欢迎回到无耻教皇党，我是乔·赫施迈尔，今天我想探讨新教中的诺斯底倾向。 Welcome back to Shameless Popery, I'm Joe Heschmeyer, and today I want to explore the Gnostic strain within Protestantism.
我想先声明，我并不是说所有新教徒都是诺斯底派， 也不是说只有新教徒才会受到诺斯底主义的诱惑。 And in saying that, I want to be clear up front, I'm not claiming that all Protestants are Gnostics, nor am I saying that only Protestants find themselves tempted by Gnosticism.
但是诺斯底主义和新教之间长期存在的联系需要被指出并谴责。 But there is a long-standing connection between Gnosticism and Protestantism that I think needs to be called out and condemned.
那么，让我们首先说说，什么是诺斯底主义？ So, to get there, let's first say, what is Gnosticism?
然后，为什么圣经将诺斯底主义谴责为敌基督？ Then, why does the Bible condemn Gnosticism as Antichrist?
最后，这种扭曲的神学如何在我们的世界中找到立 足之地，特别是在新教崇拜和神学的某些元素中？ And then, how has this perverted theology found a home within our world, and particularly within elements of Protestant worship and theology?
那么，让我们从这个问题开始，什么是诺斯底主义？ So, to start with that, what is Gnosticism?
我认为詹姆斯·怀特很好地概括了我们谈论诺斯底主义时的含义。 I think James White does a good job of capturing what we mean when we talk about Gnosticism.
现在，我想明确一点，诺斯底主义是一个复杂的术语。 Now, I want to be clear, Gnosticism is a complicated term.
一组思想。 A group of ideas.
一组意识形态。 A group of ideologies.
并非每个诺斯底派都相信同样的事情。 Not every Gnostic believed the same thing.
尽管如此，我认为这是一个很好的、简洁的概括，说明我们谈论诺斯底派时的含义。 Nevertheless, I think this is a good, quick, shorthand kind of summary of what we mean when we talk about Gnostics.
诺斯底主义基本上是一个二元论体系。 Gnosticism is basically a dualistic system.
物质的是邪恶的。 That which is physical is evil.
属灵的是善良的。 That which is spiritual is good.
因此人的问题是…… And so man's problem is...
浸信会神学家和教授罗杰·奥尔森在他的《基督教神学史》一书中这样概括：简而言 之，诺斯底派认为物质，包括身体，本质上是一个限制性的监狱，甚至是对人的善良 灵魂或精神的邪恶拖累，而精神本质上是神圣的，是居住在身体坟墓中的神的火花。 Roger Olson, the Baptist theologian and professor, puts it like this in his book, Story of Christian Theology, in a nutshell, they, the Gnostics, believe that matter, including the body, is an inherently limiting prison, or even evil drag on the good soul or spirit of the human person, and that the spirit is essentially divine, the spark of God dwelling in the tomb of the body.
那么，我们在今天哪里能看到这种思想的流传？ So where do we see that kind of idea floating around today?
在我们讨论明显具有新教特色的版本之前，我想谈谈 两个流行人物，奥普拉·温弗瑞和乔丹·彼得森。 Well, before we get into the particularly distinctively obviously Protestant kind of versions of it, I want to talk about two popular figures, Oprah Winfrey and Jordan Peterson.
首先，这是奥普拉谈论她自己的灵性观念，以及 她如何将其视为与她的基督教信仰不同的东西。 First, here's Oprah talking about her own kind of vision of spirituality and how she considers it something distinct from her Christianity.
当我们接触我们的灵性一面时，我们正在冒险。 We're taking a chance as we tap into our spiritual side.
有人知道他们的灵性一面是什么吗？ Anybody know what their spiritual side is?
那很好。 That's good.
我不是在谈论宗教。 I am not talking about religion.
我是一个基督徒。 I am a Christian.
那是我的信仰。 That is my faith.
我不是要求你成为基督徒。 I'm not asking you to be a Christian.
如果你想成为一个基督徒，我可以告诉你如何做。 If you want to be one, I can show you how.
好的，很明显她在说，我是一个基督徒，但除了 我的基督教信仰，还有另一种叫做灵性的东西。 Okay, so clearly she's saying, I'm a Christian, but in addition to my Christianity, there's this other thing called spirituality.
这是什么意思？ What does that mean?
好，这是她的解释。 Well, here's how she explains it.
没有灵性生活就没有生命。 That there is no life without a spiritual life.
我想再说一遍。 I want to say that again.
没有灵性生活就没有生命，因为我们都是正在经历人类体验的灵性存在。 There is no life without a spiritual life, because we are all spiritual beings having a human experience.
那么你们准备好敞开心扉了吗？ So are you ready to open your hearts?
是的！ Yes!
想想看。 Think about that.
同一群人在她说自己是基督徒并可以教他们如何成为基督 徒时欢呼，在她阐述这种明显的诺斯底观点时也欢呼。 The same crowd that cheered when she said she was a Christian and could show them how to be Christians also cheers when she lays out this clearly Gnostic vision.
这种认为我们是灵性存在，只是在经历肉体体验的想法。 This idea that we are spirit beings who are just kind of having a bodily experience.
如果你作为一个基督徒相信这一点，我现在需要你知道，这不是基督徒历史上所相信的。 And if that's something you believe as a Christian, I need you to know right now, that is not what Christians believe historically.
这不是圣经关于身体的教导。 That is not what the Bible teaches about the body.
我们不仅仅是在经历肉体体验的灵性存在。 We are not just spiritual beings having a bodily experience.
那是诺斯底主义的异端。 That's the heresy of Gnosticism.
我们就像被困在这些肉体中。 We're just like trapped here in these meat suits.
这不是基督教的教导。 That is not what Christianity teaches.
这不是基督教的本质。 That's not what this is about.
我稍后会详细解释为什么这是错误的，但现在我想强调第二个思想家。 I'm going to get in more about why that's wrong in a few, but for now I want to highlight a second thinker.
这是乔丹·彼得森。 This is Jordan Peterson.
现在，彼得森在某些方面可能有点难以捉摸，很难确定他认 为哪些是字面上的真理，哪些只是基督教中的美好意象。 Now, Peterson can be a little elusive, a little hard to pin down, in terms of which things he thinks are literally true and which are just nice images within Christianity.
但我认为亚历克斯·奥康纳，一个年轻的无神论者， 在这些问题上很有见地，在那个早期教会社区…… But I think Alex O'Connor, who is a young atheist, very well-spoken on these things, In that early church community...
有人说，嗯，关于复活作为一个物理的、历史的事件的问题，你有点误解了重点。 Somebody who said, well, this question of the resurrection as a physical, historical event, you're kind of missing the point.
重要的是发生在每个人内心的复活。 The thing that matters is the resurrection that takes place inside of every person.
这听起来有点像你会采取的方法。 It sort of sounds a little bit like the kind of approach that you would take.
现在，如果这是真的，那就意味着在早期教会中，你会被谴责为异端。 Now, if that's true, that would mean that in the early church, you'd have been condemned as a heretic.
所以当一个现代天主教徒对你说，你知道，乔丹·彼得森，你是基督徒吗？ So when a modern Catholic says to you, you know, Jordan Peterson, are you a Christian?
你对天主教有什么看法？ What do you think about Catholicism?
我认为他们感兴趣的原因是，如果我说的是真的，那么他们就不得不说， 哦，我想，至少根据我对天主教的理解，我不能把你算作我们中的一员。 I think that the reason that they're interested is because if it's true what I'm saying, then they would have to say, oh, I suppose, at least according to my understanding of Catholicism, I can't count you among my number.
所以我认为这可能就是人们感兴趣的原因。 So I think that's probably why people are interested.
我想知道你是否同意…… And I wonder if you agree...
嗯，那是一个真正的…… Well, that's a genuine...
你会怎么说？ What would you say?
那将构成一种真正的探究形式。 That would constitute a genuine form of inquiry.
我想知道你是否觉得你…… And I wonder if you feel like you're...
你看，我真正喜欢复活的身体传统的一点是…… See, one of the things I really like about the bodily tradition of the resurrection is that it...
你看，它所做的非常了不起的事情是它没有使身体世俗化。 See, what it does that's so remarkable is that it doesn't desacralize the body.
这非常非常重要。 That's very, very important.
我认为诺斯底主义的根本问题是它变成了……它很容 易变成一种……蔑视身体和蔑视物质世界的教义。 I think the fundamental problem with Gnosticism is that it becomes a... It's very easy for it to become a... Doctrine that's contemptuous of the body and contemptuous of the material world.
诺斯底传统的很大一部分字面上相信物质世界是由邪恶的恶魔创造的。 A great deal of the Gnostic tradition literally believes that the material world is created by an evil demon.
对，没错。 Right, exactly.
嗯，没错，完全正确。 Well, exactly, exactly, exactly.
坚持身体复活是对抗这种观点的良药。 The insistence on the bodily resurrection is a medication against that.
这是一个有效的方法。 It's an effective one.
好的，简而言之就是这样。 All right, so that's it in a nutshell.
如果你只是说复活是一个美好的意象，但它是否历 史真实并不重要，那么你听起来就更像诺斯底派。 If you just say the resurrection is a nice image, but it doesn't matter if it's historically true, then you sound much more like the Gnostics.
而回应，正如彼得森正确认识到的，是要认识到身体的中心性。 And the response is, as Peterson rightly recognizes, is to recognize that there is a centrality to the body.
诺斯底主义所呈现的是完全相反的。 What Gnosticism is presenting is completely opposite.
那么，为什么会这样呢？ Well, why is that?
好的，首先，在约翰二书第7节，它只有一章， 所以是第1章第7节，如果你想这样说的话。 Okay, well, first of all, in 2 John, in verse 7, it's just one chapter, so chapter 1, verse 7, if you want to put it that way.
他说，当我们谈论敌基督时，这个词在基督教圈子 里被随意使用，常常不知道它在圣经中的出处。 He says, When we're talking about Antichrist, that word gets bandied about in Christian circles, often with no sense of where it comes from in the Bible.
而它就在这里。 And it's here.
敌基督就是否认耶稣在肉身中来的人。 The Antichrist is the one who denies Jesus' coming in the flesh.
这意味着，正如我暗示的那样，有不同的诺斯底主义流派。 Meaning, so there's different schools of Gnosticism, as I kind of intimated.
而最极端的诺斯底主义形式，你也听到亚历克斯·奥康 纳提到过，……认为基督在肉身中来仅仅是象征性的。 And the most extreme form of Gnosticism, and you heard Alex O'Connor kind of allude to it as well, ...views Christ coming in the flesh merely as symbolic.
他并不是真的有肉身。 He wasn't actually bodily.
他在物理上并不真实，因为肉体是邪恶的。 He wasn't physically real, because the flesh is evil.
比如，如果你真的接受这个前提，即我们都只是在经历肉体体验的 灵性存在，或者如果你接受我们的灵魂是好的而身体是坏的这种二 元论思想，那么由此可见，你根本无法肯定福音的大部分内容。 Like, if you actually buy this premise, that we're all just spirit beings having a bodily experience, or if you buy the premise that our souls are good and our bodies are bad, this kind of dualistic idea, then it follows from that, that you can't affirm much of the gospel whatsoever.
我要列举七个…… I'm going to take seven...
你无法肯定的基本要点。 Basic points you can't affirm.
道成肉身、耶稣的公开事工、圣餐的设立、教会作为基督的身体的创立、 耶稣的肉身被钉十字架、耶稣的身体复活，以及我们自己的身体复活。 The incarnation, Jesus' public ministry, the institution of the Eucharist, the creation of the Church as the body of Christ, Jesus' bodily crucifixion, Jesus' bodily resurrection, and our own bodily resurrection.
我将快速地讲解这些，给你们圣经中明确的段落， 这些段落与诺斯底主义不符。第一，道成肉身。 I'm going to go through these very quickly, giving you explicit passages from the Bible that don't square up Number one, the incarnation.
约翰福音开篇说，太初有道，道与神同在，道就是神。 John begins his gospel by saying, in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
这神圣的道，他接着说，道成了肉身，住在我们中间。 This divine Word, he then says, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
好吧，如果肉身是邪恶的，那么你就不得不说道变成了邪恶并住在我们中间。 Well, if flesh is evil, then you have to say the Word became evil and dwelt among us.
这就开启了整个问题，因为然后，从道成肉身快进30年到耶稣的公开事工，耶稣 走遍加利利，在会堂里教训人，宣讲天国的福音，关键是，医治百姓各样的病症。 That just launches the whole thing, because then, flash forward from the Incarnation, 30 years to Jesus' public ministry, and Jesus is going about Galilee, teaching in the synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and here's the kicker, healing every disease and every infirmity among the people.
如果肉体是监狱，为什么耶稣要医治肉体呢？ Why is Jesus healing physical bodies if physical bodies are prisons?
想象一下，伟大的解放者来了，但他不是打开你牢房的 锁，而是只是稍微装饰一下，让你的监狱稍微好一点。 Like, imagine the great liberator comes, and instead of unlocking the key to your cell, He just spruces it up so your prison is slightly nicer.
他修理了坏掉的水管。 He fixes the water pipe that's broken.
如果身体只是灵魂的监狱，你就不得不这么说。 That would be what you'd have to say if the body is simply a prison of the soul.
第三，圣餐的设立。 Third, the institution of the Eucharist.
在约翰福音第6章，我们将重点回到这个问题上，耶稣说，你 们若不吃人子的肉，不喝人子的血，就没有生命在你们里面。 In John 6, we're going to get back to this in a big way, Jesus says, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
所以他在某种程度上将在圣餐中吃他的肉和血联系起来。因此， 圣餐的设立成为早期诺斯底派和基督徒之间争论的一个关键点。 So he is tying, in some way, the eating of his flesh and blood in the Eucharist So the institution of the Eucharist ends up being this really critical point in the early fights between the Gnostics and the Christians.
现在，有很多可以说的。 Now, there's much that could be said.
你可以阅读二世纪的伊格那丢和爱任纽关于这个问题的论述，他们一直 指出基督徒和诺斯底派之间的主要分歧之一是基督徒相信圣餐真的是耶 稣的身体和血，而诺斯底派不相信。接下来，教会作为基督的身体。 You can read Ignatius and Irenaeus on this in the 100s, and they keep pointing out that one of the major fault lines between Christians and Gnostics is Christians believe the Eucharist is really the body and blood of Jesus, and Gnostics don't. Next, the church as the body of Christ.
我这么说是什么意思？ What do I mean by that?
在以弗所书第5章，圣保罗提醒我们，从来没有人恨恶自己的身子。 In Ephesians 5, St. Paul reminds us that no man ever hates his own flesh.
这是关键的一句。 Critical line.
从来没有人恨恶自己的身子，总是保养顾惜，正 如基督待教会一样，因为我们是他身上的肢体。 No man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes it and cherishes it as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.
所以基督和教会的整个关系，头和身体的关系，都预设了身体的美好。 So the whole relationship of Christ and the church, of head and body, presupposes the goodness of the body.
你爱你的身体，这样做是对的。 That you love your body and that you're right to do so.
圣奥古斯丁谈到这一点，他指出很多人认为他们不 爱自己的身体，但想象一下如果它是别人的身体。 St. Augustine talks about this, and he points out that a lot of people think they don't love their body, but imagine if it was somebody else.
想象一下如果你的身体实际上像别人的身体。 Imagine if your body was actually like somebody else's body.
如果我说，哦，我讨厌那个人，但你发现我每天多次给他们喂食，给他 们洗澡并照顾他们，确保他们有一个良好的睡眠和其他一切，你会说， 我不知道，你似乎并不讨厌他们，你似乎在非常细心地照顾他们。 If I said, oh, I hate that person, but you found out I was feeding them multiple times a day, I was bathing them and taking care of them and making sure they got a good night's rest and everything else, you'd say, I don't know, you don't seem to hate them, you seem to be taking incredible care of them.
但即使是声称讨厌自己的人仍然在吃喝，你知道，希望还在洗澡，睡觉，做所有这些事情。 But even the person who claims to hate themselves is still eating and drinking and, you know, washing, hopefully, and sleeping and doing all of these things.
他们在照顾自己的身体，即使他们与身体有这种复杂的关系。 They're taking care of their body, even if they have this complicated relationship with it.
所以那种从来没有人恨恶自己的身子的想法，我们不能像恨别人的身体那样恨自 己的身体。我们就是做不到。理解这一点对于理解耶稣与教会的关系很重要，圣 保罗著名地称教会为基督的身体，这再次预设了身体是好的，而不是邪恶的。 So that idea that no man ever hates his own flesh, we cannot hate our own bodies the level we can hate somebody else's. We just can't. And getting that is important to understanding Jesus' relationship to the church, which St. Paul famously calls the body of Christ, which again presupposes the body as something good, not evil.
接下来，如果你看耶稣的钉十字架，对吧？ Next, if you look at Jesus' crucifixion, right?
他在十字架上用自己的身体担当了我们的罪。 He bore our sins in his body on the tree of the cross.
这是我们从彼得前书第2章得到的。然后，当然是他的复活。 That's what we get from 1 Peter 2. And then, of course, his resurrection.
与诺斯底主义相反，圣经强调即使耶稣从死里复活，他仍然是有形体的。 It's emphasized, contra-Gnosticism, that even when Jesus rises from the dead, he is still bodily.
耶稣在路加福音中亲自说，你们看我的手、我的脚，就知道实在是我了。 Jesus says himself in the Gospel of Luke, See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself.
摸我看看，魂无骨无肉，你们看，我是有的。 Handle me and see, for a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see that I have.
所以，复活，尽管圣保罗在哥林多前书15章谈到如何种下的是血气 的身体，复活的是灵性的身体，这里的灵性并不意味着无形体的。 So, the resurrection, even though St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 talks about how it's sown a physical body and rises a spiritual body, spiritual there does not mean disembodied.
因为它并不是指像灵魂、鬼魂那样的灵性。 Because it doesn't mean spiritual like a spirit, a ghost.
它不是一个幽灵般的身体。 It's not a ghostly body.
它是被改变了的。 It is transformed.
它超越了之前的物理限制，但仍然是同一个身体。 It is more than what it had been before with physical limitations, but it is still the one and the same body.
注意耶稣说，是我自己，而不是我的肉体外壳， 不是我正在经历物理体验或身体体验的地方。 And notice that Jesus says, it is I myself, not my meat suit, not the place I'm having a physical experience or a bodily experience.
他将自己的身体与他自己等同。 He is identifying his body with him himself.
并将其与无形体的灵性体验对比。 And contrasting that with a disembodied spiritual experience.
最后，这一切都预示了我们自己的复活。 Finally, all of that prefigures our own resurrection.
正如圣保罗在哥林多前书15章所提到的段落所暗示的，这意味着我 们最终的救赎是身体的再次复活，而不仅仅是在灵性上与基督联合。 As St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15, passages alluded to, Meaning, Our ultimate salvation is rising again bodily, not just being spiritually united with Christ.
你可能会说，最后一点似乎并不具有争议性。 You might say, that last point seems not controversial.
在这里，我认为我们有一个很好的过渡来讨论新教中的诺斯底倾向。 And here, I think we have a nice segue into the Gnostic strain within Protestantism.
所以，我想在开始时明确几点。 So, I want to be clear about a couple things kind of at the outset here.
首先，再次强调，正如我一开始所说，我并不是说所有新教徒都是诺 斯底派，或者他们有意识地坚持诺斯底主义，或任何类似的东西。 First of all, again, as I said at the beginning, I'm not saying all Protestants are Gnostics, or even that they're consciously adhering to Gnosticism, anything like that.
相反，我主张，第一，诺斯底的思想…… I'm instead arguing, number one, that the Gnostic ideas...
关于灵魂和身体关系的观念在我们呼吸的知识氛围中非常普遍。 Of the relationship between the soul and body are very much in the intellectual air that we breathe.
你知道，这就是为什么我关注奥普拉·温弗瑞、乔丹·彼得 森，还有很多其他人经常说一些听起来像诺斯底主义的话。 There's a reason, you know, that's why I looked at Oprah Winfrey, Jordan Peterson, there's plenty of other people saying Gnostic-sounding things regularly.
第二，这些听起来像诺斯底主义的想法，它们常常直接与基督相对，有 时被新教徒，特定的新教徒，而不是所有人，用来反对天主教，反对天 主教的事物，比如洗礼有效果，圣餐真的是耶稣，所有这些事情。 And number two, these Gnostic-sounding ideas, which are often directly Antichrist, Are sometimes used by Protestants, specific Protestants, not all, in arguing against Catholicism, in arguing against Catholic things, like the idea that baptism does something, that the Eucharist really is Jesus, all those things.
反对这些的论点，如果你仔细听，有时会让人觉得，等 一下，这甚至不是基督教的论点，这是诺斯底的论点。 The arguments against it, if you listen to them, are sometimes like, wait a second, that's not even a Christian argument, that's a Gnostic argument.
我会给你很多例子，请耐心听我说。 I'll give you plenty of examples, just bear with me.
所以有时候，促使人们拒绝关于圣事，特别是圣 餐的观念的原因，是对身体与救赎关系的误解。 So sometimes what motivates people to reject kind of the ideas about the sacraments, especially the Eucharist, is this misunderstanding of the relationship of the body to salvation.
在讨论这个问题时，我想强调几点。 And in getting there, I want to highlight several points.
这不仅仅是我作为非新教徒在说的。 This is not something that I just am saying as a non-Protestant.
这不仅仅是一个天主教徒看着新教说，听起来有点像诺斯底主义。 This isn't just a Catholic looking in on Protestantism saying, sounds kind of Gnostic.
许多福音派人士正在对他们自己队伍中的诺斯底主义敲响警钟。 Plenty of evangelicals are sounding the alarm about Gnosticism within their own ranks.
例如，在乔治·福克斯大学任教的阿比盖尔·法瓦莱在2018年为《第一事 物》杂志写了一篇名为《福音派诺斯底主义》的文章。她提出了一个观点。 So, for instance, Abigail Favale, who teaches at George Fox University, wrote a piece called Evangelical Gnosticism for First Things Magazine back in 2018. And she makes a point.
他们中的许多人都经过教会的彻底熏陶，并通过基督教学校或家庭教育课程接受教育。 She says, A number of them have been both thoroughly churched and educated through Christian schools or homeschooling curricula.
所以这些不仅仅是表面上的、名义上的基督徒。 So these are not just like surface-level, nominal Christians.
这些是决定去基督教大学的人。 These are people who have made the decision to go to a Christian college.
然而，她说，这些学生中绝大多数不相信身体复活。 Yet, she says, an overwhelming majority of these students do not believe in a bodily resurrection.
她说，是大多数。 A majority, she says.
现在，我无法自己找出这些数字，但从经验上看 ，许多福音派作者几十年来一直在说类似的话。 Now, I can't pull those numbers up myself, but experientially, plenty of evangelical authors have said similar things for decades now.
用帕瓦利的话说，虽然他们相信与神同在的永恒幸福的来世，但他们中的大多数人认为这 将是无形体的幸福，在那里灵魂最终摆脱了它的肉体外壳，这是他们喜欢使用的一个词。 In Pavali's words, while they trust in an afterlife of eternal bliss with God, most of them assume that this will be disembodied bliss, in which the soul is finally free of its meat suit, a term they fondly use.
现在，她继续解释说，那不是基督教。 Now, she goes on to explain, that's not Christianity.
那根本不是历史上的基督教。 That's not historic Christianity whatsoever.
这不是圣经所呈现的基督教。 It's not what the Bible presents of Christianity.
所以，显然是加尔文派改革者约翰·加尔文。 So, John Calvin, the Calvinist reformer, obviously.
现在，也许他不是指…… Now, maybe he doesn't mean...
塞尔玛，塞玛，早期的，比如柏拉图式的不可知论表达，认为身体只是一个监狱。 Thelma, Thema, the early, like, platonic agnostic expression that the body is just a prison.
但他把身体描述为灵魂的监狱，这再次难以调和。 But he is describing the body as a prison house for the soul, which, again, is hard to square.
现在，我意识到你可以发现，有时甚至在中世纪的天 主教中，人们也以这种方式夸大身体的可悲角色。 Now, I realize that you can find, sometimes even in medieval Catholicism, people speaking in that way with such an exaggerated kind of role of the wretchedness of the body.
但那不是基督教。 But that is not Christianity.
就像，那不是新约所阐述或教会2000年来所确认的对身体的正确理解。 Like, that is not the proper understanding of the body laid out by the New Testament or affirmed by the church for 2,000 years.
所以，你知道，我不想过分解读这一句话，只是想说，不仅 仅是现代福音派在说一些听起来像身体只是坏东西的话。 So, I don't want to, you know, I don't want to take this one line and build too much of it, except to say that it isn't just like modern evangelicals that are saying things that sound like the body is just a bad thing.
你可以在更早的时候找到这种说法，但正如我所说，这与历史上的基督教不符。 You can find that much earlier, and that doesn't square, as I say, with historic Christianity.
与之对比的是尼西亚信经，它说，我们期待死人复活和来世的生命。 Contrast it with the Nicene Creed, which says, we look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.
死人的复活不是灵性的复活。 The resurrection of the dead is not a spiritual resurrection.
我们已经相信在那之前你会在灵性上与神同在，但那不是事情的结束。 We already believe that you will be spiritually with God before that, but that's not the end of things.
我们期待着这样的日子，我们的灵魂已经与神同在，与我们现在荣耀的身体重新结合。 We are looking forward to the days in which our soul, already present with God, is reunited with our now glorified body.
这是基督教的愿景，与诺斯底主义的愿景相对。 That's the Christian vision vis-a-vis the Gnostic one.
回到法瓦莱这里，她说，没有正统信仰的指引之光，年轻 的福音派正在发展与基督教对人格理解相悖的异端感性。 Going back to Favale here, she says this, she says, Without a guiding light to orthodoxy, young evangelicals are developing heterodox sensibilities that are at odds with the Christian understanding of personhood.
身体与罪相关，灵魂与圣洁相关。 The body is associated with sin, the soul with holiness.
此外，这种对身体的感觉，特别是在肉体这个别名下，往往被过度性化。 Moreover, this sense of the body, especially under the alias flesh, tends to be hypersexualized.
因此她指出，人们过分关注性罪，而对不那么身体 化的罪，你知道，比如骄傲之类的，关注不够。 And so she makes the point that there is this extreme focus on sexual sin, and an under-emphasis on the less bodily forms of sin, you know, pride, that sort of thing.
这是一种完全的扭曲，一种完全的歪曲。用圣约翰的话说，这是敌基督的。 And that this is a total perversion, a total distortion of It is, to quote St. John's words, antichrist.
以这种方式看待身体，就好像身体是问题所在，完全误解了我们面临的灵性问题。 To view the body in this way, as just like the body is the problem, completely misunderstands the spiritual problem that we're facing.
所以在这里，我想转向真实的与虚假的C.S.路易斯。 So here, I want to transition into real verse fake C.S. Lewis.
现在我在谈论什么？ Now what am I talking about here?
有一句假的C.S.路易斯的引言，我多年前上当了，我想大约是13年前。 There is a fake C.S. Lewis quote that many years ago I fell for, I think like 13 years ago.
所以看，过去的我并不完美。 So look, past me, not perfect.
当你真正思考这句话时，它是，好吧，这就是那句引言。 And when you actually think about the quote, it is, well, here's the quotation.
再次强调，这并不是C.S.路易斯真正说的，但它经常被新教徒 引用，通常被认为是路易斯说的，而且通常是以积极的意义引用。 Again, this is not really C.S. Lewis, but it is widely quoted by Protestants usually as being Lewis, and usually in a positive sense.
你没有灵魂。 You don't have a soul.
你就是灵魂。 You are the soul.
你有一个身体。 You have a body.
现在，正如我所说，我多年前上当了，当时感觉就像，哦，看到有人肯定灵 魂的善良和存在真是太好了，而不是所有这些无神论者说我们没有灵魂。 Now, as I say, I fell for this many years ago, and at the time it was like, oh, it's great to see somebody affirming the goodness and existence of the soul, instead of all these atheists saying we don't have souls.
也许这就是当这个假的C.S.路易斯引言被约翰·派珀或拉维·撒迦利亚等 人引用时发生的情况，拉维·撒迦利亚实际上在他的一本书中引用了这句话。 And maybe that's what's going on when this fake C.S. Lewis quote gets quoted by people like John Piper or Ravi Zacharias, who actually quotes it in one of his books.
但事实是，如果你真正思考那里所说的内容，它是错误的。 But the reality is, if you actually think about what is being said there, it's just false.
你不仅仅是一个拥有身体的灵魂。 You are not just a soul who has a body.
你不仅仅是一个正在经历身体体验的灵性人。 You're not just a spiritual person having a bodily experience.
你是身体和灵魂的结合。 You are the union of body and soul.
C.S.路易斯实际上理解这一点。 And C.S. Lewis actually got that.
所以乔·里格尼在他的《路易斯论基督徒生活》一书中，里格 尼是一位福音派作家，我相信，他赞同地引用了路易斯的话。 So Joe Rigney, in his book Lewis on the Christian Life, Rigney is an evangelical author, I believe, and he is quoting Lewis favorably.
与那种观点相反，基督教坚持认为神从未打算让人成为纯粹的灵性生物。 That in contrast to that kind of vision, Christianity insists God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature.
然后有一个省略号。 And then there's an ellipsis.
这句话继续说。 And the line continues.
他喜欢物质，他发明了它。 He likes matter, he invented it.
现在，里格尼并没有完全忠实于这段引文。 Now, Rigney is not doing full service to this quotation.
我理解。 I get it.
这是一本书。 It's a book.
你必须做出编辑决定。 You have to make editorial decisions.
你不能对每件事都长篇大论地引用每个人的话。 You can't quote everybody at length on everything.
但对我来说，令人惊讶的是，对于福音派读者，路易斯实际 说的话被某种程度上审查了，因为路易斯实际说的是…… But it does seem striking to me that, for an evangelical audience, what Lewis actually said is kind of censored, because what Lewis actually said...
所以，我的意思是，我喜欢这些确实是路易斯的话，不像派珀和撒迦 利亚引用了一个想象中的路易斯版本，那根本不是他说过的任何话。 So, I mean, I like that these are actually Lewis's words, unlike Piper and Zacharias quoting an imaginary version of Lewis, where it's not anything he ever said.
但在这里，它仍然被审查了，因为路易斯实际上使用了圣体圣事，尽管他是一个新教徒，一 个英国圣公会教徒，他用圣体圣事作为例子来说明神如何想要以身体的方式在灵性上工作。 But here, it's still censored, because Lewis actually uses the Blessed Sacrament, even though he's a Protestant, an Anglican, he uses the Blessed Sacrament as an example of how God wants to work spiritually in a bodily way.
他在《返璞归真》中这样做。 He does this in mere Christianity.
这句话就是从那里来的。 That's where this line is coming from.
我将给你一个较长的版本，可能比我需要的还要长，只是为了确保你理解上下文。 And I'm going to give you a lengthy version, maybe more lengthy than I need to, just to make sure you get the context.
他说当基督徒谈到在基督里，或基督在他们里面 时，这不仅仅是说他们在思考基督，或模仿他。 He says when Christians speak of being in Christ, or Christ being in them, that is not simply a way of saying that they are thinking about Christ, or copying him.
他们的意思是基督实际上通过他们在运作。 They mean that Christ is actually operating through them.
整个基督徒群体是基督行动的物理有机体。 That the whole mass of Christians are the physical organism through which Christ acts.
我们是他的手指和肌肉，是他身体的细胞。 We are his fingers and muscles, the cells of his body.
也许这解释了一两件事。 And perhaps that explains one or two things.
这解释了为什么这种新生命，即恩典的生命，不仅通过纯粹的 精神行为如信仰传播，还通过身体行为如洗礼和圣餐传播。 It explains why this new life, meaning the life of grace, is spread not only by purely mental acts like belief, but by bodily acts like baptism and holy communion.
这不仅仅是一个想法的传播。 It is not merely the spreading of an idea.
它更像是进化，一个生物学或超生物学的事实。 It is more like evolution, a biological or super-biological fact.
现在，我们将深入讨论这个问题，因为你将看到，像查尔斯·司布真 这样的人，我们稍后会谈到，他们真的反对这种基督教思想，即新生 命不仅通过精神方式传播，还通过洗礼和圣餐等身体方式传播。 Now, we're going to get into this, because as you're going to see, People like Charles Spurgeon, who we're going to talk about in a few, really object to that idea, this Christian idea, that the new life is spread in not just mental ways, but in bodily ways through things like baptism and Holy Communion.
他拒绝圣餐或洗礼能做任何事，因为他拒绝身体在救赎中扮演这种角色的想法。 He rejects that communion or baptism can do anything because he rejects the idea of the body having this role to play in salvation.
但这显然是意见的分歧。 But this is clearly a difference of opinion.
路易斯接着说，试图比神更属灵是没有好处的。 Lewis goes on to say, There is no good trying to be more spiritual than God.
这就是前面引用的地方。 This is where it gets quoted earlier.
神从未打算让人成为纯粹的灵性生物。 God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature.
这就是为什么他使用面包和酒这样的物质来把新生命放入我们里面。 That is why he uses material things like bread and wine to put the new life into us.
我们可能认为这相当粗糙和不属灵。 We may think this rather crude and unspiritual.
神并不这么认为。 God does not.
他发明了进食。 He invented eating.
他喜欢物质。 He likes matter.
他发明了它。 He invented it.
所以你可以看到路易斯的实际话语听起来更像是关于圣餐的。 So you can see Lewis' actual lines are much more Eucharistic sounding.
尽管再次强调，路易斯在圣餐神学上并不完全与天主教一致，但他至少有一个 更高的观点，并认识到神正在做一些事情。这是一种相当引人入胜的说法。 Even though, again, Lewis is not completely with Catholics on Eucharistic theology, he at least has a much higher view and recognizes that God is doing something It's a pretty fascinating kind of line.
坦白说，你看到路易斯有时多么接近天主教的观点。 You see, frankly, how close Lewis is at times to the Catholic vision of things.
好的，但我想从大体上正确的路易斯转向大体上错误的查尔斯·司布真。 Okay, but I want to turn from Lewis, who gets things largely right, to Charles Spurgeon, who gets things largely wrong.
我选择查尔斯·司布真不仅仅是因为他非常英俊。 And I'm not just choosing Charles Spurgeon because he's extremely handsome.
我在开玩笑。 I'm joking there.
对于那些没有看视频的人，我多次被拿来与他比较，我不知道这是不是一种赞美。 For those who aren't watching the video, I've been compared to him numerous times, which I don't know is a compliment.
但我会接受，因为这是绝对准确的。 But I'll take it because it is absolutely accurate.
但我引用司布真是因为他在新教某些派别中有着令人难以置信的地位。 But I quote Spurgeon because he has this incredible place within certain elements of Protestantism.
司布真被轻易地视为有史以来最伟大的浸信会传教士。 Spurgeon is easily regarded the greatest Baptist preacher who has ever lived.
但我要补充的是，他是有史以来最伟大的英语传教士。 But I would add to that he is the greatest preacher of the English language who has ever lived.
我还要补充，我认为司布真可以说是自使徒保罗以来最伟大的传教士。 I would add to that, Spurgeon, I think, is arguably the greatest preacher since the Apostle Paul.
看，我想同意。 And look, I want to agree.
司布真是一位杰出的传教士。 Spurgeon is a brilliant preacher.
他非常雄辩。 He is extremely eloquent.
不幸的是，他经常完全错误。 Unfortunately, he is often completely wrong.
所以我想关注他在1865年传讲的一篇特别的讲道，名为《对普西主义的一击》。 And so I want to focus on a particular sermon that he preached in 1865 called A Blow for Puseyism.
普西主义是高教会圣公会。 Puseyism is high church Anglicanism.
因此，这个运动最著名的追随者是普西的一种门生，约翰· 亨利·纽曼，他后来成为天主教红衣主教，现在是圣人。 And so the most famous kind of devotee of this movement was Pusey's kind of protege, John Henry Newman, who famously becomes a Catholic cardinal and now a saint.
但这是19世纪英国圣公会的一场运动，试图恢复其与天主 教的联系，使其成为一种不那么新教，更加天主教的宗教。 But it was a movement in the 19th century, Anglican Church, to try to restore its connections to Catholicism and make it less Protestant, more Catholic kind of religion.
无论如何…… In any case...
他将回应普西主义，并进而更广泛地回应天主教 的观点，主要依赖于他反复引用的一节经文。 He's going to respond to Puseyism, and by extension to Catholic visions of things more broadly, by relying on basically a single verse that he quotes over and over and over again.
约翰福音6章63节，耶稣说，现在，我已经做了一整个视频来讲这个 ，但我需要简单地说一些，因为这是他反对的一个相当主要的部分。 John 6, 63, in which Jesus says, Now, I've done an entire video on this, but I need to briefly say something on it, because it is a pretty major part of his objection.
在这个背景下，问题是，耶稣是在嘲笑他自己的 肉体，还是在嘲笑我们未经帮助的肉体的价值？ In this context, the question is, is Jesus deriding his own flesh, or is he deriding the value of our unaided flesh?
答案很明显是第二个。 And the answer is very clearly the second one.
我们未经帮助的肉体是无济于事的。 Our unaided flesh is of no avail.
我们知道这一点有几个原因。 And we know this for several reasons.
首先，从约翰福音第6章本身，在前面的段落中，耶稣说他将为世界的生命所赐的粮…… First, from John 6 itself, earlier in the passage, Jesus says that the bread which he'll give for the life of the world...
所以很明显，他的肉体是极其宝贵的。 So clearly his flesh is of tremendous value.
那么我们应该如何理解这段经文？ And so how should we understand this passage?
嗯，肉体这个词有几种用法，但当我们谈到肉体与灵相对时， 我们不是指，你知道，身体坏，灵魂好，像诺斯底派那样。 Well, flesh is used in several ways, but when we talk about the flesh as opposed to the spirit, we don't mean, you know, body bad, soul good, the way the Gnostics do.
相反，我们的意思是，未经帮助的人性无法做必要的事情。 We mean instead, unaided humanity is incapable of doing the things necessary.
圣保罗在罗马书第8章明确谈到这一点。他说，「……那些随从肉体生活的人……」 St. Paul talks about this explicitly in Romans 8. He says, "...those who live according to the flesh..."
那么你试图满足谁？ So who are you trying to gratify?
你自己还是神？ Yourself or God?
这并不意味着你邪恶可怕，但如果你取代神的位置，那就是邪恶的。 It doesn't mean you are wicked and evil and awful, but if you are taking the place of God, that is wicked.
就像，如果你服侍自己而不是神，你就是在服侍肉体，即使 你所做的是在，正如圣保罗在这里所说的，心思的层面。 Like, if you are serving yourself rather than God, you're serving the flesh, even if what you're doing is at the level of, as St. Paul says here, the mind.
同样，在以弗所书第2章，他说，我们从前也都在其中，放纵肉 体的私欲，这并不意味着性欲，就像福音派听起来可能的那样。 Likewise, in Ephesians 2, he says, among these, we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, which doesn't mean sexual passions, like it might to an evangelical ear.
他说，随从肉体和心中所喜好的去行。 He says, following the desires of body and mind.
这比性欲要广泛得多。 That's much bigger than sexuality.
这意味着可以有纯粹非身体的东西，比如骄傲，在这种肉体的意义上仍然是属肉体的。 This means that there can be purely disembodied things, Like, for instance, pride, that are still fleshly in this sense of flesh.
这里的属肉体并不意味着身体的。 Fleshly here does not mean bodily.
你会注意到，在这种对肉体的使用中，保罗明确强调了身体和心思。 You'll notice in this use of flesh, Paul explicitly highlights both body and mind.
所以，如果你认为对保罗或约翰来说，肉体意味着身 体，当它被用在这种负面意义上时，其实并不是。 So, if your idea that flesh, to Paul or to John, means body, when it's used in this negative sense, it does not.
你可以在几个地方看到这一点，比如这里。 And you can see that in several places, like here.
奥古斯丁谈到了这一点，我将深入讨论，但你需要知道的是，这不是司布真的解读方式。 Augustine talks about this, I'm going to get into that, but what you need to know here is that's not how Spurgeon reads it.
司布真以一种更加诺斯底的方式解读它。 Spurgeon reads it in a much more Gnostic way.
他说，好吧，如果约翰福音6:63是真的，即圣灵赐生命，肉体是无益的 ，那就必须意味着，例如，真正的基督教是内在的事物而不是外在的事物。 To say, okay, well if John 6.63 is true, that the spirit gives life and the flesh is of no avail, that must mean, for instance, that true Christianity is this internal thing rather than an external thing.
犹太人通常认为宗教在于仪式性的遵守。 The Jews commonly thought that religion lay in ceremonial observances.
那么，对于他一直说犹太人尝试的所有这些外在的东西，什么才是敬虔的生活？ So of all this external stuff that he keeps saying the Jews tried, What then is the life of godliness?
可接受的敬拜的活力和本质是什么？ What is the vitality and essence of acceptable worship?
他的回答实际上是，不是你外在的遵守，而是你内在 的情感、欲望、信仰和崇拜，这些才是活的敬拜。 His answer virtually is, it is not your outward observances, but your inward emotions, desires, believings and adorings, which are living worship.
然后他实际上补充说，我的话语处理的是内在生命和灵性，是针对你们的灵性本质的。 Then he adds, in effect, My words deal with inner life and spirit and are addressed to your spiritual natures.
我对你们所说的话就是灵，就是生命。 The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life.
我们的第一点将是无益的肉体。 Our first point will be the unprofitable flesh.
宗教的外在遵守本身，完全无益。 The external observances of religion in themselves, utterly unprofitable.
这就是对比。 So that's the contrast.
我的意思是，如果你直接引用诺斯底派的话，你也不可能说得比这更好。 I mean, you couldn't have said this better if you were just directly quoting a Gnostic.
所有外在的东西都完全没有价值，唯一重要的是这个内在的东西。 That all the external stuff is completely worthless, and all that matters is this interior thing.
你的思想、情感、感受和所有这些。 Your thoughts and emotions and feelings and all that.
这与圣经完全相反。 That is quite opposite Scripture.
就像，在神我们的父面前，那清洁没有玷污的虔诚，根据雅各书 1:27所说……在神我们的父面前，那清洁没有玷污的虔诚， 就是看顾在患难中的孤儿寡妇，并且保守自己不沾染世俗。 Like, religion that is pure and undefiled before God, according to James, in James 1.27... Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is as to visit orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
现在你会注意到这涉及外在的行为。 Now you'll notice that involves external actions.
同样，当圣保罗描述属灵的敬拜时，他并不是指无形体的敬拜。 Likewise, when St. Paul is describing spiritual worship, he doesn't mean spiritual worship as disembodied.
相反，他在罗马书12章说，所以弟兄们，我以神的慈悲劝你们，将身体献上…… He says instead, in Romans 12, I appealed you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies...
这就是你将看到的对比。 This is the contrast you're going to see.
圣保罗对属灵敬拜的理解是身体的敬拜。 St. Paul's idea of spiritual worship is bodily worship.
司布真对属灵敬拜的理解是无形体的，纯粹内在的敬拜。 Spurgeon's idea of spiritual worship is disembodied, purely internal worship.
这影响了他们如何看待其他一切。 This impacts how they view everything else.
例如，司布真强烈反对圣餐。 Spurgeon, for instance, argues strongly against the Eucharist.
正如我之前暗示的，这是他传讲这个的核心原因。 As I alluded to earlier, this is at the heart of why he's preaching this.
他对一些圣公会教徒想要恢复圣洁的想法感到非常不安。首先是当今这种最大的怪 异之处，就是在迷信地称为圣体圣事的东西中，主耶稣基督真实和有形的临在。 He's really upset about this idea that some Anglicans want to restore holiness To begin with the greatest monstrosity of this kind in the present day, the real and corporal presence of the Lord Jesus Christ in what is superstitiously called the Blessed Sacrament.
最终，司布真将提出几个反对圣餐的论点。 Ultimately, Spurgeon is going to make a couple of arguments against the Eucharist.
他只是认为，认为基督能给我们他的身体和血来吃喝是荒谬的。 He just thinks it's ridiculous to think that Christ could give us his body and blood to eat and drink.
公平地说，这与约翰福音第6章中犹太人的反应 相同。这听起来太不可思议了，不可能是真的。 And in fairness, that was the same reaction the Jews had in John 6. This sounds too fantastical to be true.
这不是一个意外的反应。 That's not an unexpected reaction.
但他接着论证说，这实际上不可能是真的，因为如果是真的，那就只是食人主义。 But he then argues that actually this can't be true, because if it was true, it would just be cannibalism.
如果耶稣基督的身体真的被你的口接受，被你的牙齿咬碎，讽刺的是，圣奥古斯丁在谈 到约翰福音6:63的含义时指出，对耶稣话语的肉体理解，就是他禁止我们采取的那 种理解，会认为要吃他的肉喝他的血，我们必须像对待尸体一样将他的肉切成碎片。 If Jesus Christ's body be really received into your mouth, broken with your teeth, Ironically, St. Augustine, when he's talking about what John 6.63 means, he points out that a fleshly understanding of Jesus' words, the kind that he prohibits us from taking, would be that to eat his flesh and drink his blood, we have to cut his flesh into pieces like a carcass.
换句话说，想象我们接受基督的身体和血的唯一方式，真的是通过这种食人 主义的方式，就像把他撕碎一样，这表明一个人在理解上没有被圣灵点活。 In other words, to imagine that the only way we could receive Christ's body and blood, truly, is through cannibalism in this way, just like ripping him up, shows one not being quickened by the Spirit in their understanding.
这是奥古斯丁的论点，认为司布真的解释是属肉体的。 This is Augustine's argument, that Spurgeon's interpretation is fleshly.
现在，显然，他并不是直接回应司布真，因为奥古斯丁活在4世纪。 Now, obviously, he's not directly responding to Spurgeon, because Augustine's alive in the 300s.
司布真在1600年后，重复了奥古斯丁警告过的同样的错误，即误解约 翰福音6:63。司布真的第二个论点，或者如果你把嘲笑也算作一个论 点的话，那就是第三个论点，所以你有嘲笑它，你有，哦不，这将是食人 主义，然后第三，你有他明确表达的观点，即恩典不能通过身体工作。 Spurgeon is, 1600 years later, repeating the same errors that Augustine warns against of misinterpreting John 6, 63. The Spurgeon's second argument, or really third if you count the just laughing at it as an argument, so you've got scoffing at it, you've got, oh no, this would be cannibalism, and then third, you have him articulating explicitly the view that grace can't work through the body.
这是对恩典令人震惊的诺斯底式误解。 Which is a shockingly gnostic misunderstanding of grace.
接下来，你不能从中获得任何美德，因为耶稣基督 立即告诉你，使人活着的乃是灵，肉体是无益的。 And in the next place, you cannot derive any virtue therefrom, for Jesus Christ tells you at once, it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.
如果你真的吃了基督的身体，它会影响你的消化器官和分泌器官，通过它们影 响你的肉体，就像其他面包一样，或者如果你更喜欢的话，其他肉也会这样。 If you did actually eat the very body of Christ, it would affect your digestive and secretive organs, and through them your flesh, just as other bread, or if you like it better, other flesh would do.
但这怎么能影响你的心灵和灵魂呢？ But how could this affect your heart and soul?
恩典是通过胃部运作，通过我们的肠道品尝的吗？ Does grace operate through the stomach and savour through our bowels?
很好。 Great.
我很想证明这一点，并希望能使任何接受这种诺斯底观点的人皈依。 I would love to prove that, and hopefully make converts of anyone buying into this Gnostic view.
首先，看看沙漠中的吗哪。 To begin with, look at the manna in the desert.
在约翰福音第6章，耶稣将圣餐比作吗哪，在哥林多前书第10章，圣保罗将其描 述为我们的灵性的，有时被翻译为超自然的，但那里的词字面意思是属灵的食物。 In John 6, Jesus compares the Eucharist to the manna, and in 1 Corinthians 10, St. Paul describes it as our spiritual, sometimes it's translated supernatural, but the word there is literally spiritual food.
所以属灵的食物是 根据圣保罗的说法，它包括吗哪，这是在身体层面上吃的。 So spiritual food is According to St. Paul, it includes the manna, which was eaten at a bodily level.
圣格里高利·尼撒，另一位早期基督徒，也是在4世纪写作的，他说因为人是由灵魂和身 体组成的二重生物，圣路易斯用人是两栖动物的例子，你知道，这是身体和灵魂的结合。 St. Gregory of Nyssa, another one of the early Christians, also writing in the 300s, It says that since the human being is a two-fold creature compounded of soul and body, St. Louis uses the example of man being an amphibian, you know, it's this union of body and soul.
你不仅仅是你的身体，你不仅仅是你的灵魂，你是这两者的结合。 You're not just your body, you're not just your soul, you're the union of those two things.
用格里高利的话说，你是一个二重生物。 You're a two-fold creature, in Gregory's words.
他说，通过它们的两个组成部分。 He says, Through both their component parts.
换句话说，基督来到世上不仅是为了拯救你的灵魂，也是为了拯救你的身体。 That Christ, in other words, does not just come into the world to save your soul, but to save your body as well.
因为他想拯救你的全部。 Because he wants to save all of you.
这就是为什么道成肉身是必要的。 This is why the incarnation is necessary.
早期基督徒非常喜欢说，没有被承担的就没有被救赎。 The early Christians were very fond of saying, that which is not assumed is not redeemed.
基督并没有成为动物，所以我们不相信动物能接受神圣的生命。 That Christ doesn't become an animal, and so we don't believe that animals receive divine life.
基督确实成为了人。 Christ does become a man.
这就是为什么他既完全是神又完全是人这一点很重要。 This is why it matters that he's fully God and fully man.
他有人的身体，人的灵魂，甚至人的意志，这与 威廉·莱恩·克雷格等现代新教徒的观点相反。 That he has a human body, and a human soul, and even a human will, contrary to modern Protestants like William Lane Craig.
如果他要在我们人性的完整性中拯救我们，他就需要完全是人。 He needs to be fully human if he's going to save us in the fullness of our humanity.
格里高利·尼撒在这里说的是，好的，所以他想要拯救我们的身体和灵魂。 What Gregory of Nyssa is saying here, okay, so he wants to save us both body and soul.
他如何在灵魂层面上拯救我们？ How does he save us at the level of the soul?
非常清楚。 Very clearly.
灵魂通过信心与他融合，从中获得救恩的方法和机会。 The soul being fused into him through faith derives from that the means and occasions of salvation.
如果我们只是灵魂而没有身体，如果我们像天使一样…… That if we were merely souls and not bodies, if we were like angels...
所以他说，好吧，你可能会问，那是什么方式？ And so he says, Well, what way is that, you might ask?
好吧，所以现在，圣餐突然变得更有意义了。 Well, So now, the Eucharist suddenly makes more sense.
因为灵魂通过信心和默想接受事物，身体通过吃喝接受事物。 Because the soul receives things through faith and contemplation, the body receives things by eating them and drinking them.
所以耶稣以这两种方式来到我们中间。 And so Jesus comes to us in both ways.
格里高利总结说，既然那个作为神性容器的身体接受了这种不朽的恩典，并且已经 表明我们的身体不可能以其他方式成为不朽的，只能通过与那不朽的身体的团契参 与不朽，因此，他将在一个更长的段落中说（我不会全部引用），我们需要圣餐。 Gregory concludes, since that body, which was the receptacle of the deity, received this grace of immortality, and since it has been shown that in no other way was it possible for our body to become immortal, but by participating in incorruption through its fellowship with that immortal body, therefore, he's going to say in a much longer passage I'm not going to quote all of, we need the Eucharist.
这就是早期基督教。 That's early Christianity.
现在，注意这里，这不是异教。 Now, notice here, this isn't paganism.
这不像是，哦，圣餐是从异教思想中引入的。 This isn't like, oh, the Eucharist came in from pagan ideas.
不！异教徒才是那些主张这种无形体救赎的诺斯底思想的人，而基 督徒看着耶稣以及他如何医治身体和灵魂，说，那不是这样的。 No! The pagans were the ones who were arguing for this Gnostic idea of disembodied salvation, and the Christians, looking at Jesus and how he heals body and soul, were saying, that's not it.
现在，我要指出的第三点是，尽管司布真不相信身体在恩 典中扮演这个角色，但他确实认为吃对罪来说非常重要。 Now, the third thing I'd point out here is that even though Spurgeon doesn't believe that the body has this role to play in grace, he does view eating as being really important for sin.
这是一个有趣的双重标准。 This is a fascinating double standard.
这里他在谈论亚当和夏娃。 Here he is talking about Adam and Eve.
伊甸园中的亚当不需要救赎，他是完美的、纯洁的、清洁 的、圣洁的，在神面前是可接受的，他是我们的代表。 Adam in the garden wanted no salvation, he was perfect, pure, clean, holy and acceptable, before God he was our representative.
他作为全人类的代表站立，当他触摸禁果，吃了神说过不 可吃的树上的果子时，神说，你不可吃，否则必定死。 He stood as the representative for all the race, and when he touched the forbidden fruit, and ate of the tree of which God had said, you shall not eat thereof, or you shall surely die.
我发现这种双重标准既奇怪又有趣，因为他完全 接受原罪发生的字面方式是通过身体的吃喝。 I find that double standard bizarre and fascinating, because he's completely comfortable with the idea that the literal way original sin happens is that there is bodily eating and drinking.
他并没有把那部分比喻化。 He doesn't take that part metaphorically.
他好像在说，好吧，他们确实吃喝了，因此罪进入了世界，现在我们需要一个救主。 He's like, okay, they literally ate and drank, and therefore sin entered the world, and now we need a savior.
然而，当那位救主来临时，他并不认为对亚当之罪的补救也可能像罪一样涉及吃喝。 And yet, when that Savior comes, he doesn't think that the remedy for Adam's sin might also involve eating and drinking in the way the sin does.
我是说，想想看。 I mean, think about that.
所以，坏事可以通过吃来在灵性上发生在你身上，但好事却不能？这是一个更广泛问 题的一部分，一旦你听到它，希望你能够识别它，也许在你自己的生活中，或者如果 你来自新教背景或者你目前是新教徒，环顾四周，看看这种双重标准在哪里出现。 So, bad things can happen spiritually to you through eating, but good things can't? This is part of a broader thing, and once you kind of hear it, hopefully you'll be able to identify it, maybe in your own life, or if you're from a Protestant background or you're currently Protestant, look around and look at where this double standard comes up.
有这样一种观念，认为可以有物质的、在灵性上邪恶的东西，比如占卜板。 That there's this idea that there can be spiritually evil things that are physical, like a Ouija board.
但不可能有物质的、在灵性上良善的东西，比如圣水。 But there can't be spiritually good things that are physical, like holy water.
充其量，它们只有在提醒我们好事的时候才是好的。 At best, they're only good if they remind us of good things.
但邪恶的东西不仅仅是在提醒我们坏事时才是邪恶的。 But the evil things aren't only evil if they remind us of bad things.
那些在灵性上邪恶的东西，占卜板、塔罗牌之类的，它们实际上可以成为邪恶的 导管，但有一种观念认为，出于某种原因，身体和物质的东西不能成为恩典的导 管，然而这恰恰是早期基督徒理解它们的方式，也绝对是圣经呈现它们的方式。 The spiritually evil things, Ouija boards, tarot cards, the like, they can actually be conduits of wickedness, but there's this idea that for some reason the body and physical things cannot be conduits of grace, and yet that is absolutely how the early Christians understood them, and absolutely how the Bible presents them.
关于圣餐还有很多可以说的。 So there's much more that could be said about the Eucharist.
实际上，我在那本书《圣餐真的是耶稣》中相当直接地批评了司布真。 I actually take Spurgeon on pretty directly in that book, The Eucharist is Really Jesus.
但我想转向他讲道的其他部分，这些部分我在那本书中没有涉及。 But I want to turn to other parts of his sermon that I don't cover in that book.
即使徒传承之类的事情。 Namely, things like apostolic succession.
现在，这在对抗诺斯底主义的斗争中是一个非常关键的问题。 Now, this is a really critical one in the fight against Gnosticism.
再次回到罗杰·奥尔森这里，他是一位浸信会信徒，他指出在里昂的爱任纽对诺 斯底主义的批评中，他提出的一个重要观点是，诺斯底派是破坏教会统一的人。 Going back to Roger Olson here, again, who is a Baptist, he points out that in Irenaeus of Lyons' critique of Gnosticism, one of the important points that he makes is that the Gnostics were the ones who broke the unity of the Church.
他们是分裂主义者。 They were the schismatics.
他说，爱任纽高度重视教会的可见统一，这种统一体现在使徒任命的主教们的团契中。 Irenaeus, he says, highly valued the Church's visible unity that consisted in the fellowship of the bishops appointed by the Apostles.
诺斯底派站在这个团契之外，是它的寄生虫。 The Gnostics stood outside of that and were parasites on it.
如果你不熟悉，在180年的《驳斥异端》中，给我们马太、马 可、路加和约翰四福音的爱任纽，主要是在反驳诺斯底异端。 So if you're not familiar, in 180 and against heresies, Senior Anais, the guy who gives us Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the four Gospels, is arguing against mostly the Gnostic heresy.
那是主要的异端。 That's the chief heresy.
他写了这个百科全书式的描述，讲述这些异端相信什么，然后他驳斥他们。 He writes this encyclopedic description of what it is these heretics believe, and then he refutes them.
他驳斥他们的一种方式，一种突出的方式，是因为他们没有使徒传承。 And one of the ways he refutes them, one of the prominent ways, is because they don't have apostolic succession.
爱任纽在第三卷中指出，每个教会的任何人都有能力追溯从使徒时代到他自 己那个时代的血统，追溯他所称的这些人（即主教们）的传承到我们自己的 时代，这些人既没有教导也不知道任何类似这些（指诺斯底派）的东西。 And Irenaeus points out in Book 3 that it is within the power of anyone in every church to go and trace the lineage from the time of the apostles down to his own day, to trace what he calls the succession of these men, meaning the bishops, to our own time, those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these, meaning the Gnostics.
换句话说，你可以驳斥诺斯底主义的一种方式是，他 们以早期基督徒不相信的方式重新解释了基督教。 In other words, one of the ways you can disprove Gnosticism is they've reinterpreted Christianity in a way that earlier Christians didn't believe.
部分通过使徒传承。 Partly through apostolic succession.
我们怎么知道的？ How do we know that?
我们有这个可以追溯到使徒的主教血统，我们可以证明这根本不是真的。 We have this lineage of bishops going back to the apostles, and we can show that this just is not true.
司布真讨厌这个论点。 Spurgeon hates this argument.
司布真认为这个论点完全荒谬。 Spurgeon thinks this argument is absolutely ridiculous.
他猛烈抨击它。 He comes out swinging against it.
这里是他攻击使徒传承。 Here he is attacking apostolic succession.
听这句话，肉体是无益的。 Hear ye this word, the flesh profiteth nothing.
主教与主教之间仅仅通过连续的按手和膏抹建立的肉体联系，是完全没有价值的。 The mere fleshly connection between bishop and bishop, established by successive layings on of hands and anointings, Is utterly valueless.
在同一篇讲道的早些时候，他暗示相信使徒传承的人应该被关在疯人院里。 Earlier in the same sermon, he suggests that the people who believe in apostolic succession belong in bedlam, like the mental institution.
当我说他讨厌它时，他真的非常讨厌它。 When I say he hates it, he really hates it.
因为这意味着他不是一个真正的牧师。 Because it means that he's not a true minister.
他没有这种权威，这种来自神的呼召。 He doesn't have this authority, this calling from God.
他没有被呼召。 He has not been called.
若没有奉差遣，怎能传道呢？ How can they preach unless they are sent?
圣保罗在罗马书第10章说。他没有被差遣。 St. Paul says in Romans 10. He hasn't been sent.
谁差遣了他？ Who sent him?
他自己差遣自己。 He sent himself.
他创立了自己的教会。 He founds his own church.
他确实这样做了。 He literally does.
然而，将使徒传承是属肉体的这种观念与圣经中呈现的按手方式进行对比。 And yet, so, contrast this idea that apostolic succession is fleshly with the way the laying on of hands is presented in Scripture.
在圣经中，它并不被视为仅仅是属肉体的外在仪式。 It is not treated in Scripture as a mere fleshly outward observance.
在希伯来书第6章，我们被告知，让我们离开基督道理的开端，竭力进到完全的地步。 In Hebrews chapter 6, we're told, let us leave the elementary doctrines of Christ and go on to maturity.
那么，什么是成熟的教义呢？ And what are the mature doctrines?
关于洗礼的教导，所以，你必须有基本的基础，比如称义、从死行中悔 改和对神的信心，然后你就准备好获得对基督教本质更深入的理解。 Instructions about ablutions, So, you have to have the basic foundation, things like justification, the repentance from dead works and faith towards God, and then you're ready to get the more sophisticated understanding of what Christianity is all about.
按手礼在这个非常简短的基督教教义列表中，与死人复活和最后审判等事情并列。 And laying on of hands is on that very short list of Christian doctrines, along with things like the resurrection of the dead and the last judgment.
所以，在圣经的视野中，按手礼不仅仅是某种仪式性的轻浮行为。 So, laying on of hands isn't just some ceremonial frivolity in the biblical vision.
按手礼真的很重要。 Laying on of hands is really important.
现在，我应该指出，在新约中，按手这个词有三种不同的用法。 Now, I should point out that the phrase laying on of hands is used in three different ways in the New Testament.
一种与我们无关的用法是逮捕。 One way, not relevant to us, is arrest.
你知道，他们抓住使徒，把他们关进监狱。 You know, they laid hands on the apostles and brought them to jail.
我的意思是，他们是字面上的，这显然不是希伯来书第6章所说的。 I mean, they're literally, that's obviously not what Hebrews 6 is talking about.
其他两种方式是圣事性的。 The other two ways are sacramental.
按手礼用来描述圣职的恩赐，这将是与使徒传承相关的部分，它也用于坚振礼的恩赐。 The laying on of hands is used to describe the gift of holy orders, which is going to be the relevant part for apostolic succession, and it's also used for the gift of confirmation.
这很重要，因为在新约中很明显有一种信念，即属灵权柄是通过按手这种物理行为传递的。 Now, this matters because there is very clearly in the New Testament a belief that spiritual authority is imparted through the physical act of the laying on of hands.
例如，我们在使徒行传第8章中看到了关于坚振礼恩赐的描述。 We get this, for instance, in Acts chapter 8, about the gift of confirmation.
魔术师西门看见，引用，圣灵是通过使徒按手赐下的。 Simon, the magician, saw, quote, that the spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands.
这是使徒行传8:18。然后他也要求得到这种能力，使我按手的人都可以受圣灵。 That's Acts 8.18. And then he asks for that power also, that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.
他因此受到谴责。 And he's condemned for this.
他没有那种权柄，那种能力。 He doesn't have that authority, that power.
使徒们显然有。 The apostles clearly do.
他们没有说，哦，你误解了。 They don't say, oh, you've misunderstood.
这只是一个外在的事情。 This is a mere external thing.
我们通过给他们按手来提醒他们圣灵以某种方式存在。 We're reminding them by laying hands of them that the Holy Spirit exists somehow.
现在，很明显，按手在这里是传递一种属灵权柄。 Now, clearly, the laying on of hands is imparting a spiritual authority here.
这次的属灵权柄是坚振礼。 That spiritual authority this time is confirmation.
但就像我说的，你看到它被使用的另一种方式是在按立礼中。 But like I say, the other way you see it used is in ordination.
例如，圣保罗在提摩太后书1章6-7节提醒提摩太，他如何得到神在他里面的恩赐？ So, for instance, St. Paul reminds Timothy in 2 Timothy 1, verse 6-7, How does he get the gift of God within him?
通过保罗的按手。 Through the laying on of Paul's hands.
所以，认为按手礼只是一种属肉体的仪式的想法，与新约谈论它的方式完全相反。 So the idea that the laying on of hands is just a fleshly observance could not be more contrary to the way the New Testament talks about it.
好的，现在让我们转向更广泛地讨论基督教崇拜中的礼仪之美。 Okay, let's pivot now to just talk more broadly about liturgical beauty in Christian worship.
因为司布真的观点认为只有内在的东西才重要，所以他会否认礼仪之美的重要性。 Because Spurgeon's view, because it's all about just internal stuff that matters, he's going to reject liturgical beauty as being important.
他甚至会否认雄辩的重要性，这有点滑稽，因为他是一个多么雄辩的传教士。 He actually is even going to reject things like eloquence being important, which is kind of funny given how eloquent of a preacher he is.
但在这里，他猛烈抨击礼仪之美，认为它毫无价值。 But here he comes out swinging against liturgical beauty, thinking it's just worthless.
我们现在被告知，神职人员的盛大阵容、象征的美、彩绘窗户、香烟等等，往往 吸引人们进入敬拜场所，而当他们在那里时，这些东西有助于提升他们的思想。 We are told nowadays that the pompous array of ministering priests The beauty of symbology, the painting of windows, the smoke of incense, and so on, tend to draw people into the place of worship, and that when there, they aid in elevating their minds.
圣经对这一切怎么说？ What sayeth Scripture about it all?
这在犹太人中试过，当基督总结这长期的试验时， 他的评论是，使人活着的乃是灵，肉体是无益的。 This thing was tried among the Jews, and Christ's remark when he comes to sum up the long trial is, it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.
我应该在这里指出两点。 Two things I should point out here.
第一，这种不断将基督教与犹太教对立的做法，再 次听起来更像是诺斯底主义，而不是新约基督教。 Number one, this constant pitting Christianity against Judaism Again, it sounds much more like Gnosticism than it does New Testament Christianity.
诺斯底派确信旧约的神是邪恶的，或者说物质世 界是邪恶的，因为旧约中充满了身体性的内容。 The Gnostics were convinced the Old Testament God was evil, or the world of matter, because it's so bodily in the Old Testament.
但请注意，这不仅仅是犹太人中的一次尝试。 But notice here, this is not just a trial among the Jews.
神明确告诉犹太人要以这种方式敬拜。 God explicitly tells the Jews to have worship in this way.
例如，在出埃及记30章，他们被告知要制作一个祭坛来烧香。 So, for instance, in Exodus 30, They're told to make an altar to burn incense upon.
这不是他们因为想要一个盛大的仪式就想出了烧香的做法。 It isn't like they just came up with incense because they wanted a pompous ceremony.
神指示他们这样做。 God instructs them to do that.
我们稍后会讨论为什么。 We'll talk about why in a minute.
但天上的敬拜也是这样的。 But heavenly worship is like this as well.
这不仅仅是某种人为的错误，现在基督教来了，我们就纠正了它。 It isn't just like this is some man-made error, and now Christianity comes along, and we're remedied of it.
圣约翰在启示录第8章说，这就是旧约和新约中圣经敬拜的样子。 St. John in the book of Revelation, Revelation chapter 8 says, This is what biblical worship looks like in both the Old and the New Testament.
所以，他仅仅基于约翰福音6:63这一节经文，而且他并不理解， 就表现得好像所有这些外在的东西完全没有价值，这是很奇怪的。 And so it is bizarre that he responds based just on one verse, John 6, 63, which he does not understand, to act as if all this external stuff is completely worthless.
现在，我再次强调，我不想用一个宽泛的笔触来描绘所有的新教徒。 Now, I want to, again, I don't want to paint all Protestants with a broad brush.
所以我想实际上强调另一位我认为很好地理解这一点的新教徒。 And so I want to actually highlight another Protestant who I think gets this really well.
这来自道格·威尔逊在爱达荷州莫斯科的教会，一个名叫本·佐恩斯的人，我对他不太了 解，可能在神学上我们有很多分歧的领域，但我认为他在阐述这个观点时做得非常出色， 即如果我们理解我们既有灵魂又有身体，那么我们就理解为什么宗教中的外在事物很重要 ，为什么像跪拜这样的身体动作（我们将在另一集讨论）以及身体在崇拜中的角色是他试 图让那些可能忽视它或认为身体和外在装饰完全无关的新教徒重新关注的东西。 So this is from Doug Wilson's church up in Moscow, Idaho, and a guy by the name of Ben Zorns, and I don't know much about him, probably there are plenty of areas we disagree on theology, but I thought he did a fantastic job of laying out the case that if we understand that we are both soul and body, Then we understand why things like the externals in religion matter, and why things like bodily motions, like kneeling, which we'll talk about in another episode, and the role of the body in worship is something that he's trying to bring back in view for Protestants who may be oblivious to it, or who think that the body and the external trappings are totally irrelevant.
福音并不是将你的灵魂从身体的监狱中解放出来，而是真正让你获得生命。 And the gospel doesn't liberate your soul from the prison of the body, rather the gospel brings you truly to life.
我们所传讲的道是身体的生命，灵魂的健康，精神的活力。 The word we preach is life to the body, health to the soul, vitality to the spirit.
这就是为什么我们不应该把我们的敬拜看作是试图逃离身体。 This is why we shouldn't think of our worship as an attempt to escape the body.
相反，我们带着我们的整个自我，身体、灵魂和精神 ，因基督的恩典而复活，将自己献上，当作活祭。 Rather, we bring our whole self, body, soul, and spirit, risen by Christ's grace, to offer ourselves as a living sacrifice.
因此，我们在整个礼拜过程中采取各种姿势。 And so, we adopt various postures throughout our service.
我们站立注意聆听神呼召我们敬拜。 We stand at attention to hear God call us to worship.
我们的声音在歌唱和祷告中回响。 Our voices resound in songs and prayers.
我们怀着充满希望的悔改跪下。 We kneel in hope-filled contrition.
我们再次站起来聆听神的话语。 We stand again to hear God's word.
我们的耳朵被圣灵打开，听他对教会所说的话。 Our ears are opened by the Spirit to hear what He says to the church.
我们向前看，看到饼被擘开。 We turn our eyes forward to see the bread broken.
我们张开嘴吃喝。 We open our mouths to feast and to drink.
我们的手将饼和酒传递给我们的弟兄姐妹。 Our hands extend the bread and wine to our brothers and sisters.
我们举手圣洁地赞美。 We lift our hands in holy praise.
牧师举手以三位一体的名义祝福我们，我们伸出张开的手接受这份礼物。 The minister lifts his hands to bless us in the triune name, and we extend open hands to receive this gift.
不过，这里还有一个问题，为什么？ There's still a question here, though, like why?
为什么神以这种方式与我们相遇？ Why does God meet us in this way?
为什么敬拜如此身体化？ Why is worship so bodily?
为什么从基督教而不是诺斯底主义的意义上来说，属灵的敬拜不是无形体的？ Why is spiritual worship from the Christian and not the Gnostic sense something that isn't disembodied?
讽刺的是，我认为司布真提出了一个很好的论点，一旦你理解了人的本质是灵 魂和身体，你就会明白为什么如果神想要我们许多人得救，这真的很重要。 Well, ironically, I think Spurgeon makes a pretty good case that once you understand the nature of man as soul and body, you see why it's really important if God wants many of us to be saved.
现在，讽刺的是，司布真将用这个作为反对外在事物 的论点，但早期基督徒将此视为支持它们的论点。 Now, ironically, Spurgeon is going to use this as an argument against the externals, but the early Christians saw this as an argument for them.
大多数人无法接受一种没有什么可看的，没有什么可以取悦耳朵或满足他们品味的宗教。 The most of mankind cannot get on with a religion in which there is nothing to see, nothing to please the ear or to gratify their taste.
只有那些被神的荣耀所压倒的属灵人才不需要人的荣耀。 It is only the spiritual man who is so overwhelmed with the glories of God that he does not need the glories of man.
所以在这一点上，我想强调我认为，在很大程度上，司布真是对的。 So on this point, I want to stress that I think, largely, Spurgeon is right.
如果基督教真的是这种无形体的东西，那么它对 神想要拯救的大多数人来说将是无法接近的。 If Christianity really were this disembodied thing, It wouldn't be accessible to most of the people God desires to save.
很少有人能够以这种完全赤裸的方式生活。 Very few would be able to live in this totally denuded sort of way.
这是亚历山大的圣亚他那修在4世纪指出的关于道成肉身最初发生的原因之一。 And this is one of the points that St. Athanasius of Alexandria points out in the 300s as for why the Incarnation happened in the first place.
他这样说，「……当人的心思最终堕落到感官事物的层面时。」 He puts it like this, "...when then the minds of men had fallen finally to the level of sensible things."
我们被物质世界分散了太多注意力。 We're so distracted by the material world.
神并没有就此抛弃我们。 God doesn't just abandon us.
相反，他说，「……道屈尊以身体的形式显现。」 Rather, he says, "...the word submitted to appear in a body."
换句话说，对偶像崇拜的补救是基督以肉身来到世界。 In other words, the remedy to idolatry is that Christ comes bodily into the world.
你想要一个可以看得见的神来敬拜吗？ You want a God you can worship visibly?
这里有一个你可以看得见的神来敬拜。 Here's a God you can worship visibly.
因此，基督以肉身来到世界，并给我们圣餐等事物。 And so Christ comes into the world bodily, and he gives us things like the Eucharist.
所以这不是偶像崇拜，这是对偶像崇拜的补救。 So this isn't idolatry, this is the remedy to idolatry.
这是一种结束的方式。 This is kind of by way of closing.
我想直接进入这个问题的核心。 I want to just get to the heart of this.
因为正如我所说，从圣经的角度来看，诺斯底主义是敌基督的。 Because as I say, Gnosticism is Antichrist, biblically speaking.
然而，我们发现这些论点被新教作者一次又一次地使用。 And yet we find these arguments being used by Protestant authors over and over again.
不是所有的新教徒，不是所有的时候，不是完全概 括诺斯底派所相信的一切，但足以引起一些警惕。 Not all Protestants, not all the time, not in a full encapsulation of everything the Gnostics believed, but enough that this should be of some alarm.
正如我之前所说，经常有这样一种观念，认为天主教基督教如此强调身体性的原因 是因为异教，这是将异教引入原本纯粹属灵的早期基督教，这与事实相去甚远。 There is often this idea that, as I said earlier, This idea that the reason Catholic Christianity is so bodily and all of that is because of paganism, that this is the introduction of paganism into what had otherwise been this purely spiritual early Christianity, that could not be further from the truth.
天主教基督教如此强调身体性的原因是因为基督教 本身就如此强调身体性，因为基督是有形体的。 The reason Catholic Christianity is so bodily is because Christianity is so bodily, because Christ is bodily.
所以我想以改革宗神学家杰拉德·范·格罗宁根在他 的《第一世纪诺斯底主义》一书中的话作为结束。 And so I want to close with Gerard van Groeningen, the Reformed theologian, in his book First Century Gnosticism.
他指出，正是沿着这些线索，诺斯底派不是受犹太教的 影响（他们倾向于厌恶犹太教），而是受异教的影响。 He makes the point that it's exactly along these lines, that the Gnostics are indebted not to Judaism, which they tend to loathe, but to paganism.
他是这样说的。 He says it like this.
他说旧约的救赎观念绝对与诺斯底派相反。 He says the Old Testament idea of salvation is definitely contrary to the Gnostic.
犹太教和基督教的观点是从罪中得救。 The Jewish and Christian view is that of salvation from sin.
诺斯底派的救赎属于异教范畴，从命运、今生的压力和紧张，以及星辰的束缚中解脱。 Gnostic salvation is in the pagan category, released from fate, the strains and stresses of this life, and from the bondage of the stars.
这意味着你从命运和物质宇宙中都得到了自由。 Meaning you're free from both fate and the material cosmos.
诺斯底派关于人是被囚禁在这个物质世界中的神圣存在，并被宇宙的 障碍与其真正居所分离的概念，也表明了与犹太思想的基本区别。 The Gnostic concept of man as a divine being imprisoned in this material world and separated from his true abode by the barriers of the cosmos also sets forth the basic difference from Jewish thought.
这就是这个观点。 That's the idea.
如果你想理解这里发生的事，不是天主教基督教因为异教而强调身体性，恰恰相反。 That if you want to understand what's going on here, it's not Catholic Christianity is bodily because of paganism, it's the opposite.
天主教基督教的身体性使它与当时的知识分子异教相反。 Catholic Christianity's bodilyness made it contrary to the educated paganism of its day.
正是因为异教思想，你才有了诺斯底主义，然后这些种子被种下，在基督教历史中一次 又一次地出现，在像卡塔尔派这样的异端中，也扎下了根，虽然常常是以一种勉强的、 不完全成熟的形式，但你肯定可以在某些新教阵营反对天主教的许多论点中看到它。 And it's because of pagan thought that you get Gnosticism, and then those seeds that get planted and come up again and again in Christian history, in heresies like the Cathars, have also taken root, often in a strained, not a fully fledged out form, but you can certainly see it in many of the arguments against Catholicism from certain Protestant quarters.
我很想听听你对此的回应。 I would love to hear your response to this.
我非常努力，希望你能看出来，我试图公平对待 那些我知道并非有意成为诺斯底派的新教徒。 I've tried very much, I hope you can tell, to be fair to the Protestants who I know are not consciously Gnostics.
但我很想听听你自己的经历。 But I would love to hear your own experience.
如果你是新教徒，你在当前的敬拜中，或者如果你是前新 教徒，在以前的敬拜中，是否发现过诺斯底主义的痕迹？ Have you found in your current worship, if you're a Protestant, or maybe former worship if you're a former Protestant, strains of Gnosticism?
我是否遗漏了其中的一些元素？ Were there elements of this that I missed?
是的，我很想听到更多关于这方面的内容。 Yeah, I'd love to hear more about this.
因为我认为这是一个严重的问题，我没有看到我们对此有足够的关注。 Because I think this is something that's a serious problem that I don't see us addressing enough.
我是乔·赫施迈尔，为无耻教皇党节目。 For Shameless Popery, I'm Joe Heschmeyer.
愿神祝福你。 God bless you.