大家好，欢迎回到历史1课程和我们的历史1精华视频。 Hi folks, welcome back to History 1 and our History 1 Highlights videos.
这是第5单元的精华内容，今天我们将讨论亚略主义、 4世纪的大公会议、尼西亚会议和君士坦丁堡会议。 This is Highlights from Unit 5, and today we're going to be talking about Arianism, the 4th century ecumenical councils, the councils of Nicaea and Constantinople.
我们将简要讨论教会的圣灵论，即对圣灵的理解。 We're going to be talking a little bit about the church's pneumatology, or understanding of the Holy Spirit.
以及尼西亚信经。 and the Nicene Creed.
首先，我们要从一些破除迷思开始，因为关于君士坦丁大帝有很多流传的误解。 And first we're going to start with a little bit of myth busting because there are a lot of myths out there about the Emperor Constantine.
在我们开始之前，先提醒一下。这是学期中你开始感到疲劳的时候 ，疲劳意味着松懈，你开始以一种无法真正吸收材料的方式阅读。 Now before we get to that, just a quick reminder This is the point in the semester when you start to get tired, and tired means sloppy, and you start to read in a way where you're not really absorbing the material.
我知道这门课有很多阅读内容，但这就是历史学的本质。 And I know that there's a lot of reading for this class, but that is the nature of history.
所以请记住，你需要仔细阅读，为了理解而阅读。 And so remember that you need to read carefully and read for understanding.
你不能只是浏览或像阅读网上的娱乐内容那样阅读。 You can't just skim it or read like you're reading for entertainment, like you'd read something on the internet.
这必须深入阅读内容，以便你能理解。 This has to be read for the depth of the content so that you understand it.
因为要记住，当你去写论文时，你的论文应该写得像你在教授这些材料一样。 Because remember, when you go to write your essay, your essays are supposed to be written as though you are teaching this material.
所以你不仅要学习，还要学得足够好，能够反过来教授它。 So you need to not just learn it, but learn it well enough to turn around and teach it.
所以确保你在阅读时标记重点，这样你以后可以参 考你的标记，而不必在写论文时重新阅读全文。 So make sure that you are highlighting in the text when you read so that you can reference your highlights later and not have to read it all over again when you go to write your essay.
好，让我们来破除一些迷思。 Okay, let's do a little bit of myth busting.
君士坦丁大帝。 The Emperor Constantine.
关于君士坦丁有太多的迷思，我们没有时间一一讲解，但让我快速给你们讲四个。 There are so many myths out there about Constantine, we don't have time to cover them all, but let me just hit you with four quick ones.
第一个是君士坦丁大帝强迫尼西亚会议接受三位一体教义，好像他 是正统信仰背后的推动力，他强迫教会接受所谓的三位一体教义。 The first one is that the Emperor Constantine forced the Doctrine of the Trinity on the Council of Nicaea, that somehow he was the driving force behind what became Orthodoxy, and he forced this thing called the Doctrine of the Trinity on the Church.
现在你们知道这完全不是真的，因为三位一体教义在4世纪并不是新事物，而且从史料 和君士坦丁自己的信件中我们知道，在尼西亚会议之前，他实际上倾向于亚略主义。 Well, by now you know that is completely untrue because the Doctrine of the Trinity is not new in the 4th century, but also we know from the sources and from Constantine's own letters that before the Council of Nicaea, he actually leaned toward Arianism.
他认为亚略可能是对的，而且到最后，他并没有意识到三位一体教义有多重要，因为他在 进入会议时实际上说，嘿，你们为什么不专注于更重要的事情，比如确定复活节的日期？ He thought Arius might be right, and at the end of the day, he didn't realize how important the doctrine of the Trinity was, because he actually said, going into the Council, hey, why don't you guys focus on something more important, like settling the date for Easter?
你们为什么对这个所谓的三位一体教义如此烦恼？ Why are you so upset about this thing called this doctrine of the Trinity?
所以他甚至没有理解它有多重要，如果说他要强加什么给会议的话，那反而会是亚略主义。 So he didn't even get how important it was, and if anything, If he was going to try to force anything on the Council, it would have been Arianism.
事实上，我们知道后来他的至少一个儿子确实试图将亚略主义强加于帝国，但没有成功。 And in fact, we know that later at least one of his sons did try to force Arianism on the Empire unsuccessfully.
这就是第一个被破除的迷思。 So that's the first myth busted.
君士坦丁并没有试图将三位一体教义强加于尼西亚会议。 Constantine did not try to force the doctrine of the Trinity on the Council of Nicaea.
尼西亚会议得出其结论是因为它致力于维护传统。 The Council of Nicaea came to the conclusions that it did because it was interested in maintaining the tradition.
正如我常说的，要记住，正统信仰是与上一代正统信仰最一致的。 And as I always say, remember that orthodoxy is that which is most consistent with the orthodoxy of the previous generation.
所以在教义发展过程的每一个阶段，教父们的任务，他们也 是这样理解的，就是确定最忠于他们所接受的传统的路线。 So at every point in the process of the development of doctrine, The task of the church fathers, and they understood it this way, was to determine the course that was most faithful to the tradition that they had received.
因此，在尼西亚会议上定义三位一体教义时，那里 的主教们只是在澄清教会一直以来所信仰的内容。 And so in defining the doctrine of the Trinity at the Council of Nicaea, the bishops there were only clarifying what the church had always believed.
好的，关于君士坦丁大帝的另一个迷思是他决定了圣经中应该包含哪些书卷。 Okay, another myth about the Emperor Constantine is that he decided what books would be in the Bible.
再次强调，对于那些上这门课的人来说，你们已经读过了关于圣 经、正典、新约发展的章节，所以你们知道这完全不是真的。 And again, for those of you taking the class, you've read the chapter on the Bible, the canon, the development of the New Testament in the book, and so you know this is completely untrue.
君士坦丁大帝并没有决定圣经中应该包含哪些书卷。 The Emperor Constantine did not decide what books would be in the Bible.
甚至有人写了一本书，名字类似《君士坦丁的圣经》。 There's even a book out there that somebody wrote called something like Constantine's Bible.
这是一本糟糕的书。 It's a terrible book.
不要购买它。 Don't buy it.
不要阅读它。 Don't read it.
但它试图论证，因为君士坦丁大帝曾委托抄写一些圣经，所以他决定 了圣经中应该包含哪些书卷，并且这在某种程度上影响了其他教会。 But it tries to make the case that because the Emperor Constantine had commissioned some copies of the Bible that he therefore decided what books would be in the Bible, and that somehow influenced the rest of the church.
这完全不是真的，当然，正典和基督教圣经的发展有其自身的历史，与君士坦丁大帝无关。 Completely untrue, and of course the development of the canon and the Christian Bible has a history all its own, quite apart from the Emperor Constantine.
你可以在《阅读教父》中了解这方面的内容，但那是一个迷思。 So you can read about it in Reading the Church Fathers, but that is a myth.
君士坦丁并没有决定圣经中应该包含哪些书卷。 Constantine did not decide what books would be in the Bible.
关于君士坦丁的另一个迷思是，他创造了一种教会与国家的结合，这通常被认为 是一件可怕的事情，毁坏了教会，一旦教会与国家勾结，一切就开始走下坡路。 Another myth about Constantine is that he is the one who created a sort of marriage of church and state, which is usually presented as a terrible thing and ruins the church, and that once the church got in bed with the state, that it was all downhill from there.
公平地说，质疑教会与国家结合确实有一些充分的理由，但这并不是君士坦丁发明的。 Now, to be fair, there are some good reasons to question the marriage of church and state, but it's not that Constantine invented that.
事实上，在人类历史上，从未有过政府和宗教分离的时期。 In fact, There had never been a time in human history when government and religion were separate.
政府和宗教是一体的。 Government and religion were all one thing.
看看旧约，你知道，最初希伯来人甚至不应该有国王，因为神是他们的王。 Even look at the Old Testament, the way, you know, originally the people of the Hebrews were not even supposed to have kings because God was their king.
在其他文化中，你知道，王室、皇族被认为是准神圣的。 And in other cultures, the royalty, the royal family are considered, you know, quasi divine.
所以宗教和政府一直是交织在一起的。 So religion and government were always intertwined.
讽刺的是，正是君士坦丁大帝在313年颁布的米兰敕令中发 明了政教分离，书中有这个敕令的翻译，所以你们会读到。 And ironically, it was the Emperor Constantine who invented the separation of church and state with the Edict of Milan in the year 313, which is a translation of that in the book, so you'll read that.
但重点是，米兰敕令给予了帝国中每个人宗教崇拜的自由。 But the point is that the Edict of Milan gave freedom of worship to everyone in the empire.
当然，它使基督教合法化，但它给予了每个人宗教崇拜的自由。 It, of course, legalized Christianity, but it gave freedom of worship to everyone.
虽然君士坦丁会偏爱基督教，但他甚至说，看，你们都有权在崇拜中犯错。 And although Constantine would favor Christianity, he even goes so far as to say, look, You all have the right to be wrong in your worship.
你们都有权按照自己的良心进行崇拜。 You all have the right to worship according to your conscience.
这个迷思如此讽刺，因为君士坦丁并没有发明政教合一。 This myth is so ironic because Constantine did not invent the union of church and state.
君士坦丁发明了政教分离，恰恰相反。 Constantine invented the separation of church and state, quite the opposite.
最后，我们现在要讨论的最后一个迷思是君士坦丁大帝使基督教成为罗马帝国的官方宗教。 Finally, the last myth that we'll go over right now is that the Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
他并没有这样做。 He did not do that.
这最终发生在后来的皇帝狄奥多西时期，在380年，但君士坦丁在4世纪 初只是使基督教合法化，并在某种程度上给予优待，通过给予基督教主教某 些特权，以及做一些其他事情，使基督教在帝国中有更多的自由实践。 That would eventually happen with a later emperor, Theodosius, in the year 380, but Constantine, in the early fourth century, Only made Christianity legal and, to a certain extent, favored by giving certain privileges to Christian bishops and doing some other things that would allow Christian practice more freedom in the empire.
但他从未使基督教成为罗马帝国的官方宗教。 But he never made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
那是后来的事。 That would happen later.
好，又一个迷思被破除了。 Okay, another myth busted.
这就是我们需要立即澄清的关于君士坦丁大帝的四个迷思。 So those are just four myths about the Emperor Constantine that we need to get out of the way right away.
现在我们可以进入第5单元精华内容中的一个主要话题。那就是亚略主义异端的话题。 And now we can move on to one of our major topics in our highlights from Unit 5. And that is the topic of the heresy of Arianism.
好的，正如你们从课文中所知道的，大约在319年，我们看到亚历山大城中有一位神父。 Okay, so as you know from reading the text, In about the year 319, we see a priest in the city of Alexandria.
这位神父名叫亚略，他通过宣讲一些与传统不符的内容引起了注意 ，以至于他的主教，名叫亚历山大的主教，不得不指出他的错误。 This priest's name was Arius, and he sort of called attention to himself by preaching something that his bishop, whose name was Alexander, his bishop had to call him out for preaching something that was inconsistent with the tradition.
现在，亚历山大的主教亚历山大，是的，我没有编造这些名字，这就是 他的名字，亚历山大的亚历山大，他confronted亚略，告诉 他必须停止教导他正在教导的内容，并使自己重新与传统保持一致。 Now, Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, and yes, I don't make these things up, but that's his name, Alexander of Alexandria, he confronted Arius and told him he had to stop teaching what he was teaching and bring himself back in line with the tradition.
亚略拒绝了。 Arius refused.
亚略也指责他的主教亚历山大是异端。 And Arius accused his bishop, Alexander, of heresy as well.
所以现在我们面临的情况是，一位神父指责他的主教是异 端，主教也指责这位神父是异端，他们陷入了一种僵局。 And so now what we have is a situation where a priest is accusing his bishop of heresy, the bishop is accusing the priest of heresy, and they come to a kind of standoff.
那么，亚略到底宣讲了什么让他陷入麻烦？ So exactly what was it that Arius was preaching that got him in trouble?
无论他是否意识到，亚略从诺斯替主义者那里借用了两个错误。 Well, whether he knew it or not, Arius had borrowed two errors from the Gnostics.
让我说明一下，亚略主义不是诺斯替主义。 And let me just say, Arianism is not Gnosticism.
它不是诺斯替主义的演变。 It is not an evolution of Gnosticism.
它也不是诺斯替主义的分支。 It's not an offshoot of Gnosticism.
它甚至与诺斯替主义没有太大关系，只是亚略无 意中从诺斯替主义者那里借用了两个主要错误。 It's not even really that related to Gnosticism, except Arius had accidentally borrowed two major mistakes from the Gnostics.
第一个是认为神性可以有程度之分。 The first was that there could be degrees of divinity.
你知道，对犹太-基督教一神论者来说，神性是没有程度之分的。 And for, you know, Judeo-Christian monotheists, there are no degrees of divinity.
一个存在要么是神性的，要么不是，只有一个存在是神性的，那就是神，对吧？ A being is either divine or not, and only one being is divine, and that being is God, right?
好的，但这仍然引出了三位一体教义的问题，我们稍后会讨论到。 Okay, but that still begs the question of the doctrine of the Trinity, and we'll get there.
但关键是，亚略对三位一体教义的解决方案本质上是拒绝三位一体教义，转而支持一种基 督论，认为耶稣基督是准神性的，有神性程度之分，比你我更神圣，但比圣父神更低级。 But the point is that Arius' solution to the doctrine of the Trinity was going to be essentially rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity in favor of a Christology where Jesus Christ is quasi-divine, degrees of divinity, more divine than you or me, but less divine than God the Father.
所以这种神性可以有程度之分的想法是我们在诺斯替主义中已经 看到的，这是一个错误，是一个异端，但亚略采纳了这个观点。 And so this idea that there could be degrees of divinity is something that we already saw in Gnosticism, and it's an error, it's a heresy, but Arius picks up on this.
亚略无意中从诺斯替主义者那里借用的另一个错误是，你可以将人耶 稣与一个被称为基督的灵性实体分开，你可以将耶稣与基督分开。 The other error that Arius Accidentally borrowed from the Gnostics was the idea that you could separate the man Jesus from a spiritual entity called the Christ, that you could separate Jesus from the Christ.
这是许多诺斯替主义者的错误，顺便说一下，这也是所谓的「历史上的耶稣」探索的 错误，我们在20世纪看到这种尝试，试图将历史上的耶稣与信仰中的基督分开。 This is an error of many of the Gnostics, and incidentally, it's also the error of the so-called quest for the historical Jesus, which we saw in the 20th century, trying to separate the Jesus of history from the Christ of faith.
里昂的爱任纽早在二世纪就说过，你不能将耶稣与基督分开。 And Irenaeus of Lyon had said this all the way back in the second century, You cannot separate Jesus from the Christ.
他们是，他是，一个位格。 They are, he is, one person.
好的，但问题是这样的。 Okay, so here's the problem though.
如果你是3世纪的一个采纳说信徒，有人对你说，哦，你否认基督的神性， 但你如何解释约翰福音第1章？在3世纪，一个采纳说信徒可能会说，哦， 约翰福音不在我的圣经里，或者我对那段经文有不同的解释，诸如此类。 If you are an adoptionist in the 3rd century, and somebody says to you, oh well you deny the divinity of Christ, but how do you deal with John chapter 1? In the 3rd century, an adoptionist could probably get away with saying, Oh, the Gospel of John isn't in my Bible, or I interpret that a different way, or something like that.
但到了4世纪，新约的目录已经非常正式化和确立 ，没有人可以说约翰福音不在我的圣经里，对吧？ But by the fourth century, the New Testament is so much more formalized and established in terms of its table of contents, no one can get away with saying the Gospel of John isn't in my Bible, right?
所以现在，如果你是一个采纳说信徒，你必须处理约翰福音1:1。这就是亚略所做的。 So now, if you're an adoptionist, you have to deal with John 1.1. And this is what Arius does.
亚略教导的是采纳说的一种演变形式，他通过将耶稣与基督分开来处理约翰福音第1章。 Arius was teaching An evolution of a form of adoptionism in which he dealt with John chapter 1 by separating Jesus from the Christ.
所以，像早期的采纳说信徒一样，他说耶稣只是一 个普通人，通过自律和完全顺服神而达到了完美。 So, like the earlier adoptionists, he said Jesus was a mere man who achieved perfection through discipline and perfect obedience to God.
他达到了完美，然后神以提升他的地位作为奖励。 He achieved perfection and then God rewarded him with an elevated status.
但为了适应约翰福音第1章，亚略然后说基督是一个灵性存在，仍然是一个被造的灵性 存在，不是神圣的道，不是三位一体的第二位格，而是一个被造的灵性存在，可能是一 个天使般的存在，他被造于其他一切被造物之前，这样他就可以成为其余创造的代理。 But, to accommodate John chapter 1, Arius then said the Christ was a spiritual being, still a created spiritual being, not the divine logos, not the second person of the Trinity, but a created spiritual being, perhaps an angelic being, who was created Just before the rest of creation, so that he could then be the agent of creation for the rest of creation.
这就是他如何解释约翰福音1章中说「万物是借着他造的」这句经文。 This is how he would interpret the verse in John 1 that says, all things were created through him.
所以基督是这个被造的存在，在其余创造之前几分钟被造 ，这样圣父就可以通过这个被造的存在来创造其他一切。 So the Christ is this created being, created a few minutes before the rest of creation, so that the Father could create through this other created being.
然后当人耶稣出现并达到完美时，耶稣从神那里得到的部分奖赏 是，在他被收养时，这个先存但非永恒的基督灵内住在他里面。 And then when the man Jesus came along and achieved perfection, Part of the reward that Jesus gets from God is that at his adoption he is indwelt with this Christ spirit who is preexistent but not eternally so.
先存但非永恒，因为他是被造的。 Preexistent but not eternal because he's created.
所以无论你想谈论耶稣还是基督作为神的儿子，对亚略来说，这 种儿子身份是一种被收养的儿子身份，而不是永恒的儿子身份。 So whether you want to talk about Jesus and or the Christ as the son of God, for Arius that sonship is an adopted sonship and not an eternal sonship.
所以神的儿子，如果你想这样称呼他的话，亚略会说，嗯，他并不是一直存在的。 And so the Son of God, if you want to call him that, Arius would say, well, he hasn't always existed.
他不是永恒的。 He isn't eternal.
亚略会说，曾有一个时候，圣父存在，但圣子不存在。圣子还没有 被造，这就是亚略著名口号的由来，「曾有一个时候他不存在」， 意思是在时间之前的时间里，有一个时候神的儿子还没有被造。 There was a time, Arius would say, when the Father existed, but the Son didn't. The Son hadn't been created yet, and that's where Arius got his famous slogan, there was a time when he was not, meaning there was a time in the time before time When the Son of God hadn't been created yet.
因此，对亚略和他的追随者来说，耶稣基督比你我更神圣，但比圣父神更低级。 And so, for Arius and his followers, Jesus Christ is more divine than you or me, but less divine than God the Father.
他本质上是一个成为神的人。 He is essentially a man who became a God.
仍然是一个被造的神，但是一个成为神的人。 Still a created God, but a man who became a God.
这就是重点，因为这与正统或主流基督论完全相反。 And this is the point, because this is the exact opposite of Orthodox or mainstream Christology.
对主流来说，耶稣基督是成为人的神，而不是成为神的人。 For the mainstream , Jesus Christ is God who became a man, not a man who became a God.
正统基督论是一种降卑的基督论，这就是腓立比书2章所说的所谓的「 虚己」。「虚己」这个词只是希腊语「他倒空自己」的音译，对吧？ Orthodox Christology is a Christology of descent, and this is the so-called kenosis in Philippians 2. That word kenosis is just a transliteration of the Greek word for he emptied himself, right?
所以道成肉身是一种自我倒空，自我限制，在这过程中，三位一体的第二位格成为人。 So the incarnation is a self-emptying, a self-limiting, in which the divine second person of the Trinity becomes human.
他开始是神，然后成为人，而不是相反。 He starts out as God and becomes human, not the other way around.
但对亚略来说，他开始是人，然后成为神。 But for Arius, he starts out as human and becomes a God.
当我谈论正统基督论的降卑基督论和亚略主义的 上升基督论之间的区别时，我经常用一个类比。 And I often use an analogy when I'm talking about this difference between a Christology of descent, which is Orthodox Christology, and a Christology of Ascent, which is Aryan Christology.
一个很好的类比是超人和蝙蝠侠之间的区别。 A good analogy for this is the difference between Superman and Batman.
我理解并非每个人的文化都像我的文化那样熟悉这些超级英雄，但请跟随我的这个类比。 Now, I understand that not everyone's culture is as familiar with these superheroes as perhaps mine is, but go with me on this analogy.
顺便说一下，我在我的书《从星球大战到超人》中更深入地探讨了这个问题。 And by the way, I go into this in much more depth in my book, From Star Wars to Superman.
所以如果你对使用这些超级英雄的类比来学习和教导正统基督论而非异端感兴趣的话。 So if you're interested in using these analogies of superheroes, to learn and to teach Orthodox Christology as opposed to heresy.
这是《从星球大战到超人》，科幻和超级英雄电影中的基督形象。 This is from Star Wars to Superman, Christ figures in science fiction and superhero films.
所以这就是我要说的。 So here's what I'm talking about.
超人来自别处。 Superman came from somewhere else.
他本来不是我们中的一员。 He's not originally one of us.
他来自我们之上，对吧？ He comes from above us, right?
引用老版超人电视节目的话，他是那个来自另一个星球的奇怪访客，他做什 么？他降临，就像我们在信经中说的，他降临成为我们的一种救主形象。 To quote the old Superman TV show, he's that Strange visitor from another planet who, what, comes down, as we say in the Creed, he came down to be a kind of savior figure for us.
但他开始是在我们之上，然后成为我们中的一员。 But he starts out as above us and becomes one of us.
另一方面，蝙蝠侠并不是来自另一个星球。 Batman, on the other hand, is not from another planet.
他唯一的超能力就是他非常富有，而且有点疯狂。 His only superpower is that he's filthy rich and also kind of crazy.
但重点是蝙蝠侠开始只是一个普通人，但通过自律和意志力，他达到了英雄的地位。 But the point is that Batman starts out as a regular guy, But through discipline and willpower, he achieves hero status.
所以，超人是一个本不是我们中的一员，但成为我们中的一员来作为我们的救主形象的人。 So, Superman is someone who is not one of us, but becomes one of us to be a savior figure for us.
这就像真正的耶稣，降卑的基督论。 That's like the real Jesus, the Christology of descent.
蝙蝠侠是一个靠自己努力成为英雄的普通人。 Batman is a regular guy who pulls himself up by his own bootstraps and becomes a hero.
一个成为英雄的人，这更像是亚略主义基督论中的上升基督论。 A man who becomes a hero, That's more like the Christology of ascent in the Arian Christology.
现在，顺便说一句，不要将上升的基督论与耶稣的升天混淆。 Now, just as an aside, don't confuse Christology of ascent with the ascension of Jesus.
耶稣的升天是一个完全不同的概念，指的是他在地上事工结束时返回天国。 The ascension of Jesus is a completely different concept when he returns to the heavenly realm at the end of his earthly ministry.
把那个放在一边。 Set that aside.
那不是我们在讨论的内容。 That's not what we're talking about.
我们在讨论上升的基督论，上升意味着他的地位被提升。 We're talking about a Christology of ascent, ascent meaning he He is elevated in status.
开始是一个普通人，然后成为神。 Starts out as a regular guy and becomes a God.
这就是亚略主义，它是错误的，因为正统基督论认为耶稣基督一开始就是神。 That's Arianism and it's wrong because Orthodox Christology is that Jesus Christ starts out as God.
腓立比书2章。他本有神的形象，然后成为人。 Philippians 2. He was in the form of God and then he became human.
他是成为人的神，而不是成为神的人。 He is God who became a human, not a human who became a God.
这就是正统基督论和亚略主义之间的区别。 And so that is the difference between Orthodox Christology and Arianism.
顺便说一下，请记住我在这本书中提供了有用的图表。 And by the way, always remember that I've got the helpful charts in this book.
在阅读教父著作时，请查看第339页的图表，特别是在写论文时。 In reading the Church Fathers, check out the chart on page 339, especially when it comes time to write your essay.
你会想看那个图表，因为它非常清楚地展示了这些内容。 You're going to want to look at that chart because it lays it out very clearly.
所以请记住，当你看那个图表时，亚略主义是采纳说的一种演变。 So remember, As you look at that chart, that Arianism is an evolution of adoptionism.
采纳说是那种削弱或否认耶稣神性的异端，对吧？ Adoptionism is that heresy that diminishes or denies the divinity of Jesus, right?
亚略主义沿着这条路线发展。 And Arianism follows in that track.
尽管亚略主义现在会，因为它必须这样做，因为圣经的缘故，尽管亚略 主义现在会将一种准神性归于耶稣，就好像亚略派在说，好吧，我们承 认他有某种神性，但不是完全的神性，不像圣父那样神圣，对吧？ And even though Arianism will now, because it has to, because of scripture, even though Arianism will now ascribe a quasi divinity to Jesus, like almost like the Arians are saying, Alright, we'll give you that he's sort of divine, but not fully divine, as divine as the Father, right?
这就是4世纪采纳说的演变。 That is the 4th century evolution of adoptionism.
公平地说，他们是在试图保护一神论，因为在亚略的思想中，如果圣子和圣 父一样神圣和永恒，你知道，这不是使他们成为兄弟而不是父子关系吗？ Now, to be fair, they are trying to protect monotheism, because in the mind of Arius, if the Son is as divine and as eternal as the Father, You know, doesn't that make them brothers as opposed to father and son?
这不是变成两个神了吗？ Doesn't that make it two gods?
嗯，其实不是。之所以不是，是因为三位一体的教义，你 知道，我们现在正在理解主流教会是如何澄清这一点的。 Well, it doesn't. And the reason it doesn't is the doctrine of the Trinity, which, you know, we are understanding now how the mainstream church is clarifying that.
但关键是亚略错了，因为像早期的采纳说信徒一样，他假设圣子被生 就意味着他被造，他无法摆脱将耶稣基督视为被造物的思维模式。 But the point is that Arius got it wrong because, like earlier adoptionists, he assumed that for the Son to be begotten meant that he was created, and he could not get out of that mode of thinking of Jesus Christ as a created being.
即使对他来说存在灵性的内住，那仍然是一个被造的实体内住在人耶稣里面。 Even if for him there's a spiritual indwelling, still that is a created entity that indwells the man Jesus.
所以这意味着对他来说，即使是那个灵性实体，基督，也不是永恒的。 And so that means that for him, even that spiritual entity, the Christ, is not eternal.
在他存在之前曾有一段时间。 There was a time before he existed.
这也意味着对亚略派来说，耶稣基督可能犯罪，而且可能曾经犯过罪。 It also means that for the Arians, Jesus Christ could sin, and probably did at one time.
亚略的一些追随者相信耶稣基督曾经是一个可怕的人，他们为他编造了一 个完整的悔改故事，说他在曾经是一个可怕的罪人之后成为了一种圣人。 Some of the followers of Arius believed that Jesus Christ had actually been a terrible guy at one time, and they concocted a whole conversion story for him, that he became a kind of a saint after having been a terrible sinner.
但所有这些的问题在于它对我们救恩的影响，对救恩论的影响，对吧？ But the problem with all of this is its implications for our salvation, for soteriology, right?
因为正如我常说的，第三条规则，基督论影响救恩论。 Because as I always say, rule number three, Christology informs soteriology.
所以如果你从亚略主义的基督论开始，你必然会得出一个行为救 恩的救恩论，因为它将耶稣基督降低为不是一个真正的救主，而 是一种先驱，一个需要效法的榜样，向我们展示如何变得完美。 And so if you start with an Arian Christology, You must end with a soteriology, a salvation by works, because it reduces Jesus Christ to not a savior, really, but a kind of pioneer, an example to follow, who shows us how to become perfect.
但如果我们要得救，如果我们要获得救恩，我们就必须效法他的榜样，也变得完美。 But if we are going to be saved, if we're going to receive salvation, we have to follow his example and become perfect too.
所以在亚略主义的概念中，耶稣的信息是，耶稣成为了神，你也可以。 And so the message of Jesus in the Arian conception is, Jesus became a God, and so can you.
如果你做到了，你就会得救。 And if you do, you will be saved.
但如果你做不到，那是你的问题，你就不会得救，因为救恩是通过达到完美来实现的。 But if you don't, well, that's on you, but you won't be saved, because salvation is by achieving perfection.
从某种意义上说，这是一种自我救赎。 In a sense, it's a self-salvation.
因此，在4世纪，正统信仰成为了亚略主义和形态论这两个极端之间的一种中间道路。 And so, Orthodoxy then, in the 4th century, is now a kind of middle way between the two extremes of Arianism on the one side and modalism on the other.
所以我们仍然有形态论。 So we still have modalism.
形态论从3世纪就存在了。 Modalism is still around from the third century.
正如你在图表中看到的，正统信仰是这两个极端之间的平衡点。 And as you can see in the chart, orthodoxy is this place of balance in between the extremes.
形态论基本上是说耶稣与你完全不同，因为他只是伪装的圣父。 Modalism is basically saying Jesus is really nothing like you because he's just the father in disguise.
亚略主义说耶稣在各方面都与你完全相同，或者如果你希望得救，你需要完全像他一样。 Arianism is saying Jesus is exactly like you in every way, or you need to be exactly like him if you hope for salvation.
而正统信仰说耶稣完全是人，像你一样，但他在人 类中仍然是独特的，因为他仍然是神圣道的化身。 Whereas Orthodoxy says that Jesus is fully human like you, yet he is still unique among humanity because he is still the incarnation of the divine Logos.
这将是救恩论的全部要点，因为当我们最终回到赎罪理论时，我们会看到， 在所有这些理论中，关键是基督的两种本性都是我们救恩所必需的，既有完 全的人性，使他在除罪以外的各方面都像我们，又有完全的神性，使他是神 圣的。所以，他完全是人，像我们一样，但他在人类中仍然是独特的。 And this is going to be the whole point for soteriology for salvation, because what we're going to see when we finally come full circle to the theories of atonement is that in all of them, the point is that both of Christ's natures are required for our salvation, both a full humanity in which he is like us in every way except sin, and a full divinity in which he is as divine So, he is fully human like us, yet he is still unique among humanity.
正如我们到目前为止所看到的，特土良，尤其是3世纪的诺瓦 提安为亚历山大的主教们，亚历山大和他的继任者亚他那修铺 平了道路，为他们反驳亚略主义提供了几个非常重要的观点。 And as we've seen so far, Tertullian and especially Novation in the third century have paved the way For the bishops of Alexandria, Alexander and then his successor Athanasius, paved the way for their rebuttal of Arianism with several really important points.
我们现在不会详细讨论它们，但我只想提一下并指出它们。 And we're not going to go into them in detail now, but I just want to name them and point them out.
永恒生成的教义，对吧？ The doctrine of eternal generation, right?
这真正成为了解释三位一体教义为什么有效的原因，它不是多神论，也不 是形态论，同时也解释了为什么亚略主义不是这个问题的充分解决方案。 That becomes really the explanation for why the doctrine of the Trinity works And it's not polytheism, and it's not modalism, and also why Arianism is not an adequate solution to the problem.
所以，永恒生成。 So, eternal generation.
另一个是同质性的教义，意味着圣子，神的儿子，三位一体的 第二位格，必须同样是神圣的，所以从神性所生的就是神性。 The other one is that the doctrine of consubstantiality means that the Son, the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, must be equally divine So that what is begotten of divinity is divinity.
所以你不能说「受生」意味着「被造」。 And so you cannot say that begotten means created.
亚略在这一点上是错的。 Arius was wrong about that.
从神性所生的就是神性。 What is begotten of divinity is divinity.
所以圣子与圣父同质。 So the Son is consubstantial with the Father.
当然，圣灵也是如此。 Of course, the Holy Spirit is too.
但这一点的意义在于，它使主流教会能够对亚略的口号「曾有一个时 候他不存在」提出反驳，反驳的内容是「永远是父，永远是子」。 But the point of this is that this allows the mainstream church to To propose a rebuttal for Arius' slogan, there was a time when he was not, the rebuttal for that is always a father, always a son.
因为如果有一个时候圣子不存在，如果有一个时候在圣子被造之前， 那就意味着有一个时候圣父还不是父，这就意味着圣父从不是父变成 了父。这将意味着三位一体的第一位格成为了父，这将是一种变化。 Because if there was a time when the son didn't exist, if there was a time before the son was created, that would mean that there was a time when the father wasn't yet a father, which would mean that the father had gone from not being a father It would mean that the first person of the Trinity had become a father, which would be a change.
而我们知道，神性必须是不变的，不能改变。 And as we know, divinity must be immutable and cannot change.
所以主流对亚略口号的反驳，你知道，「曾有一个时候 他不存在」，主流的反驳是「永远是父，永远是子」。 So the mainstream rebuttal to Arius' slogan, you know, there was a time when he was not, the mainstream rebuttal to that is always a father, Always a son.
一直都有父，他一直是父，因为他一直有子，一直都有子。 There has always been a father and he has always been the father because he has always had a son and there has always been a son.
子与父有同样的神性和同样的永恒性。 The son is the same divinity and same eternity as the father.
再次，我们要特别感谢诺瓦提安为亚历山大和亚他那修能够说这些话铺平了道路。 And again, we have Novation especially to thank for setting the stage for Alexander and Athanasius to be able to say these things.
最后，正统信仰是介于极端之间的中间道路这一观念。 And then finally, just this idea that orthodoxy is this middle way in between the extremes.
它是对问题的「既...又...」的回答，拒绝「非此即彼」的回答。 It's the both-and answer to the question, rejecting the either-or answers.
耶稣与你完全不同这种说法是不对的，正如形态论者所暗示的那样。 It's not the case that Jesus is nothing like you, as the modalists would imply.
耶稣完全像你，你必须完全像他才能得救，这种 说法也是不对的，正如亚略派所暗示的那样。 It is not the case that Jesus is It is exactly like you in the sense that you have to become exactly like him in order to be saved, as the Arians would imply.
事实上，这个问题有一种「既...又...」的答案，即耶稣基督完 全是人，像我们一样，但在人类中仍然是独特的，因为他有这种对我们 的救恩必要的神性。否则，救恩本身就会被降低为一种行为称义。 It is the case that there's a kind of both-and answer to the question, which is that Jesus Christ is fully human, as we are, and yet still unique among humanity because he has this divine nature which is necessary for our salvation Otherwise, salvation itself would be reduced to a kind of works righteousness.
好的，我不会详细讨论尼西亚会议的过程，甚至不会讨论尼西亚会议的结果。 Okay, well I'm not going to go into detail about the proceedings of the Council of Nicaea or even the outcome of the Council of Nicaea.
这些要点在书中都有，你们会读到的。 The essentials of that are in the book and you'll be reading about that.
但我们想指出的是，在尼西亚会议（我们的第一次大公会议，325年）和君士坦丁堡 会议（我们的第二次大公会议，381年）之间的这段时间里，发生的事情是，所有曾 经问过关于三位一体第二位格的问题现在都在问关于三位一体第三位格，圣灵的问题。 But what we do want to point out is that in the time between the Council of Nicaea, our first ecumenical council in the year 325, between that time and the Council of Constantinople, our second ecumenical council in the year 381, what happened in that in-between time is that All of the questions that had been asked about the second person of the Trinity were now being asked about the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit.
如果你看书中第366页的图表，有一个比较信经的图表：他们开始使用的模板信 经，然后是325年在尼西亚写的信经，最后是381年完成的信经。你会注意到 有一个巨大的差异，因为第三段，所有关于圣灵的内容，实际上是在381年的君 士坦丁堡会议上添加的。在325年的信经中，他们只愿意说，「我们相信圣灵， 我们知道有一位」，但教会的圣灵论，教会关于圣灵的神学还没有真正澄清。 If you look at the chart in the book on page 366, there's a chart comparing the creeds the template creed that they started with, then the creed that they wrote at Nicaea in 325, and then finally the creed as it was finished in 381. And you'll notice that there's a huge difference because that third paragraph, all that stuff about the Holy Spirit, really gets added at the Council of Constantinople in 381. All they were willing to say in 325 in the creed is, We believe in the Holy Spirit, we know there is one, but the church's pneumatology, the church's theology of the Holy Spirit had not yet been really clarified.
当然，我们知道教会相信圣灵，主流教会相信圣灵的神性。 Of course, we know that the church believed in the Holy Spirit, the mainstream church believed in the divinity of the Holy Spirit.
这本来不是一个问题，但在尼西亚会议之后，一些倾向于亚略派的人 ，那些不愿意接受圣子完全神性的人，他们中的一些人在会议后说， 好吧，我们承认圣子的神性，但我们就是不能接受圣灵的神性。 That was not really a question, except that after the Council of Nicaea, Some of those folks who had leaned toward the Arian side and who were reluctant to get on board with the divinity, the full divinity of the Son, some of them after the Council said, okay, we'll give you the divinity of the Son, but we just can't get on board with the divinity of the Holy Spirit.
所以在尼西亚会议和君士坦丁堡会议之间的这段时间里，有人质疑圣灵的神性。 And so now there were people questioning the divinity of the Holy Spirit in that time between the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople.
因此，澄清教会对圣灵的理解就落在了那个中间时期的神学家们身上。 And so it came down to the theologians of that in-between era to clarify the church's understanding of the Holy Spirit.
这就是东方的加帕多家教父，巴西尔和两位格列高利，以及西方的米兰的安布罗修，对吧？ This would be the Cappadocian fathers in the East, Basil and the two Gregories, and then Ambrose of Milan in the West, right?
所以在这里，所有之前问过关于圣子的问题现在都在问关于圣灵。 And so here we have all of those questions that were asked about the Son previously are now being asked about the Holy Spirit.
圣灵是被造的还是非被造的？ Is the Holy Spirit Created or uncreated?
圣灵是非被造的。 The Holy Spirit is uncreated.
圣灵不是被造的存在。 The Holy Spirit is not a created being.
但另一方面，我们不会用「受生」这个词来说圣灵，因为那只用于圣子。 But on the other hand, we're not going to use the word begotten to speak about the Spirit, because that's for the Son only.
所以我们要确定这个新词。 So we're going to settle on this new word.
它并不是真的新词，但在这种用法中是新的。 It's not really new, but it's new in this usage.
圣灵是发出的。 The Holy Spirit proceeds.
那么，敬拜圣灵可以接受吗？ What about, is it acceptable to worship the Holy Spirit?
是的，可以。 Yes, it is.
敬拜圣灵是可以接受的，因为圣灵与圣父和圣子一样是神圣的。 It is acceptable to worship the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit is divine as the Father and the Son are.
现在，顺便说一句，重要的是要注意，尽管信经通过称圣灵为主和赐 生命者来肯定圣灵的神性，但那个词...当时有些人想这样做，但 人们认为如果这样做，太多人可能会难以接受和认同这个信经。 Now, as an aside, it's important to notice, even though the Creed affirms the divinity of the Holy Spirit by calling the Holy Spirit Lord and giver of life, still, that word Some people wanted to at the time, but it was perceived that if they did that, that too many people might have a hard time getting on board and accepting the creed.
你可能认为这些信经是为了排斥人而写的，在某些方面，信经确实是为了排除异端而写的。 You may think that these creeds were written to exclude people, and in some ways the creeds are written to exclude heresy.
但这里有一个例子，说明信经实际上是如何试图包容尽可能多的人的。 But here's an example of how the creeds were written actually to try and include as many people as possible.
所以为了不疏远或尽可能少地疏远人，你知道，他们没有在信经 的第三段中使用「同质」这个词，但很明显它确实适用于圣灵。 And so in an effort, you know, not to alienate or to alienate as few people as possible, They did not put the word consubstantial in that third paragraph of the Creed, but it is clear that it does apply to the Holy Spirit.
所以我们看到，圣灵与圣父和圣子一起是生命的源泉。 And so we see that the Spirit is the source of life, along with the Father and the Son.
所以，你知道，圣灵是神圣的，值得敬拜。 And so, you know, the Holy Spirit is divine and worthy of worship.
我们可以说圣灵与圣父和圣子同质，与圣父和圣子同样永恒。 And we can say consubstantial with the Father and the Son, co-eternal with the Father and the Son.
同样的神性，同样的永恒。 Same divinity, same eternity.
因此，教会至少在某种程度上澄清了它对圣灵的信仰。 And so the church clarifies, at least to a certain extent, its belief in the Holy Spirit.
现在，再次说明，我不会在这里逐行讲解信经。 Now, again, I'm not going to go through the creed here line by line.
但我在「三位一体101」中这样做了。所以如果你跟随「三位一 体101」中的那个部分，我会逐行讲解信经，讨论每一行的含义 ，它要反驳什么，因为尼西亚信经中的每一行都有其存在的理由。 But I do that in Trinity 101. So if you follow that section in Trinity 101, I go through the Creed line by line and talk about each line, what it means, what it's there to refute, because every line in the Nicene Creed is there for a reason.
没有多余的内容。 There's no fluff.
所以我讨论它要反驳或肯定什么，然后我在这里稍微涉及了一 下「和子」条款的争议，在阅读教父著作时会更深入地讨论。 So I talk about what it's there to refute or affirm, and then I go a little bit into the controversy of the filioque here, and then much more in depth in reading the Church Fathers.
我有一个关于「和子」条款争议的部分，这是西方版 本的那些词，「和子」，即圣灵从圣父和圣子发出。 I have a section on the controversy over the filioque, which is the Western edition of those words, and the Son, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
这三个英文词在拉丁文中是一个词，filioque，它们不在信经的原始版本中。 Those three words in English are one word in Latin, filioque, and they're not in the original version of the Creed.
直到今天，它们也不在我们东方弟兄姐妹所说的信经版本中。 And to this day, they're not in the version of the Creed that our Eastern brothers and sisters say.
所以这是一个有争议的问题，但我不会在这里深入讨论。 And so it is a bit of a controversy, but I'm not going to get into that here.
你在你的论文中也不需要涉及这个问题。 And you don't need to get into that in your essays either.
在你的论文中不要担心圣灵论或「和子」条款。 Don't really worry about pneumatology at all or the filioque in your essays.
我现在要用几句话总结一下大局。 I'm going to wrap this up now with a few comments about the big picture.
所以这就是大局。 So here's the big picture.
在教义发展的每个阶段，对问题的「既...又...」的回答是正确的答案。 In each stage along the way of the development of doctrine, The both-and answer to the question is the right answer.
这是主流正统信仰对抗教会边缘的极端，那些似 乎更喜欢「非此即彼」或更简单化答案的人。 It is the orthodoxy of the mainstream over against the extremes on the fringes of the church who seem to prefer an either-or answer or a more simplistic answer.
所以正统信仰是那种主流的中间道路，它保持着「 既...又...」的平衡，拒绝「非此即彼」。 So orthodoxy is that mainstream sort of middle way that holds intention a balance of the both and and rejects the either or.
具体来说，这就是我的意思。 And so specifically, here's what I mean.
在早期阶段，也许，你知道，我们在想前几个世纪，对吧？ In the early stage, perhaps, you know, we're thinking of the first couple of centuries, right?
就耶稣基督的两性而言，这真的全是关于基督论的。 It's really all about Christology in terms of the two natures of Jesus Christ.
他有人性，除了罪以外，他在所有方面都和我们一样完全是人。 He has a human nature where he is fully human as we are in all ways except sin.
他也有神性，在这方面他完全是神，与圣父和圣灵有同样的神性，对吧？ And he has a divine nature in which he is fully divine with the same divinity as the Father and the Spirit, right?
所以这一切都是关于这两种本性。 And so it's all about these two natures.
边缘的异端会选择其中之一并过分强调，你知道，他们会忽视另一个。 And the heresies on the fringes will pick one or the other and emphasize that so much that, you know, they de-emphasize the other one.
所以，你知道，我们有强调人性并削弱或否认基督神性的采纳说， 我们也有强调神性并削弱或否认基督人性的幻影说和诺斯替主义。 So, you know, we have adoptionism that emphasizes the humanity and diminishes or denies The divinity of Christ, and we have the docetism and gnosticism, which emphasizes the divinity such as it is, and diminishes or denies the humanity of Christ.
然后当我们进入3世纪，我们开始更深入地研究三位一体的教义并澄 清它，这就变成了三位一体三个位格之间的合一性和区别性的问题。 Then as we move into the third century, And we start to get deeper into the doctrine of the Trinity and clarifying that, it becomes a question of the unity and distinction between the three persons of the Trinity.
我们有过分强调合一性的异端，形态论，以至于他们削弱了位格的区别。 And we have heresies that emphasize the unity so much, modalism, that they diminish the distinction of persons.
圣子被简化为伪装的圣父，这又陷入了削弱他人性的错误。 And the son is reduced to simply the father in disguise, which again falls into the error of diminishing his humanity.
但在另一个极端，我们有采纳说，我们将有亚略主义的开始，它们强调位格的区别。 But then on the other extreme, we have adoptionism and we will have the beginning of Arianism that will emphasize the distinction of persons.
换句话说，将圣父和圣子分得如此之远，以至于它实际上不再是 三位一体，通常最终发生的是耶稣基督的神性被削弱或否认。 In other words, separate the father and son so much that it's really no longer a trinity at all, and usually what ends up happening is the divinity of Jesus Christ is diminished or denied.
所以即使亚略有一种准神性的概念，他会允许圣子，第二位格有这种准神性。 And so even though Arius has a kind of quasi-divinity, that he will allow for the Son, for the second person.
这是一种较低级的神性。 It is a lesser divinity.
这是一种获得的神性。 It is an acquired divinity.
所以它显然不是与圣父同样的神性。 And so it is clearly not the same divinity as the Father.
这就成了问题所在。 And so that becomes the problem.
然后主流正统信仰是在位格的合一性和区别性之间保持平衡 ，三位一体的三个位格是合一的，但他们不都是相同的。 And then the mainstream orthodoxy is this balance of unity and distinction of the persons in which the three persons of the Trinity are one, But they're not all the same.
他们是合一的，但不是完全相同的。 They're one, but not one and the same.
他们是有区别的，但不是分离的。 They're distinct, but they're not separate.
这就是平衡。 And that's the balance.
现在，我们要讨论的是，后来的基督论会将其提升到下一个层 次，问同样的问题，就像刚才问三位一体的三个位格那样。 Now, where we are going with this is that later Christology will sort of take it to the next level and ask the same questions that were just being asked of the three persons of the Trinity.
他们在多大程度上是合一的？ To what extent are they one?
他们在多大程度上是有区别的？ To what extent are they distinct?
他们会问这些问题，关于基督的两种本性。 They will ask those questions of the two natures of Christ.
换句话说，好的，从基督有这两种本性的假设开始，它们之间的关系是什么？ So in other words, saying, okay, Starting with the assumption that Christ has these two natures, what is the relationship between them?
它们有多统一？ How unified are they?
它们有多大的区别？ How distinct are they?
我们能模糊它们之间的界限吗？ Can we blur the line between them?
我们能把它们分开吗？ Can we separate them?
这就是我们进入5世纪要讨论的内容。 That's going to be where we're going into the 5th century.
这就是我们在整个过程中所处的位置。 That's where we are in the process of everything.
我想在这里做最后一个评论。 One last comment that I want to make here.
回到归属论，记住归属论说的是，你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的任 何事，你也可以说到其他两个位格，或者你能说的关于三位一体中一个位 格的任何事，你也可以说到整个三位一体，反之亦然，只有少数例外。 Circling back to the doctrine of appropriation, remember that the doctrine of appropriation says that anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you can say about the other two persons of the Trinity, or anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you can say about the Trinity as a whole, or vice versa, with a few exceptions.
现在，这个归属论实际上是同质论的一个推论，对吧？ Now, this doctrine of appropriation is really kind of a corollary to the doctrine of consubstantiality, right?
因为三位一体的三个位格都有同样的神性和同样的永恒性。 Because all three persons of the Trinity are the same divinity and same eternity.
它也是不可分割的运作论的一个推论，对吧？ And it's also a corollary to the doctrine of inseparable operation, right?
因为所有的神圣活动都是三位一体的三个位格共同的产物。 Because all divine activity is the product of all three persons of the Trinity.
嗯，你知道，因此，你能说的关于三位一体中一个 位格的任何事，你也必须能说到其他两个位格。 Well, you know, therefore, anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you have to also be able to say about the other two persons of the Trinity.
如果圣父是创造者，圣子也是创造者。 If the Father is Creator, the Son is Creator.
圣灵是创造者。 The Holy Spirit is Creator.
如果圣子是救主，圣父也是救主。 If the Son is Savior, the Father is Savior.
圣灵是...你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格或整个三位一体的 任何事，你都可以说到三位一体的任何其他位格，只有少数例外。 The Holy Spirit is Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity or about the Trinity in general, you can say about any of the other persons of the Trinity with a few exceptions.
这些例外恰恰是那些只属于三位一体中一个位格的独特个人属性。 And these exceptions are precisely those personal properties that are unique to one person of the Trinity only.
所以归属论的例外是三位一体三个位格的个人属性。 So the exceptions to the doctrine of appropriation are the personal properties of the three persons of the Trinity.
从技术上讲，这里真正起作用的只有四个概念。 And technically speaking, there are really only four concepts that work here.
现在，还有一些其他的名称你可以加进来，我们在课 堂上讨论过，所以我现在不会深入讨论所有这些。 Now, there are some other names you could throw in, which we talk about in class, and so I won't get into all of that now.
但四个真正重要的概念，每个都只属于三位一体中的一个位格，如下所示，对吧？ But the four really important concepts that each are unique to only one person of the Trinity are as follows, right?
只有圣父是非受生的。 Only the Father is unbegotten.
三位一体的三个位格都是非被造的。 All three persons of the Trinity are uncreated.
三位一体的三个位格都是创造者，而不是被造物。 All three persons of the Trinity are creator and not created beings.
但只有圣父是非受生的。 But only the Father is unbegotten.
只有圣父是三位一体中那个不依赖于三位一体中另一个位格而存在的位格。 Only the Father is that one person of the Trinity who is not dependent on another person of the Trinity for his very existence.
只有圣父是非受生的。 Only the Father is unbegotten.
第二个词是受生。 The second word is begotten.
只有圣子是受生的。 Only the Son is begotten.
圣子是...尽管圣灵也是由...引起的并依赖 于...，我们不用「受生」这个词来描述圣灵。 The Son is And even though it's the case that the Holy Spirit is also caused by and dependent on, we don't use the word begotten of the Holy Spirit.
我们只用「受生」这个词来说圣子。 We only use the word begotten to speak of the Son.
只有圣子是受生的。 Only the Son is begotten.
只有圣父是非受生的。 Only the Father is unbegotten.
只有圣子是受生或被生的。 Only the Son is begotten or generated.
我们还有另一个词来描述圣子，那就是，只有圣子道成肉身。 We also have another word for the Son, which is, only the Son is incarnate.
尽管有不可分割的运作，尽管三位一体的三个位格都在道成肉身中发挥作 用，但实际上只有三位一体中的一个位格真正成为肉身，只有三位一体中 的一个位格真正成为人，那就是三位一体的第二位格，圣子，耶稣基督。 Even though, inseparable operation, even though all three persons of the Trinity are active in the incarnation, yet only one person of the Trinity actually became incarnate, only one person of the Trinity actually became human, and that's the second person of the Trinity, the Son, Jesus Christ.
只有圣子是受生或被生的。 Only the Son is begotten or generated.
只有圣子道成肉身。 Only the Son is incarnate.
然后我们用来描述圣灵的词，正如我所说的，你知道，在4世纪的过程中是一个后来者。 And then the word that we have for the Holy Spirit is, as I said, you know, kind of late comer to the process in the fourth century.
这是剩下的词，被附加到圣灵身上。 It's the word that was left and got attached to the Holy Spirit.
这是我们不得不使用的词，它确实需要大量解释，这就 是为什么我在「和子」条款的部分有一整节来讨论它。 It's a word we're stuck with, and it really requires a lot of unpacking, which is why I have a whole section on that here in the section on the filioque.
但重点是这个。 But the point is this.
只有圣灵是发出的。 Only the Spirit proceeds.
无论我们如何确定「发出」的含义，请查阅书籍了解，但只有圣灵是发出的。 Whatever we determine proceeding means, and check the book for that, but only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
所以这些是归属论的例外，这些真的是唯一只适用于三位一体中一个位格的概念。 And so these are the exceptions to the doctrine of appropriation, and these are really the only concepts that apply to one person of the Trinity only.
只有圣父是非受生的。 Only the Father is unbegotten.
我们也可以说只有圣父是第一因或所有创造的最终源头，但我们必须小心 ，因为圣子和圣灵也是创造的源头，因为正如我们所知，约翰告诉我们， 万物是借着圣子造的，三位一体的三个位格都是创造者，都参与了创造。 We might also say that only the Father is the first cause or the ultimate source of all creation, but we have to be careful with that because the Son and the Spirit are also source of creation because, as we know, John tells us, all things were created through the Son and all three persons of the Trinity are Creator and were involved in creation.
所以这是一个棘手的问题。 So that's a tricky one.
但只有圣父是非受生的。 But only the Father is unbegotten.
只有圣子是受生的。 Only the Son is begotten.
现在，当然，在道成肉身的背景下，你知道，只有 圣子是耶稣，只有圣子是基督，只有圣子是道。 Now, of course, in the context of the Incarnation, you know, only the Son is Jesus, only the Son is Christ, only the Son is Logos.
所以我们还可以给三位一体的第二位格其他的称呼。 So there are other sort of names that we can put on the second person of the Trinity as well.
然后对于三位一体的第三位格，只有圣灵是发出的。 And then for the third person of the Trinity, only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
现在，我们也可以说，作为发出的推论，或作为发出的表现 ，或类似的东西，我们也可以说只有圣灵内住在信徒里面。 Now, we may also say that as a corollary to the proceeding, or as a manifestation of the proceeding, or something like that, we could also say that only the Holy Spirit indwells believers.
但这一点也很棘手，有一些经文段落我们必须仔细区分。 But that one's tricky too, and there are scripture passages that we would have to nuance that.
把这一点看作是暂定的，但可以肯定的是，只有圣灵是发出的。 Hold that one as kind of tentative, but for sure, only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
所以这些是归属论的例外。 So those are the exceptions to the doctrine of appropriation.
这些是只适用于三位一体中一个位格的个人属性。 Those are the personal properties that apply each to only one person of the Trinity.
现在，最后，对于学生们，当你们考虑写关于三位一体教义的论文时，请记住几件事。 Now, finally, for students, as you think to write your essay on the doctrine of the Trinity, remember a couple of things.
你写这篇文章就像你在教初学者一样。 You are writing this as though you're teaching it to beginners.
所以你需要定义你的术语，你需要清晰，并为他们连接所有的点。 So you need to define your terms and you need to be clear and connect all the dots for them.
你可以使用类比。 You may use analogies.
我鼓励你使用类比，并查看「三位一体101」的最后一节，关于三位一体的类比。 I encourage you to use analogies and check out the last section of Trinity 101 about analogies for the Trinity.
有不同种类的类比。 There are different kinds of analogies.
例如，如果你读过那本书《小屋》，那是一个关于三位一体的社会类比。 For example, if you read that book, The Shack, that is a social analogy for the Trinity.
在我看来不是一个很好的类比。 not a very good one in my opinion.
我完全不推荐这本书作为三位一体的类比，但你可以使用类比来教授三位一体。 I don't really recommend the book at all as an analogy for the Trinity, but you can use analogies to teach the Trinity.
只要记住，当你说三位一体像XYZ时，你还必须说明三位一 体不像这个类比的原因，因为教授三位一体不在于类比本身。 Just remember that when you say that the Trinity is like XYZ, you also have to say the Trinity is not like this analogy for these reasons, because teaching the Trinity is not in the analogy per se.
教授三位一体在于你对类比的解释，为什么它有效，为什么它无效。 Teaching the Trinity is in your explanation of the analogy and why it works and why it doesn't work.
因为你实际上将通过否定之路，即遮蔽法，教授更多关于三位一体的内容。 Because you're actually going to teach more about the Trinity through the via negativa, the apophatic way.
换句话说，当你告诉他们为什么这个类比作为三位一体的类比不成立，为什么 这个类比是一个糟糕的三位一体类比时，你将教授更多关于三位一体的内容。 In other words, to say you're going to teach more about the Trinity when you tell them why the analogy doesn't work as an analogy for the Trinity, why the analogy is a bad analogy for the Trinity.
那时你才真正开始教他们一些关于三位一体的东西。 That's when you're really going to start to teach them something about the Trinity.
注意我在课程资料中给你的大纲，记住你是在教初学者这些材料，不过不是教儿童。 Pay attention to the outline that I gave you in the course pack and remember that you are teaching this material to beginners, not children though.
不要试图向儿童教授三位一体。 Don't try to teach the Trinity to children.
大约12或13岁以下的人无法进行这种需要的抽象推理。 Anyone under about age 12 or 13 cannot do the kind of abstract reasoning that it takes.
特别是如果你使用类比，他们只会字面理解，你只会让他们感到困惑。 And especially if you use an analogy, they're only going to take it literally and you're only going to confuse them.
所以你不是在向儿童教授三位一体。 So you are not teaching the Trinity to children.
而是对那些初学的成年学习者，他们没有读过教科书，找到你 的声音，以教师的身份宣称你的权威，从这个立场来写论文。 But to adult learners who are beginners and who haven't read the textbook and find your voice, claim your authority as the teacher and approach the essay from that standpoint.
好的。 All right.
我现在就说这么多。 That's all I have for now.
感谢你看到最后，我们课堂上见。 Thanks for watching to the end and I will see you in class.
嘿，感谢你看完这整个视频。 Hey, thanks for watching this video all the way to the end.
我真的很感激。 I really appreciate that.
请与你的朋友分享这个视频。 Please share this video with your friends.
请加入我在Locals.com上的原始教会社区。 And please join me in the original church community on Locals.com.
别忘了，如果你加入Locals.com上的原始教会社区， Don't forget that if you join the original church community on Locals.com,
你可以每周加入我的实时、深入、按时间顺序的圣经研究。 you can join me each week for a live, in-depth, chronological Bible study.
每周六都有直播，但如果你没空，也可以之后观看。 It's livestreamed every Saturday, but you can watch it later if you're not available.
所以加入我吧，我们那里见。 So join me for that, and I'll see you there.
我希望在那里见到你。 I hope to see you there.
我们那里见。 And I'll see you there.