系統神學緒論(周必克) - 第17講 宗教改革與自然神學的批判性互動(斯莫利牧師)

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

好，我們繼續我們系統神學緒論的課程，
Well, we return to our lecture in Prolegomena
現在講的是大綱上的第十三大點:
under main point 13,
關於自然神學、有神論證的一些歷史觀點。
some historical perspective on natural theology and theistic proofs.
我們已經講了第一小點 – “自然神學的歷史淵源”
We have already covered subpoints A, the ancient roots of natural theology,
和第二小點 – “自然神學在中世紀的發展”。
and B, medieval developments of natural theology.
現在我們要來探討的是第三小點，
Now we’re gonna continue on to consider the Reformation’s
“宗教改革與自然神學的批判性互動”。
critical interaction with natural theology, which is subpoint C.
文藝復興與宗教改革是現代歐洲的開端，
The Renaissance and Reformation launched the modern era in Europe,
也對基督教神學產生了巨大影響。
profoundly affecting Christian theology.
隨著現代科學的興起，人們對人類理性的信心迅速膨脹，
With the rise of modern science, man’s confidence in the power of human reasoning mushroomed,
造成了世俗哲學的繁衍與盛世。
spawning a multiplication of secular philosophies.
在如何看待自然神學上，學者們百家爭鳴，
It is impossible in the scope of this lecture even to survey all the major thinkers
我們哪怕用一整節課的時間
of the modern era with respect
可能連現代主流思想家的觀點也探討不完。
to their views of natural theology.
所以，我們就重點講一講
Instead, we’re going to highlight
大改教家馬丁·路德和約翰·加爾文的觀點，
the teachings of Martin Luther and John Calvin as major Reformers,
然後我們再講一講
and then examine three theologians
宗教改革之後的改革宗正統時期里三位神學家的觀點。
of the Reformed orthodox period that followed.
宗教改革主張回歸聖經、以聖經為基督教神學的唯一基礎，
The Reformation brought a return to Scripture as the only foundation of Christian theology,
它在回歸聖經的同時，也對自然神學進行了批判。
and with it a critique of natural theology.
馬丁·路德教導說，關於上帝的認識有兩種，
Martin Luther taught that there are two kinds of knowledge of God:
一種是人人都有的、對上帝的存在與公義的普遍認識，
a general knowledge of his existence and justice that all men possess
但這個認識不能使人得救。
but that remains futile,
另一種是對“上帝是人在耶穌基督里的救主”的特殊認識。
and a particular knowledge of God as Savior through Jesus Christ.
路德說，普遍啟示照著律法向人傳揚關於上帝的知識，
General revelation transmits a knowledge of God according to the law,
唯獨上帝的話語是照著福音向人啟示關於上帝的知識。
but only the Word of God reveals the knowledge of God according to the Gospel, Luther said.
因此路德說, 人類理性討論上帝就像”一個盲人討論色彩”一樣,
Thus, human reason speaks of God as “a blind man discusses color,”
每當人類理性試圖去認識上帝的時候，
Luther said, and when reason attempts to know God,
它就像在”玩盲人捉迷藏的游戲”。
it “plays blindman’s bluff.”
路德認為，
Philosophical speculation
關於上帝的哲學推論根本無法將人帶到上帝那裡去，
about God, according to Luther, is powerless to bring men to God,
他認為亞里士多德的思想幾乎毫無用處。
and he regarded Aristotle as almost completely useless.
路德的同伴菲利普·墨蘭頓在1521年寫道，
Luther’s colleague Philip Melanchthon wrote in 1521 that
“上帝通過祂的創造和祂對宇宙的護理，
“God has declared his majesty to all men
已經向所有人顯明瞭祂的威嚴”，
by the creation and governance of the whole universe,”
但是人對上帝的猜測和推論，
but human deductions and syllogisms
不僅是對祂的不敬，也是不可信的。
about such things are neither pious nor safe.
但是到了1535年，
However, by 1535,
墨蘭頓在他的《羅馬書概要》一書中
Melanchthon had included proofs for God’s existence
寫到了證明上帝存在的證據，
in his Loci Communes,
而路德顯然也是贊成莫蘭頓的這一舉動的。
apparently with Luther’s approval,
這就表明，
a sign that
路德宗神學在系統發展的過程中
Lutheran theology found them useful as it
發現了這些論據的可用之處。
systematically developed.
約翰·加爾文既相信上帝的普遍啟示，
John Calvin believed in both general divine revelation
也相信人的全然敗壞。
and total human depravity.
加爾文毫不懷疑，
He held a magnificent view of God’s
上帝不僅在祂的創造中啟示了祂自己，
self-revelation in his creation and also of the
也在每個人的心中種下了一顆宗教的種子。
seed of religion planted in all mankind.
所以加爾文說，從這一點上看，
And on this basis, Calvin said,
這些哲學家確實找到了某些關於上帝的真理。
that the philosophers had attained to some truth about God.
加爾文還在自己的神學中
They also had made helpful distinctions
採用了哲學家對邏輯和因果關係所做的有益區分。
in logic and causation that Calvin employed in his own theology.
但是，當人類有了一些關於上帝的認識之後，
However, though men grasp some concept of the
他們緊接著就開始了對上帝的幻想 – 愚妄又敗壞的幻想。
Divine, they immediately slip into foolish and corrupt imaginations about God,
人類的這一做法，
demonstrating the,
充分展現了加爾文所說的”所有哲學家”的”愚昧和荒謬”，
what Calvin called “stupidity and silliness” of “the whole tribe of philosophers,”
就連”他們中最具宗教性的柏拉圖”也不例外。
including “Plato, the most religious of them all.”
加爾文說，這些哲學家沒有上帝的恩典、
Calvin said they are far from God’s grace,
未曾經歷過上帝慈父般的憐憫，
have no taste of God’s fatherly mercies, and offer
他們無法給人真正的安慰。
no real comfort to people.
而這些都是因著人的敗壞。
And this is due to man’s depravity.
人心就是一個混沌的迷宮，
Man’s mind is a “labyrinth” of confusion
是一股“廣闊滿溢”的不斷涌出假神的泉源。
and a “vast, full spring” pouring out false gods.
加爾文說,
The philosophers “tried
這些哲學家”試圖通過理性和學問來明白天上的事”,
with reason and learning to penetrate the heavens,” Calvin said, but
但是他們的偉大頭腦所產生的，
their great minds produced a diversity
不過是各種互相矛盾的、”轉瞬即逝的幻想”罷了。
of “fleeting unrealities” that contradicted each other.
加爾文對這些哲學家是這樣總結的，
He concluded concerning the philosophers,
“他們所有人都敗壞了上帝的真理”。
“The truth of God has been corrupted by them all.”
加爾文說，哲學家所犯的最大錯誤之一，
One of the great errors of the philosophers, Calvin said,
就是他們認為人類理性中”充滿了上帝的光照”，
is that they viewed human reason as “suffused with divine light,”
所以他們相信人的理性能夠引導人走上幸福的生活。
and thus a reliable source of direction for a happy life.
但是在約翰福音1章5節中，聖經將墮落的人稱為”黑暗”。
However, the Bible depicts fallen men as darkness, citing John 1:5.
人的理性雖然還沒有“完全消失”，
Man’s reason, while not “completely wiped out,”
但它躺在“扭曲變形的廢墟”之中，
lies in “misshapen ruins”
以至於它雖然“仍有一些火花在閃閃發光”，
so that though “some sparks still gleam,”
但這些火花卻“因人濃厚的無知而窒息”。
they’re “choked with dense ignorance.”
人類雖然知道有一位我們理應敬拜的上帝的存在，
Mankind knows there is a God whom we should worship, but cannot
卻無法通過理性去認識祂。
by reasoning find who he is.
加爾文說：“他們就像一個深夜在田野里穿行的人，
Calvin said, “They are like a traveler passing through a field
他在閃電照亮天際的瞬間瞥見了遠方與四野，
at night, who in a momentary lightning flash sees far and
但這一切在石火電光之間就消失了。
wide, but the sight vanishes so swiftly
他再次陷入了漆黑的夜中。
that he is plunged again into the darkness
他藉著閃電的光連一步都沒來得及邁出去，
of the night, before he can take even a step – let alone
更別提要藉著這光來指引道路了。”
be directed on his way by its help.”
儘管加爾文對所有非基督教的自然神學理論持否認態度，
Though Calvin rejected all non-Christian natural theologies, he did not reject
但他並不否認上帝的普遍啟示，
God’s natural or general revelation,
他也不否認“基督徒用自然神學來護教和造就信徒”的可能性。
or the possibility of Christians using natural theology for apologetics and edification.
加爾文將人類的境況比作一位視力昏花的老人，
Calvin compared our situation to an old man with poor vision
他若不戴上眼鏡，就看不清楚書上的字。
who cannot read a book until putting on spectacles.
所以同理，我們也需要披戴聖經，
And so in the same way we put on the Holy Scriptures
這樣我們才能在上帝創造的世界中看清祂的啟示。
so that we might read God’s revelation in His created world.
加爾文自己並沒有構建一種
Calvin himself did not construct a natural
成熟的、“證明上帝的存在和屬性”的哲學論證，
theology in the sense of a developed philosophical demonstration of God’s existence
但是，
and attributes.
他確實看到使徒保羅為我們示範了一種傳福音的方法：
However, he did see that the apostle Paul models an evangelistic method
保羅在向外邦人講基督之前先表明，
by which pagans are first shown there is one God, not many,
有且只有一位上帝。
before being taught of Christ.
加爾文說，保羅“用自然論證來證明上帝的存在”，
Calvin said “that God was showed by natural arguments,”
但是他並沒有“遵循那些哲學家的樣式”、
though Paul does not present complex reasoning “after the manner of the
沒有用複雜的理論，
philosophers,” but speaks
而是“簡單直接地”對這些普通百姓說，
“plainly” to ordinary people “that in the order of
“自然規律毫無疑問地向我們證實：
nature there is a certain and evident manifestation
有一位上帝存在”。
of God.”
加爾文又註意到，
When Paul addresses the intellectuals
當保羅對雅典的知識分子們說話時，
in Athens, Calvin noted
他“用自然論證來證明上帝的身份、上帝的屬性、
that the apostle “showeth by natural arguments who and what God is
以及我們應該如何正確地敬拜上帝”。
and how he is rightly worshiped.” And that word
這個被譯為“論據”、“查驗”的詞，也可以被譯為“證據”。
that’s translated “arguments,” “probationes,” could also be translated “proofs.”
儘管加爾文認為，人類墮落的理性是“邪惡”且“敗壞的”，
Though Calvin condemned man’s fallen reason as “vicious” and “corrupt,”
但他也認識到，聖靈通過聖經開始修複人的理性，
he recognized that the Holy Spirit begins to restore man’s reason through the Holy Scriptures
讓人可以分辨合理之事與荒謬之事。
so that we can discern between what is logical and what is
此外，
absurd.
加爾文並沒有完全否認用理性論證來證明上帝存在的做法，
Calvin did not completely reject the use of rational arguments to demonstrate the existence of God.
他自己就曾簡要地用過這樣的論證。
Calvin himself briefly offers an example of such a proof.
他說：“一定有上帝存在，
He said, “There is some God;
因為這個世界不是偶然存在的，也不是自我生髮的。”
for the world does not by chance exist, nor could it have proceeded from itself.”
加爾文還提出了其他證明上帝存在的論據，
Calvin presented more arguments for God from the “innumerable
比如天上的繁星，
and yet distinct and well-ordered
加爾文將這些星星稱為
variety of the heavenly host,”
“數量眾多卻井然有序的獨一無二的眾天體”，
referring to the stars in the sky, “the structure of the human body,”
又比如“人體的結構”和人性的“偉大”。
and the “great excellence” of human nature.
雖然這些並不是極為嚴謹、極具概括性的哲學論據，
Though these are not rigorous and extended philosophical proofs, they are rational
但它們確實是基於人們對自然規律的觀察所做的理性推論。
inferences based upon observations of the natural order.
顯然，
Though Calvin apparently
加爾文並沒有像阿奎那那樣發展出證明上帝存在的五種方法,
did not develop anything comparable to Aquinas’s five ways to prove God’s
但他確實認可了自然論證的可取之處，
existence, he did approve of
也採用了簡單的論據來說服人們，讓他們知道：
and use simple arguments to convince men that
人類沒有藉口不去敬拜這位造物主。
they are without excuse for not worshiping the Creator.
自宗教改革時期以來有一種思想流派，
The Reformation preserved a stream of thought quite sympathetic
他們認可這種學術性地使用哲學論證的方法，
to the scholastic use of philosophical arguments, one that engaged
也在批判性地使用有神論證。
in a critical appropriation of theistic arguments.
另一位早期改教家彼得·馬特這樣寫道：
Another early Reformer, Peter Martyr Virmigli, wrote,
“當自然哲學家在上帝的創造中研究上帝可見的跡象時，
“When natural philosophers studied the visible signs of God in creation, they were led
因著自然的奇妙特性與特質，他們開始認識上帝。
to the knowledge of God on account of the wonderful properties and qualities of nature.
當他們看到一系列的因果關係之後、
Knowing the series of causes and their relation to effects,
當他們清楚地明白因果關係不可能無限延展之後，
and clearly understanding that it is not proper to posit an infinite progression,
他們論證說：一定存在一位至高者。
they reasoned that they must arrive at some highest being,
由此他們得出結論：上帝是存在的。
and so concluded that there is a God.
柏拉圖、亞里士多德、還有蓋倫
Plato, Aristotle and Galen have set forth these matters
都已經對這些問題進行過很好的闡述。”
excellently well,” or excuse me, “exceedingly well.”
In the late 16th century,
弗朗西斯庫斯·尤尼烏斯對自然神學和超自然神學進行了區分。
Franciscus Junius distinguished between natural and supernatural theology.
他說，雖然這兩者都源自上帝，
He said, both were authored by God,
但是，上帝讓人通過理性、從自然中認識自然神學，
but one granted by nature through the method of human reasoning,
卻讓人通過恩典認識超自然神學。
and the other by grace.
然而，
Human reason,
既然人類理性在認識人性和自然現象時已有出錯的可能,
well, it can make mistakes about humanity and natural phenomena, and therefore
那麼它對超自然現實的推測就更加有限了；
is all the more limited on deductions about supernatural realities;
哪怕是在亞當墮落之前，
even an unfallen Adam,
人的神學也必須依靠超自然恩典才能得以完全。
human theology could be perfected only by supernatural grace.
尤尼烏斯的思路與阿奎那的思想路線是不一樣的，
And here Junius departed from the line of thinking of Aquinas,
阿奎那認為，
who had a much more optimistic view
墮落前的人本來是有能力靠著理性認識上帝的。
of man’s original ability to reason his way to God before the fall.
但是尤尼烏斯寫道，
Junius wrote that since the fall
人類自從墮落以來，人性全然敗壞，
of man, human nature is so depraved
“我們的自然恩賜已被敗壞，我們的超自然恩賜已經失去”。
that “the natural gifts have been corrupted and the supernatural ones lost.”
在這一點上，他的觀點與加爾文和奧古斯丁一致。
Here he followed Calvin and Augustine.
尤尼烏斯寫道,
Man’s mind, Junius
人心就像一幢被某種強大力量擊倒的漂亮房屋,
wrote, is like a beautiful house struck down by a mighty force
它現在已經“破碎、被摧毀”，
so that it is now “broken and ruined”
“埋在了成堆的碎片底下”。
and “buried in piles of broken pieces.”
雖然所有人都能從自然中看到上帝的存在，
Nature teaches all humanity that “there is a God,”
但人在屬靈的黑暗中，
but, shrouded in spiritual darkness,
“似乎只能在幽暗中遠遠地望著，
“we see something of the truth as though distantly
窺探到一星半點的真理”。
through the gloom.”
尤尼烏斯說，雖然從某些方面來說，
Junius said that though in some ways the conclusions of natural
自然神學的教導與上帝話語的超自然神學的教導
theology overlap with those of supernatural theology granted
有共通之處，
through the Word of God,
但它們就像“音樂和算術”一樣截然不同。
they are as distinct as “music and arithmetic.”
我想尤尼烏斯的意思是，
I believe the analogy here is arithmetic
雖然算術（或數學）是樂理的基礎，
or mathematics is the basis of music theory,
但“算術的基本概念”與“對優美音樂的賞析”
between the bare concepts of arithmetic and
是有天壤之別的。
sensing and enjoying the beauty of music.
所以尤尼烏斯的意思是，
And that’s the difference, Junius is saying,
自然神學與上帝話語的超自然神學有著天壤之別。
between natural theology and the supernatural theology given to us in God’s Word.
因此尤尼烏斯說，
Consequently, he said,
在墮落的、敬拜偶像的人類手中,
natural theology in fallen, idolatrous mankind
自然神學就是一種“偽神學”,
is “false theology,” whereas the “common”
不管是那種受人歡迎的普通自然神學，
kind popular among men, well, excuse me,
還是那種哲學類的自然神學，
whether it’s the “common” kind popular among men
因為人類是靠著他們“敗壞的理性”
or the “philosophical” kind, because it is done by
來研究自然神學的。
“damaged reasoning.”
但尤尼烏斯並沒有否認一切的哲學，
Now Junius did not reject philosophy wholesale.
他繼續沿用了亞里士多德的分類法，
He continued to use Aristotelian categories
對學術學科和因果關係進行了分類。
to classify academic disciplines and kinds of causation.
尤尼烏斯還大量地間接引用
He also alluded extensively to ancient non-Christian writers
亞里士多德和西塞羅等古代非基督徒作家。
such as Aristotle and Cicero.
此外，在他的其他著作中，
Furthermore, in other treatises,
尤尼烏斯還重現了阿奎那的五種證明方法,
Junius reproduced Aquinas’s five ways,
不過它們的順序不同，也有細節上的差異。
albeit in a different order and with his own nuances.
尤尼烏斯十分謹慎地使用了改革宗的教義
Junius carefully framed the Thomist arguments
來發展“托馬斯五種證明方法”。
with the Reformed doctrines of the supernatural character of faith
改革宗教導說,
and the reduction of man’s
信心是超自然的，
natural knowledge of God
但人對上帝的自然認識已經淪落為“赤裸裸的敗壞的種子”。
to, what he called, “bare and corrupt seeds.”
既然尤尼烏斯是這樣認為的，
So how was it then that Junius
那他為什麼會發展出一種證明上帝存在的自然神學呢？
could produce a natural theology to argue for God’s existence?
這是因為他相信，
He believed that what
在上帝聖言的帶領下，
fallen nature cannot accomplish,
被更新的人可以探尋到墮落的人無法明白的事情。
renewed nature can trace out when guided by God’s
雖然非基督徒無法通過理性找到真上帝,
Word. Non-Christians cannot find the true God
但基督徒神學家卻可以在上帝聖靈的帶領下、
through reasoning, but a Christian theologian, directed by the Spirit of God
在上帝話語的引導下列舉出合理的論據，
through the Word of God, can formulate proper arguments
迫使非基督徒看到普遍啟示為上帝所做的見證。
that press non-Christians to recognize the witness of God in general revelation.
雖然這些論證沒有施行拯救的能力，
These arguments then have apologetic value to cast
但是它們有護教的功用，
down intellectual obstacles
可以推翻那些攔阻人接受福音的知識性的阻礙。
to the gospel, though they do not have the power to save.
此外，
We find similar
約翰·阿爾斯特德和史蒂芬·查諾克也和尤尼烏斯一樣,
approaches to a biblically informed natural theology
認可並採用了一種合乎聖經的自然神學。
in Johann Alsted and Stephen Charnock.
弗朗西斯·圖倫丁認為，
Francis Turretin viewed the existence of God
上帝的存在是”宗教中毋庸置疑的基本原則”，
as “an indubitably first principle of religion”
“它無需證明”，人們應該“視其為理所當然”。
that should “be taken for granted rather than proved,”
但是，圖倫丁在17世紀時說，
yet, Turretin said, the “madness of modern atheists,”
“出於當代無神論者的愚昧,
remember, he is writing in the 17th century,
我們需要澄清這個問題”。
requires that the question be addressed.
圖倫丁稱，“證明上帝存在的證據充足、令人無可辯駁。
Turretin claimed that “the existence of God can be demonstrated by unanswerable arguments,
它們不僅出自聖經，也來自自然本身。”
not only from the Scriptures, but also from nature herself.”
圖倫丁提出了幾個論點，
He deployed several arguments,
其中有幾個很明顯是沿襲了阿奎那的思想路線。
some of which are clearly drawn from the same lines of thought used by Aquinas.
雖然圖倫丁採用了理性論證，
Although Turretin used rational arguments,
但是他說，
he said the conclusions
這些從“自然神學和合理理性”中總結出來的合乎聖經的結論
that biblical doctrine has in common with “natural theology and sound reason” are
是“預設性的”，
“presupposed,”
也就是說，它們屬於前提性的知識。
that is, they operate at a presuppositional level.
圖倫丁說，
By employing reason as
我們在使用理性論證時，不能過於高舉人類理性，
a means of argumentation, Turretin said that we are not to elevate
對於合乎聖經的宗教，人的理性既不是它的審判官，
human reasoning to the level of a judge, or rule, or foundation,
也不是它的標準、根基、或主人；
or a master to biblical religion,
反之，
but we are to treat
我們應當把理性視為合乎聖經的宗教的工具和僕人。
reasoning as an instrument and servant of biblical religion.
圖倫丁說，“合理的理性不會與上帝的話語相矛盾。
Sound reason will not contradict God’s Word, Turretin said,
所謂‘合理的理性’, 是指被聖靈修複與光照過的理性，
where sound reason does not refer to “that which is blind and corrupted by sin,
而不是被罪惡敗壞、因罪惡而變得盲目的理性。”
but that which is restored and enlightened by the Holy Spirit.”
史蒂芬·格拉比爾評論道, “圖倫丁在這裡所說的
Stephen Grabill comments, “Turretin’s structure here
不只表明他願意積極使用這種被上帝更新的自然神學，
not only indicates a positive use of regenerate natural theology
也表明他認識到人類墮落對人的理性所產生的影響”，
but simultaneously acknowledges the noetic effects of the fall,”
也就是罪對人的理性所產生的影響。
that is, the effects of sin upon the human mind.
但是，圖倫丁為什麼會認為
But how is it that, in Turretin’s view,
理性是為反對無神論、證明上帝存在而服務的呢？
reason functions as a servant in the arguments against atheists for the existence of God?
圖倫丁是這樣說的,
Well, Turretin said that “philosophical”
“哲學”論證的作用，是“用理性原則
arguments function such that “by principles of reason
消除人類從他們敗壞的理性中總結出的
the prejudices against the Christian religion drawn from corrupt reason
對基督教的偏見”。
may be removed.”
因此，
And as a consequence,
圖倫丁並不反對人們用理性論證來證明上帝的存在，
Turretin did not reject rational arguments for God’s existence.
但他同時也沒有把理性論證視為信仰的基礎，
But neither did he see them as foundational for faith,
反之，
but as helpful
他使用理性來有效地拆穿人類敵對上帝的愚昧藉口,
instruments to dismantle man’s foolish objections to God
因為無神論者正是藉著這些愚昧藉口
by which atheists resist the testimony that God gives to all men,
來抵擋上帝顯明給所有人的見證、來抵擋福音的。
as well as resist the gospel.
圖倫丁對一些教會先父進行了批判，
Turretin criticized some church fathers,
其中包括游斯丁和某些中世紀學者 – 很有可能有阿奎那，
including Justin Martyr and Medieval Scholastics, which probably includes Aquinas,
因為他們“試圖把哲學和神學教義糅雜在一起，
because they “endeavored to bring Gentiles over to Christianity
藉此來說服外邦人成為基督徒”，
by a mixture of philosophical and theological doctrines”
他們“倚賴的更多的，
in a manner that “depends
是亞里士多德和其他哲學家的理論，
more upon the reasonings of Aristotle and other philosophers
而非先知和使徒的見證。”
than upon the testimonies of the prophets and apostles.”
接下來，我們要用以下七點
So we may summarize Turretin’s approach
來對圖倫丁的自然神學研究法做一個總結。
to natural theology with the following seven points.
第一，因著創造與人的良心的見證，
Number one, the existence of God is rightly presupposed by men
人類可以做出正確的預設，即上帝是存在的。
because of the testimony of creation and conscience.
第二，
Number two,
大多數惡人敗壞了這份對上帝存在的感知，
most wicked men corrupt this sense of divinity
使之變成了偶像崇拜。
into idolatry.
第三，還有一部分惡人
Number three, some wicked men
完全拒絕創造與良心的見證、完全否認上帝的存在。
reject this testimony entirely and deny that God exists.
第四，
Number four,
理性論證和哲學論證證實，
rational and philosophical arguments
否認上帝的存在是愚昧的，
can demonstrate that such a denial of God
這就拿走了無神論者抵擋上帝的擋箭牌。
is foolish, thereby snatching away the shield of the atheists.
第五，除非聖靈藉著上帝的聖言來更新人的理性，
Number five, such rational arguments cannot be constructed in a reliable way by human reason
否則，人類沒有任何可靠的方式可以來構建這些理論。
until it is renewed by the Holy Spirit through the Word of God.
第六，雖然哲學論證不是信仰的根基，
Number six, philosophical arguments are no basis for faith,
但它可以攻破人們對無神論的理性上的辯護，
but may prepare men intellectually for the gospel by removing
由此在思想上預備人領受福音；
their rational justification for atheism,
它還可以幫助信徒打破他們自己的一些理性上的假象，
and may help believers to overcome the rational façade
這些假象常常在錶面上掩蓋了他們的困惑、
that often covers their doubts and makes them
卻在事實上加重了他們的困惑。
seem more forceful.
然後是第七，
And number seven.
我們必須以上帝的書面啟示、
To bring men to Christ, we must lay the foundation
以祂的聖言為基礎來領人歸向基督，
of God’s written revelation, His Word,
我們的信仰要建立在聖經之上。
upon which they then can build their faith.
正如使徒在羅馬書1章20節和10章17節中寫的，
As the apostle writes, God’s general revelation makes men “without excuse,”
上帝的普遍啟示叫人“無可推諉”，
but the gospel reveals God’s salvation.
但祂的福音卻顯明瞭祂的救恩。
Romans 1:20 and 10: 17.
因此，雖然十六、十七世紀的改革宗神學家
And so while it is certainly true that Reformed theologians of the 16th and 17th
確實在一定程度上肯定了證明上帝存在的論證，
centuries gave a place to arguments for the existence of God,
但他們從沒有把這些論證
they did not do so as a foundation
視為建造信仰結構、神學結構的根基。
upon which to build the structure of faith and thus the rest of theology.
相反，他們的目的是用這些論證來護教和辯惑。
Instead, they aimed at apologetic and polemical targets.
理查德·穆勒解釋說,
Richard Muller explains,
“我們從這些改革宗神學家對這些論證的討論中可以看出，
“Their discussion of the proofs recognize that believers fundamentally
他們並不認為信徒從根本上需要證明上帝存在的證據。
and ultimately need no proof…
但他們認識到，信徒們實際上需要的，
But also that believers do need, mediately,
是在他們的屬靈軍火庫中預備好工具和武器。”
as it were, tools and weapons for their spiritual arsenals.”
在這個充斥著疑惑與無神論的世界,
The proofs fill a need in a world where doubts arise
這些論證有它們的用處。
and atheists abound.
我們最後來看一看早期改革宗是如何評價自然神學的。
We close this section with an assessment of early Reformed views of natural theology.
對“人是否能夠通過理性來認識上帝”，
The Reformers and Reformed orthodox theologians had a very pessimistic view
改教家和改革宗正統神學家都持有一種悲觀的看法。
of natural human ability to reason its way to the true God.
因為墮落罪人的心完全籠罩在黑暗中，
The mind of fallen sinners is shrouded in darkness.
就連上帝在自然界中啟示祂自己的光，
Even the light of God’s self-revelation in nature is largely
也被人大大忽視。
ignored.
人若在一定程度上認識到上帝的存在，
What divinity man perceives, he then proceeds
他也會隨即將這種認識敗壞為偶像崇拜。
to corrupt into idolatry.
因此，
Thus, the best
最優秀的非基督徒哲學家就像一群視力欠佳的人，
of the pagan philosophers were men… Well, they were like men with poor vision
他們從很遠的地方遙望上帝，
peering at God from a great distance,
得出了漏洞百出的各種結論。
and their conclusions were stained with many errors.
但是, 路德、墨蘭頓、加爾文、菲密格裡、
However, Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, Vermigli,
尤尼烏斯、以及圖倫丁都肯定：
Junius, and Turretin all affirmed
上帝確實通過受造物啟示了祂自己。
the reality of God’s revelation through creation.
此外，改革宗神學家也教導說，
Furthermore, the Reformed divines taught that Christians,
聖靈通過上帝的話語更新了基督徒的理性，
with minds renewed by the Holy Spirit through the Word of God,
讓他們能夠正確地推理、從上帝的創造中看到上帝，
can reason rightly from God’s works to God.
基督徒是在信仰的框架中使用理性論證的。
They deployed these arguments in the context of faith.
也就是說，他們不是在認可某種純粹自然神學的理性主義，
In other words, they avoided the rationalism of a purely natural theology
而是尋求建立一種符合聖經的自然神學。
and sought to build a biblically informed natural theology.
同時，他們也不相信這些論證能夠使罪人悔改信主，
They also placed no confidence in such arguments to convert sinners,
但是他們確實相信，
but did believe that
這些論證能夠迫使不信主的人
they could press unbelievers with the irrationality
去面對他們自己不信的荒謬，
of their unbelief, thereby removing
從而挪除他們的藉口、將他們對主的悖逆暴露出來。
excuses and laying bare their rebellion against the Lord.
作為基督教教會偉大傳統的繼承人，
As heirs of the great traditions of the Christian church,
早期改革宗神學家肯定了
the early Reformed writers affirmed
那些證明上帝存在及其神性的論證有它們一定的用處。
a limited use of arguments for the existence of God and His divine nature.
但是他們認為，這些論證不是建立在哲學上的，
And they grounded these not primarily upon philosophy,
而是建立在聖經的教導之上，
but upon the Bible’s appeals to God’s
即上帝通過自然啟示了祂自己。
self-revelation in nature.
正如赫爾曼·巴文克指出的那樣,
As Herman Bavinck noted,
“人們後來用這些論證詳細闡述與證明的一切，
“Scripture contains germinally all that was later elaborated
早已包含在聖經的萌芽之中了。……
and dialectically unfolded in the proofs…
我們在聖經的幫助下，
Scripture gives us a beginning
開始用類比的方式理解羅馬書1章20節中的原因論和宇宙論、
and an analogy of the etiological or cosmological proof in Romans 1:20,
理解詩篇第8篇和使徒行傳14章17節中的本體論、
of the teleological proof in Psalm 8 and Acts 14:17,
理解羅馬書2章14節中的道德論證”，
of the moral proof in Romans 2:14,”
以及理解詩篇第94篇第9節和使徒行傳17章29節中的
and “reasons from the being of humans to the being of God” in Psalm 94:9
“由人的存在推理至上帝的存在”。
and Act 17:29.
加爾文的有神論證
For Calvin, theistic arguments
採取了簡單的因果關係的理性推理模式，
took the form of simple, rational inferences from causation or order.
這也是聖經所採用的方法。
In this, he followed the path of the Holy Scriptures.
尤尼烏斯和圖倫丁的論證方法則更偏哲學性，
Junius and Turretin developed more philosophical demonstrations,
而這種論證方法可能會使人過度依靠人的理性。
perhaps running the risk of lapsing into too much confidence in human reason.
巴文克寫道，
The danger of highly developed
高度發展證明“上帝存在”的哲學論證的危險之處在於
philosophical arguments for the existence of God is that Christian theologians
它們可能會讓基督徒神學家認為，
may become “convinced that the truths of natural religion
“人類可以像證明數學或邏輯一樣
were demonstrable in the same way as those of mathematics
來證明自然宗教的真理。”
or logic,” thus wrote Bavinck.
我們一定不能得出這樣的結論，
We must avoid this conclusion, for it shifts
因為如此一來，
a fundamental article of faith
我們就把信仰根基中順服上帝的那一部分
out of the realm of submission to God and into the realm
轉變成了人的獨立探索；
of man’s independent inquiry.
而墮落人類那軟弱無力、搖搖欲墜的理性
It also rests the truth of God’s existence upon
也變成了“上帝是否存在”的決定性因素，
the weak and unstable ground of fallen human reasoning,
這樣，如果人的論證站立不住，上帝似乎也隨之倒下了。
so that if our arguments stumble, God may seem to fall.
但事實是，就算人類在黑暗中站立不住，
On the contrary, though men stumble in the darkness,
上帝的光芒也會永遠在祂的創造和聖言中閃爍著。
God’s light remains undimmed in creation and in the Word.
雖然我們必須要謹防理性主義，
Though we must guard against rationalism, something else
但是我們在研究歷史神學時也必須要看清一些事情，
has also become clear in our study of historical theology.
那就是卡爾·巴特對普遍啟示的否認
Karl Barth’s rejection of general revelation
不是對基督教傳統中的某一個支派的思想的否認，
is not just a rejection of one strand of thought in the Christian tradition,
而是對世世代代的主流基督教傳統的否認，
it is a rejection of the mainstream Christian tradition throughout the centuries,
包括說希腊語的教會和說拉丁語的教會，
including the Greek and Latin wings of the church,
包括天主教教會和改革宗教會。
Catholic and Reformed.
巴特對羅馬書1章這樣的重點經文的解讀
Barth’s exegesis of key texts such as Romans 1
是非常不同於主流傳統、且疑點重重的。
is highly eccentric and doubtful.
巴特試圖表明他與加爾文的意見一致，但這不是真的。
His attempt to link himself to Calvin fails, for
在解讀使徒行傳中保羅傳福音的那段經文時,
Calvin’s interpretation of the Pauline evangelistic method
加爾文認為,
recorded in Acts
保羅的做法表明,
sanctions the use
我們在論證時是可以使用自然界的論據的。
of arguments from the natural world.
加爾文自己也提出了這樣的論證，
Calvin himself offered such arguments,
只不過他的論證是修辭性、勸導式的，
though in a rhetorical and persuasive manner instead of a philosophical
而非哲學論證式的。
and demonstrative form.
此外，
Furthermore,
雖然早期改革宗神學家所教導的合乎聖經的人論
while Cornelius Van Til’s warnings against the corruption of human autonomous
與範泰爾的教導一致
reason certainly resonate
（範泰爾警示我們要謹防人類自主理性的敗壞），
with the biblical view of man as seen by the early Reformed divines,
但這些神學家通過他們的著作向我們表明，
Those divines’ writings show us that we need not fear
我們無需懼怕任何形式的有神論證，
all forms of theistic argumentation.
因為我們可以找到一種合乎聖經的改革宗方式
There is an approach to arguments for the existence of God
來論證上帝的存在。
that is biblical and Reformed.

感謝清教徒改革宗神學院特別授權