系統神學緒論(周必克) - 第15講 普遍啟示之自然神學與有神論證

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

歡迎大家回到系統神學緒論的課堂。
Well, welcome back to Prolegomena.
在今天的課上，我們要講課程大綱上的第12大點：
Today we are gonna be covering in this lecture in the outline, main heading 12,
普遍啟示、自然神學、以及有神論證。
General Revelation, Natural Theology and Theistic Arguments.
讓我們以羅馬書1章21節至23節，來開始今天的課程。
So let me begin by reading from Romans 1, Romans 1:21 to 23.
“因為他們雖然知道上帝，卻不當作上帝榮耀他，也不感謝他。
“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful;
他們的思念變為虛妄，無知的心就昏暗了。
but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
自稱為聰明，反成了愚拙， 將不能朽壞之神的榮耀變為偶像，
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God
仿佛必朽壞的人和飛禽、走獸、昆蟲的樣式。“
into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”
我們來禱告。
Let’s pray.
我們在天上的父，你已經將你自己啟示給了全人類。
Our Father in heaven, You have made Yourself known to all mankind,
但是主，我們卻是如此地虧負你。
and yet Lord, how have we mistreated You,
你是上帝，又對我們極其良善，你配得那豐盛的感謝和榮耀。
how have we failed to give You the thanks and the glory that You so richly deserve.
可是，我們卻沒有感謝你、也沒有榮耀你。
Both because You are God, and also because You’ve been so good to us.
這是我們所有人都犯了的重罪，我們在此請求你的原諒和寬恕。
We ask that you would forgive us of this great sin that we have all committed against You,
現在，我們將在這堂課上進一步地探討“普遍啟示”這一主題，
and we pray that You would help us as we examine this topic of general revelation further
所以，我們祈求你賜下幫助，
to understand what is a realistic view
讓我們能夠更真實地認識到你賜給全人類的普遍啟示、
of how Your general revelation reaches out to mankind
以及我們該有的回應。
and how we respond to it.
主啊，求你賜給我們謙卑，讓我們對自己言行的真實境況有清醒的認識，
Give us the humility Lord, to acknowledge how we truly act
也幫助我們從中看到你的榮耀和良善。
and help us to see Your glory and goodness in this.
禱告奉主耶穌的名，阿門。”
In Jesus’ name, Amen.
上帝已經在自然界和人的良心中顯明瞭祂自己。
God has revealed Himself in the natural world and also in the consciences of man.
我們已在前面的課中學到，聖經中這樣教導：
In our study of biblical teachings about general revelation in prior lectures,
上帝一方面在祂可見的創造中以一種有限的方式顯明瞭祂自己，
we have seen that God reveals Himself in a limited manner through His visible creation
另一方面也在人的靈魂中顯明瞭祂自己。
and also inwardly within man’s soul,
所以，人人心裡都清楚，有一位上帝，
resulting in a universally available knowledge that there is a God,
且上帝的屬性與祂所創造的這個世界截然不同，
that God has a nature that is distinct from
祂也遠遠超越這個被造的世界。
and transcendent over the created world,
同樣，每個人也知道，上帝會讓我們負起當有的責任，
and that God will hold us accountable
無論是因著順服祂的律法還是不順服祂的律法。
for our obedience or disobedience to His moral law,
事實上，上帝的忿怒此時此刻就在罪人身上。
and in fact that God is presently angry with sinners.
史蒂芬·查諾克（Stephen Charnock）說：
Stephen Charnock said,
“我們見到的每一株植物，每一個原子，每一顆星星，
“Every plant, every atom, as well as every star, at the first meeting,
都在我們的耳旁低語，’我有一位造物主。’”
whispers this in our ears, ‘I have a Creator.’”
但是，墮落的人類對這一普遍啟示作出的回應，
Now Fallen mankind responds to this revelation
是抵制關於上帝的真理，是拒絕將榮耀歸給祂，
by resisting the truth about God, refusing to honor him
是轉而敬拜偶像，是繼續犯罪、毫不悔改。
and worshiping idols, continuing in sin without repentance,
而這一回應產生的後果是，”人無可推諉“。
with the consequence that they are without excuse.
然而，那些被上帝的聖言和聖靈拯救的人，
However, those who are saved by the Word and Spirit of God
他們因著心已被上帝打開，
have their hearts opened,
就能夠在上帝的創造中認識祂的榮耀。
so that they are enabled to acknowledge God’s glory in His creation.
教會也可以在宣教中使用普遍啟示，
The church may use general revelation as a missiological testimony
一方面證實罪人犯了冒犯上帝的罪行，
to the guilt of sinners against God
一方面也證明，罪人亟需救贖，
and their need for salvation,
就是那唯獨顯明在耶穌基督福音里的救贖。
salvation that is revealed only in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
教會還可以使用普遍啟示來敬拜我們的造物主和救贖主，
The church may also use general revelation as a way to worship our Creator and Redeemer,
就是我們在之前的一堂課上所講的那樣。
as was discussed in a previous lecture.
但是，現在又出現了另一個問題，那就是：
However, now another question arises, and that’s this:
教會是否可以用基於普遍啟示的理性推論來證明我們上帝的存在？
may the church use rational arguments based on general revelation to prove that our God exists?
這實際上就是在建立一種自然神學。
That would be the task of building a natural theology.
我們前面已經提過，神學家們有時候稱普遍啟示為“自然啟示”，
We have noted that general revelation is sometimes called by theologians a “natural revelation”
因為普遍啟示靠的就是上帝護理的一般運行，
because it operates through the ordinary workings of God’s providence,
而我們藉著上帝為我們所造的思想，可以使用普遍啟示。
and we can appropriate it through the ordinary workings of our minds as God created them.
而我們在這裡所討論的，不僅有自然啟示，
Here we’re speaking not only of a natural revelation
還有自然神學這種思想體系，
but of a natural theology,
它是一種從對可見事物的理性思考中提煉出來的、
a system of beliefs about God derived by rational reflection
關於上帝的思想體系。
upon observable reality.
自然啟示是上帝的”作品”，而自然神學是人的”作品”。
Natural revelation is a work of God; natural theology is a work of man.
現代自然神學已經開始在朝著不同的方向發展。
In the modern era, natural theology has taken different directions.
有些人試圖建造一種能引起所有人共鳴的自然宗教，
Some people have attempted to derive a natural religion that all men have in common
而非在特殊啟示上建立宗教。
instead of building religion on special revelation.
這種方法奠定了自然神論的基礎。
This approach formed the basis of deism.
另一些人則試圖使用理性推論、經驗性推論，
Others attempted to formulate rational, empirical arguments
一方面反對自然神論，一方面建立基督教。
to defeat deism and establish the Christian religion.
還有一些人推崇懷疑主義，以之抨擊自然神學的基礎理論。
Still others promoted skepticism and attacked the fundamental assumptions of natural theology,
例如，自然神學提出：我們能由結果推理出原因。
such as attacking the argument
持懷疑主義的人便抨擊這一論點，
that we can reason from effect to cause,
他們指出，因果關係不過是人類思想的一種產物而已。
stating that causation is only a construct of our minds.
迄今為止，基督教護教學家仍在力圖戰勝這些懷疑主義者的理論，
While Christian apologists to this day seek to defeat these arguments
他們提出了與之相反的理性推論和經驗性推論，
and to present counter arguments, both rational and empirical,
以證明基督教信仰的合理性和真實性。
to demonstrate the reasonableness and truth of the Christian faith.
對他們而言，自然神學是一個合理的護教學和辯惑學工具。
For them, natural theology is a rational tool for apologetics and polemical theology.
但是，另一些基督教神學家卻猛烈抨擊自然神學、並堅決拒絕它。
However, some Christian theologians have severely criticized or rejected natural theology.
而我們相信，當我們採取一種平衡的、符合聖經的方法時，
We believe that a balanced, biblical approach
我們可以避免創造出一套不基於上帝聖言的自然神學，
will avoid building a natural theology independent of God’s Word,
也可以幫助基督徒，
but will allow the Christian
讓他們在與非基督徒交流時，能夠使用普遍啟示。
to appeal to general revelation when speaking with non-Christians.
那麼接下來我們要講的是A大點：對自然神學與有神論證的反對意見。
This brings us now to sub point A, Various rejections of natural theology and theistic arguments.
在20世紀30年代，
Controversy broke out in the 1930s
卡爾·巴特(Karl Barth)和艾米爾·布倫納(Emil Brunner)之間
between Karl Barth and Emil Brunner,
爆發了一場爭論，雖然從許多層面來說，
who in many ways had stood together
他們是並肩作戰的、現代神學自由主義的新正統評論家。
as neo-orthodox critics of modernistic theological liberalism.
布倫納是接受普遍啟示的，
Brunner affirmed general revelation,
但巴特對任何非“上帝在耶穌基督里的啟示”的系統
but Barth responded with an angry “nein” or “no” against any system
都採取怒不接受的態度。
that is not an exposition of “the revelation of God in Jesus Christ.”
巴特認為，“自然神學”在術語上就是矛盾的，
For Barth, “natural theology” is a contradiction in terms,
在邏輯上是不可能的，是根本不存在的。
it’s a logical impossibility or a nonentity.
巴特說，除了上帝在基督里的特殊啟示外，
Apart from the special revelation of God in Christ,
墮落的人根本看不見上帝，
Barth said, fallen man is totally blind to God,
人的思想向他自己所展示的，不過是魔鬼和偶像而已。
and man’s contemplation reveals to him only demons and idols.
人生來所有的智慧與聖靈的啟示之間沒有任何“接觸點”。
There is “no point of contact” between the natural wisdom of men
巴特還說，羅馬書第1章和使徒行傳第17章所描述的，
and the revelation of the Holy Spirit. Romans 1 and Acts 17, Barth said,
僅僅是“明白啟示的可能性”，並非現實，
describe only “the possibility of the knowledge of revelation,” but not the reality,
因為若沒有上帝的話語，祂只是一位“未知之神”。
for apart from God’s Word, God remains “the unknown God.”
巴特後來又論證說，羅馬書1章18節及其之後的經文所指的，
Later, Barth argued that Romans 1:18 and following must refer
一定是人對上帝在福音中的啟示的回應，而不是對自然啟示的回應。
to man’s response to God’s revelation through the gospel, not creation.
後來，隨著他的神學的發展，
As his theology developed,
巴特逐漸願意將被造物稱為彰顯上帝榮耀的“光”，
Barth did become willing to speak of created things as “lights” that show God’s glory,
但他仍舊不願意承認創造中有“啟示”。
but he was never comfortable with speaking of “revelation” through creation.
巴特對自然神學所持的這種拒絕態度，
Now aspects of Barth’s rejection of natural theology
也受到了改革宗基督徒的部分認可。
have some appeal for Reformed Christians.
我們認可聖經所教導的人的全然敗壞和屬靈黑暗，
We affirm the Bible’s doctrine of man’s total depravity and spiritual darkness,
就是我們在以弗所書2章1至10節
as found in Ephesians 2:1 through 10,
和4章17節至19節中讀到的那樣。
and chapter 4:17 through 19.
我們如保羅在提摩太前書2章5節中所說的那樣，
We exult in Christ as the only Mediator between God and man,
因基督是上帝與人之間唯一的中保而喜樂。
as Paul states in 1 Timothy 2:5.
我們相信，基督的聖言是我們信仰的根基，
We recognize that the Word of Christ is foundational for our beliefs,
哥林多前書3章11節。
而如保羅在羅馬書11章33節至34節中所說的那樣，
And we also bow before the incomprehensible mystery
當面對我們無法理解的、上帝超然榮耀的奧秘時，
of God’s transcendent glory,
我們便俯伏敬拜於上帝面前。
as Paul speaks of it in Romans 11:33 to 34.
但是，巴特對普遍啟示的完全否認並不符合聖經的教導。
However, Barth’s complete rejection of general revelation does not fit
聖經明確講到了創造和人的良心，比如羅馬書1章19至20節：
with the biblical teachings about creation and conscience, such as in Romans 1:19 and 20:
“神的事情人所能知道的，原顯明在人心裡，
“That which may be known of God is manifest in them;
因為神已經給他們顯明。
for God hath shewed it unto them.
自從造天地以來，神的永能和神性是明明可知的，
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood
雖是眼不能見，但藉著所造之物就可以曉得，叫人無可推諉。”
by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”
巴特對羅馬書第1章的詮釋並不正確，
Barth misinterpreted Romans 1
他也沒能正確理解使徒保羅的做法，
and failed to appreciate the positive use that the apostle Paul makes
即保羅在使徒行傳中用普遍啟示向不信之人傳講上帝的做法。
of general revelation in his speaches to unbelievers in Acts.
好，討論完了巴特，我們接下來看一下範泰爾。
Now having considered Barth, we next consider Cornelius Van Til.
範泰爾對巴特的神學進行了強烈的批判，
Van Til was a strong critic of Barth’s theology,
他認為，巴特的神學在許多方面都是對基督教正統的攻擊。
regarding it as an assault on Christian orthodoxy at a number of points.
但是，範泰爾出於與巴特不同的原因，也不接受自然神學。
However, Van Til had his own reasons to reject natural theology.
範泰爾認為，墮落之人在理性上所進行的嘗試，
He believed that fallen man’s attempts to reason
所產生的只能是“一種對上帝的扭曲的認識”。
can produce only “a distorted notion of God.”
因為墮落之人不肯順服於造物主，
Human thoughts about creation are distorted
且定意要以他自己為一切思想與行為的最終參考點，
because fallen man refuses to bow before the Creator and is determined to treat himself
所以人對創造的認識是扭曲的。
as the ultimate reference point in all of his thinking and acting.
於是，範泰爾在此做出了一個驚人之舉。
Now at this point, Van Til makes a startling move.
他認為，在“人應該做什麼”這一方面，
He admitted the validity of the arguments for God
那些關於上帝的論證是有道理的。
in terms of what man ought to do.
人應該認識到，受造物中展現出來的次序、以及受造物的依賴性
Men ought to realize that the dependence and order of creation
都在表明：受造物是上帝創造的。
indicate that it comes from God;
範泰爾還說，即使是受造物中的混亂，
even its disorder, Van Til said, demonstrates God’s wrath against sin
也體現了上帝對罪惡的憤怒和對罪人的持續恩典。
and continuing grace toward sinners.
範泰爾接著說，但是，如果我們的有神論證
However, Van Til said, God’s wrath against,
是以“人類理性是‘獨立自主’的，或人類理性獨立於上帝”為出發點，
or excuse me, the theistic proofs fail when used from the standpoint
那麼，這樣的有神論證是不成立的。
that human reason is “autonomous” or independent from God.
範泰爾所反對的，
Van Til is objecting against people positioning themselves
是人們將自己視為終極的審判官，來裁斷上帝的真實性。
as the ultimate judges and now they are going to judge whether or not God is real.
範泰爾說，
Van Til said
一個不信主的人可能”會在名義上接受那些證明上帝存在的理論”，
that an unbeliever may “give a formal assent to the intellectual argument for the existence of God,”
但是我們會發現，他不斷表現出來的思維和生活方式，
but his mind-set and life will be “a continual falsification”
完全不符合他被迫承認的這些真理。
of what he is compelled to admit.
因此，範泰爾說，雖然這種方法對於非基督教徒來說不可避免，
And therefore such an approach, which is inevitable for the non-Christian,
但是它使得有神論的論證“站不住腳”，
makes the theistic arguments “invalid,”
因為這些有神論證帶來的結果僅僅是偶像崇拜。
Van Til said, because they simply result in idolatry.
範泰爾說：“但是，在對普遍啟示證據的使用上，
However, Van Til said, “We should distinguish,
我們會將符合基督教信仰的方式
or we would distinguish between a Christian
與不符合基督教信仰的方式區別開來。”
and a non-Christian use of the proofs.”
只要基督徒是以上帝的特殊啟示為根基的，
Christians may take up the proofs of God’s existence,
他們就可以採納這些證明上帝存在的論據，用它們去論證這一點：
so long as they are standing upon the ground of God’s special revelation and use them
“接受上帝的特殊啟示才是人類應該做的、唯一一件合理的事情。”
to “argue that it is the only reasonable thing to do for a human being to accept this revelation.”
因此，範泰爾堅持認為，
Van Til therefore maintained that the theistic proofs have some validity
有神論證在以聖經為基礎的基督教思想體系中，是有一定合理性的。
in the context of a Christian system of thought that is grounded upon the Bible.
雖然他並不認為不信主之人能夠正確理解或使用這些有神論證，
He denied that they can be rightly developed or used by unbelievers.
但是他確實相信，當基督徒向不信的人傳講基督教的合理性時，
And yet he did see them as playing some role in the way that
這些有神論證是有它們的用處的。
believers show unbelievers that Christianity is reasonable.
因此，範泰爾的觀點有些複雜、又有些細緻微妙。
And so Van Til has a complex and nuanced position.
他認為基督徒可以使用有神論證
Van Til allowed for the use of theistic arguments by Christians
來顯明不信的人的觀點是不合理的、令人難以理解的，
to show that the unbeliever’s position is irrational and unintelligible,
但是他認為，有神論證的使用僅限於“間接”論證、或否定性論證，
but he restricted the use of the theistic arguments to “indirect” or negative arguments,
例如”歸謬法“。
such as the “reductio ad absurdum.”
然而，許多人從不同角度出發，並不認可範泰爾對有神論證的觀點。
Now Van Til’s approach to the theistic arguments has been criticized from a number of standpoints.
約翰·傅瑞姆指出，限於否定性論證的這一要求過於主觀，
John Frame points out that the limitation to negative arguments is arbitrary,
因為我們可以用肯定性的形式將任何一個否定性論證重述一遍。
for any negative argument can be restated in the form of a positive argument.
其他評論家指出，僅反駁某一個非基督徒的觀點是不夠的，
Other critics have pointed out that simply refuting one non-Christian point of view is not sufficient,
因為要瞭解基督教信仰，還有許多其他方法。
because there are many alternatives to the Christian faith.
史普羅、約翰·葛士那（John Gerstner）、
R. C. Sproul, John Gerstner,
和亞瑟·林思里（Arthur Lindsley）三位所持的觀點也與範泰爾不同，
and Arthur Lindsley have said that, contrary to Van Til,
他們認為，有神論證是有根據的，
theistic proofs have warrant
因為“由無矛盾律、因果關係、
because “the triad of the law of noncontradiction, the law of causality,
以及感知理論的基本可靠性組成的三合一組合
and the basic reliability of sense perception
是人一切認知中不可或缺的一部分。 ”
is integral to all knowledge.”
那麼，我們接下來要看大綱中的B大點，
This brings us under sub point B to consider a way
來考慮一種改革宗的、符合聖經的論證有神論的方法。
toward a biblical, Reformed approach to theistic arguments.
我們認為，處理這些問題的最佳方式，
We believe that the best approach to these matters
是一方面肯定普遍啟示，
is to affirm general revelation
另一方面，避免僅憑人對自然世界的觀察和推理
and yet avoid trying to build a system of beliefs about God
來建立一種關於上帝的信仰體系。
entirely on human observations and reasoning in the natural world.
因此，一方面來說，巴特對自然啟示拒不接受的態度，
So on the one hand, Barth’s absolute rejection of natural revelation
否定的不僅是基督教思想家中的某一分支，
is a rejection not just of one stream of Christian thinkers,
他否定的是基督教傳統的主流思想，
but he’s rejecting the mainstream of the Christian tradition,
我們在以後的課中會講到這一點。
as will be demonstrated in a future lecture.
我們非常贊成範泰爾的提醒，
Van Til’s warnings that
即這個世界上根本就不存在中立的理論；
there is no such thing as neutral reason are well taken;
我們的出發點必須始終是對上帝聖言的信心，
we must always operate from the standpoint of faith
同時，我們也應該勸勉別人與我們一同以此為出發點。
in God’s Word and invite others to join us.
但是，這並不會使一切有神論證失去它們的作用。
However, this does not disqualify all theistic arguments,
加爾文觀察到，保羅在《使徒行傳》中
as Calvin observed from Paul’s method
就使用了有神論證來向異教徒傳福音。
of evangelizing pagans in the book of Acts.
如果你想查考這一點，
And for that, you can look at Calvin’s Commentaries
請參考加爾文對《使徒行傳》14章15節、17節和17章22節的註釋。
on Acts 14:15 and verse 17, and also Acts 17:22.
對於教會而言，普遍啟示是一種連接的基礎，
For the church, general revelation is the infrastructure
將我們在基督里的信仰與生命里的一切、
by which our faith in Christ connects to all of life,
乃至整個宇宙的意義連接起來。
indeed to the meaning of the entire universe.
如果基督教信仰不承認普遍啟示，
Without an acknowledgment of general revelation,
那它就成為了一種不近人情、且空洞無物的信仰，
the Christian faith would become unnatural and otherworldly
而它本來是上帝用來賜下恩典、醫治這個墮落世界、
instead of God’s gracious means to heal fallen nature
和恢復祂的創造的方法。
and restore his creation.
為了避免這種支離破碎的世界觀，
To avoid such a fragmented worldview,
世世代代的基督徒們都認信：
Christians have confessed throughout the ages,
“我信上帝，全能的父，創造天地的主。”
“I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.”
我們的造物主通過祂的創造來顯明自己，
The Creator makes Himself known through His creation,
而我們的救贖主並沒有破壞祂的創造，
and the Redeemer does not destroy His creation,
而是對其進行了超自然的改造。
but supernaturally renovates it.
因此，這個問題其實是比較複雜的，它需要平衡。
And so this question is complex, it requires balance.
一方面，神學家已經認識到
On the one hand, theologians have recognized
人的墮落對他的思想所造成的破壞性影響，
the debilitating effects of man’s depravity upon his mind
以及人對上帝的特殊啟示和內在恩典的需要。
and the need for special revelation and inward grace.
人類哲學早已被我們驕傲的叛逆所腐化，
Human philosophy is corrupted by our proud rebellion,
它試圖通過理性來分析上帝，
and its very attempts to reason about God
但因著它宣稱自己是獨立自主、無需上帝的，
are marred by its assertion of
它的這些嘗試便是有問題的。
independence from God.
另一方面，基督教神學家教導說，
On the other hand, Christian theologians have taught
普遍啟示仍舊在向人類傳遞著一些關於上帝的知識，
that general revelation continues to transmit some knowledge of God
而當基督徒向各國各民宣講耶穌基督的福音時，
to all mankind, and that Christians may appeal to that knowledge
仍舊可以利用這些知識。
as they declare the gospel of Jesus Christ to the nations.
所以，我們在此提供以下原則以指導基督徒，如何借用理性辯證
And so we offer the following principles to guide Christians in the use of reasoning
來從受造物這一角度傳講這位又真又活的獨一上帝。
from creation to a knowledge of the only true God.
第一，上帝藉著祂所創造、維持和統治的自然世界顯明祂自己。
Number one, God testifies to Himself through the natural world that He created, sustains, and rules,
我們從使徒行傳14章17節和羅馬書1章20節便可以看出這一點。
it’s evident from Acts 14:17 and Romans 1:20.
同時，上帝也通過人的良心顯明祂自己，
He also does so through the human conscience,
羅馬書2章14節至16節。
Romans 2:14 through 16.
因此，自然啟示的主動權是屬於上帝的，
In natural revelation then, the initiative belongs to God.
是上帝在顯明祂自己。
It is God who is testifying to Himself.
赫爾曼·巴文克說：“自然神學有一個預設，
Herman Bavinck said, “Natural theology presupposes, first of all,
即首先，上帝藉著祂自己的創造彰顯祂自己。
that God reveals himself through his handiwork.
不是人在尋找上帝，而是上帝在尋找人。”
It is not humans who seek God but God who seeks humans.”
因此，即使是我們從自然界中所收穫的關於上帝的認識，
Therefore, the knowledge of God, even through nature,
也是上帝啟示的結果，
is an effect of divine revelation,
它既不是人類自己的發現，也不是由人類推理得來的。
it’s not an independent discovery or a deduction of men.
第二，“相信上帝”，是人類思想的合理預設，或基本信仰。
Number two, belief in God is a valid presupposition, or basic belief, of human thought.
我們若不相信上帝，生命就是荒謬的。
Without belief in God, life is irrational.
上帝已經向人類顯明瞭祂自己，羅馬書1章19節。
God has manifested Himself to mankind, Romans 1:19.
但是，保羅在羅馬書1章18節和21節中說，當人們抑制真理，
But when men hold back the truth from attaining its proper consequences
不讓它在他們的生命中結出合宜的果實去敬拜與感謝上帝時，
of worship and thanksgiving in their lives, their minds become dark
他們的思念就昏暗了，他們也變得虛妄。
and they become fools, Paul says in Romans 1:18 and 21.
因此，如若沒有這個大前提，
So without this presupposition,
我們就無法用一種完全理性的方式進行思考。
we are not able to think in a fully rational manner.
第三，人類理性應處的位置，是敬畏上帝、作祂的僕人，
Number three, the proper posture of human reason is to fear God as His servant,
而不是將自己視為一名智慧的審判官，認為自己可判斷萬事。
not to view oneself as the wise judge over all things.
箴言1章7節說，“敬畏耶和華是知識的開端。
Proverbs 1:7 says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge:
愚妄人藐視智慧和訓誨。”
but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
上帝賜給我們思想和所有其他的才能，是為了讓我們榮耀祂。
God gave us our minds and all our other faculties so that we may honor Him.
如果我們認為自己很有智慧，
Considering yourself to be wise
想要依靠自己的才智來思想生命中的種種問題，
and depending on your intelligence to reason through life’s questions
而不願順服於上帝和祂旨意的帶領，這其實是一種悖逆。
without submitting to God and the leading of His mind is an act of rebellion against Him.
箴言3章5節至7節說：
Proverbs 3:5 through 7 says,
“你要專心仰賴耶和華，不可倚靠自己的聰明。
“Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not on your own understanding.
在你一切所行的事上都要認定他，他必指引你的路。
In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
不要自以為有智慧，要敬畏耶和華，遠離惡事。”
Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil.”
第四，罪人的心思意念是與上帝隔絕的。
Number four, the sinner’s mind is alienated from God,
罪人若想要靠理性去判斷上帝，最終也不過是以無知和虛妄終了罷了。
and cannot reason to its Creator without ending up in foolishness and futility,
以弗所書4章17節。
Ephesians 4:17.
《多特信條》說，人墮落以後，
The Canons of Dort say that
心中”仍然保留自然之光的餘輝”，
“glimmerings of natural light” remain in fallen man,
但是，雖然他對“上帝”和“善惡之別有某些認識，”
but though “he retains some knowledge of God” and “virtue,”
但這些認識無法使他得救，
this knowledge cannot bring him to salvation,
他“在自然和社會事務上…… 不能正確使用這種認識，”
and he is “incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil,”
反而”是在各方面污染它，”因此，他“在上帝面前無可推諉”。
but defiles it with sin and thus is “inexcusable before God.”
這是《多特信條》第三與第四項教義，第4條。
That’s the third and fourth head of the Canons of Dort, article four.
第五，撒旦扭曲了非基督徒的哲學，
Number five, the philosophy of non-Christians is distorted by Satan,
牠是“迷惑普天下的”，啟示錄12章9節。
who “deceiveth the whole world”, Revelation 12:9.
有時候，非基督徒還會通過異教信仰去尋求屬魔鬼的智慧，
At times Non-Christians seek demonic wisdom through pagan spirituality,
一些古代哲學家就承認自己做過這樣的事情。
as was admitted by some ancient philosophers.
即使是無神論哲學家，也常常講到精神信仰的事情，
Even atheistic philosophers often speak in terms of spirituality
又或者，他們會去尋求一種超然的感覺 – 通常是某種泛神論，
or they may seek a sense of transcendence—generally by a form of pantheism
將物質世界神化，將人視為神靈。
that divinizes the material world and treats men as gods.
因此，沒有重生之人的理性絕不是中立的，
Therefore, unregenerate reason is far from neutral,
而是由上帝的頭號屬靈仇敵主導的。
but it is dominated by God’s great spiritual enemy.
第六，若想要正確利用理性，
Number six, a right use of reason
我們需要依靠被聖靈光照的上帝的話語，
depends upon the Spirit-illuminated Word in order that
這樣我們才能夠在這個世界上認識造物主的榮耀。
we may acknowledge the glory of the Creator in His world.
以賽亞書8章20節告訴我們，除了聖經，“他們…… 必不得見晨光。”
Apart from the Word, Isaiah 8:20 says to us, “there is no light in them.”
但是，保羅在以弗所書第5章中說，
But by union with Christ, Paul says
藉著與基督的聯合，我們“在主里是光明的”，
in Ephesians 5 that we are “light in the Lord”
我們有能力分辨，也有智慧。
and we have the capacity to be discerning and wise,
以弗所書第5章第8節、第10節、和第15節。
that’s Ephesians 5:8, 10 and 15.
斯科特·斯溫（Scott Swain）寫道：
Scott Swain writes,
“在恩典之下，藉著聖經的教導、和聖靈使人重生與更新的作工，
“In the state of grace, natural theology is healed under the tutelage of Holy Scripture
自然神學的不足之處便得到了更正。”
and through the Holy Spirit’s work of regeneration and renewal.”
巴文克說：“所以，如果基督徒在探討自然神學時所遵循的方法，
Bavinck said, “Accordingly, Christians follow a completely mistaken method
是先‘脫下’上帝在聖經中的特殊啟示、
when, in treating natural theology, they, as it were,
‘脫下’聖靈的光照、脫離基督教信仰的前提，
divest themselves of God’s special revelation in Scripture and the illumination of the Holy Spirit,
先用這樣的方法來討論自然神學，之後再去探討特殊啟示，
discuss it apart from any Christian presumptions,
這樣的研究方法是完全錯誤的。”
and then move on to special revelation.”
如果我們認為自己對關於上帝的事情的思考能力
That would be an unbiblical
並沒有因人的墮落而遭到嚴重損害，
and indeed semi-Pelagian stance to believe
這種想法非但不符合聖經、甚至可以說是帶著半伯拉糾主義的色彩。
that our ability to think about God has not been severely damaged by the fall.
第七，基督徒可從創造中提煉出關乎上帝的合理推論。
Number seven, Christians may make rational arguments from creation to God.
保羅是我們的榜樣，他在使徒行傳第14章第15節中論證說，
Paul is our model here, arguing in Acts 14:15,
人不應該去敬拜那些與他們”性情……一樣”的人，
that men should not worship other people “of like passions” with them,
而是應當去敬拜“永生上帝”。
but they should worship “the living God.”
保羅在使徒行傳第17章第25節中提出，
Paul argues in Acts 17:25,
我們不應將上帝視為人造廟宇中的無能偶像，
that we should not view God as anything like a finite idol in a man-made temple
因為上帝“將生命、氣息、萬物，賜給萬人”，
because God “giveth to all life, and breath, and all things”,
保羅特別指出，甚至希腊哲學家們都是認可這一觀點的。
a concept that Paul pointed out, was acknowledged even by Greek philosophers.
我們從現有的對保羅言語的記錄中可以看到，
Insofar as we have records of Paul’s messages,
他沒有試圖用多步驟的演示邏輯論證來證明上帝的存在，
we see that he does not use demonstrative, multistep logical proofs
但他確實向不信的人發出了呼籲，
to try and prove the existence of God, but he does call pagans
希望他們能從自然界中得出這些簡單的邏輯推理。
to draw simple logical inferences from the natural world.
我們可以效法保羅的做法，我們也應該效法這樣的做法。
We can do the same and we should.
第八，基督徒可以使用論據去顯明那些否認上帝之人的愚昧，
Number eight, Christians may use arguments to show the foolishness
不管他們是在思想上否認，還是在行動上否認。
of those who deny God intellectually or practically,
在這一點上，我們可以利用普遍啟示向他們展示，
in this we apply general revelation to show them
他們”無可推諉“，正如保羅在羅馬書第1章第20節中所說的那樣。
that they are without excuse, as Paul says in Romans 1:20.
比如，當人拒不承認，無所不知的上帝知道他們的罪、
For example, when men deny that an omniscient God knows their sins
並要求他們為之負責時，
and calls them to account,
詩篇作者便斥責他們是”愚頑人”，並論證說，
the psalmist rebukes them for foolishness and reasons
我們對周圍世界的認識一定來自一位知識遠超於我們的造物主，
that our knowledge of the world around us must come from a Creator who knows far more,
詩篇94篇6節至10節。
Psalm 94:6 through 10.
當自然論證“通過揭露不信之人對真理的故意壓制，
When a natural argument “refutes unbelievers by exposing their willful suppression
即上帝已經藉著創造和護理顯明祂自己的這一真理，
of the truth that God has made manifest through
並以此來反駁他們時，”
creation and providence,” it also serves
自然論證同時也是在鼓勵信徒不要猶疑，
to encourage believers against doubts and,
也鼓勵他們“用自然律”給社會帶去一定程度的秩序和約束，
“with natural law,” to bring a measure of order and restraint to society,
儘管自然律不能使人最終擁有得救的恩典、智慧、和聖潔。
though it cannot elevate men to saving grace, wisdom and holiness.
這也是引用自斯科特·斯溫的《自然神學論文》。
There I am drawing, again, from Scott Swain’s Theses on Natural Theology.
第九，在不同的文化與教育背景之下，
Number nine, the wise use of theistic arguments
有智慧地使用不同的有神論證。
varies with culture and education.
我們從保羅在使徒行傳中的傳道可以看出這一點。
We see this in Paul’s preaching in Acts.
當保羅的傳講對象是猶太人、
When addressing Jews and God-fearing
和敬畏上帝、並承認聖經乃上帝聖言的外邦人時，
Gentiles who accept the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God,
他所使用的論據就是聖經歷史，他並沒有從創造的角度來論證。
Paul appeals to biblical history and really makes no argument from creation.
我們在使徒行傳13章16節至41節中便看到這一點。
We see that in Acts 13:16 to 41.
但是，當保羅的勸勉對象
However, when exhorting a group of pagans
是一群對任何行神跡的人都俯伏敬拜的異教徒時，
who were really worshiping anybody that they saw working a miracle,
他在論述中使用的就是一些與人性以及日常體驗相關的簡單事實，
the apostle appeals to simple facts about human nature and everyday experience,
使徒行傳14章11節至18節。
Acts 14:11 to 18.
而當保羅的談話對象是雅典的精英知識分子時，
When addressing the intellectual elites of Athens,
他的論證中就出現了更多的依據，
Paul makes a more reasoned argument
其中還引用了異教徒作家的典故和語錄。
that includes allusions and quotations from pagan writers,
使徒行傳17章22節至31節。
Acts 17:22 to 31.
我們從這些例子中可以看出，
This shows us that
如何使用有神論證、在多大程度上使用它，
it requires some discernment about how we use these theistic arguments
需要一定的智慧和分辨能力。
and to what degree we develop them
我們有時候可能只需要提及一些簡單的觀察，
from very simple observations
有時候也可能需要舉出更加複雜的論證，
to more complex arguments,
這都取決於我們談話對象的背景情況。
depending upon the background of those who we are addressing.
第十，基督徒應該謹慎，避免以人的智慧誇口，
Number ten, Christians should beware of glorying in human wisdom
也不要試圖用人的言語或論證來使人悔改。
or attempting to convert people through human rhetoric or argumentation.
保羅知道，“希腊人是求智慧”，哥林多前書1章22節。
Paul knows that “the Greeks seek after wisdom”, 1 Corinthians 1:22.
他們喜愛雄辯和理論，
They loved the kind of oratory
因為在他們的文化里，這樣便被視為是有智慧的。
and reasoning that their culture deemed wise.
但是保羅也知道,“世人憑自己的智慧既不認識神…… 這就是神的智慧了”,
However, Paul also knows that “in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God,”
哥林多前書1章21節。
而保羅在接下來的第29節和第31節中寫道，
God has designed salvation so that
上帝計划了救恩, 是為了“使一切有血氣的，在神面前一個也不能自誇”,
“no flesh shall glory in his presence,” but will “glory in the Lord”,
而是要“指著主誇口”。
as Paul writes in verses 29 and 31.
因此，保羅在哥林多前書2章1節中說，
Therefore, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 2:1 that
他在說話時並沒有使用“高言大智”。
he refuses to speak “with excellency of speech or of wisdom”.
這不是摒棄理性，
This is not a renunciation of reasoning,
而是願意在我們傳福音的過程中使用平實直接的言語，
but it is a commitment to plain and direct speech in our evangelism
同時也是為了避免造成任何以人的聰明誇口的情況。
and also to avoid anything that smacks of intellectual pride.
提到人的智慧、人愚昧的驕傲，有一個例子
One example of foolish pride is
就是有人要求我們必須為自己所相信的一切
when people demand rational
都拿出理性和實證兩方面的證據。
and empirical proof for all our beliefs.
布萊恩·莫利 (Brian Morley) 說：”若從‘證明’一詞的一般含義出發,
Brian Morley says, “We cannot expect to have 100 percent proof,
我們對所相信的大部分事物，都不可能拿出百分之百的證明。
in the normal sense of the term proof, for most of what we believe.
我們並非是全知的，
As non-omniscient beings,
我們無法用絕對的、無懈可擊的證據來證明現實世界中的事物。”
we do not have absolute, airtight proof for real-world things.”
因此，我們不應聲稱自己能夠提供毫無破綻的邏輯證明，
So we should not flatter ourselves or our hearers
來證明上帝的存在或者祂的身份，
by claiming to make an infallible logical demonstration
這實在是抬舉了我們自己或我們的聽眾。
of God’s existence or who He is.
唯有上帝的聖言在這些事情上有絕對無誤的確定性，
Absolute, infallible certainty in these matters belongs only to the Word of God,
因為只有上帝是無所不知、且完全正確的。
for He alone is omniscient and perfectly true.
十一，有神論證是我們所做的一種嘗試，
Number eleven, theistic arguments
想用言語清楚說明受造物為上帝所作的見證。
are appeals to God’s witness in creation.
換句話說，有神論證嘗試用言語道明創造中的見證。
In other words, they are appeals to testimony.
使徒行傳14章17節說：“他……為自己未嘗不顯出證據來。”
Acts 14:17 says, “He left not himself without witness.”
這是一個很有意思的說法。因為在使徒行傳這本書中，
And that is a very interesting statement, because in the book of Acts,
基督的“見證人”就是使徒教會中的這些從聖靈得力的傳道人。
Christ’s “witnesses” are the Spirit-empowered preachers of the apostolic church.
因此，當聖經把”見證”一類的詞彙
And so it’s somewhat surprising that this witness language
用在上帝的創造與護理上時，是有些令人驚訝的。
would be applied to God’s creation and providence.
“見證人”和“見證”這一類的法律術語，在聖經中的定位都是盟約性的。
The legal terminology of witness and testimony in the Bible is covenantal in its orientation.
在摩西之約中，主使用天地作為祂與以色列立約的見證。
In the Mosaic covenant, the Lord invokes heaven and earth as witnesses to his covenant with Israel.
以賽亞寫道，以色列是上帝的見證，向列國宣告唯獨祂是上帝，
Isaiah writes that Israel was God’s witness to declare to the nations
而非以色列人的那些偶像，以賽亞書43章9節至13節，
that He alone is God, not their idols, such as in Isaiah 43:9 to 13,
還有以賽亞書44章8節至9節。
and Isaiah 44:8 through 9.
在以賽亞書中，這有點像上帝發起的一場訴訟，
And in Isaiah, it’s almost like a legal case
祂要堅持祂作為天地的創造者的權利。
in which God is asserting His rights as the Creator of heaven and earth.
同樣，上帝也用創造為祂在亞當後裔面前作見證，
Well, in a similar fashion, God uses creation as His witness to the sons and daughters of Adam
顯明他們沒有敬拜上帝這一事實，
that their failure to worship Him
以說明他們是毀約的一方，由此要受到上帝的咒詛。
demonstrates that they are covenant breakers and therefore under His curse.
我們要知道，權威見證與理性邏輯論證之間有著天壤之別。
There is a big difference between an authoritative witness or testimony and a rational logical proof.
巴文克指出：“聖經沒有試圖要證明上帝的存在。”
Bavinck notes “that Scripture makes no attempt to prove the existence of God.”
巴文克說，當聖經提到自然啟示時，
The Bible speaks of natural revelation, Bavinck says,
它“用的是’見證’一類的詞彙，
“in the language of witness,
它所講的不是用理智“去判斷某個論證是否具有說服力，”
not appealing to the reasoning intellect” to judge whether the argument is compelling,
而是“帶著權威”對“人的內心和良知”說話。
but speaking “with authority” to “the human heart and conscience.”
因此，我們絕不能建立一種
And so we must not set up any kind of natural theology
以人類理性為權威、以之判斷上帝及其存在的自然神學，
that would even imply that human reason is the authority,
哪怕是有絲毫這樣的傾向也不行。
rendering a judgment over God and His existence.
我們一定要說明白這一點，上帝才是權威，
We’ve got to declare that God is the authority,
我們要將罪人帶到上帝的法庭上，在那裡，
we need to bring sinners into His courtroom where God’s witnesses,
上帝的自然啟示和超自然啟示都見證了上帝的榮耀和罪人的邪惡。
both natural and supernatural, testify of His glory and the sinners’ ungodliness.
巴文克在提到這些見證時說，如果我們恰當地使用它們，
Used properly, Bavinck said of these witnesses,
雖然它們只是薄弱的證據，但卻是有力的見證。”
“Though weak as proofs, they are strong as testimonies.”
為什麼說它們是薄弱的證據呢？
How are they weak as proofs? Well,
我想，任何一位曾經試著與無神論者或不可知論者進行討論的人
anybody who’s tried to engage in an argument with an atheist or an agnostic,
都可能已經認識到，
has probably learned that
不信的人總是能找到某種反駁的論點來壓制真相。
unbelievers can always find some counter argument by which they can suppress the truth.
但是不管怎麼說，當上帝的真理對他們的內心和良知產生影響時，
But God’s revelation in His creation, nevertheless,
上帝在祂創造中的啟示仍然會觸動他們。
touches their hearts and their consciences when the truth is brought to bear.
這就引出了我們要講的第十二點，
And that brings us to the twelfth point we would like to make,
即有神論證的作用充其量就像律法一樣，
and that’s this, theistic arguments are at best
能定人的罪，卻無法使人得救。
like the law that convicts but cannot save.
有神論證和上帝的道德律的教導
Theistic arguments and the teachings of God’s moral law
都沒有辦法將人帶到救恩面前。
have no power to lead anyone to salvation,
只有基督的福音才能將人帶到救恩面前。
only the gospel of Christ does that.
也正是出於這個原因，
For this reason,
多特信條把“自然之光”和“律法”聯繫在了一起，
the Canons of Dort link the “light of nature” with “the law,”
然後信條說：“不管是自然之光，還是十誡律法，
and then they state, “What therefore neither the light of nature, nor the law could do,
都不能成就的事，卻由上帝藉著聖靈的運行，
that God performs by the operation of the Holy Spirit
通過聖言的傳講這勸人與上帝和好的職事完成了。
through the Word or ministry of reconciliation,
這聖言是關乎彌賽亞的佳音，
which is the glad tidings or good news concerning the Messiah,
上帝按照祂自己的美意用此來拯救在舊新約之下相信的人。”
by means whereof it hath pleased God to save such as believe.”
我們一定不能認為，
We must never think
自己那些證明上帝存在的論點有使人信主的能力。
that our arguments for the existence of God have the power to bring someone to faith.
傅瑞姆說：“有些證明上帝存在的論證是有一定的用處的。
Frame says, “There are arguments for God’s existence that are of some value.
因為，即使是那些沒有重生得救的人，
Even the unregenerate sometimes
有時也會因為某個證據、某種經驗、或某種感覺而承認上帝的存在。
confess the existence of God on the basis of argument, experience, or feeling.
但是，他們並不為祂而活。
But they do not live for him.
這種暫時的相信不足以帶來以上帝為中心的生活。”
Such tentative beliefs are not sufficient to produce a God-centered life.”
因為那種相信僅僅存在於頭腦之中，
Because those kinds of mere mental beliefs
它沒有能力戰勝埋在人內心深處的邪惡的不信。
do not have the power to overcome the wicked unbelief that resides in people’s hearts.
於是，讓我們以奧古斯丁的話來結束這一部分，
And so we conclude with Augustine, who said,
他說，“就連這個世上的一些哲學家都看到，
“That God is a certain life eternal, unchangeable, intelligent, wise, making wise,
上帝是一個永恆的存在，祂不改變、且充滿智慧。
some philosophers even of this world have seen.
他們確實看到了一切被造物的原理，但是，卻只是遠遠的看著。
The principles of all things created, they saw indeed, but afar off.
他們在人類目所能及之處，藉著造物主的創造看到了造物主，
They saw, as far as can be seen by man, the Creator by means of the creature,
藉著上帝的作品看到了上帝。”
the Worker by his work.”
然而，正如使徒保羅所說，
And yet, as the apostle Paul says,
他們阻擋真理，以行不義來阻擋它，成了愚拙之人。
they suppress to that truth, they held it back in unrighteousness and became fools.
因此，奧古斯丁說：
And so Augustine said,
“他們從好奇的探尋中發現的，卻在傲慢中喪失了。”
“What by curious search they found, by pride they lost.”
那我們應該怎樣做？
What shall we do then?
我們應該用什麼來規勸人們、使他們相信？
Where shall we go in order to convince people and to bring them to faith?
奧古斯丁將我們引向基督的話語：
Augustine directed us to the words of Christ:
“我就是道路、真理、和生命：若不藉著我，沒有人能到父那裡去。”
“I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

感謝清教徒改革宗神學院特別授權