大家好！ Howdy folks!
这是一个提醒，如果你喜欢这个内容，可以通过点赞、评论，特别是订阅视频来帮助我。 This is just a reminder that if you like this content, you can help me out by liking, commenting, and especially subscribing to the video.
订阅时请确保点击小铃铛，这样每当我有新视频发布时， 无论是《神秘世界》还是其他内容，你都会收到通知。 And be sure to hit the bell notification when you do so that you always get notified whenever I have a new video out, whether it's Mysterious World or something else.
这些天，我通常每周发布几个视频。 These days, I usually have several videos out a week.
希望你喜欢这个内容！ Hope you enjoy this!
怀特先生主张唯独圣经是教会信仰的无误准则，所以他将首先发言。 Mr. White has the affirmative that scripture alone is the infallible rule of faith for the church, so since he is at the affirmative, he will be going first.
晚上好。 Well, good evening.
今晚能在这里真是太好了。 It is great to be here this evening.
恐怕我们时间很少，但要讨论的内容很多。 We have a very small amount of time to cover a lot of ground, I'm afraid.
这是我至少第五次讨论这个特定话题。 This is at least the fifth time that I've done this particular topic.
事实上，大约两个月前，我在德克萨斯州休斯顿与公教会答 疑的特伦特·霍恩就这个话题进行了辩论，离这里不远。 In fact, I was debating Trent Horn of Catholic Answers about two months ago on this topic in Houston, Texas, which isn't all that far from here.
我开车经过休斯顿来到这里。 I drove through Houston to get here.
所以这是我们多次处理过的一个话题。 So it is a subject we've dealt with many, many times.
我要非常明确地说，唯独圣经是圣经的默认立场。 I want to be very specific and clear I say that sola scriptura is the default biblical position.
为什么？ Why?
那么，让我们思考一下圣经怎么说。 Well, let's think about what the Bible says.
主耶稣说，圣经是神对每一个读其话语的人说话，在《马太福音》22章3 1节中，他让人们对1400年前写下的话负责，仿佛神直接对他们说话。 The Lord Jesus said scripture is God speaking to each and every individual who reads its words in Matthew chapter 22 verse 31, where he held men accountable for what had been written 1400 years before them, as if God had spoken it directly to them.
彼得写道，预言的圣经并非出于先知，而是人被圣灵感动从神那里说出 话来。保罗指示提摩太那是神所默示的，使他能完全装备，预备行各样 的善事。你找不到其他来源，没有任何传统或训导权能与之相比。 Peter wrote that prophetic scripture does not find its origin even in the prophet, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit . And Paul directed Timothy to that which is God-breathed, so that he might be thoroughly equipped for every good work . You will not find any other source There is nothing like this about traditions or magisteriums or anything else.
这就是神说话的方式。 This is how God speaks.
这是圣经本身的默认立场。 This is the default position of the Scriptures themselves.
如果圣经本体上确实是神的话语，那么我们只需问神是 否通过使徒见证赐给了我们生活和敬虔所需的一切。 If, in fact, Scripture is ontologically the very speech of God, then we only have to ask whether God has given all that we need for life and godliness through the Apostolic Witness.
也就是说，启示还在继续吗？ That is, is Revelation still taking place?
在回答这个问题后，再问，有没有其他东西在本质上可以与圣 经相提并论？如果我们不能指出圣经之外的任何特定的神的启 示，那么显然，唯独圣经是任何顺服于此启示者的默认立场。 And, upon answering that question, ask this, is there anything else that we can meaningfully describe as equal to Scripture in nature If we cannot point to anything else that is the specific revelation of God outside of Scripture, then clearly, sola scriptura is the default position of anyone in submission to that very revelation.
那么，我们是否发现耶稣或使徒指引我们去其他任何终极权威来源？ So, do we find Jesus or the apostles directing us to any other ultimate source of authority?
耶稣在许多论证中引用了圣经文本，但他从未以犹 太传统或其他所谓的权威来源来结束他的论证。 Jesus concluded many of his arguments with a citation of a biblical text, but he never concluded his arguments by reference to Jewish traditions or any other alleged source of authority.
我们比道成肉身的主更智慧吗？ Are we wiser than the Incarnate Lord?
这就是为什么我们相信圣经是教会信仰的唯一无误准则。 This is why we believe Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith of the Church.
因此，任何其他宗教权威都服从于圣经，因为如果圣经是神的说话，它就具有神的权威。 It flows, therefore, from this reality that any other religious authority is subject to Scripture For if Scripture is God's speaking, it partakes of God's authority.
这使它成为最高权威。 That makes it the supreme authority.
现在，我们坚持圣经的独特性，并不否认神设立的次级权威。 Now we do not, by insisting upon Scripture's uniqueness, deny that there are subordinate authorities established by God.
如教会中神所设立的职员、长老和执事。 Such as the church's God-ordained officers, elders and deacons.
顺便说一下，在新约中，长老、监督和监督者是同义词。 By the way, elder, bishop, and overseer are synonymous in the New Testament.
它们不是不同的职分。 They are not different offices.
监督不高于监督者或长老。 A bishop is not above an overseer or an elder.
这些都是同一个职分。 These are all the same office.
同样，基督徒可以在不同的背景下写文件表达他们 的信仰，以帮助他们进行传福音和护教的任务。 Likewise, Christians can write documents expressing their beliefs in different contexts so as to aid them in their evangelistic and apologetic tasks.
但这些文件总是次要的、解释性的，只有在准确反映圣经教导和规范时才具有权威。 But such documents are always secondary and explanatory and have authority only insofar as they reflect accurately scriptural teachings and norms.
现在，罗马公教会的代表常说他们的是古老的、圣经的范式。 Now, it is often said by Roman Catholic representatives that theirs is the ancient and biblical paradigm.
具体来说，神的话语在古代有时是口头传递的，比如从亚 当到摩西，先知们说出神的话语而不一定写在圣经中。 Specifically, that God's words have been orally transmitted at times in the ancient past, you know, from Adam to Moses, for example, and that prophets spoke God's word without necessarily writing them down in Scripture.
这当然是完全正确的。 And that, of course, is quite true.
双方至少正式承认使徒或先知的职分早已结束，启示随着最后一位使徒的去世而停止。 Both sides at least formally admit that the office of apostle or prophet ended long ago, and that Revelation ceased with the last apostle.
我们只能讨论今天的情况，而不是很久以前的情况。 We can only debate about the situation today, not the situation long ago.
因此，有人声称在使徒时代建立了某种范式。 So it is claimed that during the days of the Apostles, a certain paradigm was established.
据说，罗马至今仍在遵循这一范式。 That, it is said, Rome continues to follow to this day.
反对罗马权威的人必须证明这一范式在使徒去世后发生了变化。 And that those who oppose Rome's authority, claims must prove was changed after the Apostles passed from the scene.
因此，你必须证明，圣经在哪里教导说范式会在使徒去世后改变，这是所面临的挑战。 So you have to prove, well, where does the Bible teach that the paradigm is going to change after the Apostles passed from the scene, is the challenge that is given.
据说，这一范式由圣经、传统和训导权组成。 This paradigm, we are told, is made up of scripture, tradition, and the magisterium.
圣经、传统和训导权。 Scripture, tradition, and the magisterium.
问题是，这需要大量使用模棱两可的说法才能奏效。 The problem is, this requires a massive use of equivocation to work.
为什么呢？ Why is that?
那么，让我们来考虑一下。 Well, let's consider it.
使徒和圣经所设立的由长老/长执领导的地方教会模式，实际上 无法与罗马训导权的庞大层级结构联系起来，顺便说一下，这是 一个非常现代的术语，由单一的主教领导，目前是方济各。 The apostolic and biblical pattern of local churches Led by elders slash presbyters cannot realistically be connected to the massive hierarchy of the Roman magisterium, itself, by the way, a very modern term, led by a single bishop, currently Francis.
枢机主教、大主教和构成现代训导权的无数职分和称号 ，与基督通过他的使徒所设立的权威结构相去甚远。 Cardinals, archbishops, and the myriad of offices and designations that make up the modern magisterium is far, far removed from the authority structure ordained by Christ through his apostles.
考虑到一个基本事实，使徒范式并不包括圣事祭司职分，这是一个基本的出发点。 Consider the basic reality that the apostolic paradigm did not include a sacramental priesthood, for example, as a basic point of departure.
请允许我简要提一下耶路撒冷会议的误用，这次会议是为了解决《使徒行传》第15章中 记载的犹太人和外邦人之间的争议。这是使徒时代进行的讨论，并记录在默示的圣经中。 Allow me here to make a brief aside about the misuse of the gathering in Jerusalem to deal with the Jewish-Gentile controversy recorded in Acts chapter 15. That was a discussion that took place during apostolic times and is recorded for us in inspired scripture.
使徒和长老都参与其中的原因非常明显。 The reason both apostles and elders are included is very obvious.
这是初期教会面临的最大危险，分裂将导致犹太基督徒教会和外邦基督徒教会的出现。 This was the greatest danger facing the infant church, one in which a split would result in a Jewish Christian church and a Gentile Christian church.
这正是保罗在写给罗马人和加拉太教会时所关心的问题。 This is what Paul was so concerned about in writing to the Romans and to the churches of Galatia.
因此，《使徒行传》第15章并不是为未来的“合一”会议提供 模板，只有主教而没有使徒在场，而是表明在场的人提供了一致 的见证，证明犹太人和外邦人在基督的一个身体中的合一。 So rather than providing a template for future, quote, ecumenical, end quote, councils, with only bishops and no apostles present, Acts 15 only shows that those present were there to provide a consistent testimony to the unity of Jews and Gentiles in the one singular body of Christ.
《帖撒罗尼迦后书》2章15节在这一点上经常被误用，保罗指示帖撒罗尼 迦人说：「所以，弟兄们，你们要站立得稳，坚守所领受的教训，不拘是我 们口传的，还是信上写的。」但在上下文中，保罗谈论的是福音，只需看前 两节，他以两种形式传递给帖撒罗尼迦人，一是他与他们同在时的讲道，《 使徒行传》第17章，二是书信，我们称之为《帖撒罗尼迦前书》。 Often 2 Thessalonians 2.15 is misused at this point, where Paul instructed the Thessalonians, So then, brothers, stand firm, and hold fast to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or by epistle . But in context, Paul is talking about the gospel, just look at the preceding two verses, which he delivered to the Thessalonians in two forms, by preaching, when he was with them, Acts chapter 17, and by epistle, which we call 1 Thessalonians.
试图将这段经文变成一个口头的、未记录的、未定义的启示体 ，传递在圣经之外，仅为训导权所知，这是最高程度的误读。 It is eisegesis at its height to attempt to turn this text into a basis for an oral Unrecorded, undocumented, undefined body of revelation passed down outside of Scripture and known only to the magisterium.
有趣的是，在90年代，公教会答疑大力推动物质形式充足性的论点。 Interestingly, back in the 90s, Catholic Answers was big on pushing the material formal sufficiency argument.
我知道这一点，因为我在1990年8月的第一次辩论是在加利福尼亚州长 滩的圣西普里安罗马公教会与公教会答疑的代表杰里·马蒂蒂克斯进行的。 I know that because my first debate In August of 1990 was with Catholic Answers representative Jerry Matitix at St. Cyprian's Roman Catholic Church in Long Beach, California.
但在2022年5月，吉米·艾金在公教会答疑直播的一个公开论坛节目中表示，如 果他必须选择，他会采取部分观点，即启示部分是口头传递的，部分是书面传递的。 But in May of 2022, Jimmy Akin, doing an open forum program on Catholic Answers Live, indicated that if he had to choose, he would take the partly viewpoint, that is, the idea that Revelation has been passed on to us partly in the oral and partly in the written.
现在，他对此进行了更长时间的讨论。 Now, he gave a much longer discussion of that.
他可以在有时间时自己深入探讨。 He can go into that for himself as he has the time to do so.
今晚我们需要认识到，证明使徒范式的圣经/传统/ 训导权已经改变的挑战是站不住脚的，也是错误的。 For our purposes this evening, what needs to be recognized is that the challenge to demonstrate that the apostolic paradigm of scripture-slash-tradition-slash-magisterium has changed is untenable and fallacious.
传统通常被使徒们负面使用，当它被正面使用时，是指福音的单一信息，而不是 一个秘密的、隐藏的、未写下的、未定义的非公开启示体，我只是指出，在过去 几百年中，这些被用来定义诸如无玷始胎、教宗无误和马利亚升天等教义。 Tradition is normally used negatively by the apostles, and when it is used positively, it is referring to the singular message of the gospel, not to a secret, hidden, or unwritten and undefined body of non-public revelation, which has been used, I simply point out to you, over the past couple of hundred years to define such doctrines as the Immaculate Conception, the papal infallibility, and the bodily assumption of Mary.
使徒的训导权并不是由教宗、枢机主教和大主教等组成的， The magisterium of the apostles was not made up of popes and cardinals and archbishops, etc.,
而是由地方教会的长老组成的。 but of elders in the local churches.
正如保罗在以弗所所示，教会的领导权将托付给这些人，而不是某个圣经之外的启示体。 It was to these men, as Paul demonstrated in Ephesus, that the leadership of the church would be entrusted, not some extra-scriptural body of revelation.
确实，正如保罗对提摩太所说，你从我这里听到的事，如何？ Indeed, as Paul said to Timothy, and the things which you have heard from me, how?
在许多见证人面前，保罗明确排除了秘密的、未记录的、非公开的内容，这正是罗 马声称的本质，必须作为诸如身体升天、无玷始胎、教宗无误、炼狱、赦罪券以及 罗马强加于人们良心并宣称为福音一部分的所有其他教义的基础。我们也应记住， 罗马关于信仰宝库的主张要求他们否认唯独圣经没有产生对圣经的无误解释。 In the presence of many witnesses, Paul specifically excludes secret, undocumented, non-public content the very essence of the Roman claim that would have to underlie such dogmas as the bodily assumption, immaculate conception, papal infallibility, purgatory, indulgences, and all the rest of the things Rome binds upon men's consciences and proclaims to be a part of the gospel itself . We should likewise keep in mind that Rome's claims regarding a deposit of faith requires them to deny Sola Scriptura has not produced an infallible interpretation of the Bible.
而是模糊地声称至少定义了圣经中六七段经文的部分含义。 but a vague claim to have at least defined part of what about six or seven passages in the Bible mean.
其中之一，《创世记》3章15节，曾被无误地定义，然后又被后代不无误地反驳。 And one of those, Genesis 3.15, has been infallibly defined and then un-infallibly contradicted by later generations.
罗马不能告诉我们传统的内容，也不能告诉我们发现了多少个无误的会议。 Rome cannot tell us the content of tradition, nor can it tell us even how many infallible councils have been found.
对此存在争论。 There's argument about that.
事实上，罗马直到1546年4月才无误地定义了 圣经正典，那是在最后一位使徒去世很久之后。 In fact, Rome did not infallibly define the canon of Scripture until April of 1546. That's a long time after the last apostle died.
因此，我们必须认识到，这场辩论一直是在两个终极权威来源之间进行的。 So, we must recognize that this debate has always been between two ultimate sources of authority.
罗马声称是三重形式，但实际上，罗马是最终的权威。 Rome claims a tripartite form, but in reality, Rome is the final authority, period.
罗马定义什么是圣经，什么不是圣经，并在方便时，至少要你相信圣经在某些地方的说法。 Rome defines what is and what is not Scripture, and when convenient, what you have to at least believe Scripture says in a few places.
以及它在其他地方根本不可能的意思。 and what it simply cannot mean in others.
同样，她假装在教父文献中表达的无数不同观点中 识别使徒传统，拒绝大量反对她特定主张的证据。 Likewise, she pretends to identify apostolic tradition in the myriads of differing views expressed in patristic sources, rejecting the mountain of testimony that goes against her particular claims.
总之，我们还必须认识到这场辩论的重要性。 In conclusion, we must also recognize the vital importance of this debate.
罗马要求人们相信使徒从未教导过的作为福音一部分的事物，但你今天必须相信它们。 Rome demands men and women to believe things the Apostles never taught as part of the Gospel, but you must believe them today.
她这样做是因为她拒绝唯独圣经。 And she does so because she rejects Sola Scriptura.
今天，随着方济各试图对罗马公教会进行根本性改变，我们看到 了拒绝唯独圣经的必然结果，即失去了约束这些力量的能力。 Today, with Francis seeking to make fundamental changes in the Roman Catholic Church, we see the inevitable result of the denial of sola scriptura, the loss of the ability to restrain such forces.
我向你们提交的理由是，今天我们在罗马看到如此混乱的原因，你看到 整个非洲说，不，我们不跟随那个，不，我们不会做那件事的原因。 I submit to you that the reason we see such havoc In Rome today, the reason you see all of Africa saying, nope, we ain't following that, nope, we're not going to do that thing over there.
你看到这种情况发生的原因是，因为你们否认了唯独圣经，你们已经将 罗马公教会与基督唯一确定的声音隔绝，并用教会取代了那个声音。 The reason you see this kind of thing happening is because since you've denied Sola Scriptura, you've cut the Roman Catholic Church off from the only sure voice of Christ and replaced that voice with the Church.
这就是否认唯独圣经的问题。 That's the problem in denying Sola Scriptura.
要否认唯独圣经，诚实地说，需要证明今天在圣经之 外的某个来源中有基督所设立的、神所默示的启示。 To deny Sola Scriptura requires, honestly, the demonstration of Christ-ordained revelation that is God-breathed in some source other than the Bible today.
不是说它曾经以口头形式存在，而是说它今天仅以口头形式存在。 Not that it existed orally at one point, but that it only exists orally today.
能够确凿地证明来自基督和他的使徒。 that can with certainty be demonstrated to have come from Christ and his apostles.
从未有过这样的来源，特别是在今天方济各的教宗任 期内，我们可以自信地说罗马教会没有这样的来源。 No such source has ever been produced, and especially today in light of the papacy of Francis, we can say with confidence that no such source is in the possession of the Roman Church.
只有圣经，只有圣经可以说：「你们没有读过神对你们说的话吗？」 It is only of Scripture, only of Scripture can it ever be said, have you not read what God spoke to you saying?
所以我希望你们思考这一点。 And so I want you to think about that.
耶稣与撒都该人争论时，对他们说，引用了1400年前写的摩西 五经：「你们没有读过吗？」他没有说：「你们没有听过吗？」 Jesus was arguing with the Sadducees and he said to them, quoting from the Pentateuch which was written 1400 years earlier, have you not read He didn't say, have you not heard?
他说：「你们没有读过神对你们说的话吗？」 He said, have you not read what God spoke to you?
他让当时的人对圣经的内容负责，仿佛神直接对他们说话。 He held men in his day accountable to the content of Scripture as if God had spoken it directly to them.
教会没有其他东西具有那种清晰度和权威性，因为圣经是神在说话。 There is nothing else in the possession of the church that has that level of clarity and authority Because scripture is God speaking.
这就是为什么圣经是教会信仰的唯一无误准则。 That is why scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith for the church.
非常感谢你们的关注。 Thank you very much for your attention.
看来我们准备好开始了。 Looks like we're ready to rock and roll.
大家好，你们怎么样？ Howdy folks, how you doing?
现在，今晚我们的议题，如你所见，这是詹姆斯 选的，是「圣经是教会信仰的唯一无误准则」。 Now, our resolution tonight, as you can see, this was picked by James, is Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith for the church.
这很有帮助，但它并没有真正让我们全面了解唯独圣经是什么以及它如何运作。 And that's helpful, but it doesn't really give us a full sense of what Sola Scriptura is and how it functions.
幸运的是，詹姆斯在这里再次帮助我们，因为在他1996年的书《罗马公 教会争议》中，在「唯独圣经是什么」这一标题下，他告诉我们以下内容。 Fortunately, James is here to help us out again, because in his 1996 book, The Roman Catholic Controversy, under the heading, What Sola Scriptura Is, he tells us the following.
第一，唯独圣经的教义，简单来说，就是圣经本身足以作为教会信仰的无误准则。 One, the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, simply stated, is that the scriptures alone are sufficient to function as the regula fide, the infallible rule of faith for the church.
第二，所有一个人必须相信的，顺便说一下，红 色的两个词「必须」和「是」，这是他的强调。 Two, All that one must believe, and by the way, the two words in red, must and is, that's his emphasis.
所以，一个人成为基督徒必须相信的一切都在圣经中，而不在其他任何来源中。 So all that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and in no other source.
那些在圣经中找不到的，无论是直接的还是必要的推论，都不对基督徒有约束力。 That which is not found in Scripture, either directly or by necessary implication, is not binding upon the Christian.
所以让我们记住这些要点。 So let's remember those points.
现在，我在研究这个话题时注意到，詹姆斯似乎在一个问题上至少稍微改变了他的立场。 Now, I have noticed in researching this topic, it seems like James has changed his position at least a little bit on one question.
也许他改变了，也许没有。 Maybe he has, maybe not.
他可以稍后为我们澄清这一点。 He can clarify that for us later.
但在《罗马公教会争议》中，他说圣经声称是基督教会唯一且足够的无误信仰准则。 But in the Roman Catholic controversy, he said that the Bible claims to be the sole and sufficient infallible rule of faith for the Christian church.
但三年后，在1999年，他在他的网站上写道， 新教徒不主张唯独圣经在启示时代是有效的概念。 But three years later, in 1999, on his website, he wrote that Protestants do not assert that sola scriptura is valid, is a valid concept during times of Revelation.
指向启示时代并说「看，唯独圣经在那里不起作用」是一个谬论。 It's a canard to point to times of Revelation and say, see, sola scriptura doesn't work there.
他说，当然不起作用。 Of course it doesn't, he says.
所以这是一个非常有趣的变化。 So that's a very interesting change.
这意味着新教徒常用来支持唯独圣经的经文实际上并没有教导唯独圣经。 It would mean that none of the verses that Protestants commonly appeal to in support of sola scriptura actually teach sola scriptura.
如果唯独圣经在使徒时期没有使用，那么就没有经文告诉当时的基督徒使用它。 If sola scriptura was not in use in the apostolic period, then there are no verses telling Christians in that period to use it.
所以圣经并没有声称是基督教会唯一且足够的无误信仰准则。 So the Bible doesn't claim to be the sole and sufficient infallible rule of faith for the Christian Church.
相反，唯独圣经必须是一个圣经之后的推论。 Instead, sola scriptura would have to be a post-biblical inference.
我们可以在几个月前詹姆斯与我的同事特伦特·霍恩的辩论中看到这一点。 And we can see that in the debate that James did a couple of months ago with my colleague Trent Horn.
在那部分辩论中，他是这样推理的。 During part of that, he reasoned this way.
他说，他们，即一世纪的基督徒，有圣经和使徒。 He said they, meaning first century Christians, had Scripture and the Apostles.
使徒已经不在了。 The apostles are gone.
好吧，这是一个圣经之后的前提，因为圣经从未说过他们会消失。 Okay, that's a post-biblical premise, because the Bible never says they're going to go away.
我们现在有什么？ What do we have now?
我们有圣经，意思是只有圣经。 We have Scripture, meaning Scripture only.
好吧，那是另一个圣经之后的前提。 Well, that's another post-biblical premise.
因此，他得出结论，他们，即圣经，构成了今天教会唯一的无误信仰准则。 Therefore, he concludes, they, meaning the Scriptures, form the only infallible rule of faith for the church today.
那么，让我们谈谈权威在圣经中是如何实际运作的。 Well, let's talk about how authority actually worked in the Bible.
旧约和新约都是一样的，但我这里要重点讲新约， 因为我没有时间详细讲旧约中它是如何运作的。 And it's the same for both the Old and the New Testament, but I'm going to focus on the New Testament here because I don't have time to go into how it worked the same way in the Old Testament.
但在新约中，耶稣给了一堆新的启示。 But in the New Testament, Jesus gave a bunch of new revelation.
你知道的，比如他说，圣殿里的所有石头都会被拆毁。 You know, like when he said, all the stones in the temple, they're all going to be torn down.
那是新的启示。 That was new revelation.
那不在旧约中。 That was not in the Old Testament.
由于耶稣从未写过任何东西，他以口头形式给了这个新的启示，但他希望它传递给其他人。 And since Jesus never wrote anything, He gave this new revelation in oral form, but he wanted it passed on to others.
所以他告诉他的使徒和某些选定的其他人，通过口头讲道将这个神圣的启示传递给其他人。 And so he told his apostles and certain select others to transmit this divine revelation to others via preaching in oral form.
他举例说，如果他们听你们的，就是听我的。 And he said, for example, if they hear you, they hear me.
如果他们拒绝你们，就是拒绝我和那差我来的。 If they reject you, they reject me and the one who sent me.
此外，虽然我们将看到并不是所有的启示，但其中一些启示后来被写在权威的圣经中。 Also, some of this revelation, although as we're going to see it doesn't look like all of it, some of this revelation was later written down in authoritative scriptures.
所以这就是我们看到耶稣时代事情的运作方式。 So that's how we see things working at the time of Jesus.
现在，我知道「传统」这个词在新教圈子里有点敏感，这是有合理依据的。 Now, I know that the term tradition is kind of sensitive in Protestant circles, and there's a reasonable basis for that.
第一，因为它在新教圈子里几乎总是被负面使用，但也因为圣 经中有一些经文警告传统，圣经确实以负面方式谈论传统。 Number one, because it tends to be used almost exclusively negatively in Protestant circles, but also because there are passages in which the Scriptures warn about tradition, where the Scripture does speak of tradition in a negative way.
每当这种情况发生时，讨论的总是人的传统。 And whenever that happens, it is always Human tradition that's under discussion.
基本上是在福音书的两段经文中，加拉太书的一段和歌罗西书的一段，其他不多。 It's basically in two passages in the Gospel and one in Galatians and one in Colossians and not much else.
但平衡来看，新约中也有对传统的正面提及。 But balancing that, there are positive references to tradition in the New Testament.
每当它是正面的，它谈论的是使徒传统，而不是基督之前法利赛 人所遵循的某些犹太传统，而是使徒传递给基督徒群体的传统。 And whenever it's positive, It's talking about apostolic tradition, not some Jewish tradition from before the time of Christ that Pharisees were into, but traditions that were being passed on to the Christian community by the apostles.
例如，保罗称赞哥林多人遵守他传给他们的传统。 So, for example, Paul commends the Corinthians for keeping the traditions just as he delivered them to them.
他还命令帖撒罗尼迦人坚守他们所受的教训，无论是口传的还是书写的。 He also commands the Thessalonians to hold to the traditions they were taught, whether they were taught orally or in writing.
他命令帖撒罗尼迦人远离那些不按他给他们的传统生活的人。 And he commands the Thessalonians to stay away from anyone who's not living according to the traditions that he had given them.
所以，当传统被负面提及时，你会注意到它是人的传统。 So when tradition is spoken of negatively, you'll notice it's human.
当它被正面提及时，它是使徒的传统。 When it's spoken positively, spoken of positively, it's apostolic.
但还有一个问题是，你如何解释圣经和传统？ But then there's also a question of how do you interpret Scripture and tradition?
因为它们可以有多种解读方式。 Because they can be read more than one way.
例如，在第一世纪，有一个争议是你是否需要受割礼才能成为基督徒？ For example, in the first century there was a dispute about do you need to be circumcised in order to be a Christian?
那么，神愿意召开一个会议，权威地解释先前的圣经和传统，涉及割礼和基督徒身份。 Well, God willed A council to authoritatively interpret previous scripture and tradition as related to circumcision and Christian identity.
我们知道这是神的旨意，因为保罗说他因启示上了这个会议。 And we know God willed it because Paul says that he went up to this council because of a revelation.
神说，你上去与耶路撒冷的教会谈谈。 God said, you get on up there and talk to the church in Jerusalem.
但会议包括的不仅仅是使徒，正如詹姆斯承认的那样。 But the council included, as James admitted, more than just the apostles.
它还包括耶路撒冷的长老。 It also included the elders in Jerusalem.
所以这不是一个仅限于使徒的会议。 So this isn't a council limited to the apostles.
经文中没有说长老只是作为见证人在场。 And there's nothing in the text that says the elders were just there as witnesses.
他们没有参与讨论。 They didn't get to participate in the discussion.
经文没有这么说。 Doesn't say that.
有趣的是，神在这次会议期间没有给出任何新的启示。 Now, interestingly, God didn't give any new revelation during this council.
他没有给任何人异象，也没有对任何人说话，但圣灵引导 会议，使其最终做出无误的决定，并以神的权威发言。 He didn't give anybody a vision, he didn't speak to anybody, but the Holy Spirit guided the council so that it ended up making an inerrant decision, and it spoke with divine authority.
这就是为什么在会议结束时，会议的父老们说：「圣灵和我们 定意，不将别的重担放在你们身上，除了这些必要的事。」 That's why at the end of the council, the council fathers say, it has seemed good to us, It has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements.
因此，这次会议是按照神的旨意行使教导权，或用拉丁语说，训导权。 And so this council was, by God's will, exercising a teaching authority, or in Latin, a magisterium.
所以我们看到了詹姆斯提到的使徒范式的要素。 So we see the elements of the apostolic paradigm that James referred to.
在第一世纪，当使徒们在传道时，基督徒被期望从使徒的圣经中得 出他们的教义，这些是使徒授权的权威著作形式的神圣启示，这包 括旧约，因为他们说，是的，所有那些旧约经文都是权威的。 In the first century, as the apostles were preaching, Christians were expected to derive their doctrine from apostolic scripture, which is divine revelation in the form of authoritative writings that the apostles had authorized, and that would include the Old Testament, because they said, yeah, all those Old Testament scriptures, those are authoritative.
此外，还包括使徒传统，这是以口头传递的教义形式与圣经并行的神圣启示。 Also, it included apostolic tradition, which is divine revelation in the form of teachings passed on orally alongside scripture.
还包括训导权，这是神设立的教导权威，权威地解释圣经和传统中的神圣启示。 And it included a magisterium, a teaching authority instituted by God to authoritatively interpret the divine revelation in Scripture and in tradition.
我们应该遵循使徒范式吗？ Should we follow the apostolic paradigm?
使徒范式是神圣授权的，神圣授权的东西是有约束力的，除非神做出新的规定。 Well, the apostolic paradigm was divinely authorized, and what is divinely authorized is binding, unless God makes new provisions.
因此，任何替代使徒范式的东西必须是神圣授权的。 Therefore, any replacement for the apostolic paradigm must be divinely authorized.
但正如我们将看到的，唯独圣经不是神圣授权的，所以我们今天应该坚持使徒范式。 But as we're going to see, sola scriptura is not divinely authorized, so we should stick with the apostolic paradigm today.
换句话说，基督徒应该遵循我们所知道的耶稣对他的追随者的旨意，除非他另有告知。 Put it another way, Christians should follow what we know Jesus willed for his followers, unless he tells us otherwise.
基督旨意他的教会使用使徒范式，并且他的教会超越使徒时代。 Christ willed that his church use the apostolic paradigm, and he willed that his church extend beyond the apostolic age.
所以，除非我们得到某个启示告诉我们另有安排，否则 我们应该在教会历史上使用耶稣所旨意的使徒范式。 So unless we get a revelation somewhere telling us otherwise, we should use the apostolic paradigm that Jesus willed throughout the history of the church.
你知道吗？ And you know what?
这是基督徒在宗教改革之前所做的。 That's what Christians did do until the Reformation.
使徒范式在使徒时代被基督徒使用，然后传递给后来的基督徒并被使用。 The apostolic paradigm was used by Christians in the apostolic age, and it was then passed on to and used by later Christians.
在他二月份的辩论中，詹姆斯承认这种圣经、传统和训导权的范式被公教会、 希腊、俄罗斯和乌克兰东正教会、东方亚述教会和其他东方基督教团体使用。 In his February debate, James acknowledged that this paradigm of Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium is used by the Catholic Church, by Greek, Russian, and Ukrainian Orthodox churches, by the Assyrian Church of the East, and by other Oriental Christian groups.
现在这些不同的团体并不完全彼此相通，他们有差异，但 他们都保持着相同的圣经、传统和训导权的基本范式。 Now these different groups aren't all in full communion with each other, they have differences, but they are all maintaining the same basic paradigm of scripture, tradition, and magisterium.
所有这些团体都只是保持了这个范式。 All of these groups have simply maintained the paradigm.
他们并不总是正确地应用它，但他们保持了从使徒继承的范式。 They haven't always applied it correctly, but they've maintained the paradigm they inherited from the apostles.
因此，唯独圣经是对在新教宗教改革中普及的使徒范式的拒绝。 Sola Scriptura, thus, is a rejection of the apostolic paradigm that was popularized at the Protestant Reformation.
那么，新约对我们所生活的时代，对使徒后的时代有什么说法？ Well, what does the New Testament say about the age we're living in, about the post-apostolic age?
它说了很多事情。 Well, it says a number of things.
这里有三个相关的。 Here are three pertinent ones.
第一个你可以争论，但大多数基督徒已经辨别出，当耶稣告诉使 徒圣灵会引导他们进入一切真理时，那是对整个教会的应许。 The first one you could quibble with, but most Christians have discerned that when Jesus tells the apostles that the Holy Spirit will guide them into all truth, that that's a promise for the whole church.
圣灵不会在某个时候抛弃教会。 The Holy Spirit's not going to abandon the church at some point.
它会继续引导教会。 It's going to continue to guide the church.
不可争论的是耶稣在大使命中所说的，他会引导教会教导直到世界的末了。 What's not debatable is what Jesus says in the Great Commission, which is that he will guide the church as it teaches Unto the end of the world.
他说：「去使万民作我的门徒，教导他们遵守我所吩咐你们 的一切事，看哪，我天天与你们同在，直到世界的末了。」 He says, go make disciples, teaching them to observe everything I've commanded you, and behold, I'm with you all the days until the end of the world.
所以他会引导教会的教导直到世界的末了。 So he's going to guide the church in its teaching until the end of the world.
当圣保罗在他最后一封书信中即将去世时，他告诉提摩太要接受他 在许多见证人面前从保罗那里得到的口头传统，所以这不是某种秘 密的诺斯底传统，并将其托付给其他人，这些人将教导其他人。 And as St. Paul is about to die in his last epistle, he tells Timothy to take the oral tradition that he has received from Paul in the presence of many witnesses, so it's not some secret Gnostic tradition, And entrust it to other people who will teach other people.
因此，由于他计划去世，保罗设想这种使徒传统 的传递发生在使徒后的时代，他列出了前四代。 And so, since he's planning to die, Paul's envisioning this passing on of apostolic tradition happening in the post-apostolic age, and he names the first four generations of it.
他自己的使徒世代，提摩太的世代，提摩太将教导的世代，以及他们教导的世代。 His own apostolic generation, Timothy's generation, the generation Timothy will teach, and the generation that they teach.
所以新约期望我们在使徒之后传递使徒传统。 So the New Testament expects us to pass down apostolic tradition after the apostles.
你猜他们做了什么？ And guess what they did?
与詹姆斯的说法相反，我们今天确实有圣经之外的使徒传统。 We do, contrary to James' claims, we do have extra-biblical apostolic tradition today.
这里有四个没有在圣经中提到的使徒传统，我选择它们是因为我们对此达成一致。 Here are just four apostolic traditions that are not mentioned in Scripture that I've picked because we agree on them.
首先，不会有新的使徒。 First, there aren't going to be any new apostles.
不一定非得那样。 It doesn't have to be that way.
你知道，保罗不是耶稣的目击者，但耶稣向他显现，教导他，并任命他为使徒。 You know, Paul was not an eyewitness of Jesus, but Jesus appeared to him and taught him and appointed him an apostle.
他本可以在整个教会历史中继续这样做，但我们知道 根据使徒传统，因为这不在圣经中，使徒们停止了。 He could have kept doing that all the way through church history, but we know as a matter of apostolic tradition, because it's not in the Bible, that the apostles stopped.
此外，我们知道不会有任何新的公共启示。 Also, we know there's not going to be any new public revelation.
公共启示是指对整个基督徒公众有约束力的启示。 Public revelation meaning revelation that is binding on the whole Christian public.
这在最后一位使徒去世时停止了。 That stopped with the death of the last apostle.
因此，不会有任何新的经文。 Consequently, there are not going to be any new scriptures.
因此，新约只包括27卷书。 And consequently, the New Testament consists of only 27 books.
我们现在不能再增加了。 We can't add to it now.
所以声称我们没有任何现存的使徒传统或使徒传统除了罗马之外无人知晓，这是错误的。 So the claim that we don't have any surviving apostolic tradition or that apostolic tradition is unknown to anybody but Rome, that's just false.
我们在这四点上达成一致。 There's four points of it that we agree on.
神有时会引导训导权做出无误的决定吗？ Does God sometimes guide the magisterium into infallible decisions?
确实，在第一世纪中期，长老和监督是同一个职分。 Well, it's true that in the mid-first century, elder and bishop were the same thing.
但到第一世纪末，这发生了变化，正如安提阿的伊格那修提到的，后 来二世纪的人物如里昂的爱任纽说，使徒们是做出这一改变的人。 But that shifted by the end of the first century, as Ignatius of Antioch mentions, and later second century figures like Irenaeus of Lyon say the apostles were the ones who made that change.
他们设立了这种区别。 They instituted the difference.
我们看到，当他们在会议中聚集时，训导权在神的引导下做出了 无误的决定，如耶稣是神，圣灵是神，耶稣是一个人，等等。 And we see that when they met together in councils, The magisterium was led by God to inerrant decisions like Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, Jesus is one person, and so forth.
其中一些决定直到基督时代后近700年才做出。 Some of these decisions not being made until almost 700 years after the time of Christ.
所以我们看到神在基督时代后几百年引导教会做出无误的决定。 So we see God guiding the church into making inerrant decisions hundreds of years after the time of Christ.
现在，为了证明唯独圣经，你最终需要以某种方式展示教导它的经文。 Now in order to prove sola scriptura, You would ultimately need to show verses that teach it, in one way or another.
唯独圣经认为所有教义必须在圣经中明确或隐含地教导。 Sola Scriptura holds that all teachings must be taught explicitly or implicitly in Scripture.
唯独圣经是一种教义。 Sola Scriptura is a teaching.
因此，如果唯独圣经是真的，它必须在圣经中教导。 Therefore, if Sola Scriptura is true, it must be taught in Scripture.
但它没有在圣经中教导，所以它是假的。 But it's not taught in Scripture, so it's false.
它是自我反驳的。 It's self-refuting.
詹姆斯承认它在第一世纪没有使用，因此新约中的任何经文都没有教导它。 James has acknowledged it was not in use in the first century, and consequently none of the passages in the New Testament are teaching it.
这是一个基于错误前提的圣经之后的推论，比如我们不再有任何使徒传统。 It's a post-biblical inference based on false premises like we don't have any apostolic tradition anymore.
所以简单总结使徒范式，是耶稣的旨意吗？ So to just summarize the apostolic paradigm, was Jesus's will?
对于他的第一批追随者，它从未被撤销。 For his first followers, it was never rescinded.
他应许他和圣灵会永远引导教会。 He promised he and the Holy Spirit would guide the church forever.
新约谈到在使徒后的时代传递使徒传统，神在几个世纪后引导训导权做出无误的决定。 The New Testament speaks of passing down apostolic tradition in the post-apostolic age, and God guided the Magisterium into inerrant decisions centuries later.
而唯独圣经不是耶稣对他第一批追随者的旨意，从未在新约中教导，基于错误的使徒后前 提，如我们今天没有任何使徒传统，并且它是自我反驳的，因为它未能通过自己的测试。 Whereas, Sola Scriptura was not Jesus' will for his first followers, is never taught in the New Testament, is based on false post-apostolic premises such as we don't have any apostolic tradition today, and it's self-refuting because it fails to meet its own test.
非常感谢大家。 Thank you very much, folks.
好的，现在你会注意到，我在开场陈述中几乎回应了艾肯先生的所有陈述。 All right, now you will notice that I addressed pretty much all of Mr. Aiken's presentation in my opening presentation.
所以我们得到的是一个明显的模棱两可的例子。 And so what we have gotten is a clear example of equivocation.
让我给你一个例子。 Let me give you an example.
他说，他将使徒传统称为与圣经一起教导的教义，并说使徒们指的是这个。 He said, he referred to apostolic tradition as teachings taught alongside scripture and said that the apostles were referring to this.
使徒们指的是福音的传讲。 What the apostles were referring to was the preaching of the gospel.
福音为我们记录在新约中。 The gospel is recorded for us in the New Testament.
所以当使徒们不再在这里时，他们所教导的内容在圣经中可以找到。 And so when the Apostles aren't here any longer, what they taught is found for us in Scripture.
当我与米奇·帕克瓦就这个主题辩论时，实际上我刚刚意识到这是我第六次就这个主题辩 论，当我问米奇·帕克瓦，罗马公教会是否定义了耶稣曾说过的一个不在圣经中的字？ When I debated Mitch Pacwa on this subject, actually I just realized this is my sixth debate on the subject, when I asked Mitch Pacwa, has the Roman Catholic Church defined a single word that Jesus ever spoke that's not found in Scripture?
他说，没有。 He said, no.
罗马公教会是否无误地定义了任何使徒曾说过的一个不在圣经中的字？ Has the Roman Catholic Church defined infallibly a single word that any Apostle ever said that's not found in Scripture?
他说，没有。 He said, no.
那么，我们怎么知道他们教导了什么？ So, how do we know what they taught?
在圣经中。 It's in Scripture.
我们怎么知道耶稣教导了什么？ How do we know what Jesus taught?
在圣经中。 It's in Scripture.
唯独圣经与使徒后的教会相关，因为你必须先有圣经才能有唯独。 Sola Scriptura is relevant to the church after the apostles because you have to have a Scriptura to have a Sola first.
所以，正如我在开场时所说，我们必须谈论我们今天的位置，而不 是圣经形成时期发生的事情，包括《使徒行传》第15章的会议。 So, as I said in my opening, we have to talk about where we are today, not what was happening during the time of the Scripturation, which includes the Acts chapter 15 Council.
所以，如果你仔细注意，看看他所谈到的所谓的使徒传统。 So, if you keep close attention, look at the quote-unquote apostolic traditions that he talked about.
他谈到，例如，没有更多的使徒和没有更多的圣经书卷。 He talked about, for example, no more apostles and no more books of Scripture.
读《希伯来书》第1章：「在这末世，神借着他的儿子对我们说话。」 Read Hebrews chapter 1. In these last days God has spoken to us by his Son.
他在过去做了这些事。 He did these things in the past.
现在，在基督里，我们有了这个结论，这个完成，这就 是早期教父们理解《希伯来书》第1章所谈论的内容。 Now, in Christ, we have this conclusion, this finishing, and that's how the early fathers understood what Hebrews chapter 1 was talking about.
例如，在《提摩太后书》2章2节中，他说我们要将这些使徒传统 教导给提摩太，提摩太再教导给下一个人，下一个人，依此类推。 In 2 Timothy 2.2, for example, he said that we are to teach these apostolic traditions to Timothy, and he's to teach it to the next person, the next person, so on and so forth.
这是真的，但这些不是存在于圣经之外的传统。 That's true, but these are not traditions that exist outside of Scripture.
保罗自己说了什么？ What did Paul himself say?
「你在许多见证人面前听见我所教训的。」 What you have heard me teach in the presence of many witnesses.
你们看，大家，你们需要理解这很重要的原因是艾肯先生代表 一个宗教团体，他们会告诉你们必须相信马利亚身体升天。 You see, folks, you need to understand the reason this is important is that Mr. Aiken represents a religious group that will tell you that you must believe that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven.
这是福音的一部分。 It's a part of the gospel.
这是信仰的教义。 It's De Fide.
我曾与罗马公教会的护教学者辩论，他们说，你有同样的理 由相信马利亚身体升天，就像你相信耶稣基督的复活一样。 I've debated Roman Catholic apologists who have said, you have as much warrant to believe in the bodily assumption of Mary as you have to believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
这就是它的确定性。 That's how certain it is.
顺便说一下，当时他在公教会答疑工作。 And he worked for Catholic Answers, by the way, at that time.
如果是这样，记住我们有无玷始胎、马利亚的永恒童贞、 炼狱、赦罪券和教宗无误等教义，这些都是使徒传统吗？ If that is the case, and remember we have the Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity of Mary, such doctrines as purgatory and indulgences and papal infallibility, all these things, are they apostolic traditions?
你看，艾肯先生给了我们一些很容易的例子。 You see, Mr. Akin gave us the real easy ones.
那么使徒们真正必须教导的那些呢？ How about the ones the apostles really had to teach?
但事实是，教会历史告诉我们，当时没有人知道这些。 But the reality is church history teaches us nobody back then knew anything about it.
没有人宣讲马利亚身体升天。 No one was preaching about the bodily assumption of Mary.
没有人相信罗马的教宗是无误的。 No one believed that the Pope in Rome was the infallible.
好吧，罗马的教宗可能认为他是无误的，但没有其他人这么认为。 Well, the Pope in Rome might have thought he was infallible, but nobody else did.
问问奥古斯丁，问问西普里安，问问那些在教会历史上反对这种想法的人。 Ask Augustine, ask Cyprian, ask the number of people who contradicted that kind of thinking down through church history.
这就是为什么如果你要说这些使徒传统是使徒教 导的而没有记录在圣经中，你必须给我们证据。 That's why it's so important that if you're going to say that these apostolic traditions were taught by the apostles and not recorded in Scripture, you've got to give us evidence.
而罗马做不到。 And Rome can't do it.
罗马不能告诉我们什么是传统。 Rome can't tell us what tradition is.
罗马不能告诉我们她定义了这么多教义的信仰宝库是什么。 Rome can't tell us what the deposit of faith is upon which she has defined so many of these dogmas.
他说我承认，例如，有其他的，当然有教会，东正教， 如果我在与一个东正教徒辩论，我会谈论他们的传统。 He said that I admitted, for example, that there were other, well, certainly there are churches, the Eastern Orthodoxy, if I was debating an Eastern Orthodox person, I'd be talking about their traditions.
我会谈论第二次尼西亚会议及其引入的荒谬之处。 I'd be talking about the Second Nicene Council and the absurdities that it introduced.
以及这如何完全违背了之前几百年的传统。 and how that was completely contrary to what had come in the hundreds of years before that.
我会用不同的例子来遵循同样的标准，那就是，我想知道耶稣和他的使徒 教导了什么，而我们今天唯一能知道的方式就是在圣经中找到的内容。 I'd be using different examples by beholding them to the exact same standard, and that is, I want to know what Jesus and his apostles taught, and the only way we can know that today is what is found in Scripture.
我们不能在圣经之外找到这些。 We cannot go outside of Scripture to get that.
所以，艾肯先生说，当提到人的传统时，是的，那是负面的，但你需要记住一些事情。 So, Mr. Aiken said, well, when human tradition is referred to, yes, that's a negative thing, but you need to remember something.
在《马太福音》第15章和《马可福音》第7章中，当耶稣谈到人的传统时 ，他说我们要用圣经来检验它，文士和法利赛人相信他们所遵循的传统，注 意这一点，跟随这一点，是由摩西传递并在圣经之外口头传递下来的。 In Matthew chapter 15 and Mark chapter 7, when Jesus talked about human tradition, and he said we are to test it by scripture, The scribes and Pharisees believed that the traditions that they were following, watch this, follow this, had been delivered by Moses and passed down orally outside of Scripture.
他们相信这些是神圣的传统，他们相信这些来自神，但它 们不在圣经中，而是通过犹太训导权口头传递下来的。 They believed they were divine traditions, they believed they came from God, but that they weren't found in Scripture, they were passed down orally through the Jewish magisterium.
耶稣屈服于此吗？ Did Jesus bow to that?
他当然没有。 he most certainly did not.
事实上，他告诉我们要检验任何宣称的传统，即使是那些说这是来自神的人，如何检验？ And in fact he told us to test any proclaimed tradition even from people who say this came from God by what?
用圣经。 By scripture.
那么什么是使徒范式？ So what is the apostolic paradigm?
是以彼得为首的训导权吗？ Is it a magisterium with Peter at the head?
顺便说一下，在《使徒行传》第15章中，他们不仅引用圣经作为基础，顺 便说一下，如果你读了它，你会注意到不是彼得主持的，而是雅各主持的。 By the way, in Acts chapter 15, in Acts chapter 15, not only do they quote Scripture as the foundation, by the way, did you notice if you read it, Peter didn't run that, James did.
雅各做出了最终决定。 James made the final decision.
在这个特定的时间点，彼得并没有被认为是所有基督徒的领袖或类似的角色。 Peter was not considered the head of all Christians or anything like that at this particular point in time.
但当你看那些语境中的内容时，你会发现传统这个概念在正面使用时，只是指福音。 But when you look at what is being said in those contexts, you discover that the idea of tradition When it is used positively, it is simply talking about the gospel.
这就是保罗对帖撒罗尼迦人说的，我在你们那里 传道时和写信给你们时教导你们的那一套真理。 That's what Paul, when he said to the Thessalonians, I have taught you one body of truth when I was with you by preaching and when I wrote you the epistle.
你们持守了这些，我为此称赞你们。 And you're holding to that and I commend you for that.
你我今天如何遵守这些？ How do you and I obey that today?
通过相信那些几百年来你找不到一丝证据的传统，事实上 可以找到各种早期作家反驳你现在称为传统的那些东西？ by believing in traditions you can't find a single shred of evidence for, for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years, and fact can find all sorts of early writers who contradicted those things you now call tradition?
你看，这是唯独圣经对唯独教会。 You see, it's sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia.
当教会决定我们来定义什么是圣经，它的意思是什么， 什么是传统，它的意思是什么时，你没有办法纠正它。 And when the church decides we get to define what scripture is, what it means, what tradition is, and what it means, you have no way of correcting that.
你没有办法解决我们今天与方济各的问题以及罗马发生的事情。 You have no way of fixing the problem we have with Francis today and what's happening in Rome.
这就是今晚的问题所在。 That's what the issue is tonight.
集中注意力。 Keep your eye on the ball.
不要允许重新定义。 Don't allow for redefinition.
我可以再讲30秒，因为他讲了，但我不会。我会停下。 I could go for another 30 seconds, because he did, but I won't. I'll stop.
谢谢。 Thank you.
詹姆斯，任何时候你想再讲30秒，我都支持你。 Anytime you want another 30, James, I got your back covered.
所以有很多内容我想回应，但我没有时间，因为詹姆斯在使用一种辩论者的策略，有时称 为超载，你不断地提出一个又一个指控，并对它们做出声明，让你的对手没有机会回应。 So there's a lot in there that I would love to respond to that I simply don't have time to because James is engaging in a debater's tactic that's sometimes called overloading, where you just throw one charge after another after another after another and you make claims about them that your opponent has no chance to respond to.
所以在这种情况下，一个有道德的辩论者唯一的选择是不被分 散注意力，只是指出对手在做什么，然后继续坚持基本原则。 So in such a circumstance, the only option for an ethical debater is to not be distracted and to just point out what one's opponent is doing and then move on and stick to basic principles.
所以这就是我要做的。 So that's what I'm going to do.
这里有一些不能证明唯独圣经的事情。 Here are some things that don't prove sola scriptura.
其中之一是耶稣或新约其他地方的经文，谈到圣经是默示的、无误的 或无谬的，因为这些经文不能证明没有其他东西也具有这些特质。 One of them is passages from Jesus or elsewhere in the New Testament that speak of the scriptures as inspired, infallible, or inerrant, because those passages don't prove there aren't other things that don't have those qualities.
此外，耶稣或新约期望一些犹太人知道一些经文。 Also, Jesus or the New Testament expects some Jews to know some scriptures.
那么，这不能证明唯独圣经，事实上没有经文表明他期望所有犹太人知道所有经文。 Well, that doesn't prove sola scriptura, and in fact there are no passages showing that he expected all Jews to know all scriptures.
事实上，当时犹太人对正典是什么存在分歧。 In fact, there was disagreement among Jews about what the canon was at the time.
此外，如果耶稣诉诸圣经作为权威，这不能证明 唯独圣经，因为这并不意味着没有其他权威。 Also, it doesn't prove sola scriptura if Jesus appeals to the scriptures as authoritative, because that doesn't mean there weren't other authorities.
或者，如果耶稣指示一些犹太人用圣经解决一个问题，这不能证明唯 独圣经，因为这只表明圣经足以解决那个问题，而不是所有问题。 or it doesn't prove it if Jesus directs some Jews to Scripture to settle a question, because all that shows is that Scripture is sufficient to settle that question, not all questions.
另外，声称耶稣从未指示任何人除了圣经之外的任何东西作为最终权威是错误的。 And as a bonus, the claim that Jesus never directed anyone to anything but Scripture as a final authority is false.
他还指示人们遵循使徒传统，例如他说：「听从你们的，就是听从我 ；弃绝你们的，就是弃绝我；弃绝我的，就是弃绝那差我来的。」 He also directed people to apostolic tradition, such as when he said, if they hear you, They hear me, and if they reject you, they reject me, and the one who sent me.
所以他在说，如果他们拒绝你们传递给他们的这个口头传统，就是在拒绝神。 So he was saying, you're rejecting God, if they're rejecting God, if they reject this oral tradition that you're delivering to them.
那么，唯独圣经是一种教义吗？ Is sola scriptura a doctrine, though?
这是一个重要的问题。 That's an important question.
现在，我早些时候提出了一个论点，如果唯独圣经认为所有教义必须仅由圣经明 确或隐含地教导，那么如果唯独圣经是一种教义，它就需要仅在圣经中教导。 Now, I made an argument earlier, if sola scriptura holds that all doctrines must be taught by scripture alone, explicitly or implicitly, then if Sola Scriptura is a doctrine, it's going to need to be taught in Scripture alone.
而詹姆斯没有做任何反驳。 And James hasn't done anything to counter that.
在新教教会中普遍同意唯独圣经是一种教义。 And it's universally agreed in the Protestant Church that Sola Scriptura is a doctrine.
我可以引用各种作者的观点，但我只引用《罗马公教会争议》中的三段经文。 I could cite all kinds of authors for that, but I'll just cite three passages from the Roman Catholic controversy alone.
詹姆斯自己在其中将唯独圣经称为一种教义。 where James himself refers to Sola Scriptura as a doctrine.
在他的网站上有几十次将其称为教义的引用。 And there are dozens of references to it as a doctrine on his website.
此外，我们可以这样接近这个主题。 Furthermore, we could approach the subject this way.
唯独圣经是基督徒应该相信的吗？ Is sola scriptura something that Christians are supposed to believe?
詹姆斯自己告诉我们，一个人成为基督徒必须相 信的一切都在圣经中，而不在其他任何来源中。 Well, James himself told us that all that one must believe to be a Christian is found in Scripture and no other source.
那些在圣经中找不到的，无论是直接的还是必要的推论，都不对基督徒有约束力。 That which is not found in Scripture, either directly or by necessary implication, is not binding on the Christian.
所以，除非唯独圣经可以直接或通过圣经的必要 推论得到证明，否则它不会对你们有约束力。 So unless Sola Scriptura can be documented either directly or by necessary implication from Scripture, it's not going to be binding on y'all.
詹姆斯甚至承认唯独圣经需要由圣经支持。 And James even admits that Sola Scriptura needs to be supported by Scripture.
如果他不这么认为，他就不会引用耶稣和其他经文来支持它。 If he didn't think that, he wouldn't be quoting Jesus and other passages trying to support it.
所以，如果有人说，好吧，它不是一种教义，或者它是一种教义，但不是那种需要通 过自己的测试的教义，那么这只是一个临时的举动，旨在挽救一个本来失败的提议。 So if one says, well, it's not a doctrine or it's a doctrine, but it's not the kind that needs to meet its own test, then that's just an ad hoc move designed to save an otherwise failing proposal.
那么默示呢？ What about inspiration?
詹姆斯在各种场合谈了很多关于默示的事情，有时他讲话好像认 为神所默示或启示的东西是成为基督徒约束性信仰所必需的。 James has, on various occasions, talked a lot about inspiration, and he sometimes speaks as if being God-breathed or inspired is something that is needed for something to be a binding belief on Christians.
但这不是真的。 But this is not true.
基督徒应该相信任何真实的东西，任何没有错误的东西。 Christians should believe anything that is true, anything that's not in error.
因此，无误的决定，无误的真理应该被相信，无误教导的真理应该被相信。 Therefore, inerrant decisions, inerrant truths should be believed, infallibly taught truths should be believed.
詹姆斯甚至通过将我们今晚的议题表述为「圣经是唯一无误 的信仰准则，而不是唯一默示的信仰准则」来承认这一点。 And James even admits this by phrasing our resolution tonight as, Scripture is the sole infallible rule of faith, not the sole inspired rule of faith.
所以我不需要证明某些东西是默示的才能对基督徒群体具有权威性。 So I don't need to show that something is inspired for it to be authoritative for the Christian community.
我只需要证明它是无误的或在无误的恩赐下教导的。 I only need to show that it's inerrant or otherwise taught under the gift of infallibility.
我已经做到了，因为我已经展示了我们同意的四个使徒传统，它们继续存在于教会中。 And I've already done that, because I've already shown us four apostolic traditions that we agree on that continue to exist in the church.
但神所默示的是什么？ But what does God breathe?
我会简要说明这一点，但在《提摩太后书》中，它说 ，在一个常见的翻译中，所有圣经都是神所默示的。 I'm going to be brief about this, but In 2 Timothy, it says, in a common translation, all Scripture is inspired by God.
实际上，所有圣经应该是每一卷圣经，因为在希腊语中，这个短语是 ，当它 是一个没有定冠词的名词的形容词时，意思是每一个、每一个和任何一个。 Really, all Scripture should be every Scripture, because in Greek that phrase is , and means each, every, and any when it's an adjective with a noun lacking the definite article.
所以实际上，这应该是每一卷圣经都是神所默示的。 So really, this should be every Scripture is God-breathed.
圣经被称为神所默示的，因为它承载着神的话语。 And Scripture is said to be God-breathed because it carries God's Word.
这在比喻上是由他的气息承载的，就像我们的气息承载我们的言语一样。 which is metaphorically carried by his breath, just like our breath carries our words.
所以任何承载神话语的东西在这个词的原意上都是神所默示的。 So anything that carries God's Word is God-breathed in the original sense of the term.
后来的神学发展了一个更为狭义的含义，但在保罗时代 的用法中，任何承载神话语的东西都是神所默示的。 Later theology developed a more restricted meaning, but in the usage that was there in Paul's day, anything that carried God's Word was God-breathed.
所以神的道是神所默示的。 And so the Word of God is God-breathed.
如果你研究一下圣经中「神的道」这个短语，你会发现一些有趣的东西，它出现了46次。 Well, you find out some interesting stuff If you do a study of the phrase Word of God in the Bible, it appears 46 times.
在任何情况下，「神的道」这个短语都不是圣经的同义词。 In no cases is the phrase Word of God a synonym for Scripture.
没有一次。 None.
在三种情况下，它用来指圣经中包含的信息，但不是指圣经本身。 In three cases, it's used to refer to a message contained in Scripture, but not to the Scripture itself.
在两种情况下，它指的是神的创造之言。 In two cases, it refers to God's creative word.
在一段经文中，它指的是耶稣。 In one passage, it refers to Jesus.
在十一种情况下，它指的是以口头传统形式新给予 的神圣启示，或指不局限于圣经的过去的启示。 In eleven cases, it refers to a divine revelation newly given in the form of oral tradition, or to a past one not limited to Scripture.
在29种情况下，它指的是过去神圣启示的口头 传递，除了一个之外，所有这些都在新约中。 And in 29 cases it refers to oral transmission of past divine revelation, and all but one of those is in the New Testament.
所以它指的是使徒传统。 So it's referring to apostolic tradition.
绝大多数情况下，「神的道」这个短语指的是使徒传统。 Overwhelmingly, the phrase Word of God refers to apostolic tradition.
因此，使徒传统在圣保罗所谈论的意义上是神所默示的。 And therefore, apostolic tradition is divinely inspired in the sense that St. Paul is talking about.
所以不要找借口，比如，给我看其他默示的东西。 So don't look for dodges like, show me something else that's inspired.
我已经展示了。 I already have.
我已经展示了四个。 I've shown you four.
很快再聊！ Talk to you soon!
好的，辩论的本质是你要处理很多不同的话题。 Okay, the nature of debate is that you deal with a lot of different topics.
我反感认为我在使用某种超载策略的说法。 I resent the idea that I'm engaging in some type of a tactic of overload.
如果你想要一个对方超载的例子，我邀请你回去听听我与公教会答疑代表进行的任何辩论。 I just invite you to go back and listen to any debate I ever did with Catholic Answers representatives if you want an example of overload from the other side, allegedly.
我觉得很有趣的是，吉米已经有了他的反驳幻灯片。 I find it fascinating that Jimmy already has his slides for rebuttals.
如果你不知道对方具体会说什么来回应你，你怎么做到的？ How do you do that if you don't know what the other person is going to be saying specifically in response to you?
所以，与其参与我在这场辩论中所说的内容，不如说， 你在书中写了这个，好吧，我已经回答了书中的内容。 So instead of engaging with what I'm saying in this debate, well, you wrote this in a book, okay, fine, I've answered the things that are in my book.
但这种想法，好吧，我只是继续我的陈述，我觉得非常非 常有趣，考虑到有人指控我试图超载某人或类似的事情。 But the idea of, well, I'm just going to continue on with my presentation, I find very, very, very interesting in light of the allegation that I'm sort of trying to overload someone or anything like that.
我希望你注意到使徒传统被多少次以模棱两可的方式使用。 I want you to catch how many times apostolic tradition is being used in an equivocal way.
好吧？ Okay?
所以，使徒传统是耶稣教导使徒的内容和使徒教导的内容。 So, Apostolic Tradition is what Jesus teaches the Apostles and what the Apostles teach.
那叫做福音。 That's called the Gospel.
它在圣经中找到，在圣经中定义，在圣经中辩护。 It is found in Scripture, it's defined in Scripture, it's defended in Scripture.
罗马使用使徒传统作为对你灵魂具有约束力的教义的基础，如马利亚身体升天和教宗无误。 Rome uses apostolic tradition as the basis for binding dogmas upon your soul, such as the bodily assumption of Mary and papal infallibility.
你需要能够识别这些事情之间的区别，因为很容易为简单的事情辩护。 You need to be able to recognize the difference between these things because it's real easy to defend the easy one.
嗯，你知道，我们都同意启示已经结束。 Well, you know, we all agree that the Revelations ended.
但我们并不都同意马利亚身体升天，对吗？ But we don't all agree that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven, do we?
然而，据称，这一切都基于使徒传统。 And yet, allegedly, it's all based upon apostolic tradition.
我告诉你们，使徒们从未教导任何人关于身体升天、教宗无误、无玷 始胎、炼狱、赦罪券或罗马强加于人们灵魂上的任何其他信仰教义。 I say to you, the apostles never taught anyone anything about bodily assumption, about papal infallibility, about immaculate conceptions, about purgatory, about indulgences, or any of those other things that Rome has bound, de fide, upon people's souls.
如果你想说他们教导了这些，那么你必须能够证明它。 And if you want to say they did, then you've got to be able to prove it.
艾肯先生没有给我们任何神所默示的例子。 Mr. Aiken has not given us any example of something that is theanoustos, God breathes.
他们说，嗯，神的话可以是这个，神的话可以是那个。 They said, well, God's word can be this, and God's word can be that.
但保罗对提摩太说，如果你想准备好在教会中行各样的善事，那么你要转 向神所默示的，我至少要感谢吉米·艾肯没有使用特伦特·霍恩最近使用 的论点，即神所默示的并不是真的意思是神所默示的，而是赋予生命的。 But what Paul said to Timothy is, if you want to be prepared to perform every good work in the church, Then you turn to that which is theanoustos, and I'm at least thankful, I have to thank Jimmy Akin for not using the argument that Trent Horn used recently, that theanoustos doesn't really mean God breathes, it means life-giving.
我很感激他至少没有走那个方向。 I am thankful that at least he didn't go that direction.
从我的角度来看，这是一个进步。 That's an improvement from my perspective.
但它的意思是神所默示的。 But it means God breathed.
它独特地存在于圣经中，你今天找不到任何东西，包括 在梵蒂冈，任何可以恰当地描述为神所默示的东西。 It is uniquely found in Scripture, and you cannot find anything today, including in the Vatican, anything that is properly described as God breathed.
这意味着那些使用非神所默示的来源并将其强加于基督徒的教导。 And that means that that which is taught by those who are using sources that are not God breathed and binding those upon Christians.
我请求你们每一个人，花时间回去阅读那些定义 身体升天、无玷始胎，甚至教宗无误的声明。 I ask every one of you, take the time to go back and read the statements that define bodily assumption, immaculate conception, and even papal infallibility.
阅读这些声明本身。 Read the statements themselves.
他们会说，如果你甚至认为与此不同，你就是被咒诅的。 They will say if you even think otherwise than this, you are anathema.
你是被咒诅的。 You are anathema.
所以这不是，你不能简单地说，嗯，你知道，如果我们有一些关于没有更 多使徒的东西，那就等同于使徒在圣经之外口头传递这个教义和教导。 So this is not, you can't just simply say, well, you know, if we have something about, you know, there aren't to be any more apostles, that's the same thing as the apostles passing on this doctrine and teaching orally outside of Scripture.
没有证据表明那发生了。 There is no evidence that that happened.
罗马从未定义过耶稣使徒在圣经之外说的一个字。 Rome has never defined a single word that Jesus the Apostle said outside of Scripture.
只有圣经是神所默示的，只有圣经是神在说话，这就是为什 么它是任何想要遵循神希望我们相信的基督徒的默认立场。 Only scripture is theanoustos, only scripture is God speaking, and that's why it is the default position for any Christian who wants to follow what God would have us to believe.
谢谢。 Thank you.
所以明晚再来，因为你会想知道咒诅是什么意思。 So come back tomorrow night because you're going to want to know what anathema means.
与此同时，让我们谈谈詹姆斯反复声称的，当使徒提到传统时，他们只是在指福音。 In the meantime, let's talk about James' repeated assertion that when the Apostles refer to tradition, they're only referring to the Gospel.
好吧，有一段经文，或者说一本书，在这个主题 上很有启发性，那就是《帖撒罗尼迦后书》。 Okay, one passage that is, or one book that is informative on that subject is 2 Thessalonians.
现在，如果你想断言使徒传统只是福音，你需要有证据支持这一点。 Now, if you want to assert that apostolic tradition is nothing but the Gospel, You're going to need to have evidence for that.
你不能只是做一个好像它是真的的断言。 You can't just make an assertion as if it's true.
我们怎么知道使徒传统只包含福音？ How do we know that apostolic tradition contained nothing but the gospel?
我们怎么知道它没有包含其他东西？ How do we know it didn't include other stuff?
我们怎么知道这一切都被写下来了？ And how do we know it all got written down?
这些是重要的问题。 Those are important questions.
那么，看看我们对帖撒罗尼迦的了解，保罗只在帖撒罗尼迦度过了三个安息日。 So, looking at what we know about Thessalonica, Well, Paul only spent three Sabbaths in Thessalonica.
他在那里不到四周就不得不离开了，所以他没有时间给他们完整的基督教教义课程。 He was there for less than four weeks before he had to leave, and so he didn't have time to give them a full course of Christian doctrine.
他能教他们福音的基本内容吗？ Could he have taught them the basics of the gospel?
当然，但他会希望他们接受其他不属于福音本身 的使徒教导，因为基督教教义不仅仅是福音。 Sure, but then he's going to want them to be receptive to other apostolic teachings that aren't part of the gospel itself, because there's more to Christian doctrine than just the gospel.
他是否口头教导了他们其他作为使徒传统一部分的内容，这 些内容不属于福音，也没有在《帖撒罗尼迦后书》中提到？ Did he teach them other things, though, orally as part of apostolic tradition that are not part of the gospel and that are not mentioned in 2 Thessalonians?
是的，他教导了。 Yes, he did.
我们可以证明这一点，因为他提醒帖撒罗尼迦人他们已经知道是什么在阻止那不法的人。 And we can show that because he reminds the Thessalonians that they already know What is restraining the man of lawlessness?
这个预言中的人物。 This prophetic figure.
他告诉他们：「我还在你们那里的时候，岂不是告诉过你们这些事吗？」 And he tells them, do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you this?
所以他作为口头传统的一部分告诉他们一个预言的事实，即 他认定的阻止那不法之人的东西，但这在圣经中没有提到。 So he had told them as part of oral tradition a prophetic fact that something that he identified as restraining the man of lawlessness But it's not mentioned in Scripture.
他没有说那是什么，所以著名的浸信会学者F.F.布 鲁斯说，帖撒罗尼迦人因为被告知，知道那是什么。 He doesn't say what it is, and so the famed Baptist scholar F.F. Bruce says they, the Thessalonians, because they had been told, knew what this was.
后来的读者与他们相比处于劣势，不得不猜测，因为从文本本身并不明显。 Later readers are at a disadvantage compared with them and have to guess, because it is not obvious from the text itself.
现在，教父们支持你。 Now the Church Fathers got your back.
他们对这是什么有一些想法，他们相信这些已经传给了他们，也许有 一天其中一个会被确立为真，因为训导权，这是其工作的一部分。 they have some ideas about what this was that they believed had been passed down to them, and maybe one day one of those will be established as true, because the magisterium, that's part of its job.
但事实仍然是，使徒传统与福音并不相同，我们可以从圣经文本本身证明这一点。 But it nevertheless remains the case that apostolic tradition is not identical with the gospel, and we can show that from the text of Scripture itself.
现在简要地说，让我回过头来谈谈《提摩太后书》中的另一段经文。 Now briefly, let me back up and talk about this other passage in 2 Timothy.
保罗在谈论圣经，詹姆斯经常做的一件事是他专 注于这段经文的最后两节，这两节涉及圣经。 where Paul is talking about Scripture One of the things that James regularly does is he focuses on the final two verses of this passage, which deal with scripture.
但实际上，保罗指引提摩太同时诉诸使徒传统和使徒认可的圣经。 But actually, Paul is pointing Timothy to a double appeal to both apostolic tradition and apostolically approved scriptures.
他说：「至于你，你所学习的、所确信的，要存在心里，因为你知道是跟谁学的。」 He says, as for you, continue in what you've learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you've learned it.
所以那是他从保罗那里得到的使徒传统。 So that's apostolic tradition he got from Paul.
「并且知道你是从小明白圣经，这圣经能使你因信基督耶稣有得救的智慧。」 how from childhood you've been acquainted with the sacred writings, which would be the Old Testament at the time, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ.
现在，除非你听到使徒的传道，否则它们不会让你完全认识耶稣 基督，所以你需要使徒传统才能正确阅读旧约并应用于基督。 Now, they won't get you all the way to Jesus Christ unless you hear the apostolic preaching, so you need apostolic tradition in order to be able to correctly read the Old Testament and apply it to Christ.
然后他谈到每一卷圣经都是神所默示的等等，但注意那是后半部分。 He then talks about how every scripture is God-breathed and so forth, but notice that's the back half.
对传统和圣经的双重诉求。 of a double appeal to tradition and to Scripture.
非常感谢。 Thank you so much.
好的，大家，我们要休息五分钟。 Okay, everyone, we are going to take a five-minute break.
我们将重新布置舞台进行交叉质询。 We're going to reset the stage for cross-examination.
此时你需要交上你的问答卡。 You need to turn in your Q&A cards at this time.
三位牧师，如果你们能上来站在这里，你们可以在 晚上7点40分把卡片交给他们。我们将继续。 The three pastors, if you will come and stand up here, you can hand your cards to them at 7.40 p.m. We will resume.
请就座，我们要开始了。 Please take your seat and we're going to get started.
所以在辩论的这一部分，是交叉质询。 So for this portion of the debate, it is cross-examination.
在我看来，这是辩论中信息量最大的部分，因为每个提问者都可以质问对方。 In my opinion, this is the part of the debate that is the most informative because each questioner gets to question the other.
所以既然怀特博士持肯定立场，他将有10分钟时间交叉质询艾 肯先生，然后艾肯先生将有10分钟时间交叉质询怀特先生。 So since Dr. White has the affirmative, he will have 10 minutes to cross-examine Mr. Aiken, and then Mr. Aiken will have 10 minutes to cross-examine Mr. White.
在此期间，提问者只提问，另一方回答。 During this time, the one asking the questions The questioner is just to ask questions, and the other is to respond.
这是提问者的时间，所以如果他需要继续并提出另一个问题，他有权这样做。 It is the questioner's time, so if he needs to move on and ask another question, he has the right to do that.
如果我们开始10分钟计时器，那时开始。 And if we'll start the 10-minute timer, when that happens.
你提到了《帖撒罗尼迦后书》中的阻拦者，然后 我想你说也许有一天他们会告诉我们那是什么。 You made reference to the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians, and then I think you said maybe someday They'll tell us what it is.
那么，你能告诉我们，根据使徒传统，《帖撒罗尼迦后书》中的阻拦者是谁吗？ So, can you tell us, from apostolic tradition, who the restrainer is in 2 Thessalonians?
其中一个主要提议是它是罗马法律的制约力量。 One of the key proposals is that it is the restraining force of Roman law.
然而，这不是保证，训导权尚未对此问题做出裁决，但这是其中一个存在的传统。 However, that's not a guarantee, and the Magisterium hasn't yet ruled on that question, but that is one of the traditions that is out there.
那么，你并不知道那段经文无误地指的是什么？ So, but you don't know infallibly what that passage is referring to?
不，因为教会从未有机会无误地定义它。 No, because the church has never had an occasion to infallibly define it.
它不会随意这样做，只有在特殊情况下才会。 It doesn't do that willy-nilly, only in special circumstances.
那些特殊情况是什么？ And what would those special circumstances be?
嗯，例如，如果那不法的人在四处奔走，我们需要识 别他并确认他已经来了，那可能会引发这样的反应。 Well, for example, if the man of lawlessness was running around and we needed to identify him and the fact he had come, that might provoke such a response.
好的，你认为信托请求者是使徒传统的功能吗？ Okay, do you believe that fiduciary supplicants is a function of apostolic tradition?
我认为信托请求者在正确解读时并不与使徒传统的任何元素相矛盾，但它超越了使徒传统。 I think that fiducia supplicans does not, when read correctly, does not contradict any elements of apostolic tradition, but it goes beyond apostolic tradition.
它超越了使徒传统。 It goes beyond apostolic tradition.
所以教会有权超越使徒传统？ So the church has the authority to go beyond apostolic tradition?
当然，例如，授权在路易斯安那州南部的教会使用空调。 Sure, like for example, authorizing the use of air conditioners in churches in southern Louisiana.
那超越了使徒传统，但教会可以授权。 That's beyond apostolic tradition, but the church can authorize that.
我认为大多数人对此感到高兴。 I think most people are glad it has.
是的，我同意，但你真的认为这与信托请求者以及它在教 宗对同性恋的明显看法方面引发的巨大争议是平行的吗？ Yeah, I would agree, but do you really think that that's parallel to fiduciary supplicants and the tremendous controversy it has engendered in regards to the obvious reality of the Pope's view of homosexuality?
我认为教宗的看法，我认为你误解了教宗对同性恋的看法，我不完全理解你问我的问题。 I think that the Pope's view, I think you're misreading the Pope's view of homosexuality, and I don't understand exactly what you've asked me.
你能重述一下问题吗？ Can you restate the question?
嗯，在我看来，空调和祝福不规则关系的想法，特别是 在共议会议的背景下，是一个非常不合适的长远推论。 Well, it just seemed to me that air conditioners and the idea of blessings of irregular relationships, especially in light of the synod of synodality, is a really long stretch that's not appropriate.
你不同意吗？ Wouldn't you agree?
我认为在这两种情况下，教会都在做一些既不被圣经也不被使徒传统禁止的事情。 I think that in both cases we have the church doing something that is not prohibited by either scripture or apostolic tradition.
你可能对你认可的事情有不同的评价，但我在这里看不到原则上的区别。 You may have different valuations in terms of which ones you approve, but I don't see a difference in principle in what's happening here.
坦率地说，我认为你误解了情况，可能是因为你 没有足够密切地关注天主教媒体对此的报道。 And I frankly think you're misreading the situation, perhaps because you haven't followed the Catholic press on this closely enough.
但给予祝福，已经澄清这不涉及对一个结合的祝福，而是对两个人的祝福。 But giving a blessing, it has been clarified that this does not involve giving a blessing to a union, but to two individuals.
我明白这一点。 I understand that.
教宗最近还说，两名同性恋关系中的男人在表达他们的爱。 The Pope has also said recently that two men in a homosexual relationship are living out their love.
作为一个持有圣经的基督徒，我有权将这种声明置于圣经标准之下并拒绝它吗？ Do I have the right, as a Christian holding the scriptures, to hold that kind of statement to a biblical standard and reject it?
你有权将该声明和任何其他声明置于圣经标准之下。 You have a right to hold that statement and any other to a biblical standard.
如果它确实是矛盾的，你有权拒绝它。 You have a right to reject it if it is actually contradictory.
对。 Right.
那需要我对神所默示的东西的解释，对吗？ And that would require my interpretation of that which is theanoustos, correct?
你需要正确解释圣经及其要求，是的。 You would need to correctly interpret scripture and what it requires, yes.
如果我要正确解释，例如《哥林多前书》第6章第9到11节，说 arsenikoitai不能承受神的国，你认为在《哥林多前 书》之外有使徒传统定义arsenikoitai的意思吗？ And if I am to correctly interpret, for example, 1 Corinthians chapter 6, verses 9 through 11, that says that arsenikoitai will not inherit the kingdom of God, do you believe there is an apostolic tradition outside of 1 Corinthians that defines what arsenikoitai means?
不，我认为这个词相当直白。 No, I think the term is fairly straightforward.
我同意。 I would agree.
那么，许多在共议会议上的人向主教们讲授需要 包容LGBTQ个体，这不让你感到困扰吗？ Does it then not bother you that many of the people at the Synod of Synodality were lecturing the bishops on the need to be inclusive of LGBTQ individuals?
是的，就像一些人在南方浸信会会议和新教社区的其他地方向你们社区的传统 主义者讲授他们需要如何重新解释各种圣经经文一样，这也让我感到困扰。 Yes, just like it bothers me that some people in the Southern Baptist Conference and elsewhere in the Protestant community have lectured traditionalists in your communities as well about how they need to reinterpret various biblical passages.
鉴于共议会议是训导权的功能这一说法，你认为这些是平行的吗，不是吗？ Do you see those as parallel in light of the claim that the synod and synodality is a function of the magisterium, is it not?
实际上不是。 Actually, it's not.
不是吗？ It's not?
不是。只有在教宗批准的情况下，其结果才获得训导权的权威。 No. Its results only gain magisterial authority if they are approved by the Pope.
如果教宗批准，那将是教宗普通训导权的一部分，是的，但我确信在《使徒行传》第1 5章会议上有人发言，支持所有基督徒都需要受割礼，我会说他们也在误导那个会议。 And if the Pope It would be part of the Pope's ordinary magisterium, yes, but there are people who I'm sure spoke at the Acts 15 Council That were in favor of circumcision being required for all Christians, and I would say they were misadvising that synod as well.
所以仅仅因为你可以指出一些人在一个会议上说，哦，这里有些人说了他们不该 说的话，当然在第一次尼西亚会议上也有这种情况，那里定义了基督的神性。 So just because you can point to some people at a synod and say, oh, there are some people here saying stuff they shouldn't, there certainly were at first in Isaiah where the divinity of Christ was defined.
这并不使其作为训导权的整体行使无效。 That doesn't invalidate this as an overall exercise of the magisterium.
那么，假设理论上，共议会议产生了一份声明，你会接受那作为对圣经经文的有效解释吗？ So, but, let's say, theoretically, that the Synod of Synodality produces a statement Will you then accept that as a valid interpretation of biblical scripture?
嗯，我从不对假设发表评论，直到我能看到他们说了什么。 Well, I never comment on hypotheticals until I can see what they say.
然而，我可以概述原则，天主教徒必须同意教会无误教导的任何内容。 However, I can sketch principles, and Catholics are required to agree with anything that the Church has taught infallibly.
教会承认，除了无误教导之外，可能会有一些情 况，一个人出于良心无法同意非无误的教导。 The Church recognizes that apart from infallible teaching, there can be situations where a person is unable in good conscience to agree with a non-infallible teaching.
所以如果共议会议或其他任何会议，音乐将被省略。 And so if the synod or any other Music will be omitted.
如果它这样做了，那么我不得不说，这不是无误的。 And if it does, then I would have to say, well, this is non-infallible.
在这种情况下，这是一个错误。 It's a mistake in this case.
所以你不仅需要解释圣经，还需要解释古代信经、古代会议、训导文件。 So you're required to interpret not only scripture, but ancient creeds, ancient councils, magisterial documents.
你真的认为这比直接阅读圣经的人给你更高的确定性吗？ Do you really think that gives you a higher level of certainty than a person who is going directly to the scriptures?
这些情况非常不相似。 The situations are very disanalogous.
我在尽力... I'm trying to do my best to...
我是在一般性地说。 I was speaking generally.
我把信托请求者和共议会议放在一边。 I'm leaving fiduciary supplicants and the synodality behind.
好的。 Okay.
你说你是在一般性地说，你说一般来说你有责任和权利不同意非无误的声明。 You're saying you were speaking generally, and you were saying that in general you have the responsibility and the right to disagree with non-infallible statements.
原则上，在有限的情况下，是的。 In principle, in limited circumstances, yes.
有限的情况。 Limited circumstances.
是的。 Yeah.
好的。 Okay.
每个人都同意什么是无误的声明，什么不是吗？ Does everyone agree on what is and what is not infallible statements?
学者们通常对此有很大的共识。 Scholars typically have a great deal of consensus on this.
好的，例如，有多少个无误的会议，是否有绝对的共识？ Okay, is there an absolute consensus, for example, on how many infallible counsels there have been?
就大公会议而言，无论它们是否行使了无误性，是的，这在天主教会中几乎是普遍同意的。 In terms of ecumenical councils, whether or not they exercised infallibility, yeah, that's pretty much universally agreed upon in the Catholic Church.
所以你不知道是否存在关于某个会议是否无误运作的任何分歧？ So you're not cognizant of any disagreement as to whether a certain council was functioning infallibly?
某处有一个列表告诉你这些。 There's a list somewhere that tells you that.
我在区分无误性的行使和无误性的能力。 I'm distinguishing between the exercise of infallibility and the capacity for infallibility.
所有大公会议都有无误教导的能力。 All ecumenical councils have the capacity to teach infallibly.
并不是所有的会议都实际行使了这种能力。 Not all of them have actually exercised it.
你会认为《赦罪教义》是一个无误定义的声明吗？ Would you consider indulgentiarum doctrina an infallibly defined statement?
不，当然不是。 No, of course not.
教宗并没有在其中使用那种语言，必要时。 The Pope doesn't remotely use the language in that, necessarily.
这是保禄六世在20世纪60年代发布的一份文件。 This is a document that came out from Paul VI in the 1960s.
好的，关于赦罪券的主题。 Okay, in regards to the subject of indulgences.
但你会接受它具有罗马公教会的教义权威吗？ But would you accept it as having doctrinal authority for the Roman Catholic Church?
是的。 Yeah.
好的。 Okay.
你认为你已经举出了神所默示的例子，这些例子不在... Do you believe that you have given examples of something that is theanoustos, that is not found...
让我支持一下这个观点。 Let me back that up.
你听到我说的关于米奇·帕克瓦的内容了吗？ You heard what I said about Mishpachwa?
是的。 Yeah.
你同意米奇·帕克瓦的说法，即教会从未定义过 耶稣或使徒曾说过的一个不在圣经中的字吗？ Would you agree with Mishpachwa that the church has never defined a single word that Jesus or the apostles ever said that is actually not found in Scripture?
如果你指的是逐字逐句的引用，我同意。 If by word you mean a verbatim quotation, I would agree.
如果你指的是它是否曾无误地定义过一个来自他们的教义而不在圣经中，我会说它做过。 If you mean, has it ever infallibly defined a teaching that came from them that is not found in Scripture, I would say it has done that.
你会用你之前用过的例子吗？ And you would use the examples you used before?
还有其他的。 Among others.
我用那些只是因为我们相信它们。 I use those only because we believe in them.
对。 Right.
那么，很快，你能指出教会前五个世纪中任何使徒传递给 帖撒罗尼迦人的内容，作为现代马利亚教义的基础吗？ And so, very quickly, can you point to anything in the first five centuries of the Church that gives the reality that the Apostles delivered to the Thessalonians the foundation of the modern Marian dogmas?
具体给帖撒罗尼迦人，还是一般给基督徒群体？ To the Thessalonians specifically, or to the Christian community in general?
嗯，那是《帖撒罗尼迦后书》说的。 Well, that's what 2 Thessalonians says.
嗯，《帖撒罗尼迦后书》说的是传递给你们的内容。 Well, 2 Thessalonians says what was delivered to you.
那是给教会的，对吗？ That was to the Church, right?
是的，但这些原则适用于所有基督教会。 Yes, but the principles apply to all the Christian churches.
正如我所说，保罗只对帖撒罗尼迦人讲了很短的时间，我们没有他告诉他们的全部记录。 As I said, Paul spoke to the Thessalonians for only a very limited time, and we don't have a complete record of all he told them.
但我是否有来自教会教父的证据，支持前五个世纪的基本马利亚教义？ But do I have evidence from the church fathers from the first five centuries supporting the basic Marian doctrines?
当然有。 Absolutely I do.
看看我的书《教父最了解》。 Look in my book, The Fathers Know Best.
它在外面的桌子上出售。 It's up for sale out there on the table.
好的，前10分钟的时间已经到了。 All right, time has expired for the first 10 minutes.
我想让艾肯先生回答那个问题。 I wanted to allow Mr. Aiken to answer that question.
怀特先生在他时间结束前刚好问到了。 Mr. White got it in just before the end of his time.
我想给你足够的机会回答他最后的问题。 I want to give you sufficient opportunity to answer his last question.
现在我们将计时器设为10分钟，让艾肯先生向怀特先生提问。 Now we'll set the timer for 10 minutes for Mr. Aiken to ask questions of Mr. White.
好的，詹姆斯，你承认唯独圣经在使徒时期没有运作。 Okay, so James, you've acknowledged that sola scriptura was not operational during the apostolic period.
它什么时候成为基督徒的义务？ When did it become obligatory for Christians?
在哪个世纪？ In what century?
当你有了圣经的时候。 When you had a scriptura.
在你有了圣经之前，你甚至不能讨论唯独圣经、首要圣经或其他任何东西。 You can't even have a discussion of sola scriptura or prima scriptura or anything else until you have a scriptura.
那么，那是什么时候发生的？ So when did that happen?
哪个世纪？ What century?
嗯，那是在最后一位使徒去世之后。 Well, that would be after the death of the last apostle.
哪个世纪？ Which century?
我不是在问相对的时间顺序。 I'm not asking for a relative chronology.
不，我不认为约翰活到了140岁或类似的情况，所以那是在第一世纪末。 No, I don't think John made it to 140 or anything like that, so that would be at the end of the first century.
好的，所以你认为唯独圣经从第二世纪开始对基督徒是义务吗？ Okay, so you think that Sola Scriptura was obligatory for Christians beginning in the second century?
我相信基督徒认识到他们需要听到基督的声音，并且他们在圣经中找到了，是的。 I believe that Christians recognized that they needed to hear what Christ's voice said and that they found that in Scripture, yes.
你承认这个时期的作者也声称在使徒传下的传统中认出基督的声音吗？ Do you acknowledge that authors from this period also claim to recognize Christ's voice in the tradition passed down from the apostles?
取决于他们指的是什么。 Depending on what they're making reference to.
所以，关于如何施洗的传统，或者向前三次，或 者向后三次，这种情况持续了相当长的时间。 So, in reference to traditions regarding such things as how to baptize, or three times forward, or three times backwards, that goes on for quite some time.
但有一个区别。 But there is a difference.
例如，爱任纽在谈到使徒传统时，将其定义为有一位神，天地的创造者。 Irenaeus, for example, when he speaks of apostolic tradition, defines it as there is one God, the maker of heaven and earth.
现在那显然是一个次圣经的... Now that's obviously a sub-biblical...
我们不要偏离，因为我想专注于这个问题。 Let's not get, because I want to stay focused on this issue.
我还没有从你那里得到一个明确的答案，即唯独圣经在第二世纪对基督徒有约束力吗？ I haven't yet gotten a clear answer from you to, was Sola Scriptura binding on Christians in the second century?
你是否同意，除非我错过了，你是否同意它在第二世纪对基督徒有约束力？ Do you, unless I missed it, did you agree to that, that it became binding on Christians in the second century?
嗯，有几件事。 Well, a couple things.
我认为让历史在这里发言非常重要。 I think it's very important to allow history to speak here.
并不是每个在第二世纪的人都有整个新约。 Not everyone in the second century had the entirety of the New Testament.
当然。 Sure.
例如，游斯丁殉道者几乎没有显示出对使徒保罗的熟悉。 So Justin Martyr, for example, shows next to no familiarity with the Apostle Paul.
我不确定没有保罗你的神学会是什么样子，但我的神学会与现在非常非常不同。 I'm not sure what your theology would look like without Paul, but mine would be very, very different than what it currently is.
所以有一个相同的发展时期，即对使徒传递的内容的理解，就像你在旧约中一样。 So there is the same period of development of understanding of what the apostles have delivered that you have in the Old Testament.
所以我的回应是，你有与犹太人在两约之间时期面临的完全 相同的情况，到耶稣的时代，耶稣可以让人们对什么负责？ So my response to that is you have the exact same situation that was faced by the Jewish people during the intertestamental period, and by the time of Jesus, Jesus could hold men accountable to what?
圣经，而不是犹太传统。 Scripture, not to Jewish tradition.
好的。 Okay.
我很想与你进一步探讨这个问题，但我们只有七分半钟。 I'd love to explore this further with you, but we only have seven and a half minutes.
在你的书和你的网站上，有几十次将唯独圣经称为教义或教导的引用。 In your book and on your website, there are dozens of references to Sola Scriptura as a doctrine or teaching.
教义（Doctrina）只是拉丁语中“教导”的意思。 Doctrina is just the Latin word for teaching.
你仍然认为唯独圣经是一种教义吗？它需要通过自己的测试才能成功吗？ Do you still recognize Sola Scriptura as a doctrine, and would it need to pass its own test in order to be successful?
当然它是一种教义，但它是一种不同于复活的教义。 Of course it's a doctrine, but it is a doctrine that is different than, say, resurrection.
复活是一个历史事实，所以圣经中教导了它的意义、为什么发生、谁做的、何时发生等等。 Resurrection is a historical reality, and so it's taught in Scripture what it meant, why it happened, who did it, when it happened, so on and so forth.
唯独圣经... Sola Scriptura...
它需要通过自己的测试才能对基督徒有约束力吗？ Does it need to meet its own test in order to be Binding on Christians.
所以请允许我先回答上一个问题。 So allow me to finish the last question first.
唯独圣经涉及终极权威的本质。 Sola Scriptura speaks to the nature of ultimate authority.
所以，正如我在开场陈述中所说，唯一涉及终极权威 的经文是神在说话的地方，这些经文今天在圣经中。 And so, as I said in my opening statement, the only passages of Scripture that address ultimate authority where God is speaking place that within the pages of Scripture for us today.
你可以声称在使徒时期，他们有我们没有的东西。 You can make claims that During the apostolic period, they had access to something we don't have.
但对我们今天来说，我们唯一能确定的是神在说话的东西是圣经。 But for us today, the only thing that we can identify that is God speaking is Scripture.
现在，说我们唯一能确定的是使徒时代的约束性内容，我不会咬定神在说 话，因为我已经表明在保罗的著作中，这比后来的神学有更广泛的意义。 Now, in saying that the only thing we can identify as binding from the apostolic age, I'm not going to bite on God speaking, because I've already shown that that has a much broader meaning in Paul than it does in later theology.
所以使徒传统是神在说话。 And so apostolic tradition was God speaking.
我完全不同意。 I completely disagree.
这是完全的模棱两可。 It's complete equivocation.
是的，好吧，有很多新教学者，比如布鲁斯·梅茨格和F.F.布鲁斯。 Yeah, well, there are a lot of Protestant scholars like Bruce Metzger and F.F. Bruce.
布鲁斯·梅茨格不认为罗马公教会的使徒传统与圣经的使徒传统是同一回事。 Bruce Metzger did not believe that Roman Catholic apostolic tradition is the same thing as biblical apostolic.
那是一个不合逻辑的结论，实际上现在是我的提问时间。 That's a non-sequitur, and it's my question time, actually.
有多位新教学者，包括李·麦克唐纳、布鲁斯·梅茨格、F.F. 布鲁斯和奥古斯特·勒塞尔夫，我本来要问那是不是一个问题。 There are multiple Protestant scholars, including people like Lee MacDonald, Bruce Metzger, and F.F. Bruce, and Auguste Le Cerf, I was going to ask if that was a question.
所以假设我的立场是否定的。 So presuppose the negation of my position.
我不想参与那种游戏。 I'm not getting into that kind of game.
不，不，不。 No, no, no.
我不是说假设否定。 I'm not saying presuppose the negation.
我只是说不要假设它。 I'm just saying don't assume it.
不要假设唯独圣经，因为如果你假设唯独圣经，那 么你的论点是循环论证的，它不能证明任何东西。 Without assuming sola scriptura, because if you assume sola scriptura, then your argument is circular and it doesn't prove anything.
如果圣经是神在说话，那是终极权威，不能在终极权威之外证明这种终极权威。 And if scripture is God speaking, that is the ultimate authority and there cannot be any demonstration of that ultimate authority outside of the ultimate authority itself.
这是一个认识论问题。 This is an epistemological question.
如果你想假设圣经是神的话语，我完全同意。 If you want to assume that scripture is the word of God, I'm all with you.
所以我们不需要为此争论。 So we don't need to fight about that.
这不是假设，这是教导。 It's not an assumption, it's teaching.
但如果你在假设，告诉我这一点，你是否假设圣经之外没有其他也是神 的话语的东西，还是你有一个不是仅仅基于你自己神学观点的依据？ But if you're assuming, tell me this, are you assuming That there is nothing outside of Scripture that is also the Word of God, or do you have a basis for that that is not simply your own theological views?
我没有假设任何东西。 I'm not assuming anything.
我只是说，圣经明确告诉我圣经是神在说话，不仅仅是《提摩太后书》第 3章，还有耶稣对撒都该人的话：「你们没有读过神对你们说的话吗？」 I am simply saying, Scripture tells me explicitly that Scripture is God speaking, not just 2 Timothy 3, But Jesus' statement to the Sadducees, have you not read what God spoke to you?
我的声明是，没有其他你或任何人可以指出的神在说话的东 西，我们在神赐给我们的这个伟大礼物的封面内没有拥有。 And my statement is, there is nothing else that you can point to or anyone else can point to that is God speaking that we do not possess within the covers of what God has given us in this great gift.
嗯，我必须说我已经多次这样做了，比如说有... Well, I have to say that I've already done that multiple times, like the fact that there is...
那是一个问题吗？ Is that a question?
我在设置一个问题。 I'm setting up a question.
在这个期间，我可以回应你所做的声明。 I get to respond to statements you make in this period.
我已经多次这样做了。 And I've already done that multiple times.
你只是没有承认这一点。 You're just not acknowledging it.
所以让我们稍微转移一下讨论。 So let's shift the discussion a little bit.
正如我提到的，如果你假设唯独圣经来证明唯独圣经 ，那么你的论点是循环论证的，不能证明任何东西。 As I mentioned, if you assume sola scriptura to prove sola scriptura, then your argument is circular and doesn't prove anything.
所以在不假设唯独圣经的情况下，你能向我展示我们不再有任何 使徒传统，比如我提到的那些，比如不会再有使徒的事实吗？ So without assuming sola scriptura, can you show me that we no longer have any apostolic traditions like the ones I mentioned, such as the fact there will be no more apostles.
再说一次，我相信不会再有使徒，因为圣经在《希 伯来书》第1章告诉我们我们可以做出那个应用。 Again, I believe there will be no more apostles because the scriptures tell us in Hebrews chapter 1 we can make that application.
所以有圣经启示我们可以做出那个应用。 So there is biblical revelation that we can make that application.
我不相信那是某种传下来的使徒传统。 I don't believe that that is some apostolic tradition that was passed down.
如果你认为是，那么请指出使徒是谁，他们传给了谁。 If you think it was, then identify who the apostle was and who they passed it down to.
在《希伯来书》第1章中，它说神在古时借着众先知多 次多方地晓谕列祖，但在这末世借着他儿子晓谕我们。 In Hebrews 1, it says God spoke to our fathers in many various ways, but today he's spoken to us by his son.
那并没有告诉我们将来不会再有使徒。 That doesn't tell us that there are not going to be any more apostles in the future.
那是你远远超出文本的内容。 That's something that you're going way beyond the text for.
不，我完全不这么认为，考虑到《希伯来书》的内容。 No, I don't think that it is at all, in light of what the book of Hebrews was.
作为一个护教学者告诉人们没有什么可以回头的，新约的 完整性和基督的工作是《希伯来书》第1章的核心内容。 As an apologetic to tell people there's nothing to go back to, the completeness of the New Covenant and the work of Christ is the very central aspect of what Hebrews chapter 1 is about.
我只是认为你没有深入研究《希伯来书》第1章。我会邀 请人们阅读《希伯来书》第1章，看看它是否提到使徒。 I just think you're not going deep enough into Hebrews 1. I would invite people to read Hebrews 1 and see whether it even mentions apostles.
我会说它提到了。 I would say it did.
对不起？ I'm sorry?
我没有说它提到了。 I didn't say it did.
嗯，好吧，我认为那伤害了你的论点。 Well, okay, I think that injures your case.
不，并没有。 No, it does not.
转到另一个问题。 Moving on to another question.
你错了。 You are in error.
所以，在《提摩太后书》第3章中，保罗提到使徒传统，当他告诉提摩太要持守他所学的。 So, in 2 Timothy 3, Paul invokes apostolic tradition when he tells Timothy to hold fast to what he was taught.
然后他说提摩太知道圣经，在这种情况下是指旧 约，它们能够使他因信基督耶稣有得救的智慧。 He then says that Timothy knows the sacred writings, which means the Old Testament in this case, and that they're able to instruct him for salvation through faith in Christ.
所以旧约帮助支持对基督的信仰，当时是以口头形式存在的。 So the Old Testament helps support faith in Christ, which at the time was in oral form.
所以你需要使徒传统来正确解释关于基督的旧约。 So you need apostolic tradition to correctly interpret the Old Testament regarding Christ.
你承认在这段经文中，保罗同时诉诸使徒传统和使徒认可的圣经吗？ Do you acknowledge that in this passage Paul is making a double appeal to both apostolic tradition and to scriptures approved by the Apostles?
不，先生。 No, sir.
你在其中插入了大约四五次使徒传统这个词，而它在文本中根本找不到。 You've inserted the term apostolic tradition about four or five times in there, where it's not found anywhere in the text whatsoever.
这是模棱两可。 It's equivocation.
你一直在使用它。 You keep using it.
你必须继续使用它，但这是一个主观解释的举动，实际上导致了对文本 的不同看法，并使其教导的内容与保罗打算教导提摩太的内容不同。 You have to keep using it, but it is an eisegetical move that really results in a different perspective on the text, and it makes it teach something other than what Paul was intending it to teach to Timothy.
所以我们知道使徒范式是基督为他的第一批追随者 所设立的，你承认唯独圣经在第一世纪没有使用。 So we know that the apostolic paradigm was willed by Christ for his first followers, and you've admitted that sola scriptura was not in use in the first century.
这意味着所有使徒传统必须在最后一位使徒去世前写下来，以便它 们成为圣经，或者这意味着它们在最后一位使徒去世后失去权威。 That would mean either that all apostolic traditions have to get written down before the death of the last apostle so that they become scripture, or it would mean they lose their authority after the death of the last apostle.
你支持哪种选择？ Which of those options do you support?
都不是，这是一个错误的问题。 Neither one, it's a false question.
这是一个真实的问题。 It's a true question.
我会继续回答它。 I'll go ahead and answer it.
事实是，所谓的使徒传统的内容在圣经中给了我们。 The reality is the content of quote-unquote apostolic tradition is given to us in Scripture.
它们是一致的。 They cohere.
它们不是这里有一个体，那里有一个体，包括马利亚教义、 教宗制度和其他所有东西，以及我们在圣经中有的内容。 They do not have one body here and one body there that includes Marian dogmas, papacy, and everything else over here and what we have in Scripture over here.
它们是一致的，这就是为什么我们今天继续拥有它们。 They cohere, and that's why we continue to have them today.
好的，交叉质询的时间到了。 All right, time has expired for cross-examination.
你们不知道这一点，菲利普和拉斯蒂，但你们在怀特博士 后面的镜头里，所以你们可以向所有在观看的人打招呼。 You guys didn't know this, Philip and Rusty, but you're in the camera shot behind Dr. White, so you can tell everybody hello who's watching.
他们一直在为我整理问答卡片。 They've been sorting the Q&A cards for me.
我们有超过一百张卡片，所以我不得不请求他们的帮助。 We have over a hundred cards, and so I had to ask for their help.
我没想到会有这么多问题。 I didn't realize there would be so many questions.
然后进行问答环节。 And do the Q&A afterwards.
你们完成了吗？ Are you guys finished?
如果他们还没完成。 If they're not done.
好吧？ Okay?
嗯，是的。 Well, yeah.
我们继续。 We'll go ahead.
如果你们需要，可以继续整理。 And you guys can continue to sort if you need to.
这些是给怀特的，这些是给艾肯的。 So these are for White, and these are for Aiken.
好的，我会尽力给予平等对待。 Okay, I'm going to do my best to give equal treatment.
我们确实有更多给艾肯先生的卡片，而不是怀特先生的，所以如 果你们能给我一些更多给怀特先生的卡片，我会开始处理这些。 We do have more cards for Mr. Aiken than Mr. White, so if you guys can get me some more cards for Mr. White in a moment, and I'll get started with these.
我们从艾肯先生开始。 We'll start with Mr. Aiken.
问题是，如何调和教宗无误与不同教宗之间的矛盾声明或既定传统？ The question is, What is the reconciliation of papal infallibility with contradictory statements or established traditions between different popes?
教宗们在非常少的场合行使了无误性。 The popes have exercised infallibility on a very small number of occasions.
根据大多数学者的说法，只有六到八份文件是教宗行使了无误性的。 According to most scholars, there are only between six and eight documents where popes have exercised infallibility.
为了涉及教宗无误性的矛盾，必须是在那六到八份文件中的两 份或更多文件之间的矛盾，而这些文件之间没有相互矛盾。 In order for there to be a contradiction involving papal infallibility, it would have to be a contradiction between two or more of those six to eight documents, and none of those documents contradict each other.
他们可能会拒绝早期的非无误性内容，但如果教宗拒绝先 前的非无误性教导，则不存在涉及教宗无误性的矛盾。 They may reject earlier things that were non-infallible, but there's no contradiction involving papal infallibility if a pope rejects a prior non-infallible teaching.
为了产生涉及教宗无误性的矛盾，你需要两个无误的声明相互矛盾 ，而这种事情从未发生过，并且在圣灵的保护下，永远不会发生。 In order to generate a contradiction involving papal infallibility, you would need two infallible statements contradicting each other, and such a thing has never happened, and by the protection of the Holy Spirit, will never happen.
好的，怀特先生有30秒时间回应。 Alright, 30 seconds for Mr. White to respond.
在我看来，教宗无误性的整个概念可能是我听过的最无用的教义，因为从根 本上说，正如我与蒂姆·斯台普斯、罗伯特·圣吉尼斯在这些问题上的辩论 中所听到的那样，我从他们那里听到的是教宗是无误的，除非他不是。 It seems to me that the whole concept of papal infallibility is probably the most useless doctrine I've ever heard because fundamentally, as I've debated Tim Staples, Robert St. Genis on these issues, what I heard from them was the Pope is infallible except when he's not.
所以当你证明何诺里乌斯或其他任何事情时，好吧，他只是没有无误地说话。 So when you demonstrate honorius or whatever else it might be, well, he just wasn't speaking infallibly.
问题是你永远不知道某人什么时候实际上是在无误地说话。 The problem is you never know when someone actually is speaking infallibly.
总是有关于它的分歧。 There's always disagreement about it.
那就是问题所在。 That's the problem.
好的，下一个问题将来自怀特先生。 Alright, the next question will be from Mr. White.
问题是，是什么来源给了我们新约正典？ The question is, what source gave us the New Testament canon?
这个来源是神所默示的吗？ Is this source God-breathed?
这是几个问题，如果不是，这是否意味着正典可能包含非无误的著作？ This is a number of questions, and if not, does this mean that the canon could contain non-infallible writings?
是的，一分钟时间来谈论整个正典。 Yeah, one minute to talk about the entirety of the canon.
我只是简单地向大家推荐... I'll just simply recommend to everybody...
你说吧，詹姆斯！ You go, James!
我会引导大家去听我在G3会议上与迈克尔·克鲁格博士的对话， 我想是在2018年，我们讨论了正典是一个神学问题的事实。 I would direct people to a conversation I had with Dr. Michael Kruger at G3, I think in 2018, where we discussed the fact that the canon is a theological issue.
这不是一个历史问题。 It's not a historical issue.
它是启示的产物。 It is an artifact of revelation.
一旦你理解它是启示发生的自然结果，那么你不仅会理解认可背后的历史现实 ，还会理解在两约之间时期发生的事情，以及我们所称的旧约正典的认可。 And once you understand that it is the natural result of inspiration taking place, then you'll understand not only the historical realities behind the recognition, but also what happened in the intertestamental period with the recognition of what we would call the Old Testament canon as well.
所以，不，你不需要一个所谓的无误训导来源。 And so, no, you do not have to have a quote-unquote infallible magisterial source.
罗马直到1546年才解决这个问题。所有主要问题在那时 已经决定，但它实际上是启示的产物，而不是启示的对象。 Rome didn't get around it until 1546. All the major issues had already been decided at that point, but it is in fact an artifact of Revelation, not an object of Revelation.
有30秒时间回应。 Thirty seconds to respond.
所以只是评论一下这个，因为詹姆斯经常提到天 主教会直到1500年代才无误地定义正典。 So just commenting on this, because James frequently brings up that the Catholic Church didn't infallibly define the canon until the 1500s.
这是有原因的。 There's a reason for that.
如果你是一个新教徒并且使用唯独圣经，那么知道什么属于圣经 ，什么不属于圣经，拥有精确的知识，是一个紧迫的优先事项。 If you're a Protestant and you're using Sola Scriptura, then what belongs in the Bible and what doesn't, having a precise knowledge of that, is an urgent priority.
因为如果你包括了一本不是圣经的书或遗漏了一本是圣经的 书，那么如果你局限于唯独圣经，你就有一个巨大的问题。 Because if you include even one book in there that's not Scripture or omit one book that is Scripture, Then you've got a huge problem if you're limited to Sola Scriptura.
但如果神在整体上引导你，而你不局限于唯独圣经，这就不是那么紧迫的优先事项。 But if God is guiding you overall and you're not limited to Sola Scriptura, this is much less of a priority.
所以直到出现一个挑战正典的主要团体，教会才感到需要无误地定义它。 And so it wasn't until a major group challenging the canon appeared that the church felt a need to infallibly define it.
好的，下一个问题是给艾肯先生的。 Alright, the next question is for Mr. Aiken.
问题是，当罗马公教会反复推翻或重新定义以前 的传统时，我们如何信任口头传下的使徒传统？ The question is, how can we trust apostolic tradition that has been handed down orally when the Roman Catholic Church has repeatedly overruled or redefined previous tradition?
好的，不是所有的传统都是使徒传统，我们已经讨论过了，所以如果罗马公教会 以无误的方式推翻了以前的传统，那么它就不是使徒传统，而是其他的东西。 Okay, well not all tradition is apostolic tradition, we covered that, and so consequently, if the Roman Catholic Church overrules prior tradition in an infallible way, well then it wouldn't have been apostolic, it would have been something else.
至于我们如何信任它，那是因为圣灵和耶稣基督在引导他的教会。 In terms of how can we trust it, it's because the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ are guiding his church.
耶稣说圣灵会引导我们进入一切真理，耶稣自己说，当教会使人成为门徒 并教导他们他吩咐我们的一切事时，他与我们同在，直到世界的末了。 Jesus said the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth, and Jesus himself said that as the church is making disciples and teaching them everything he commanded us, he's with us until the end of the age.
所以基督和圣灵对教会的基本引导是让我们对他在自己教会中设立的权威有信心的东西。 And so that fundamental guidance of the church by Christ and by the Holy Spirit is something that gives us confidence in the authorities that he's instituted in his own church.
所以这是一个唯独教会的好例子。 So there's a good example of sola ecclesia.
如果教会说了，那就是真的，我们可以简单地信任，因为我们说基督与我们同在。 If the church says it, then it's true, and we can simply trust that because we say Christ is with us.
嗯，我们相信基督与这个教会同在，但我们认识 到基督与哥林多教会同在，他们需要很多纠正。 Well, we believe Christ is with this church, but we recognize that Christ was with the Corinthian church, and they needed a lot of correction.
这在教会历史上一直被看到。 And that has been seen down through the history of the church.
我教教会历史，你会看到教会在其传统中犯错的次数。 I teach church history, and you see the number of times that the church has erred in its traditions.
这贯穿整个历史。 It's all through history.
下一个问题给怀特先生。 Next question for Mr. White.
你说正典直到1546年才被天主教定义。其他基 督徒是什么时候定义的，如何决定的，谁决定的？ You said that the canon was not defined by Catholicism until 1546. When was it defined for other Christians, how was it decided, and who decided it?
嗯，再说一次，讨论正典问题会很好，54秒内信息量太大，但事实是有两种传统。 Well, again, it'd be great to have a discussion of canon issues, it's far too much information in 54 seconds, but the reality is that there were two traditions.
就新约而言，几乎没有分歧。 As far as the New Testament is concerned, there was very, very, very little disagreement.
是的，《启示录》必须争取进入，诸如此类的事情，这是真的。 Yes, Revelation had to fight to get in, things like that, that's true.
但主要的争论，我们已经在这个主题上进行了辩论，去听听我 与一些人在这个旁经主题上的辩论，我们之间的主要区别在于 那些书，当你看那时，有两种传统一直延续到宗教改革时期。 But the major argument, and we've done debates on this subject, go listen to the debates I've done with a number of people on this subject of the apocryphal books, The major difference between us is in those books, and when you look at that, there's two traditions that went all the way to the time of the Reformation.
你有教宗，你有耶柔米，你有各种各样的人拒绝那些书，就像犹太人拒绝那些书一样。 You had popes, you had Jerome, you had all sorts of people who rejected those books, as the Jews had rejected those books.
然后你有另一种传统，主要是那些跟随希腊七十 士译本的人，不知道希伯来背景，接受了旁经。 And then you had another tradition, primarily people who followed the Greek Septuagint, not knowing the Hebrew background, who accepted the Apocryphal books.
然后你有了宗教改革，在特伦特会议上你有了这 种最终性，它采用了其中一种传统并确立了它。 And then you have, with the Reformation, you have this finality at the Council of Trent that takes one of those traditions and establishes it.
所以，正如我刚才提到的，这对天主教会来说不是一个紧迫的优先 事项，因为当教义争议出现时，它可以诉诸于不仅仅是圣经本身。 So, As I was just mentioning, this was something that was not an urgent priority for the Catholic Church, because when doctrinal controversies arose, It could resort to more than just Scripture itself.
它可以诉诸于传下来的使徒传统。 It could resort to apostolic tradition that had been passed down.
如果有严重问题，它可以咨询训导权。 It could consult the magisterium if there was a severe problem.
因此，弄清楚圣经的确切范围不是一个紧迫的优先事项，但 对于相信唯独圣经的人来说，这是一个紧迫的优先事项。 It was therefore not an urgent priority to figure out exactly the parameters of Scripture, but for someone who believes in sola scriptura, it is an urgent priority.
好的，下一个问题给艾肯先生。 All right, the next question for Mr. Anken.
如果你相信没有更多的启示，那么教宗被认为是无误的依据是什么真理或权威来源？ If you believe that there is no more revelation, By what source of truth or authority is the Pope considered inerrant?
好的，所以神启示的东西和无误的东西之间有区别。 Okay, so there's a difference between something being revealed by God and something being inerrant.
教宗没有从神那里接受新的启示。 The Pope does not receive new revelations from God.
相反，发生的是神保护他不教导错误。 Instead, what happens is God protects him from teaching error.
这有点像如果有人给你一张数学测试卷，神引导你让你每个问题都答对。 It's kind of like if someone gave you a math test and God guided you so that you got every question on that correct.
嗯，那不是新的启示。 Well, that's not new revelation.
这不像是神在帮助你作弊，在你耳边低语答案。 It wasn't like God was helping you cheat and whispering answers in your ear.
相反，他以一种方式引导你，让你没有犯任何错误。 Instead, he guided you in such a way that you didn't make any mistakes.
在有限的情况下，这适用于教宗。 And in limited situations, that applies to the Pope.
神以一种方式引导他，让他在那些特定情况下不 犯错误，正如我提到的，这种情况非常罕见。 God guides him in such a way that he doesn't make mistakes in those specific situations, which as I mentioned are very rare.
现在，实际上有一个开放的问题是神如何做到这一点。 Now, there's actually an open question about how God does that.
可能是如果教宗即将犯错，他会召回教宗到天堂，但无论如 何，他保护教宗在尝试行使无误性时不向教会教导错误。 It could be he would recall the Pope to heaven if he were about to make an error, but one way or another, he protects the Pope from teaching error to his church when the Pope is trying to engage infallibility.
三十秒。 Thirty seconds.
召回到天堂。 Recall to heaven.
我在这方面很礼貌。 I was being polite about it.
有趣的说法，是的。 Funny way of putting it, yeah.
我只是指出，教宗何诺里乌斯因其教导被罗马40 0年来每一个继承彼得宝座的人按名咒诅为异端。 I would simply point out that Pope Honorius was anathematized as a heretic for his teachings by every person who took the throne of Peter in Rome for 400 years by name.
那些人显然不相信教宗无误性。 Those people clearly did not believe in papal infallibility.
好的，如果你们在我问下一个问题时把剩下的卡片带给我，我会很感激。 Alright, if you guys will bring me the rest of those cards while I'm asking the next question, I'd appreciate that.
就送到这里。 Just send them right here.
怀特先生，下一个问题是给你的。 Mr. White, the next question is for you.
谁有权解释圣经，当不同的解释被归因于圣灵的启示时，我们该怎么办？ Who has the authority to interpret Scripture, and what do we do when differing interpretations are attributed to the illumination of the Holy Spirit?
归因于什么？ To the what?
启示。 Illumination.
哦，我以为你说的是消除。 Oh, I thought you said elimination.
这是一个我从未听过的新教义。 It's a new doctrine I've never heard before.
所以如果我们将计时器重置为60秒，我会再读一遍问题。 So if we'll reset the timer for 60 seconds, I'll read the question one more time.
谁有权解释圣经，当不同的解释被归因于圣灵的启示时，我们该怎么办？ Who has the authority to interpret Scripture, and what do we do when differing interpretations are attributed to the illumination of the Holy Spirit?
我得记住我在路易斯安那州。 I got to remember I'm in Louisiana.
好的，所以... Okay, so...
是的，好吧，这是解释任何书面文件的一个例子。 Yes, well, and this is a case of interpreting any written document.
这是，你会得到... This is, you get...
看看最近的教宗文件的所有不同解释。 Look at all the different interpretations just of the recent papal document, too.
你有各种各样的看法。 You've got all sorts of different takes on that.
事实是，我确实相信基督应许与他的教会同在。 The reality is that I do believe that Christ promised to be with his church.
当涉及定义福音的事情时，我们有很大的一致性。 And when it comes to the things that define the gospel, we have had great consistency.
事实上，我会提出这个论点。 In fact, I'll make this argument.
相信唯独圣经并寻求实践它的人在神是谁和福音是什么方面比任 何声称圣经不够并带入其他东西来帮助解释的宗教更加团结。 People who believe in sola scriptura and seek to practice it are much more united on who God is and what the gospel is than any religions that claim that the Bible is not enough and they bring something else in to help interpret it.
我们之间的一致性比所有带入圣经之外其他权威的人要多得多。 There is much more consistency between us than everybody else who brings in other authorities outside of Scripture.
那么，这是否意味着我们对所有事情都有相同的看法？ And so, does that mean we all have the same opinion on everything?
不，不是。 No, it's not.
我认为，最终会来的。 That will come, I think, eventually.
三十秒。 30 seconds.
嗯，我很高兴听到相信唯独圣经并认真对待它的新教 徒之间有这么多的团结，这听起来非常令人振奋。 Well, I'm very glad to hear that there's so much unity Between Protestants who believe in Sola Scriptura and take it seriously, that's very heartening to hear.
我们明晚会听到更多关于团结的内容，但在新教社区中，声 称认真使用唯独圣经的人在救恩方面存在一些显著的差异。 We're going to hear a lot more about unity tomorrow night, but there are some noticeable differences between people who claim to be using Sola Scriptura seriously in the Protestant community concerning salvation.
比如，你需要受洗才能得救吗？ Like, do you need to get baptized to be saved?
有些人说是，有些人说不是。 Some say yes, some say no.
你需要为婴儿施洗吗？ Do you need to baptize babies?
有些人说是，有些人说不是。 Some say yes, some say no.
好的，下一个问题是给艾肯先生的。 Alright, the next question will be for Mr. Aiken.
关于《提摩太后书》2章2节，保罗写道：「你从我这里听到的。」 Concerning 2 Timothy 2 verse 2, Paul wrote, What you heard from me.
提摩太从保罗那里听到的圣经之外的内容是什么？ What are the contents of what Timothy heard from Paul outside of Scripture?
嗯，每次保罗对提摩太讲教义性质的内容，讲教义性质的主题，而不仅仅是引 用旧约时，他在向他传达使徒传统的信息，这包括现在在圣经中的内容，但不 限于现在在圣经中的内容，正如我之前所展示的，比如不会再有使徒的事实。 Well, every time Paul was speaking to Timothy on a doctrinal nature, on subjects of a doctrinal nature, and wasn't just quoting from the Old Testament, He was communicating to him information that is apostolic tradition, and that would include things that are now in Scripture, but it is not limited to things that are now in Scripture, as I demonstrated earlier, like the fact there are not going to be any more apostles.
那不在圣经中，但这是我们都承认的东西。 That's not in Scripture, but it is something that we both recognize also.
公共启示的结束不在那里。 The close of public revelation is not there.
阻止那不法之人的阻拦者的身份不在那里。 And the identity of the restrainer that's holding back the man of lawlessness is not there.
但提摩太会听到保罗在这些主题上的讲道。 But Timothy would have heard Paul preach on these subjects.
三十秒。 30 seconds.
让我们记住一些事情。 Let's keep something in mind.
爱任纽在第二世纪末说他有使徒传统，说耶稣去世时超过50岁。 Irenaeus, by the end of the second century, said that he had apostolic tradition, that Jesus was more than 50 years old when he died.
他将其与他的救赎重述理论相结合。 And he fit that in with his recapitulation theory of the atonement.
现在，我不知道今天有谁真正同意这一点，但你必须有一种 方法来看任何早期教父写的东西，并检查它是否真的正确。 Now, I don't know anybody who actually agrees with that today, but you have to have a means to look at anything that's written by an early father and examine it to see whether it's actually true.
圣经成为了这一点的标准。 Scripture becomes the standard for that.
怀特先生，一个问题给你。 Mr. White, a question for you.
你如何解释成千上万的新教教派的所有不同教义和信仰？ How do you explain all the different doctrines and beliefs that the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations have?
我喜欢成千上万的新教教派。 I love the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations.
我们已经揭穿了这个很长时间。 We've debunked that one for a long time.
根据人们得到35000、43000的同一来源，也有大约1400个罗马公教会。 According to the very same source that people get the 35,000, 43,000, there are like 1,400 Roman Catholic churches too.
所以要小心你使用的来源。 So be careful what sources you're using.
任何类型的严肃规模的数量都比那小得多。 There's a very, very much smaller number than that of any type of serious size whatsoever.
你如何解释这一点？ How do you explain that?
非常简单。 Real simple.
人们没有遵循唯独圣经。 People not following Sola Scriptura.
人们带来了自己的传统，自己的无知，无论是什么，但是的，这是主要原因。 people bringing their own traditions, their own ignorances, whatever it might be, but yes, that is the primary reason.
正如我之前所说，相信唯独圣经并实践它的团体在彼 此的观点上非常接近，特别是在神是谁的问题上。 As I said earlier, the groups that believe in Sola Scriptura and practice it are very close in their perspectives with one another, especially on who God is.
我可以出去与他们辩论穆斯林和其他一切。 I can go out and debate Muslims with them and everything else.
那些拒绝它并带入传统和启示以及所谓的使徒传统的人，他们最终会有各种不同的观点。 The people who reject it and bring in traditions and revelations and quote-unquote apostolic traditions, they end up with all sorts of different perspectives.
这是一个需要记住的重要事情。 That's an important thing to keep in mind.
所以我会让你高兴，詹姆斯，承认我们需要小心夸大基督教团体的数量。 So I'm going to please you, James, by admitting that we need to be careful about exaggerating the number of Christian groups.
这些数字，比如35000个新教教派之类的，是根据一个糟糕的数学系统计算的。 These numbers, like 35,000 Protestant denominations and stuff, are reckoned according to a bad system of mathematics.
它们不应该那样计算，尽管我会说不是1400 ，而是那个来源中的230个不同的天主教会。 They shouldn't be counted that way, although I would say it's not 1,400, but 230 different Catholic churches in that source.
所以我同意这一点，我也同意差异，或者取决于你怎么说，同意这是唯独圣经。 So I agree with that, and I would also agree that the differences, or depending on how you would say this, agree that it is sola scriptura.
这导致了不同团体之间的差异，因为圣经对某些问题的解释不足，这导致了意见的分歧。 That has led to the differences among the different groups, because Scripture underdetermines certain questions, and that leads to divergences of opinion.
好的，时间到了。 Alright, time's expired.
伙计们，如果可以的话，在我问下一个问题时给我带些更多的卡片，因为我快用完了。 Guys, if you will, bring me some more cards while I ask the next question, because I'm almost out.
艾肯先生，下一个问题是给你的。 Mr. Akin, the next question is for you.
是的，是的，是的。 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
我只是很兴奋地听到它。 I'm just excited to hear it.
对不起，我在试图... I'm sorry, I'm trying to...
我告诉过你同时处理这些事情会很难。 I told you it would be hard to multitask these things.
好的，艾肯先生，这个问题是给你的。 All right, so Mr. Aiken, this question for you.
当教宗与圣经相矛盾时，你会对他说什么？ What do you say to the Pope when he contradicts the Scriptures?
这对你来说可以接受吗？ Is this acceptable to you?
嗯，任何人都不能与圣经相矛盾，所以如果任何教宗，方济各或其他 人，与圣经相矛盾，我看了之后说，是的，这些声明无法调和，那么 我会快速拨号给他，我会说，嘿，伙计，觉得你想收回那个吗？ Well, it's not acceptable for anybody to contradict the Scriptures, and so if any Pope, Francis or anybody else, was contradicting the Scriptures, and I looked at it and said, yeah, there's just no way to reconcile these statements, then I would get him on speed dial and I would say, hey, bud, think you want to walk that one back?
我很想看看那到底是怎么运作的。 I would love to see exactly how that works.
我不知道你在快速拨号中有方济各。 I didn't know you had Francis on the speed dial.
有些事情告诉我，联系他会比那更困难一些。 And something tells me getting hold of him would be a little bit more difficult than that.
虽然你是吉米·艾肯，你确实戴着牛仔帽，但我不确定那是否足以让你达到那个地步。 And though you are Jimmy Akin and you do wear a cowboy hat, I'm just not sure that would be enough to actually get you to that point.
我的观点是，如果教宗在无误地运作，你没有办法采取那个立场。 And my point is, if the Pope is functioning infallibly, you don't have a way to take that position.
好的，怀特先生，下一个问题是给你的。 Alright, Mr. White, the next question is for you.
你说过你必须有圣经才能有唯独。 You stated that you have to have a scriptura in order to have a sola.
圣经正典直到使徒时代几个世纪后才最终确定。 The canon of scripture was not set definitively until centuries after the apostolic age.
那么，唯独圣经怎么不是使徒时代之后出现的有约束力的传统呢？ How then is sola scriptura not a binding tradition surfacing after the apostolic age?
嗯，再说一次，这会是一个很好的辩论，但我只是想指出我长期以来一直在问罗马公教徒 的问题，特别是自从我在1993年在波士顿学院与杰里·马蒂蒂克斯辩论以来。那就是 ，基督之前50年的信仰犹太人是如何知道《以赛亚书》和《历代志下》是圣经的？ Well, again, it would be a great debate to have, but I would just like to point to the question I've been asking Roman Catholics for a long time, especially since I debated Jerry Matitix at Boston College in 1993. And that is, how did the believing Jewish man, 50 years before Christ, know that Isaiah and 2 Chronicles were Scripture?
机制是什么？ What was the mechanism?
因为耶稣让人们对那些经文负责。 Because Jesus held men accountable to those scriptures.
他们从未说过，哦，我不知道那是圣经。 And they never said, oh, I didn't know that was scripture.
那么他们是怎么知道的？ So how did they know?
他们没有无误的训导权。 They had no infallible magisterium.
事实上，犹太人拒绝了特伦特会议添加到正典中的书籍。 And in fact, the Jews rejected the books that the Council of Trent added to the canon.
那么，他们是怎么知道的？ So, how did they know?
必须有一个机制，我不相信罗马公教会的系统能解释他们是如何具体知道的。 There had to have been a mechanism, and I don't believe that the Roman Catholic system can explain how they can know that specifically.
所以必须有一个随着时间被动识别的过程，而不是一个主动定义的过程。 So there has to be a process of recognition passively over time, not an active definition.
所以我会回答你关于他们是如何知道的问题。 So I'll answer your question about how they knew.
他们不知道。在基督时代之前，没有无误的正典确定。 They didn't. There was no infallible determination of the canon prior to the time of Christ.
在犹太社区中，对于哪些书籍算作圣经，哪些不算存 在分歧。所以这是一个尚未得到明确回答的问题。 And there were differences in the Jewish community about which books counted as scripture and which didn't. So this was a question that simply had not been answered yet definitively.
那些书，耶稣让人们对他们承认是圣经的书负责，但他没有让其他 人对他们不承认是圣经的书负责，比如当他与撒都该人辩论时。 Those books, Jesus held people accountable to the books that they recognized as scripture, but he didn't hold other people accountable to books that they did not recognize as scripture, such as when he debated with the Sadducees.
好的，艾肯先生，下一个问题是给你的。 All right, Mr. Akin, the next question is for you.
我不知道你能否在60秒内做到这一点，但如果你能给我们一个大致的答案。 And I don't know that you can do this in 60 seconds, but if you can give us a general answer.
詹姆斯已经被逼问了。 James has been pressed.
我会尽力而为。 I'll do my best to.
你能简要介绍一下圣经正典的历史吗？ Could you please offer a brief history of the canon of Scripture?
这只是报复，对吗？ This is just payback, right?
你是谁？ Who are you?
你们这些人怎么了？ What's wrong with you people?
我会在这里引用R.C.斯普罗尔的话。 I'll pull an R.C. Sproul here.
让我重新表述这个问题，以便你能在60秒内回答。 Let me reformulate the question in a way that maybe you can answer in 60 seconds.
教会是如何制定正典的？ How did the church formulate the canon?
那是你的观点吗？ Is that your perspective?
如果是这样，它是如何做到的？ And if so, how did it do it?
所以正典本质上是权威的，因为神写了它。 So the canon is intrinsically authoritative because God wrote it.
但在他如何引导教会认识哪些书是正典，哪些书 不是正典方面，基本标准是使徒们批准了什么。 But in terms of how he guided the church into a recognition of which books are canonical and which books are not, the basic criterion was what did the apostles approve.
这是教会通过涉及传统的双重测试来辨别的。 And that's something that the church discerned by a two-fold test involving tradition.
当他们看待被提议纳入圣经的书籍时，有很多，比 大多数人知道的要多得多，他们问了两个问题。 When they looked at books that were proposed for inclusion in Scripture, and there were a lot, a lot more than most people were aware, they asked two questions.
第一个问题是，这本书在教会中被阅读的历史或传统是什么？ The first question was, is there a history or tradition of this book being read in the churches?
三十秒。 30 seconds.
《罗马书》第3章第2节，它说，犹太人的优势是什么？ Romans 3, verse 2, and it says, what's the advantage of the Jew?
它说，各方面都很大。 It says, great in every respect.
首先，他们被托付了神的圣言。 First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.
所以，这一点至关重要，特别是在这里双方在正典问题上完 全不同意的一个领域，即次经，这些书没有被犹太人接受。 And so, vitally important, especially in the one area where the two sides here completely disagree on the issue of the canon, the Deuterocanonical books, those books were not accepted by the Jews.
它们被拒绝了，但圣经说他们是被托付了神的圣言的人。 They were rejected, and yet scripture says they were the ones entrusted with the oracles of God.
那应该是主要标准。 That should be the primary standard.
怀特先生，下一个问题给你。 Mr. White, the next question for you.
你提到炼狱不在圣经中。 You mentioned purgatory not being in Scripture.
《马加比二书》12章43-46节呢？嘿，你挑了我。 What about 2 Maccabees 12, 43-46? Hey, you picked on me.
现在轮到我了。 Now's my turn.
我认为我们今晚辩论的主题错了。 I think we debated the wrong topic here this evening.
所以，很明显，不仅我不相信这是正典圣经，还有教宗也不相信这是正典圣经。 So, obviously, not only do I not believe that this is canon scripture, there were popes that didn't believe it was canon scripture either.
更重要的是，这些人身上有偶像。 And what's more, these individuals had aisles on their bodies.
偶像崇拜是一个，再次，这是完全的时代错误，将轻罪和致死罪的类别读回到这个背景中。 Idolatry is a, and again, this is complete anachronism to read categories of venial and mortal sin back into this context.
这简直荒谬。 It's just absurd.
但既然它是这样使用的，事实是这会是一个致死罪，整个炼狱的 概念与为他们祈祷无关，因为他们是偶像崇拜者，真是荒唐。 But since it's used this way, the reality is that this would have been a mortal sin and the whole concept of purgatory would be irrelevant to pray for them because they were idolaters, for crying out loud.
所以再次，在我看来，在宗教改革的问题期间，这比在更平静的时期得到了更多的关注。 So again, it seems to me that during the issues of the Reformation, this got a whole lot more attention than it might have otherwise in more calmer periods of time.
但它肯定与炼狱的概念毫无关系。 But it certainly has no connection whatsoever to the concept of purgatory.
我很高兴这个问题被问到，因为它给了我一个机 会回应你在一个反驳中说的我不能反驳的事情。 I'm so glad this question was asked because it gives me an opportunity to respond to something you said in one of your rebuttals where I'm not allowed to counter-rebut.
但你应该评论这个问题。 But you're supposed to be commenting on the question.
嗯，我会评论这个问题，因为这个问题问的是《马加比二书》， 这让我指出詹姆斯声称正典是由拥有神的圣言的犹太人所知的。 Well, I am going to comment on the question, because this question asks about 2 Maccabees, and that allows me to point out that James' assertions that the canon was known by the Jews who possessed the oracles of God.
嗯，这是真的，他们拥有神的圣言，但这并不意味着他们都准确理解这些圣言是什么。 Well, it's true, they possessed the oracles of God, but that doesn't mean that all of them had an accurate understanding of what those oracles were.
事实上，撒都该人没有。 In fact, the Sadducees did not.
存在分歧，一些犹太人认为《马加比二书》是圣经。 There was disagreement, and some Jews regarded 2 Maccabees as scripture.
好的，下一个问题给艾肯先生。 All right, the next question for Mr. Aiken.
关于《帖撒罗尼迦后书》2章15节，你怎么知 道那段经文中提到的传统不是后来的圣经... In regards to 2 Thessalonians 2.15, how do you know that what traditions are spoken of in that text are not either later Scripture...
不是后来的圣经... are not either later Scripture...
后来被纳入圣经。 In Scripture-rated later.
是的。 Yes.
哦，就是这样？ Oh, that's it?
好的。 Okay.
嗯，我在演讲中专门用了一整张幻灯片来讲这个。 Well, I devoted a whole slide to this during my presentation.
首先，我不能假设它们与后来写下的内容完全相同，也不能假设它们不是。 First of all, I can't assume one way or another that they are all identical with what's later written down, and I can't assume that they're not.
我需要证据。 I need evidence.
所以我提供了证据，指出保罗没有时间，因为他在 帖撒罗尼迦不到一个月，给他们完整的信仰课程。 So I provided evidence by pointing out that Paul did not have time, because he was in Thessalonica for less than a month, to give them a full course of instruction in the faith.
所以他不可能在谈论他给他们的那些传统。 So he can't be talking about that as the traditions he gave them.
此外，我指出他提到他们已经知道阻拦者是什么 ，因为他说，记得我告诉过你们阻拦者是什么。 Also, I pointed to the fact that he says they already know what the Restrainer is because he says, remember I told you what the Restrainer is.
但他没有在这里记录，也没有在圣经的其他地方记录，所以 显然他在那三周内教他们的一些东西后来没有写在圣经中。 But he doesn't record it here and it's not recorded elsewhere in Scripture, so obviously some of the things that he taught them in that three-week period were not later written down in Scripture.
所以在我们现在拥有的新约之外有使徒传统。 So there was apostolic tradition outside of what we now have in the New Testament.
三十秒。 30 seconds.
《帖撒罗尼迦后书》2章13节说：「所以，弟兄们，你们要站立 得稳，坚守所领受的教训，不拘是我们口传的，还是信上写的。」 2 Thessalonians 2.13 says, So then, brothers, stand firm and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.
那么，在上下文中，他指的是什么？ So in context, what is he referring to?
他指的是以两种方式传递给他们的福音内容。 He's referring to the content of the gospel that has been delivered to them in two ways.
怀特先生，下一个问题给你。 Mr. White, the next question for you.
如果两个人在阅读圣经时得到了相互矛盾的解释，如果你相信唯独圣经，他们应该去找谁？ If two people are reading Scripture and they get conflicting interpretations, who are they supposed to go to if you believe in Sola Scriptura?
他们应该去找谁？ Who are they to go to?
嗯，如果他们在一个好的、稳固的教会中，新约告诉我们教会中有多个长老和 执事，这是新约唯一开始理解的教会形式，那么他们应该与他们的长老谈谈。 Well, if they're involved in a good, solid church, which the New Testament tells us has multiple elders and deacons in it, and that's the only form of the church the New Testament even begins to understand, then they should talk to their elders about it.
那将是第一步。 That would be the first thing.
如果长老之间有分歧怎么办？ And what if you have a difference between elders?
那么，他们需要更深入地研究圣经文本。 Well, then they need to go much more deeply into the text of Scripture.
我完全不反对他们研究教会历史，阅读奥古斯丁 或阅读戈特沙尔克或阅读他们想读的任何人。 And I don't have any problem whatsoever in their going into church history and reading Augustine or reading Gottschalk or reading whoever they want to read.
只要你不在他们的话语和权威以及圣经之外的传统上投资，那就很好。 That's fine and dandy, as long as you do not invest in their words and authority and a tradition outside of Scripture.
但事实是，在这个生命中，个人之间将会存在差异，直到圆满到来 ，这涉及到末世论，我不能在布莱恩坐在这里时讨论这个问题。 But the fact of the matter is, in this life, there are going to remain differences between individuals Until the fullness is brought in, and that gets into eschatology, and I can't do that with Brian sitting here.
是的，我们稍后会在吃玉米饼时进行那场辩论，怀特博士。 Yeah, we'll have that debate later, Dr. Dwight, over some tacos.
好的，三十秒。 Alright, 30 seconds.
我同意詹姆斯的观点，对于普通目的，你知道，我们必须在我们的情况下尽力而为 ，与教会中的长老、祭司或长老或你想称呼他们的任何人交谈是一个好的第一步。 I agree with James that for ordinary purposes, you know, we have to do the best we can in our situation, and talking to the presbyters, the priests, or elders, or whatever you want to call them in your church, is a good first step.
从天主教的角度来说，如果你在那里得不到满意的答案， 你可以向主教提出，最终你可以去信理部甚至教宗那里。 And speaking from a Catholic perspective, if you don't get satisfaction there, you can take it up to the bishop, and ultimately you could go to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith or even the Pope.
但在实际情况下，这种情况非常不可能发生。 But that's very unlikely to happen in a practical case.
天主教系统拥有的，而不幸的是新教系统没有的，是获得明确答案的可能性。 What the Catholic system does have that, unfortunately, the Protestant system doesn't, is the possibility of getting a definitive answer.
那是件好事。 And that's a good thing.
你没有快速拨号图赫尔吗？ You don't have Tuchel on speed dial?
不，我只有方济各。 No, I just have Francis.
哦，好吧。 Oh, okay.
你直接找最高层。 You just go for the top.
我们不要担心下层的人。 Let's not worry about the lower people.
好的。 Okay.
好的。 All right.
下一个问题，艾肯先生。 Next question, Mr. Aiken.
根据特伦特会议，新教徒是否被咒诅？ Are Protestants anathematized according to the Council of Trent?
哦。 Ooh.
我们在剧透明晚的演讲。 We're spoiling tomorrow night's talk.
答案是否定的，他们没有被咒诅。 The answer is no, they're not.
正如我明晚会解释的那样，咒诅这个词并不像新教社区中的许多人认为的那样。 As I'll explain tomorrow night, the term anathema does not mean what many in the Protestant community think it does.
我会向你们展示它的确切含义，并展示今天咒诅的状态。 I'll show you exactly what it did mean, and I'll show you the status of anathemas today.
所以剧透警告，大家，新教徒没有被咒诅。 So spoiler warning, everybody, no Protestants are not anathematized.
让我们为没有被咒诅的每个人鼓掌。 Let's hear it for everybody who's not anathematized.
所以为此感到高兴，但我希望你们明晚再来，我会在明天解释原因。 So be happy about that, but I want you to come back tomorrow night, so I'll explain the reasoning tomorrow.
但好消息是这里没有人被咒诅。 But the good news is nobody here is anathematized.
怀特博士，三十秒。 Dr. White, 30 seconds.
嗯，我想加入所有的乐趣，但事实是，在1500年代，一批又一批的传教士从 日内瓦教会出来，进入意大利，带去恩典的福音，而他们每一个人都被杀害了。 Well, I'd like to join in all the fun, but the fact of the matter is a steady stream of missionaries came out of the Church of Geneva in the 1500s going into Italy to bring the gospel of grace there, and every single one of them was murdered.
所以你可以随意玩弄咒诅这个词。 So you can play with the term anathema all you want.
历史现实是它导致了流血事件。 The historical reality was it led to bloodshed.
好的，怀特先生，下一个问题。 Alright, Mr. White, the next question.
在路德之前，唯独圣经的教义出现在基督教著作中的哪里？ Prior to Luther, where does the doctrine of sola scriptura appear in Christian writing?
我在一本叫《唯独圣经》的书中写了一整章，我认为目前由S oli Deo Gloria出版，在那里我深入探讨了教 父的见证，我想我停在了亚他拿修那里，如果我没记错的话。 I've written an entire chapter in a book called Solo Scriptura that I think is currently published by Soli Deo Gloria, where I went rather in-depth into the patristic witness up through, I think I stopped with Athanasius, if I recall correctly.
但我提供了许多文本，向我们展示了一个完全不同于现代罗马公教会的 观点，不仅涉及圣经的性质，还涉及圣经在确定这些问题上的充分性。 But I provided a number of texts that present to us a viewpoint utterly different than what you have in modern Roman Catholicism in regards to not only the nature of Scripture but the sufficiency of Scripture to determine these issues.
我只是指出，当时没有人关心正典，因为他们有其他东西可以参考。 And I would simply point out that when it said that no one back then was concerned about the canon, because they had other things to refer to.
让我指出，那是完全错误的。 Let me point out, that is baldly false.
当时教会最大的斗争是与诺斯替主义的斗争，诺斯 替主义者确实争论正典，那是在第二和第三世纪。 The church's greatest struggle back then was with Gnosticism, and the Gnostics did dispute the canon, and that was in the second and third centuries.
你可以肯定他们有理由知道正典是什么。 You bet they had a reason to know what the canon was.
三十秒。 30 seconds.
所以当涉及诺斯替主义者时，他们很快拒绝了所有诺斯替主义的著作，因为它们是异端。 So they did when it came to the Gnostics, and they quickly rejected all of the Gnostic writings because they were heretical.
它们未能通过我提到的两个传统测试。 They failed to pass the two tradition tests that I mentioned.
所以他们拒绝了它们，但他们不需要定义一切，因为没有紧迫的优先事项来定义一切。 So they rejected them, but they didn't need to define everything because there wasn't an urgent priority to get everything defined.
话虽如此，既然你刚刚提到了我提到的其他事情 ，是的，有一些传教士去了意大利并被杀害。 Having said that, since you just brought back something else I mentioned, yeah, there were some missionaries who went to Italy and got killed.
有一群天主教传教士去了英国并被杀害。 There were a bunch of missionaries who were Catholic who went to England and got killed.
所以如果你想玩那个游戏，我们可以。 So if you want to play that game, we can.
艾肯先生？ Mr. Aiken?
最后一个问题是给你的。 The last question will be for you.
当圣经直接反对同性婚姻时，罗马如何在祝福同性婚姻等事情上立场？ How does Rome land on such things like blessing same-sex marriage when the Bible directly opposes such a thing?
天主教会不支持祝福同性婚姻。 The Catholic Church does not support blessing same-sex marriages.
这是对问题的简单回答。 That's the simple answer to the question.
好的，三十秒。 Okay, 30 seconds.
我同意，那不是所说的内容。 I agree, that's not what was said.
但所说的内容，如果你看过LGBTQ运动如何在自 由派新教教派中推进，那就是在梵蒂冈发生的事情。 But what was said, if you've watched how the LGBTQ movement has moved through the liberal Protestant denominations, it's what's happening in the Vatican.
你稍微打开一点门，然后再打开一点，再多一点，再多一点。 You kick the door open just a little bit, you open it just a little bit, then a little bit more, then a little bit more, and a little bit more.
我只是无法相信任何人会相信在仅仅20年前，任何教宗都能像方济各这样走到这一步。 I just don't believe that anyone can believe that any Pope, before only 20 years ago could ever have gone where Francis has gone with this.
我简直无法相信。 I just can't believe it.
好的，请给我们一分钟时间，我们将重新布置舞台 进行总结陈述，所以如果我们能把讲台放回原位。 All right, if you'll give us just a minute, we are going to reset the stage for closing statements, so if we can get the podium back in place.
好的，每位辩论者有五分钟时间做总结陈述。 Okay, each debater has five minutes to make his closing statement.
这将是辩论的最后部分。 This will be the last portion of the debate.
怀特博士，五分钟。 Dr. White, five minutes.
稍等一下。 Just a second.
我们这里有电线。 We've got wires up here.
在他开始之前不要启动计时器。 Don't start the timer until he begins.
好的。 All right.
非常感谢。 Thank you very much.
嗯，我要感谢这里的教会让我们聚在一起，提供了这个机会。 Well, I want to thank the church here for bringing us together, providing the opportunity.
把这些事情组织起来需要很多工作，感谢吉米· 艾肯开车来到这里，参与这个非常重要的话题。 It takes a lot of work to put these things together, for Jimmy Akin for driving down to be here and engage this very important subject.
我想强调的是，我们听到了这样的断言，这就是使徒传统。 I want to emphasize that we have heard assertions Well, this is what apostolic tradition is.
我知道在教会历史上，这个词被用于各种各样的事情 ，其中许多艾肯先生不会接受为实际上来自使徒的。 And I know in church history that term has been used of all sorts of things, many of which Mr. Akin would not accept as actually having come from the apostles.
但事实是，我们没有看到任何真正的神所默示的东西，这些东西在圣经之外。 But the reality is we have not been shown anything that is truly theanoustos, God-breathed, that is outside of Scripture.
没有。 Nothing.
我们当然没有得到任何东西可以作为圣事神学、马利亚教义、教会职 务的发展、大公会议和会议主义以及教宗制度的大规模发展的基础， 我们没有得到任何你可以以任何有意义的方式追溯到使徒的东西。 And we certainly have not been given anything that would be a foundation For the massive developments of theology in sacramentalism, in the Marian dogmas, in the development of church offices and ecumenical councils and conciliarism and the papacy, we've been given nothing that you could in any meaningful way trace back to the apostles historically.
你做不到。 You couldn't do it.
这是不可能的。 It's not possible.
所以我的第一个断言实际上仍然没有受到挑战。 And so my first assertion remains really, literally unchallenged.
那就是，保罗对提摩太说的话，提摩太将要面对，提摩太，艰难的时刻即将到来。 And that is, what Paul said to Timothy, and Timothy's going to be facing, Timothy, hard times are coming.
叛教即将到来。 Apostasy's coming.
假教师即将到来。 False teachers are coming.
只要看罗马的彼得。 Just look to Peter in Rome.
那不是他说的。 That's not what he said.
当他在《使徒行传》第20章中与以弗所的长老会面时，他对他们说了什么？ When he met with the Ephesian elders in Acts chapter 20, What did he say to them?
将会有很多人。 There are going to be many people.
从你们中间兴起，带走门徒。 Rise from your very ranks and draw disciples away.
所以我把你们交托给神和他恩典的道。 I therefore commit you to God and to the word of his grace.
不是交托给训导权，不是交托给使徒传统，而是交托给神的道。 Not to a magisterium, not to apostolic tradition, but to God's word.
你可以提出论点。 And you can make arguments.
嗯，但有时候有些人不知道。 Well, but there's a time where some people don't know.
那没关系。 That's fine.
在旧约中也发生过。 Happened in the Old Testament too.
耶稣每次都让人们负责。 And Jesus did hold men accountable every time.
你可以说，嗯，撒都该人，他继续引用了摩西五 经，并且关于他们在那方面的确切位置有争论。 You can say, well, the Sadducees, he went ahead and just quoted the Pentateuch, and there's argument about exactly where they were on that.
但那没关系。 But that's fine.
当他引用《以赛亚书》时，人们怎么知道那是圣经？ How, when he cites the book of Isaiah, did someone know it was Scripture?
没有人曾经对耶稣说，嗯，那不是圣经。 No one ever responded to Jesus by saying, well, that's not Scripture.
他们怎么知道的？ How did they know?
他说，他们不知道。我只是坐在那里看着你们，希望每个人在这一点上都还清醒。 And he said, they didn't. And I just sat there looking out over you, going, I'm hoping everyone's still awake at this point.
因为他说他们不知道。 Because he just said they didn't know.
耶稣说：「你们没有读过神对你们说的话吗？」 Jesus said, have you not read what God spoke to you?
嗯，我不知道神对你们说了那话。 Well, I didn't know God spoke that to you.
那行不通。 That doesn't work.
那行不通。 That does not work.
所以，如果你仔细听了使徒传统这个短语的使用， 你会发现吉米今晚使用的使徒传统是一个橡皮人。 And so if you've been listening carefully to the use of the phrase apostolic tradition, you have found that apostolic tradition as it's been used by Jimmy tonight is a Gumby.
你们中的一些人太年轻，不知道橡皮人是什么，我为你们感到遗憾。 And some of you are too young to know what Gumby was, and I feel sorry for you.
但橡皮人，你看，当然你知道。 But Gumby, see, of course you know.
橡皮人是我那时候的一个小人物，你可以把他拉伸到各种不同的方向，他非常灵活。 Gumby was a little figure back in my day that you could stretch all sorts of different directions and he was quite flexible.
比我现在灵活得多，我可以向你保证。 A whole lot more flexible than I am anymore, I can guarantee you that.
但你看，要使使徒传统有意义并成为你说必须相信的信仰 教义的基础，它必须实际指的是确实来自使徒的东西。 But you see, for apostolic tradition to be meaningful and to ground dogma that you say you must believe, de fide, It has to actually refer to something that really came from the Apostles.
我们没有任何理由相信罗马强加于人们良心的东西实际上来自任何使徒。 And we have been given no reason to believe that the things that Rome has bound upon men's consciences actually come from any Apostle at all.
默认情况下，如果你只是读圣经... The default, if you simply read the Scriptures...
让我请你做一件事，无论你今晚是罗马公教徒还是新教徒。 Let me ask you to do something, whether you're Roman Catholic or Protestant tonight.
回家读《诗篇》第119篇。 Go home and read the 119th Psalm.
这是一篇长篇。 It's a long one.
可能会让你入睡。 might put you to sleep.
但读《诗篇》第119篇，听诗人谈论神的律法和神的见证的崇 高性质，并意识到他没有任何东西可以与我们今天拥有的相比。 But read the 119th Psalm and listen to the psalmist speak of the exalted nature of God's law and God's testimonies and realize he didn't have anything in comparison to what we have today.
他没有《以弗所书》，他没有《约翰福音》。 He didn't have Ephesians, he didn't have John.
然而，听听圣经说了什么，问自己一个简单的问题。 And yet listen to what the scripture says and ask yourself a simple question.
在这个世界上，有什么东西可以用诗人在《诗篇》 第119篇中用来描述神的见证的词语来描述。 Is there anything In this world, it could be described in the words that the psalmist uses to speak of God's testimonies in Scripture in the 119th Psalm.
答案是否定的。 And the answer is no.
这确立了唯独圣经。 And that establishes sola scriptura.
感谢你们今晚的关注。 Thank you for your attention this evening.
愿神祝福。 God bless.
所以詹姆斯提到了一些我没有提供依据的事情，比如炼狱、 会议主义、教宗制度和马利亚教义，所有这些不同的事情。 So James mentioned a number of things that I have provided no basis for, like purgatory and conciliarism and the papacy and the Marian doctrines, all these different things.
他说，这做不到。 And he said, and it can't be done.
嗯，不是在我最后的五分钟内。这又是超载。 Well, not in my last five minutes it can't. That's overloading again.
如果你想辩论那些主题，你应该要求一个不同的辩论主题。 If you wanted to debate those subjects, you should ask for a different debate topic.
所以我将专注于我们今晚要讨论的内容，即原则。 So I'm going to stay focused on what we're here to talk about tonight, which is the principles.
在使徒时代，他们使用使徒范式。 And in the apostolic age, they used the apostolic paradigm.
它包括使徒认可的圣经，包括旧约，它包括超越旧约的使徒传统 ，并且它包括神自己设立并引导的训导权或教导权威，以至于那 个训导权的成员可以说，圣灵和我们认为宣布这个决定是好的。 It included apostolically approved scriptures, including the Old Testament, It included apostolic tradition that went beyond what was in the Old Testament, and it included a magisterium or teaching authority that God himself had instituted and was guiding such that the members of that magisterium could say it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to announce this decision.
我们还看到新约，比如在《提摩太后书》中，谈到 社区的年轻成员在使徒去世后如何传递使徒传统。 And we also see the New Testament, like in 2 Timothy, talking about how the junior members of the community are to pass on apostolic tradition after the apostles are dead.
保罗列出了四代人来做这件事。 Paul names four generations to do that.
他自己的，开始了使徒传统，提摩太的，提摩太 将教导的那一代，以及他们将教导的那一代。 His own, which began the apostolic tradition, Timothy's, the generation Timothy will teach, and the generation they will teach.
所以新约设想使徒范式在使徒后的时代继续存在，并且确实如此。 So the New Testament envisions the apostolic paradigm continuing in the post-apostolic age, and it did.
我已经向你们展示了我们同意的四个使徒传统，它们在新教社 区中具有权威性，就像它们在天主教社区中具有权威性一样。 I've shown you four apostolic traditions that we agree on, that are authoritative in the Protestant community just like they're authoritative in the Catholic community.
我本可以展示更多，尽管与一些新教徒可能存在差异，但我已经 展示了这些对我们今天有约束力，并且它们也是神所默示的。 I could have shown many more, even though there might be differences with some Protestants, but I've already shown that these are binding on us today, and they also are theopneustos.
它们是神所默示的，因为早期教会对默示的概念与詹姆斯在文本中读到的不同。 They are God-breathed, because the early church had a different concept of what inspiration is than what James is reading into the text.
唯独圣经的最大问题是它认为所有教义，所有教导，必须在圣经中明确或隐含地教导。 The big problem with Sola Scriptura is that it holds that all teachings, all doctrines, must be taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture.
詹姆斯承认它是一种教义。 James has admitted it's a doctrine.
唯独圣经是一种教义。 Sola Scriptura is a doctrine.
因此，如果唯独圣经是真的，唯独圣经必须在圣经中教导。 Therefore, if Sola Scriptura is true, Sola Scriptura must be taught in Scripture.
但它没有在圣经中教导。 But it is not taught in Scripture.
正如詹姆斯也承认的那样，它在第一世纪没有运作。 As James has also admitted, it was not operational in the first century.
因此，没有圣经经文教导唯独圣经。 Therefore, no Bible verses teach sola scriptura.
第一世纪的基督徒没有被告知要使用它。 First century Christians were not being told to use it.
因此，唯独圣经是一个基于我们不再有使徒传统或神圣引导的训导 权的想法的圣经之后的推论，我们已经看到这些说法是错误的。 Sola Scriptura is therefore a post-biblical inference based on the idea that we no longer have apostolic tradition or a divinely guided magisterium, and we've seen that those claims are false.
因此，唯独圣经未能通过自己的测试，我们应该继续使用使徒期望他们的皈依 者使用的使徒范式，就像所有在宗教改革之前的基督教团体一样，继续使用。 Therefore, Sola Scriptura fails its own test, and we should continue to use the apostolic paradigm that the Apostles expected They're converts to use, and just like all of the Christian groups that precede the Reformation, have continued to use.
所以，简要总结，使徒范式是耶稣对他第一批追随者的旨意。 So in very quick summary, the apostolic paradigm was Jesus' will for his first followers.
它从未被撤销。 It was never rescinded.
耶稣应许他和圣灵会永远引导他的教会在其教导中。 Jesus promised that he and the Holy Spirit would guide his church forever in its teaching.
新约谈到在使徒后的时代传递使徒传统，神在基 督时代后几百年引导训导权做出无误的决定。 The New Testament speaks of passing down apostolic tradition in the post-apostolic age, and God guided the magisterium into inerrant decisions hundreds of years after the time of Christ.
另一方面，唯独圣经不是耶稣对他第一批追随者的旨意，正如詹姆斯承认的那样。 On the other hand, Sola Scriptura was not Jesus' will for his first followers, as James has admitted.
它从未在新约中教导，无论是对耶稣的第一批追随者还是对他后来的追随者。 It is never taught in the New Testament either for Jesus' first followers or for his later followers.
它基于错误的使徒后前提。 It is based on false post-apostolic premises.
例如，它错误地声称我们没有圣经之外的使徒传统，而实际上我们有。 For example, it falsely claims that we don't have extra-scriptural apostolic tradition when we do.
我们对此达成一致。 We agree on it.
因此，它是自我反驳的，因为它未能通过自己的测试。 And it is thus self-refuting because it fails its own test.
我提供这个供你们考虑。 I offer this for your consideration.
非常感谢大家，感谢你们今晚的到来！ Thank you so much, everybody, and thanks for coming out tonight!
感谢我们的两位辩论者。 Thank you to both of our debaters.
当我们今晚结束辩论时，艾肯先生将在门厅的公教会答疑桌旁。 As we close our debate tonight, Mr. Aiken is going to be at the Catholic Answers table in the foyer.
怀特先生会在前面，如果你想和他说话。 Mr. White will be up here at the front if you'd like to speak to him.
我想用一句祷告结束这次活动。 I want to close this in a word of prayer.
让我们向主祷告。 Let's go to the Lord in prayer.
父啊，我们今晚来到这里，感谢你给我们这个机会，让我们彼此互动，思考你的话语 及其权威，主啊，我今晚祈求你帮助我们每一个人辨别你的真理，主啊，你的福音。 Father, we come tonight thankful for this opportunity for us to interact with one another, consider your word and its authority, and Lord, I just pray tonight that you would help each of us to discern your truth, Lord, your gospel.
主啊，我祈求你的圣灵真正帮助我们找到你的真理。 I pray, Lord, that your Holy Spirit would truly help us to Find your truth.
主啊，我祈求你保守每个人在开车回家时的安全，当我 们明天来到这里时，求你继续祝福这些辩论，主啊。 And Lord, I just pray that you would keep everyone safe as they drive home, as we come tomorrow, that you would continue to bless these debates, Lord.
我们非常感谢你对这件事的所有兴趣以及这次活动的历史性出席。 We just thank you so much for all of the interest in this and this historic attendance at this event.
主啊，我们非常感恩。 Lord, we are so thankful.
因此，我们奉主耶稣的名祷告。 And in that, we pray in the Lord Jesus' name.
阿们。 Amen.
在我们离开之前，再次提醒一下，如果你喜欢你所观看的内容 ，你可以通过点赞、评论，特别是订阅这个频道来帮助我。 And before we go, just one more reminder that if you like what you've watched, you can help me out by liking, commenting, and especially subscribing to this channel.
我正在努力发展它，我真的很感激你的帮助。 I'm trying to grow it and I'd really appreciate your help.
谢谢，愿神祝福。 Thank you and God bless.