volumes.
一共有兩卷，現在已經售完了。
It’s a little bit shorter than the Institutes,
它比《基督教要義》略短一些，
but it covers, it’s somewhat of a lower level,
所涵蓋的內容也比《基督教要義》更為基礎，
you might say it’s for educated lay people.
可以說是寫給受過一定教育的平信徒的。
But this book becomes the standard textbook for ministers
但就是這本書，成為了在英國以及其他地方學習的
studying in England and other places, as their standard text,
牧師們所用的標準教材。
and outsells Calvin’s Institutes 3 to 1 in Europe and in England.
它在英國、在歐洲的銷量竟然是加爾文《基督教要義》的三倍。
I mean, you would never imagine that.
你們可能都不敢相信這一點。
Most people have never even heard of Bullinger’s Decades.
而大多數人甚至從來都沒有聽說過這本書。
I remember when I first was gonna publish Bullinger’s Decades,
我記得我們最開始想要出版布林格的《講道集》時，
I want to reprint it now, but at first I was gonna publish it,
（現在我們想要重印它）
I wrote to Iain Murray, and said why don’t we do,
我寫信問伊恩•默裏：為什麼真理旌旗出版社沒有出版這本書？
why hasn’t Banner done this, you know, should I do it?
改教傳統圖書出版社是不是應該出版它呢？
And he goes, well, I don’t know what’s so important about it.
默裏回答說，他不確定這本書是不是真的有很大的價值。
And I started doing some research on it,
於是我就開始對這本書進行一些調查研究，
it was incredible, I mean, this was the standard text.
結果發現這本書原來這麼好，這可是當時的標準教材啊！
Yes, you are not gonna find in Bullinger what’s the errors of Osiander,
確實，我們在布林格的書中看不到他對奧西安謬誤的批判，
and Calvin will beat him to death.
而加爾文卻能把奧西安批判得體無完膚。
But for solid basic teaching
但是在聖經教導的基礎真理方面，
that educated people need to know
就是受過教育之人所應該瞭解的，
what the Bible says, Bullinger is every bit as good as Calvin.
布林格的著作絲毫不遜色於加爾文的著作。
Now Calvin writes with a particular flair.
加爾文在寫作上確實有特別的恩賜。
Because of his humanistic background and his training in law,
因著他的人文主義背景和在法律專業方面所受過的訓練，
he has a superior way of writing, his language flows, it’s beautiful.
他的語言流利、寫作風格出眾超群，他的書實在是十分出色。
In that sense, he’s more intriguing to read than Bullinger.
所以從這個意義上講，他的著作確實比布林格的更加耐人尋味。
But Bullinger, don’t forget,
但我們不要忘了，在銷售方面，
outsells Calvin 3 to 1. Yes.
布林格的書以3比1的比例遠超加爾文的書。

Student: I just thought that it was funny that you said
學生：我覺得很有意思，您說曆史上存在著那些“追隨者”、
how those “epigones” are there, and how we should elevate them.
並說我們應該提高他們的地位，
But I thought isn’t this in Christian life always the case?
但我想，基督徒的生命不就是常常如此嗎？
That people that get the least credit are sometimes
那些最沒有聲望的人有時候卻是被上帝最為重用的人。
used the most by God, and they, as the Bible says,
正如聖經所說，他們將會在天堂中得到更多的賞賜。
will be rewarded more in heaven. So it’s Christian life,
所以我想，基督徒們就是一個又一個的“追隨者”。
it’s being an epigone, I guess, we are working hard.
我們每個人都在努力。
Beeke: Right, right, and we’re all gonna be epigones, which is great.
周必克教授：是的，而我們全都會成為“追隨者”，這其實很好。
It’s hard to be recognized as a leader too. It’s a good comment,
但其實，一個被公認為帶領者的人的生活也充滿了難處。
I just want to throw this out just so you’ll understand this.
你說的很好，但是我想講一點，這樣你就會明白我的意思。
When I was at one of Ligonier’s conferences
有一次我去參加林格尼福音事工的一個大會。
and you know, when you are rubbing shoulders with people
你要知道，當我們接觸到像約翰•麥克阿瑟、史普羅、
like John MacArthur and R. C. Sproul, and John Piper,
和約翰•派博這樣的著名人物時，我們就會發現，
don’t think they have an easy life. Al Mohler was there as well,
他們的生活並不輕鬆。阿爾伯特•穆勒也在那裏，
and he was on the phone with people in between talks,
他得在講座與講座的空隙之間與人通電話，
because someone was giving him death threats. And there were
因為有人給他發了死亡威脅信件。
plain clothes police men, someone had threatened R. C. Sproul’s
有人在幾週前也給史普羅發了死亡威脅信件。
life as well,a couple of weeks before. Plain clothes police men
所以在會場那裏有便衣警察，
around in the conference.
他們在四處走動查看。
I was thinking, man, you know,
你們知道嗎，當時我就在想，
I am so glad I’m not those guys,
我慶幸自己不是他們，
you know, living with that constantly
他們要不斷地忍受著這一切。
and this was what it was like in the Reformation as well.
那麼在宗教改革時期，情況也是這樣的。
I mean, Calvin had all kinds of death threats and these men.
加爾文和這些人一樣都曾收到過各樣的死亡威脅信件。
When you really are influential in a mega way,
當一個人擁有著巨大影響力的時候，
it’s not an easy life. It’s not an easy life.
他的生活是不輕鬆的。

01:04:21 – 01:08:44
But thank God, there are leaders.
但是，我們要為這些帶領者們感謝上帝。
And thank God that most of us will be epigones,
也要為我們大部分人
and be faithful epigones.
能夠成為忠心的“追隨者”而感謝上帝。
And yes indeed, you’ll be rewarded.
並且，這些“追隨者”們的確會得到上帝的賞賜。
Now, Bullinger, Calvin come up with very, and Zwingli
布林格、加爾文、慈運理和墨蘭頓他們
and Melanchthon for that matter, come up with very able
發展出了非常強大的係統神學體係，
systematic theologies which rattles the Roman Catholic cage.
但這卻使得羅馬天主教十分惱怒。
Because Roman Catholics are going to say, aren’t they,
因為當羅馬天主教徒們發現
Whoa! Wait a minute, so many people are converting to the reformed cause,
許多人開始歸正、接受改革宗神學時，
we better get our act together.
他們便決定要團結起來、行動起來。
So the Roman Catholics began, particularly through the Jesuits,
因此，羅馬天主教開始回擊改革宗神學，
to respond to this theology, which of course,
特別是透過耶穌會。
culminates in the council of Trent, which means often on, for, what was it?
而這一回擊在特倫托會議時達到頂峰。
18 years? I think 1545 to 1563, and the Roman Catholics
在從1545年至1563年的18年間，
began then to pick apart different statements of Calvin,
羅馬天主教開始嚴厲批判加爾文、慈運理等的論述，
and Zwingli and so on, and challenge things.
挑戰與質疑它們。
And what happens then,
接下來發生的事情是，
is that theology becomes much more scholastically oriented,
神學開始變得更加的以學術為導向，
much more careful in its reasoning.
神學家們的論述也顯得更加謹慎小心。
Because it comes into a much more polemical era
因為當羅馬天主教與改教家們做鬥爭時，
where Rome is fighting against the reformers,
改教家們必須要對他們的異議作出相應的回應，
the reformers have to answer objections.
於是神學就進入了一個更加具有爭辯特徵的時代。
I actually agreed finally today, I have a book coming out
萬登出版社今天剛剛同意要出版我的一本書，
on debated issues in sovereign predestination in the reformation
內容是關於在宗教改革時期與後宗教改革時期中、
and post reformation eras, that Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht just agreed today to print,
有關上帝主權性預定論的熱點爭議問題。
and well we came to final terms today.
我們今天剛剛簽訂了最終的出版協議。
But the interesting thing is that within Calvin’s own lifetime,
有意思的是，在加爾文的時代，
so much of this polemical writing was already developing,
人們已經寫了許多這類護教、辯惑的書。
that Calvin was forced to write a whole bunch more
而加爾文也被迫寫了許多有關棄絕論的神學內容。
on reprobation than he ever would have written
若不是因為羅馬天主教的反擊，
without having the Roman Catholic responses
還有許多其他人的回應與質疑，
and other people respond to him and challenge it.
他是不會寫這麼多護教、辯惑的內容的。
So when you go from, say 1550 onward, and particularly
因此，從1550年開始，特別是17世紀，
in the 17th century, for people like Turretin,
對於像圖倫丁這樣的人來說，
there’s a different flavor in systematic theology.
係統神學發展出了一種不一樣的特徵。
Bullinger was simple, down to earth, no polemics.
比如布林格的著作：簡單、腳踏實地，沒什麼護教內容。
If you get to the 17th century, there’s a lot of polemics.
但是到了17世紀，就出現了許多的辯惑型著作。
And a lot of fine nuance in a different doctrine
並且人們在不同的教義中寫入了許多細微的細節，
to protect from this error, to protect from that error.
以防各樣的謬誤。
If you look at the difference, for example, between the Heidelberg Catechism of 1563,
例如，當我們讀1563年的《海德堡教理問答》時，
an irenic document. Oh there’s a few questions
我們會發現它是一個很溫和的信條。其中有幾個問題
against the Lutherans, and you know one strong one
是回應路德宗的，有一個措辭比較強烈的問題反對彌撒。
against the Mass, but for the most part, it’s a positive document.
但是這個信條的大部分內容都是積極正面的。
Then you look at the Canons of Dort, you get the positive articles,
但當我們讀《多特信條》時，雖然會先讀到正面的條款，
and then rejection: error one, error two, error three.
但接下來就是反對條款：錯謬一，錯謬二，錯謬三。
And some of those errors you are reading, you’d say,
你們還會發現，信條中提到的一些錯謬並不好懂，
you got to read them twice to understand what they’re saying.
可能需要讀兩遍才能明白它們的意思。
But what’s happening, every one of those errors is somebody
但這就是當時的情形，信條中所記錄的每一個錯謬，
in that day who’s saying precisely that. And the Canons wanted
在當時都有人在宣揚、教導。17世紀的《多特信條》，
to defend in the 17th century now, truth against error.
為的是捍衛真理、抵禦錯謬。

So we get a much more scholastic method.
因此，人們就發展出了一種更為學術的神學研究方法。
It begins already with William Perkins in his Exposition of the Creed.
這其實從威廉·柏金斯的著作《使徒信經詮釋》就已經開始了。
He dies in 1602.
（柏金斯逝世於1602年）
But much more so is used by Amandus Polanus in his systematics.
但波蘭努在他的係統神學著作中使用得更多。
William Ames, the Marrow of Theology, Perkins’ disciple,
還有柏金斯的學生，威廉·阿穆斯所寫的《神學精華》。
That’s still in print now, that’s a fantastic book,
這本書仍然還有售，這是一本寫得非常精彩的書。
but very brief, but still scholastic in its approach,
它非常簡短，但仍採用了學術型的方法。
but he just encapsulates whole paragraphs in one sentence each.
阿穆斯隻用一句話就能把一段話的內容說出來，
It’s a fascinating book to read actually.
這實在是一本引人入勝的書。

01:08:44 – 01:11:09
Johannes Wollebius writes his Compendium Theologiae Christianae,
約翰內斯·荷列比烏寫了他的《基督教神學綱要》，
which I quoted you from him,
我剛剛給你們讀了一段其中的摘錄。
there’s little parts translated,
這本書只有一小部分被翻譯出來了，
the whole thing needs to be translated.
這整部著作都需要被翻譯出來。
And then the Leiden theologians,
然後就是萊頓神學家們，
three Leiden theologians produced the Synopsis of a Purer Theology,
三位萊頓神學家寫出了一部《更純粹神學概要》。
which astonishingly was so influential on the continent,
雖然這本書在歐洲大陸極具影響力，
has only recently been translated.
但它最近才剛剛被翻譯出來。
And other reformed high-water marks in treatises is, of course,
若論及改革宗神學的頂級著作，
Francis Turretin, his Institutes of Elenctic Theology,
當然少不了弗朗西斯·圖倫丁
written in the late 17th century.
在17世紀後期所寫的《辯道學要義》。
And going on to the early 18th century,
但是，當我們接著進入18世紀初的時候，
and then systematic theology suffers.
係統神學的境況開始變得很不理想，
No really great treatments for a while.
在很長一段時間裏都沒有什麼真正重大的著作。
Rationalism of the Enlightenment,
啟蒙運動的理性主義
emotionalism of Romanticism makes significant incursions
和浪漫主義的情感主義在18、19世紀
into the evangelical reformed churches in the 18th and 19th centuries,
對福音派改革宗教會產生了極大的影響，
and systematic theology is not a very attractive subject
而與浪漫主義比起來，
in the midst of romanticism.
係統神學並不是一個非常有吸引力的主題。
So not a lot is done.
所以這一領域中沒有什麼著作。
Charles Hodge comes along.
然後查爾斯·賀智就出現了。
And in the 19th century, he’s teaching systematics at Princeton,
19世紀時，他在普林斯頓神學院教授係統神學。
and gets extremely frustrated with his students.
在教授過程中，他對他的學生十分懊惱。
Because he’s using Turretin in Latin, Turretin had not been translated into English, you know,
因為他使用的教材是圖倫丁的著作（拉丁語），
at least the whole of Turretin, until very recently.
（要知道，整全的圖倫丁著作是直到最近才被翻譯成英語的）
And so begrudgingly, he says, I’ve got one of two choices,
於是，非常不情願地，他對自己說，我只有兩個選擇，
either try to translate the whole of Turretin,
要麼就是去翻譯整套圖倫丁的著作，
that would take me forever,
（而這要花費大量的時間）
I can probably be quicker write my own.
可能我自己寫一部係統神學還更快一些。
So I am gonna write my own.
好吧，我就自己寫一部吧。
So he writes his three volumes of systematic theology,
所以他就寫了一部有三冊書的係統神學著作，
but he says, it’s inferior to Turretin,
但他說，這部係統神學比起圖倫丁的差遠了，
I am just doing it because I have to,
我寫它實在是不得已，
because these stupid students can’t read Latin anymore.
都怪這些不會拉丁語的傻學生。
So he almost resentfully writes his systematic theology in English,
所以賀智幾乎是帶著憤恨的情緒、用英語寫出了他的係統神學，
it’s a huge capitulation to the inferior students
這是為19世紀不能流利閱讀拉丁文的差生
of the 19th century that can’t read Latin fluently.
所做的一個巨大的妥協讓步。

01:11:09 – 01:13:05
And then there’s a guy comes along by the name of Geiger,
之後有一個名叫蓋革的人，
and he translates part of Turretin, maybe like 400 pages.
翻譯了大概400頁的圖倫丁的作品。
When I went to Westminster,
當我在威斯敏斯特神學院讀書時，
that was the only thing of Turretin available in English.
這是當時唯一的圖倫丁的著作的英文譯本。
And that was a prize, I took it home, I took it out of the library,
當時這本書特別珍貴，我把它從圖書館裏借出來，拿回家，
it’s all mimeograph sheets, never got published.
書的紙張用的是油印紙，還從沒有出版過。
I copied every sheet,
我把每一頁都複印了一遍，
I thought that was the most valuable book in my library,
還以為這是我藏書中最貴重的一本書，
never dreaming that 20 years later we’d have the whole thing
沒想到20年後我們會有整套作品的英文譯本，
beautifully done in English, a superior translation.
並且是一個翻譯更為精準的譯本。
And then of course, since the 20th century,
然後從20世紀開始，
I’m not gonna go into detail with all the other ones, you know them,
我就不詳細敘述你們聽說過的這些人了，
Hoeksema has a one volume Dogmatics,
豪克摩有一部單卷的《改革宗教義學》，
Kersten has a two volume,
克斯坦寫了一部有兩冊書的係統神學，
Michael Horton just wrote one.
邁克·何頓寫了一卷。
There’s just a proliferation of Dogmatics that have come out.
現在有大量的係統神學著作出版。
Some based on, say Westminster,
有些著作的內容是以威斯敏斯特信仰準則為基礎的，
like Robert Reymond.
比如羅伯特·雷蒙德的書。
And that also was traditional throughout the years,
而這也是這些年來的一種慣例，
that there were sometimes systematic theologies written based on,
有時候一些係統神學著作還
say the Shorter Catechism,
以《威斯敏斯特小教理問答》為基礎，
many of them actually.
這樣的著作有許多。
Two on the Larger Catechism only,
只有兩部關於《威斯敏斯特大教理問答》的書，
Thomas Ridgley being the most famous one.
其中更為有名的是托馬斯·瑞格理的那本。
That was a great systematic theology
那真的是一本
written on the Westminster Larger Catechism.
關於《大教理問答》的偉大係統神學著作。
And a few written on the Westminster Confession of Faith as a whole.
還有一些著作是關於整個《威斯敏斯特信仰告白》的。
But today there is a stream of systematic theologies,
雖然有些人說係統神學已經失去了它的用處、
even though some people are saying systematic theology has lost
說它只能造成人與人之間的分歧，
its usefulness, and just divides people and there’s all
還提出了我們隨後會查看的各種反對意見，
these objects which we’ll look at later in this course.
但是神學中始終存在著一條係統神學的細流。
But systematic theology is like the church,
係統神學就像教會一樣，
people are always predicting her ruination.
人們總是在預測著她的滅亡，
And she’s surviving well,
但是，她雖然在某些地方經曆苦難，
despite the suffering in certain places.
卻總是能夠安然無恙地倖存下來。
And I suspect systematic theology is gonna still be standing
而我預測，當那些認為係統神學已死的人躺在墳墓裏時，
when the people that think it’s dead are lying in the grave.
係統神學仍舊屹立不倒。

01:13:05 – 01:15:11
All right, let’s take a five minute break
好，我們休息五分鍾，
and we’ll come back and look at the Loci.
休息後我們回來查考係統神學的主題。
Okay, we want to just look for a few minutes then at the Loci of systematics.
好，我們花幾分鍾時間來看一下係統神學的主題。
And remind you that this is gonna be very very brief here,
這一部分我將會講得非常簡短，
because you’re gonna have seven courses on the Loci,
因為你們在係統神學中一共有七門課，
so I’m just introducing it to you here.
所以我只是在這裏給你們做一個介紹。
Different approaches can be taken to organize the topics
要整理係統神學的主題，
of a systematic theology.
有很多種不同的方法。
Two historic approaches are, first the Trinitarian model.
有兩個曆史性方法。第一個是三位一體模式。
That’s kind of the approach that’s natural to use if you’re gonna
如果我們要以《使徒信經》為基礎來研究係統神學，
do a systematic theology based on the Apostles’ Creed, right?
自然會採用這種方法。
I believe in God the Father, I believe in God the Son,
我信聖父，我信聖子，
I believe in God the Holy Ghost. There’s your structure.
我信聖靈。這就是結構大綱。
It’s perfectly acceptable to do that.
這樣做是完全沒有問題的。
Calvin’s Institutes are kind of that, aren’t they?
加爾文的《基督教要義》就採用了類似這樣的方法，對吧？
So Trinitarian model. And you could say, some people say,
這是三位一體模式。有些人會說，
well then there’s an extra section in the end on the Church.
可是《使徒信經》的最後還附加了一個關於教會的部分呢。
But in the Apostles’ Creed,
其實在《使徒信經》中，
the Church really comes under the last section of the Holy Spirit.
教會這一部分實際上歸屬於聖靈的那一部分。
So it’s mainly a Trinitarian model.
所以它主要還是一種三位一體的模式。

You can also have a redemptive historical model, that’s possible,
我們還可以採用一種救贖曆史模式，
kind of walking through the Scriptures,
像要穿越整本聖經，
almost kind of a blend of biblical theology and systematic theology.
幾乎有點像聖經神學與係統神學的結合。
Then you can have a more topical model.
此外，我們還可以採用一種主題的模式。
Bonaventure, who I mentioned up here on the board,
聖文德（之前在白板這裏寫過他的名字）
has a more topical structure.
採用的就更像是一種主題的模式。
He goes like this, Trinity, Creation, Sin,
他是這樣整理的：三位一體、創造、罪、
Christ’s Incarnation, the Spirit’s Grace,
基督的道成肉身、聖靈的恩典、
Sacraments of the Church, the Final Judgement.
教會的聖禮，以及最後的審判。
There you see, if you tweak it a little bit,
你們看，如果我們把它稍微調整一下，
what almost later becomes standard reformed treatment
它幾乎就可以變成改革宗係統神學的標準體繫了，
of the six Loci plus Prolegomena.
即加上緒論一共有六個主題。

01:15:11 – 01:18:49
But more importantly, in the early reformed confessions,
更值得關的是，改革宗早期的信仰告白，如受1559年的
the Belgic Confession, 1561, which is influenced by
《法蘭西信條》影響的1561年的《比利時信條》，
the French confession, a 1559, follows this order.
遵循的就是這一順序。
Scripture, think Prolegomena;
關於聖經的教義，屬於緒論的範疇；
God, think Theology Proper;
關於上帝的教義，屬於神論的範疇；
man and sin, think Anthropology;
關於人與罪的教義，屬於人論的範疇；
election in Christ, think Christology;
在基督裏的揀選的教義，屬於基督論的範疇；
salvation by faith, think Soteriology;
因信得救的教義，屬於救恩論的範疇；
Church and sacraments, think Ecclesiology;
教會和聖禮的教義，屬於教會論的範疇；
civil government and the last things,
公民政府與末世的教義，
we’ll skip the civil government,
我們會跳過公民政府的內容，
and think Eschatology. Okay? So here you have something
但末世的教義屬於末世論的範疇。
quite surprising already in 1561, you have the basic structure
所以十分令人驚訝的是，1561年的《比利時信條》
of doing systematic theology in the Belgic Confession
已經建立了係統神學體係的基本框架，
that reformed systematic theologians are still using today.
而今天的改革宗係統神學家們仍然在使用這一框架。
Now Calvin actually does a blend
實際上，若我們再仔細一點查看，
if you look at it more carefully
加爾文的《基督教要義》其實做了一個融合，
where he kind of follows this topical order,
他採用了類似主題的順序，
but he does place those topics in a Trinitarian framework.
但是同時又把這些主題放在了一個三位一體的框架中。
And he puts it himself into four books: Creator and creation,
他自己把這些內容劃分為了四卷書：造物主和創造、
redeemer in Christ, grace through the Spirit.
救贖主基督、借聖靈而來的恩典，
And he himself calls the last book, the Church.
還有最後一卷，教會。
Andreas Hyperius, which is also a contemporary of Calvin,
安德裏亞斯·海培瑞裏斯是與加爾文同一時代的人，
an “epigone”, who wrote his systematic theology in 1568,
是一名“追隨者”，他在1568年（即加爾文去世後4年）
so four years after Calvin dies, argued that the most important
寫了一部係統神學著作，他認為，
articles of the faith should be used as loci, common places,
基督教信仰中最重要的認信條款
common topics to structure systematic theology itself. And so,
應該被用來作為構建係統神學的主題。
he’s the one, even more than Calvin or Bullinger, who talked about
關於係統神學研究方法，
the method of doing systematic theology. And Hyperius actually
海培瑞裏斯比加爾文和布林格談的更多。
said this, I propose introducing theology with the doctrine of
實際上，海培瑞裏斯建議，
Holy Scripture, which is Prolegomena, second half of
先以聖經的教義來介紹神學，
Prolegomena anyway, followed by six loci: God, creatures
這就是緒論，至少是緒論的第二部分，然後是六個主題：
and man, the church, law and gospel, sacraments. Interestingly,
上帝、受造物與人、教會、律法與福音、聖禮，
he separates that from the church, and the end of the age.
（有趣的是，他把聖禮與教會分開來講）和末世。
So a little different order, but you see it’s developing.
順序稍有不同，但是我們可以看出係統神學在發展。
And so we in this seminary, we follow the traditional reformed order,
我們這間神學院遵循的，是改革宗神學的傳統結構，
it’s been established pretty consistently
大多數係統神學已經比較固定地
in most systematic theology there,
確立了這一結構，
at least conservative reformed in the last couple of hundred years,
至少在近幾百年的保守改革宗神學中是這樣。
with, you could either call it Prolegomena and six loci,
我們既可以稱它為緒論和六個主題，
or I suppose you could say seven loci if you include Prolegomena.
或者也可以稱之為七個主題（把緒論看為一個主題）。
So you’ve got these seven then.
所以我們有的就是這七個主題。
Prolegomena. Remember that’s the Greek word for “things spoken before”,
緒論。還記得這個詞的希臘語原文的意思嗎？
“things that need to be spoken first”.
“在…之前說的話”，“先說的話”。
So we have under Prolegomena the preliminary questions
在緒論中，我們要探討的就是神學的預備性問題，
about theology, which is what we’re working with right now.
也就是我們現在正在學習的。

And then about the doctrine of the Word of God,
然後還有探討上帝的話語這一教義，
which is the second half of this course,
也就是本課程的後半部分，
inspiration, inerrancy and that type of thing.
包括聖經的默示、無誤性，等等。

01:18:51 – 01:20:49
Second, you’ve theology Proper, which is the doctrine of God.
第二，神論，就是關於上帝的教義。
“Theo”, meaning “God”, “ology”, meaning “study”,
“Theo”的意思為“上帝”，“ology”的意思是“研究”，
study of God. So that includes God’s decree,
關於上帝的研究。它的內容包括上帝的諭旨、
creation of universe, providence, God’s attributes, things like that.
宇宙的創造、上帝的護理、上帝的屬性，等等。
Third, Anthropology, “anthrōpos” from Greek means “man”,
第三，人論，”anthrōpos”這一希臘詞語的意思是“人”，
so study of man. His creation in God’s image,
所以是關於人的研究。人是按照上帝的形象創造的，
the covenant with Adam needs to be addressed here, and man’s fall
我們會談到亞當之約，
into sin and misery is an important part of Anthropology.
人墮落到罪惡和愁苦中也是人論中的一個重要部分。
And notice how each one of these flows out of the one before,
我們可以看到，每一個主題都是接續前一個主題而來的，
it’s not just seven random doctrines.
所以這七個主題並不是隨機任意的。
Remember what Calvin said, do you begin with God
加爾文問過這樣一個問題，
or do you begin with man?
我們的神學應該是從上帝開始，還是從人開始？
Well, it’s hard. They both kind of come together,
這很難抉擇。因為這兩點有很緊密的聯繫。
but logically, probably you better begin with God,
但是從邏輯上來說，可能我們最好的做法是從上帝開始，
because He’s created all things,
因為是祂創造了一切。
“In the beginning, God…” Theology Proper.
“起初，上帝……”這就是神論。
But you can’t think of God separate from yourself,
但是我們又不能脫離人類自己來思想上帝，
because you’re related to God so next you need Anthropology.
因為我們與上帝有關聯，所以接下來就需要探討人論。
And because you’re falling to sin, what do you need next?
而又因為人墮落、墜入了罪中，所以接下來需要什麼？
Christ, Christology, so the study of Christ.
需要基督。所以基督論，即對基督的研究。
The doctrine of Christ, His natures, His offices, His states and so on.
關於基督的教義、他的神人二性、職分、他的降卑升高，等等。
And here probably you’d put also the covenant of grace.
而我們很有可能也需要在基督論裏談到恩典之約。
Now once you know Christ, or your hope is in Christ,
那麼，在我們認識了基督以後、將盼望放在基督裏以後，
what are you naturally going to study next?
什麼是我們自然而然、接下來需要探討的？
How the Holy Spirit works out the whole way of salvation in the soul,
就是聖靈如果在我們的靈魂中工作、實現這整個救恩的，
which is soteriology. Doctrine of Salvation,
這就是救恩論，關於救贖的教義。
“soteria” meaning “salvation”.
“soteria”這一詞的意思是“救贖”。
So this is the application of redemption
所以救恩論研究的是聖靈如何
by the Holy Spirit for the conversion,
將救恩實施在上帝的子民身上，使他們悔改信主、
growth and glorification of God’s people.
在信仰中成長，以及最後得榮耀。

01:20:50 – END
Now when you get saved, what are you going to do
而在上帝將我們從世界中拯救出來之後，
if you’re plucked out of the world?
我們接下來需要做什麼？
You are going to look for fellow believers,
我們會想要找到同樣信主的同伴，
and you are gonna go to the church.
我們就會去到教會裏面。
So naturally you would have ecclesiology.
所以接下來很自然的，我們就會探討教會論。
Some reformers, you’ll notice, like Brakel,
你們會意到，有一些改教家，例如佈雷克，
will plunk ecclesiology right in the middle of soteriology.
他對教會論的探討是穿插在救恩論中的，
Cause once you have saving faith,
因為一旦一個人有了得救的信心、因信稱義了，
you’re justified by faith, you long for fellowship,
他就會渴望聖徒之間的交通，
so he brings ecclesiology right in that point,
所以佈雷克就在救恩論中的這個點上引入了教會論，
before he brings in “perseverance”
他也把對教會的探討放在了“聖徒的堅忍”、
and “assurance of faith” and so on.
“得救的確據”等教義的前面。
So soteriology is kind of split in half,
所以他有點把救恩論分成了兩個部分，
and ecclesiology is plunked right in there.
他就把教會論穿插在中間。
I mean, it’s fine, I understand that,
我覺得這也是可以的，我明白他的出發點是
he’s following the order of the experience.
遵循我們在信仰中的實際體驗的順序。
So nothing wrong with that.
所以他這樣也沒有錯。
But this is a little bit neater, a little bit cleaner,
只是如果我們分開研究這兩個主題，
just doing these two separately.
在結構上會顯得更加乾淨利落一些。
And then you have, of course, the church,
所以我們現在有了教會，
the militant church leads ultimately to the triumphant church.
這是一個參加戰斗的教會，走向最後的勝利的教會。
The end times, glory, heaven, hell.
所以接下來是末世，是榮耀、天堂和地獄。
What the Puritans called the four great last things:
清教徒將這些稱為末世四大要素：
death, judgement, heaven and hell.
死亡、審判、天堂和地獄。
And of course, here would come the question of millennium,
當然，我們會在末世論中談論到千禧年的問題，
and what do you believe about the last times and so on.
還有關於末世、我們到底相信些什麼，等等。
By the way, when the Puritans meditated…
順便提一下。在需要默想的話題上，
I once counted all the different subjects they said to meditate on
清教徒給了基督徒們很多的建議，
in all 41 different books where they suggest subjects.
我曾經從41本清教徒的書中做了一個統計，
I made a list of them under the seven loci,
我把這些話題分列到係統神學的七個主題之下，
and the Puritans said to meditate on the four great last things
發現清教徒對末世四大要素的默想的建議是最多的，
more than anything else. “Christ” was a close second.
比其他所有話題都多。“基督”這一話題緊隨其後。
But they meditated a lot on the last things. What a sad commentary…
他們確實在末世這一主題上默想了很多。
I am not saying that there’s a rule, you got to meditate
當然，我的意思並不是說一定有一個準則，
more on the last things than anything else of course,
或我們一定要更多地默想末世的事，
but a sad commentary in our day
但是在我們這個時代，
when we can hardly sit in a chair,
我們幾乎都不能好好坐下來，
unless I’m just speaking for myself,
用五分鍾的時間去默想關於天堂的事
and meditate for five minutes on heaven.
（也有可能只是我自己沒做到）。
I mean, it’s hard to just sit and meditate
我覺得，要我們能好好坐下來，
on the day of judgement for any length of time.
花任何時間去默想審判的日子，都是很困難的。
Well, the Puritans were much more oriented to Eschatology in this area.
而清教徒在默想方面確實更加傾向於去默想末世。
Even though they were really wacky at times on the millennium,
雖然他們有關千禧年的教義有時候實在很古怪，
they were sound on these four last things.
但他們在這末世四大要素上的教導是很純正的。

So this approach is commonly used then today
在今天，這樣的探討主題的研究方法
in modern Protestant systematic theologies
廣泛應用於現代新教係統神學中，
and the one we’ll follow in our seminary.
而我們這間神學院也是遵循這一方法。
And together this approach is very effective,
這種方法也是非常有成效的，
because it really embraces all the major doctrines of the Bible.
因為它確實囊括了聖經中的所有主要教義。
Some other approaches, there’s also an approach I didn’t mention yet,
有些人也採用了一些其他的方法。有一種我沒有提到的，
which is covenantal approach, like Herman Witsius uses.
是用聖約的方法，韋修斯就是用的這種方法。
To bring everything under the theme of covenant,
就是將一切都放在聖約的主題之下，
the Economy of the Covenants, he calls his systematic theology.
他把他的係統神學著作稱為《聖約的執行》。
It has a bit more of historic redemptive approach,
這本書改採用的方法有點類似救贖曆史模式，
has that advantage, it kind of goes through Scripture.
它的優點是它查考了整本聖經。
But when you mix biblical and systematic theology like that in one book,
他想在這本書融合聖經神學和係統神學，
it’s not the easiest thing to do.
但這並不是一件容易的事情。
Because are you looking at it from that particular period forward
因為到底是應該從一個特定時期開始查考聖約呢，
or are you looking at as a whole?
還是應該將其作為一個整體來察看聖約呢？
Systematic theology says you look at it as a whole,
係統神學傾向於從整體上查考，
biblical theology says you are looking at it in orderly progression.
而聖經神學傾向於在有序的曆史進程中查考。
Rich Gamble tries to do both in his books.
理查德·甘布爾在他的幾本著作中嚐試同時做到這兩點。
And I was just talking with him recently about it,
我最近才和他談過這件事，
they have not sold well. They are good books,
他說他的這幾本書賣的並不好。它們都是很不錯的書，
but they haven’t sold well for P&R. And
但在長老會與改革宗出版社的銷路並不好。
I think there’s problem when you try to mix the two, you need to,
當我們嚐試把這兩者混合在一起時，會出現一些問題，
each field needs to be aware of what the other field is saying,
一個領域需要能明白另一個領域想要表達的東西。
but the mixture of the two can send confusing signals.
將這兩者混合在一起時，比較容易讓人混淆。
And so I don’t know of a more effective way of doing theology.
所以，我認為這是目前最為有效的神學研究方法。
The other order, of course, is to use experiential order,
當然我們還有一種採用經曆式順序的方法，
like the Heidelberg Catechism: misery, deliverance and gratitude.
如《海德堡教理問答》中的愁苦、拯救和感謝。
But you notice the catechism leaves out certain doctrines
但是我們需要意到，當一些教義不符合這個順序時，
because it doesn’t necessarily fit under that order.
《海德堡教理問答》就會省去這些教義。
So this is the most complete order, to follow the Belgic Confession,
所以這個結構順序是最為完整的，
all the way back to Belgic Confession,
可以一直追溯到《比利時信條》，
has a reputable stream in reformed theology that suits us well,
它在改革宗神學中一直名聲良好，
and does a good job of bringing in all the doctrines of the Bible,
也非常適合我們的神學研究，
all the major doctrines.
能夠很好地引入聖經中的所有主要教義。

感謝清教徒改革宗神學院特別授權