注册 登录  
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

Maria Marta





圣约神学实例说明 罗马书第五章论亚当和基督是盟约的头 -1(Steven M. Baugh )  

2014-09-09 01:47:27|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |


罗马书第五章论亚当和基督是盟约的头  -1

Covenant Theology Illustrated

Romans 5 on the Federal Headship of Adam and Christ


作者Steven M. Baugh        Maria Marta譯自線上文章/駱鴻銘:

原英文网址: http://www.crtsbooks.net/blog/post/2014/08/22/%E7%BE%85%E9%A6%AC%E6%9B%B8%E7%AC%AC%E4%BA%94%E7%AB%A0%E8%AB%96%E4%BA%9E%E7%95%B6%E5%92%8C%E5%9F%BA%E7%9D%A3%E6%98%AF%E7%9B%9F%E7%B4%84%E7%9A%84%E9%A0%AD%EF%BC%88Baugh%EF%BC%89.aspx





Understanding Covenant Theology




Let me make a bold assertion about Covenant theology: It is not incidental to Reformed theology-it is Reformed theology. In the United States, the debate with Dispensationalism in the twentieth century led many to define Covenant theology more narrowly as "Not-Dispensationalism." Consequently, Covenant theology's scope for many was narrowed to the relation of Old Testament Israel with the New Testament church. But it is much more extensive and, frankly, more interesting than this.


圣约神学就像任何系统神学一样宽广,触及到所有标準的神学要点(主题),因为它仅仅是把焦点集中在圣经本身盟约的组织原则上的系统神学。十九世纪改革宗神学家和普林斯顿大学教授查理斯?贺智(Charles Hodge)指出以这种方式来看待圣约神学的好处:

Covenant theology is as vast as any systematic theology, touching on all the standard theological loci (topics), because it is simply systematic theology focused on the Bible's own organizing principle of covenant. Nineteenth century Reformed theologian and Princeton professor, Charles Hodge, points out the benefits of this approach:


既然这[盟约]是圣经所呈现的模式,重要的是我们应该把它保留在神学的范围内。我们保存圣经真理的唯一保障,是坚持我们所呈现的教义模式尽可能接近圣经的启示。[1 ]   

As this [covenant] is the Scriptural mode of representation, it is of great importance that it should be retained in theology. Our only security for retaining the truths of the Bible, is to adhere to the Scriptures as closely as possible in our mode of presenting the doctrines therein revealed. (1)




Notice that covenant is a "mode of presenting ... doctrines" for Hodge, not just one doctrine among many. Other theologies display the structure of more parochial interests-for example, liberation theology or feminist theologies-but Covenant theology is an attempt to capture the theology of the whole of Scripture.


这样,盟约本身不是我们的神学要点(locus,主题),像三位一体、基督论、或者因信称义等教义那样。相反,盟约是我们神学的主要组织原则,并且与所有或几乎所有的要点相关联。虽然盟约最直接的影响是在救恩论方面(救恩的教义),但它远远超过这范围。例如,三位一体的工作的教义(the economical doctrine of the Trinity)被经典盟约神学描述為永恒的、三位一体之内的盟约,通常称為救赎之约(pactum salutis或者,covenant of redemption)。[2]  圣经本身可以被看作是对立约双方具有约束力的盟约文件形式(例如,启廿二18-19)。这甚至还没有说到基督的位格和工作(即,以马内利、『上帝与我们同在』——一个盟约的公式)、教会、圣礼等,所有这些都会在圣经的盟约题目内探讨。

Covenant, then, is not itself a locus (topic) of our theology like the Trinity, Christology, or justification. Rather, covenant is a mainorganizing principle of our theology and correlates with all-or nearly all-the loci. While covenant's most direct impact is in soteriology (the doctrine of salvation), it extends far beyond this. For example, the economical doctrine of the Trinity is described in classic Covenant theology in terms of an eternal, intra-Trinitarian covenant, commonly called the pactum salutis (or, covenant of redemption). (2) The Scriptures themselves can be seen as having the form of binding covenant documents (e.g., Rev. 22:18-19). This does not even speak of the doctrines of the person and work of Christ (i.e., Emmanuel, "God with Us"-a covenant formula), the Church, and the Sacraments, which are all addressed within the biblical rubric of covenant.


因此,圣约神学家会在圣经中没有明确提到「盟约」这个字的经文裡,看到盟约运作的概念。塑造圣经材料的一些基本神学原则,往往不会被明确地指出来。例如,圣经中没有明确提到三位一体,但每个正统的基督徒都肯定上帝的三位一体概念塑造了圣经的素材,并由此证明上帝是三位一体的概念。[3]  我们也可以举大卫之约為例。在撒母耳记下第七章8-16节(与代上十七1-14平行),当上帝和大卫立约时,「盟约」这个词并没有出现,但后来圣经明确称之為盟约(诗八十九30-36;耶三十三21)。在这些情况中,足以表明定义盟约的一些概念,必然是在一段圣经章节中运作的,我们才能看见盟约在这段经文裡的作用,就像我们处理圣经的许多其它教义那样。

Hence, Covenant theologians see the concept of covenant operating in scriptural passages where there are no explicit references to the word "covenant." Fundamental theological principles often give shape to biblical material without being explicitly stated. For instance, there are no explicit references to Trinity in the Bible, but every orthodox Christian affirms that the biblical material is shaped by-and thereby attests to-a Trinitarian concept of God. (3) We could also point to the Davidic covenant. The word "covenant" does not occur when God makes his covenant with David in 2 Samuel 7:8-16 (parallel in 1 Chron. 17:1-14), but Scripture explicitly calls this a covenant later (Ps. 89:30-36; Jer. 33: 21). In such cases, it is sufficient to show that the conceptsthat define covenant are necessarily operating in a passage to see covenant at work much as we all do with many other doctrines of Scripture.



The Two-Covenant Schema



圣约神学的必要组成部分是恩典之约和行為之约这双重盟约的架构。1648年的威斯敏斯特大要理问答(Westminster Larger CatechismWLC)对这两个作為支架的盟约有经典的表述。大要理问答至今仍然被普世的改革宗群体所使用,以表达他们的信仰和教导。

Integral to all Covenant theology is the two-covenant schema of the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. These two overarching covenants are classically expressed in the Westminster Larger Catechism of 1648 (WLC), which is still used today as an expression of faith and instruction by Reformed communions worldwide.





(1) 把他安置在乐园裡,吩咐他修理看守,赐给他吃地上各样果子的自由;

(2)  将万物都置於他的治理之下,并设立婚姻帮助他;

(3)  為他提供与上帝的亲密交通;

(4)  设立安息日;

(5)  又与他立生命之约——以个人的、完全的、持续的顺服為条件,生命树就是此约的记号;

(6)  人不可吃分别善恶树上的果子,否则必受死亡的苦楚。

Q. 20. What was the providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created?
A. The providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created, was the placing him in paradise, appointing him to dress it, giving him liberty to eat of the fruit of the earth; putting the creatures under his dominion, and ordaining marriage for his help; affording him communion with himself; instituting the sabbath; entering into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, of which the tree of life was a pledge; and forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death [emphasis added]. 




Q. 30. Doth God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
A. God doth not leave all men to perish in the estate of sin and misery, into which they fell by the breach of the first covenant, commonly called the covenant of works; but of his mere love and mercy delivereth his elect out of it, and bringeth them into an estate of salvation by the second covenant, commonly called the covenant of grace. 




(1) 在此约裡,上帝白白地向罪人提供了一位中保;使他们靠祂得生命和救恩;但他们必须以信心与中保连结;

(2) 又应许赐下圣灵给祂的选民,使他们能生发出这种信心,并赐下其他与救恩相伴的美德;

(3) 也使他们能够虔敬顺服,作為真信心和对上帝感恩的凭据,这一切就是祂所命定给他们的得救之路。

Q. 32. How is the grace of God manifested in the second covenant [emphasis added]?
A. The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely provideth and offereth to sinners a mediator, and life and salvation by him; and requiring faith as the condition to interest them in him, promiseth and giveth his Holy Spirit to all his elect, to work in them that faith, with all other saving graces; and to enable them unto all holy obedience, as the evidence of the truth of their faith and thankfulness to God, and as the way which he hath appointed them to salvation [emphasis added]. 



答:这恩典之约在旧约时代的施行方式与在新约时代的施行并不相同。 [4]   

Q. 33. Was the covenant of grace always administered after one and the same manner [emphasis added]?
A. The covenant of grace was not always administered after the same manner, but the administrations of it under the Old Testament were different from those under the New [emphasis added]. (


教理问答教导,上帝与亚当立了一个行為之约(或生命之约),这个约特别要求亚当个人的顺服,违约则受死亡诅咒的惩罚(创二17;三23-24)。[5]     当亚当破坏了这个约,上帝立刻设立一个「应许之约」(a promissory covenant),威斯敏斯特大要理问答称之為「第二个约」、「恩典之约」(创三15;弗二12)。这恩典之约在不同的时代以不同的方式施行(如,「从亚当到摩西」;罗五14),但在亚当堕落之后的每一个时代,其实质都同样集中在盟约的中保身上。[6]    

The catechism teaches that there was a covenant of works (or covenant of life) with Adam, which required of him, particularlypersonal obedience sanctioned by the curse of death (Gen. 2:17; 3:23-24). (5) When Adam broke this covenant, God immediately instituted a promissory covenant, which the WLC calls the "second covenant," and the "covenant of grace" (Gen. 3:15; cf. Eph. 2:12). This covenant of grace was administered differently under the different dispensations (e.g., "from Adam until Moses"; Rom. 5:14), but its substance was the same in every epoch after Adam's fall in that it focused on a covenant mediator. (6)



十七世纪杰出的荷兰神学家韦修斯(Herman Witsius)準确地表达了行為之约和恩典之约的本质区别:

The essential difference between the covenant of works and covenant of grace is well expressed by Herman Witsius, a prominent seventeenth century Dutch theologian:


 行為之约没有中保:恩典之约有中保基督耶穌...... 行為之约的条件要求完美的顺服,由立约人自己同意并履行。恩典之约提出了相同的条件,要由、或者已由中保来履行。在「人」这方面的代替,构成了这两个盟约主要和根本的区别。[7]    

In the covenant of works there was no mediator: in that of grace, there is the mediator Christ Jesus.... In the covenant of works, the condition of perfect obedience was required, to be performed by man himself, who had consented to it. In that of grace, the same condition is proposed, as to be, or as already performed, by a mediator. And this substitution of the person, consists the principal and essential difference of the covenants. (7)



Keep in mind that the covenant of works was a covenant imposing personal obligation upon Adam. He was bound to its stipulations and its curses fell on him for breaking it. Under the covenant of grace, however-whether in its administration before the coming of Christ or after Christ, for its effects are eternal and benefit both the Old Testament and New Testament household of God together (e.g., Heb. 3:5-6; 9:15; 11:39-40; 13:20)-the essential character is the substitution of the Mediator and Guarantor who himself fulfills its terms exactly and takes upon himself the curses of the broken covenant on behalf of others.


此外,在行為之约裡,亚当是一个「公眾人物」。更现代的词语是,亚当是人类「盟约的头」(federal head)。[8]   在行為之约裡,亚当作為立约或盟约的头,他的行為代表祂的整个族类。这在今天也不是完全没有类比。例如,当美国总统签署条约时,所有他所代表的公民就受到约束,要维护这个条约。如果总统的官方行动违反条约,整个国家可能要承担责任。恩典之约的头是「第二个人」、「末后的亚当」,即主耶穌基督(林前十五4745)。

Furthermore, in the covenant of works, Adam was a "publik person." The more modern term is that Adam was the "federal head" of the human race. (8) As covenantal or federal head, Adam acted on behalf of his whole race in the covenant of works. This is not entirely without analogies today. For example, when the president of the United States signs a treaty, it binds all the citizens he represents to uphold that treaty. Should the president break the treaty through his official actions, the whole country may be accountable. The covenant of grace has as its head, the "second man," and the "Last Adam" (1 Cor. 15:47, 45), the Lord Jesus Christ.




 Federal Headship in Romans 5


让我们来看看圣约神学如何照明一段特别的经文:罗马书第五章1221节。这是在一卷充满深邃洞见的书卷中更為深奥的段落。这是保罗阐述基督是盟约的头的重头戏。认信的路德宗正确地将它视為法庭式称义的清晰阐述,但圣约神学对这基本的抗罗宗观点的贡献是:圣约的圣经结构内的归算工作。称义不是抽象的法庭宣告, 保罗也不是在借用希腊罗马的法学原则,这是和圣经的观念格格不入的。这裡所说的是圣约的法理,并且要追溯到上帝啟示的开端,事实上,是追溯到亚当本人和亚当的行為之约。

Let's see how Covenant theology illumines a particular passage, Romans 5:12-21, one of the more profound passages in a book full of profundities. This is the centerpiece for Paul's exposition of the federal headship of Christ. It is rightly regarded by confessional Lutherans as a clear exposition of forensic justification, but what Covenant theology contributes to this essential Protestant viewpoint is that imputation works within the biblical structure of covenant. Justification is not forensic in an abstract sort of way. Neither is Paul appropriating principles from Greco-Roman jurisprudence, which are foreign to the biblical conceptions. What is working here is covenant jurisprudence and goes back to the beginnings of God's revelation, indeed, to Adam himself and the Adamic covenant of works.


这段经文的一开始提到了先前说过的话:「这就如罪是从一人入了世界」。[9]    有些註释家把这希腊连接短语(dia touto)译為「因此」(译按:新译本译為「正好像」),或「出於这个原因」,这就是把保罗在罗马书五章1221节所说的,和他从罗马书第一章18节在此之前说过的所有的话连接起来,特别是他对犹太人和希腊人(对人类全面性的划分)在上帝的审判之下(如罗三9-20)的控告连接起来。这种连接观点的依据是,「因此」通常是将先前的想法,作為后面接著要说的某些事的理论根据:例如,「因為他们虽然知道上帝,却不当作上帝荣耀祂,也不感谢祂。他们的思念变為虚妄,无知的心就昏暗了。所以上帝任凭他们逞著心裡的情慾,行污秽的事,以致彼此玷辱自己的身体。」(罗一2124)。这裡的连接回答了这个问题:「為什麼上帝任凭他们?」理由是:因為他们却不当作上帝荣耀祂。  [10] 

The passage opens referring to what precedes it: "Therefore, just as sin entered the world." (9) Some commentators take this Greek conjunctive phrase (dia touto), rendered "therefore" or "for this reason," as relating what Paul says in Romans 5:12-21 to all of what he has said from Romans 1:18 up to this point, particularly to his indictment of both Jews and Greeks (a comprehensive division of mankind) under the divine condemnation (e.g., Rom. 3:9-20). The basis of this view is that the "therefore" normally identifies the preceding thoughts as forming the rationale for something that follows: "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him.... Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity.... " (Rom. 1:21, 24). The connection here answers the question, "Why did God give them over? The rationale: because they refused to glorify him." (10)



Although the preceding view on the "therefore" in Romans 5:12 has some merit, I believe that Paul, in his own inimitable way, is actually connecting Romans 5:12-21 more narrowly to one point that he had been stressing in the immediately preceding passage. It is a fundamental point of the Pauline Gospel: that Christ died on our behalf while we were weak and helpless (5:6), guilty sinners (5:8), and God's rebellious enemies (5:10). Christ hardly died because we were personally righteous and, therefore, deserving of acquittal at his judgment seat (cf. 5:7), nor did he die only after our renovation. The question should arise in our minds from this "on our behalf"-as it does in Paul's-how can there be this kind of exchange? How can Christ die in the place of someone else? "No man can redeem the life of another or give to God a ransom for him-the ransom for a life is costly, no payment is ever enough" (Ps. 49:7-8). (11)



How is it then that Christ could give his life in exchange for ours when no one else can do this for another? How can Jesus Christ act as our Substitute? This is the thread in Romans 5:6-11, which Romans 5:12-21 picks up and answers, and the "therefore" in verse 12 makes the connection: Christ died on our behalf, therefore, we must see that the workings of this exchange is just as in Adam ... so also in Christ. In biblical theology, this substitution is the act of a federal representative, or using biblical terms, a "Mediator" or "Guarantor of the new covenant" (Heb. 7:22; 8:6; 9:15; 12:24; cf. 1 Tim. 2:5).


那麼,什麼是基督為我们作成这个伟大交换的确实依据呢?在罗马书第五章1221节,保罗通过将基督介绍為是末后的亚当(林前十五45)而作了回答, 简要总结在其他的书信裡:「一个人替眾人死了,眾人就都死了。祂替眾人死了,為的是要使活著的人不再為自己活著,却為那替他们死而復活的主而活。」(林后五14-15;新译本)。但一个人如何能替眾人死的呢?保罗回答:「死既藉著一人而来,死人復活也藉著一人而来。在亚当裡眾人都死了,照样,在基督裡眾人也都要復活」(林前十五21-22;新译本)。这样,他的回答就是:基督作為盟约的代表,在某种方式上类同於亚当(也假定此类同在某些方式上失效了,这是他在罗马书第五章1517节提到的)。这是问题的实质,与保罗著作的其他地方相比,在罗马书第五章,他对这问题作了更详细的论述。

What then is the precise basis for this great exchange of Christ for us? Paul answers in Romans 5:12-21 by introducing Christ as the Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), summarized briefly in other letters: "[O]ne died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again" (2 Cor. 5:14-15). But how can one die for all? Paul's answer: "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:21-22). His answer then is that Christ functions as covenant representative in a way analogous with Adam (granting certain ways in which the analogy breaks down, which he mentions in Romans 5:15-17). This is the substance of the issue and the answer that Paul provides in a little more detail in Romans 5:12-21 than elsewhere in his writings.



阅读(56)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载




<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->


网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2016