圣子的永恒从属。 The Eternal Subordination of the Sun.
这是近几年变得相当激烈的一个争议。 This is a controversy that has gotten pretty heated in the last few years.
确实有很多出版物涉及这个问题，包括文章和整本书。 It's really had a lot of publications dealing with articles as well as full-length books addressing this issue.
所以我将解释这个问题究竟是什么，并简要说明我为什么对永恒从属的观念有疑问。 So I'm going to explain what exactly this issue is and give a brief explanation and reason why I have a problem with the idea of eternal subordination.
这不是我非常深入关注的争议。 This isn't a controversy that I have followed really extensively.
我在某种程度上关注过这个问题，但我绝不是这个领域的专家。 It is one I have followed to some extent, but I'm by no means an expert in this area.
我没有阅读所有相关文献和争议，但我至少对一些基本问题和这里的关键点有一定了解。 I haven't done all of the readings and all of the controversies, but I have a decent handle on at least what some of the basic issues are and exactly what's at stake here.
基本上有两个人物，至少是我所熟悉的，他们捍卫了圣子永恒从属的观念。 There are basically two figures, at least that I'm familiar with, who have defended this notion of the eternal subordination of the sun.
所以它被称为ESS，即圣子的永恒从属，也被称为永恒功能从属。 So it's referred to both as ESS, eternal subordination of the sun, but also eternal functional subordination.
所以我也听说过它被称为EFS。 So I've heard it referred to as EFS as well.
我将解释这是什么。 So I'll explain what that is.
但推广这个观点的两个主要人物是韦恩·格鲁登，你知道，他是一种标准的福音派系统 神学，倾向于加尔文主义，但他也有一点灵恩派的特点，在某些影响上有点像浸信会。 But two major figures who have promoted this idea would be Wayne Grudem, who is, you know, he's kind of the standard evangelical systematic theology, Calvinist-ish leaning, but he's also a little bit charismatic, kind of Baptist in some of his influences.
所以他在一些关于妇女事工和性别的著作中特别推广了这个观点，他在其中捍卫 传统的性别角色，并捍卫这样一种观念，即事工，道和圣事的职分，虽然他不会 用这种说法，是神特别呼召男性而不是女性的事，并且在这方面存在性别差异。 So he has promoted this idea specifically in some of his writings on women in ministry and on gender, where he's defending traditional gender roles and defending the notion that ministry, the office of word and sacrament ministry, not that he would use that language, is specifically something that God calls men to, not women, and that there are gender differences there.
另一个名字是布鲁斯·韦尔，他写了一本通俗级别的三位一 体著作，除了其中出现的这些问题外，总体上是一本好书。 So the other name is Bruce Ware, who's written a popular level book on the Trinity, which largely was a good book other than these issues that came up in it.
他是南方浸信会的教授、神学家，四点加尔文主义者 ，所以属于那种倾向于福音派加尔文主义的领域。 So he's a Southern Baptist professor, theologian, four-point Calvinist, so kind of in that evangelical Calvinist-ish leaning field.
所以这两个人物都在谈论婚姻中的角色或关系的背景下特别捍卫了这种永恒生成的观念。 So both of these figures defended this notion of eternal generation specifically in the context of speaking about roles or relationships in marriage.
所以论点是这样的，在婚姻中，丈夫的角色和妻子的角色是有区别的。 So the argument goes like this, that within marriage, there is a distinction between the role of the husband and the role of the wife.
丈夫的角色是作为头，而妻子或女性在关系中的角色是顺服。 And the role of the husband is one of headship, and the role of the wife or the woman in the relationship is one of submission.
所以在这种关系中，今天很多人会问这样一个问题，他们正在反对所谓的父权制和任 何因性别或类似原因而使某人成为另一人之首的制度，他们认为这使女性低于男性。 And so in this relationship, the question that a lot of people would ask today who are fighting against what they call the patriarchy and any kind of system where someone is the head of someone else because of gender or something like that, they argue that this makes women less than men.
所以这种区别，也就是整个讨论出现的原因，是为了说明 在三位一体的神格中，圣父和圣子之间存在永恒的区别。 And so the distinction, the reason why this whole conversation came up, is to say that there is an eternal differentiation between the Father and the Son in the triune Godhead.
在这种永恒的区别中，圣子向圣父顺服。 And so in this eternal differentiation, there is a submission of the Son to the Father.
所以这种从属或顺服是永恒的。 And so this subordination or the submission is something that is eternal.
这不仅仅是因为道成肉身，这是事物本质中固有的。 It's not just because of the incarnation, this is something that just is in the very nature of things.
论点是，圣父和圣子都同等是神，所以在本体论上他们是同一存在。 And the argument is, well, the Father and the Son are both equally God, so ontologically they're the same being.
一个不比另一个更大，但即使在这个体系内，也存在顺服。 One is not greater than another, but even within that system, there is submission.
所以这是一种论证方式，表明一方可以顺服另一方， 而不是说顺服的一方在本体论上低于被顺服的一方。 So this is a way to argue to say that you can have one party submitting to another without saying the one who submits is somehow ontologically less than the one who was being submitted to.
所以他们会说这是神自身内部的结构，三位一体的结构，然后这在婚姻关系中得到反映。 And so they'd say this is kind of the structure within God himself, the structure of the Trinity, and then this is mirrored in marriage relationships.
所以这是在许多这样的讨论中提出的基本观点。 So that's the kind of the foundational point that's being made in a lot of these discussions.
我认为在更广泛的福音派中，对神的教义整体上的理解非常薄弱。 And I think just generally within broader evangelicalism, there is a very weak understanding of the doctrine of God as a whole.
这是最近通过关于不变性和神圣单一性等主题的新出版物得到了更多关注的问题。 And this is something that's been addressed a lot more recently with new publications on things like immutability and divine simplicity.
人们正在回归更加古典的神论理解，更加古典地 理解三位一体意义上的神是谁，以及神的属性。 There's been a move back toward a more classical theistic understanding, a more classical understanding of who God is in a Trinitarian sense, as well as just in terms of the attributes of God.
所以通过这些讨论，人们开始发现，我们今天在教会中谈论神的一些方式实 际上与教父们的观点不一致，也与历史上基督徒谈论各种事物的方式不符。 So with a lot of those discussions, what people have begun to discover is that some of the ways that we've spoken about God within the church today really don't line up with where the church fathers were at and with historically just how Christians have spoken about various things.
现在，我也有这方面的过错。 Now, I'm guilty of this as well.
我读过一些在这场争议中被引用的作品。 I read some of the works that are cited in this controversy.
我读过布鲁斯·韦尔的作品。 I've read Bruce Ware.
我刚开始学习神学时读过韦恩·格鲁登的作品。 I read Wayne Gruden when I first started studying theology.
所以即使在我自己的思想中，在我自己的写作中，过去也出现过 一些这样的观点，直到我真正开始研究这个问题并深入探讨。 And so even in my own thoughts, in my own writing, some of these ideas kind of came across in the past until I really started studying this issue and looking into it.
当我这样做时，我开始意识到，等一下，这实际上是一 个有问题的立场，这不仅仅是历史上的三位一体论。 And when doing that, I began to realize that, wait a minute, this actually is a problematic position and this isn't just historic Trinitarianism.
那么这种观点有什么问题呢？ So what is the problem with this view?
顺便说一下，这种观点在路德宗中也出现过。 And by the way, this view does come up within Lutheranism as well.
有人在推特上向我指出约翰·克莱尼格的一篇文章， 他在处理妇女按立问题时提出了非常相似的论点。 Someone pointed me on Twitter to an article by John Kleinig where he makes an argument very similarly in dealing with the issue of women's ordination.
我很喜欢约翰·克莱尼格。 And I love John Kleinig.
我认为他是一位出色的作家和神学家。 I think he's a wonderful writer and theologian.
我很惊讶在他的写作中发现这种观点。 And I was surprised to find this kind of thing within his writing.
我不知道他是否仍然持有这种立场，但这肯定是过去出现过的观点。 And I don't know if he still holds this position, but this is certainly something that came out in the past.
我猜想那里可能有格鲁登的影响，但我不确定。 I would assume there was probably an influence from Gruden there, but I'm not sure.
所以我不知道他今天的确切立场。 So I don't know where he's at exactly that today.
但可以说，这是一个广泛影响了各种不同传统的教会的问题。 But just to say that this has been something that has impacted the church broadly in all sorts of different traditions.
所以福音派、路德宗、改革宗、英国圣公会，所有不同的圈子都受到影响。 So evangelical, Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, all different circles.
我不确定罗马公教会和东正教的情况。 I'm not sure about Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
老实说，他们通常比我们新教徒更好地掌握了他们历史上的神学教义。 Generally, they have a much better handle on their historic doctrine of God than we Protestants do, honestly.
不幸的是，情况确实往往如此。 Unfortunately, that does tend to be the case.
所以当我向人们推荐写神学教义的作者时，我通常会 推荐罗马公教会的作者，因为他们往往是最好的。 So when I do point people to authors who are writing on the doctrine of God, I usually do point them to Roman Catholic authors because they do tend to be the best.
现在，我认为这种情况正在改变，因为广义上说，新教内部正在回归古典神论。 Now, I think that's shifting in that there is a move back toward classical theism within Protestantism, broadly speaking.
但总的来说，罗马公教会的作者在这些问题上是最好的。 But generally, Roman Catholic authors are the best on some of these issues.
所以我认为在那里这不是一个问题。 So I don't think that it's been an issue there.
如果有的话，请告诉我。 If it has been somehow, please point me to it.
我真的很有兴趣看看。 I would be really interested to see that.
那么主要问题是什么？ But so what's the major issue?
为什么这很重要？ Why does this matter?
现在，一方面，那些提倡这种观点的人并不是说圣子在本体论上从属于圣父。 Now, on the one hand, those who promote this idea are not saying that the Son is ontologically subordinate to the Father.
圣子并不低于圣父。 The Son is not less than the Father.
所以他们在价值、尊严和敬拜中的地位等所有这些方面都是平等的。 So they are equal in worth and dignity and value in worship and all of those things.
但圣子的意志确实顺服于圣父的意志。 But there is a submission of the will of the Son to the will of the Father.
现在，我们确实在新约中多次看到这种情况。 Now, we do see that played out in the New Testament several times.
我们看到圣子顺服于圣父。 We have the Son submitting to the Father.
但问题是，这种情况何时发生？ But the question is, when does this occur?
这是永恒的还是暂时的？ Is this something that is eternal or is this something that is temporal?
这是否仅仅是道成肉身现实的一部分？ And is it simply a part of the reality of the Incarnation?
因为我们知道，基督在道成肉身状态下作为圣子对 圣父的功能与圣父和圣子的永恒关系是有区别的。 Because we know that there is a difference in terms of Christ functioning as Son to the Father in this incarnate state than there is in the eternal relationship of Father and Son.
这并不是说两者之间存在分离，以至于永恒的关系被破坏。 Not to say that there is a divorce between the two so that, you know, somehow the eternal relationship is breached.
不，那种关系仍然继续存在。 No, that continues as it is.
但因为圣子取了人性，我们在耶稣的一生中看到有些事情会有所不同。 But because the Son is assumed to human nature, there are things that are going to be different that we see played out throughout the life of Jesus.
其中之一就是圣子有必要将自己的意志顺服于圣父的意志。 And one of those is that there is this necessity of the Son to submit his will to that of the Father.
但在历史上的基督论中，被定义为正统基督论的观点，关于 基督意志的立场被称为二意说，即认为基督有两个意志。 But in historic Christology, that's been defined as orthodox Christology, the position in terms of Christ's will has been called diothelitism, to say that there are two wills in Christ.
这样说的原因是，就其神性而言，只有一个单一的神圣意志。 And the reason for this is to say that in terms of his divine nature, there is one singular divine will.
所以，圣父的意志、圣子的意志和圣灵的意志之间没有分歧。 So, there is no division between the will of the Father and the will of the Son and the will of the Spirit.
所以，意志与本质相连，而不是与位格相连。 So, will is connected to essence, not person.
好的，所以本质的统一包括圣父、圣子和圣灵之间意志的统一。 Okay, so the unity of essence includes a unity of will between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
现在，因为基督道成肉身，他取了完整的人性，他具有构 成人之为人的所有方面，其中之一就是他有人的意志。 Now, because Christ is incarnate, he's assumed a complete human nature, he has all aspects of what makes a human human, and one of those is that he has then a human will.
所以，他的人的意志和神圣意志之间有区别。 So, there's a distinction between his human will and the divine will.
因此，那些顺服的方面与基督的人的意志有关，而不是说圣子有别于圣父的独特意志。 And so, those aspects of submission have to do with the human will of Christ, not to say that there is a distinct will of the Son from the Father.
因为如果你假设有三个不同的意志，不是一个神圣意志，而是 三个神圣意志，你最终基本上就有了三个不同的神圣本质。 Because what you have, if you're positing that there are three distinct wills, there is not one divine will, there are three divine wills, you end up with basically three distinct divine essences.
你最终得到的是类似于三神论的东西，一种多神论，其中圣父、圣子和圣灵之间有区别。 You end up with something like a tritheism, a kind of polytheism, where there is a distinction between Father, Son, and Spirit.
你有这三个具有自己独特意志的不同存在，然后使 他们结合在一起的是某种社会关系或类似的东西。 You have these three distinct beings with their own unique wills, and then the thing that aligns them together is some kind of social relationship or something like that.
所以，通常教导说，意志是本质的一个方面，而不是位格的方面。 So, generally, it's been taught that will is an aspect of essence rather than person.
因此，当我们区分位格，区分圣父、圣子和圣灵时，当我们说他们是不 同的，我们并不是说他们是我们所理解的人的意义上的不同位格，就像 我们每个人都有自己的意志，但也许我们在某种总体愿景或类似的东西 上是统一的，我们都是人，但我们有不同的个性和不同的意志等等。 And so, to distinguish between persons, what we're distinguishing between Father, Son, and Spirit, when we say that they are distinct, we are not saying that they're distinct persons in the sense that we think of human persons, like we each have our own will, but maybe we're united in a kind of general vision or something like that, and we're all humans, but we have distinct personalities and distinct wills and things like that.
神格并非如此。 This is not the case with the Godhead.
区分圣父与圣子和圣灵的是，生和发出的行为来自圣父。 What distinguishes the Father from the Son and the Spirit is that from the Father comes the acts of begetting and procession.
圣子是被生的那一位，圣灵是从圣父和圣子发出的那一位。 The Son is the one who is begotten, and the Spirit is the one who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
这些是我们区分圣父、圣子和圣灵的方式，我们以这些方式区 分他们，因为这些是圣经用来区分圣父、圣子和圣灵的术语。 Those are the ways that we distinguish the Father, Son, and Spirit, and we distinguish them in those ways because these are the terms that Scripture uses to distinguish Father from Son from Spirit.
我们被告知基督是圣父的独生子，所以圣父不是由谁所生的。 We're told that Christ is the only begotten Son of the Father, so that the Father is begotten of none.
他不是从谁而出的。 He proceeds from none.
我们被告知圣灵是从圣父而出的。 We're told that the Spirit proceeds from the Father.
他也是从圣子或通过圣子差遣的，正如一些人所表达的那样。 He's also sent from the Son or through the Son, as some have expressed it.
所以，我们必须以圣经的方式区分神格中的位格，而圣经的方式 不是说有三个各自不同的神圣意志，位格必须使他们的意志与拥 有最终意志的圣父一致，而是通过这些发出或呼出和生的行为。 So, we have to distinguish between the persons of the Godhead in the way that Scripture does, and the way that Scripture does it is not by saying that there are three divine wills that are each distinct, and the persons have to align their wills with the Father who has the ultimate will, but instead through these acts of procession or spiration and then generation.
这就是我的简短评论。 So, that's my brief comments.
我确实认为这最终在降低神的方面会有问题，比如神圣单一性。 I do think this ends up being problematic in terms of reduction of God, things like divine simplicity.
它分裂了位格。 It divides the persons.
我认为这是异端吗？ Do I think that it's heresy?
这是一个被频繁使用的术语。 This is a term that's been thrown around a lot.
我不确定我会称之为异端。 I'm not sure that I would refer to it as heresy.
我认为它有一些有问题的含义，但因为那些定义这些问题的人，持有这种 立场的人，因为他们仍然承认神在本质上是一体的，圣父、圣子和圣灵之 间存在本体论上的平等，并且位格之间存在区别，我认为我们不能称之为 异端，但我认为它肯定可能导致三神论，而三神论将是一种异端立场。 I think it has some problematic implications, but because those who are defining these issues, who hold to this position, because they are still acknowledging that God is one in essence, that there is an ontological equality between Father, Son, and Spirit, and that there is a distinction between persons, I don't think we can call it heresy, but I think that it certainly can lead to what would be tritheism, and tritheism would be a heretical position to hold.
这就是我的评论。 So, those are my comments.
如果你想要更多这样的内容，请订阅。 If you want more content like this, please do subscribe.
我们下次再见。 We'll see you next time.
愿神祝福你。 God bless.