几乎每一个我交谈过的无神论者都不理解我们所说的神是什么意思。 Almost every atheist I've ever spoken to doesn't understand what we mean by God.
所以，无神论者所否认的，我也会否认。 So, what an atheist is denying, I would deny too.
大多数无神论者否认有一个至高存在，是世界中或世界之上的一个个体。 Most atheists deny that there's some supreme being who is an item in the world or above the world.
我也会否认这一点。 I would deny that too.
或者说，神充其量只是一个遥远的对象，也许把事物启动后就退休了。 Or God is, at best, a sort of distant object who maybe wound things up and then went into retirement.
嗯，我也会否认这一点。 Well, I would deny that too.
所以，我倾向于同意无神论者的看法。 So, I would tend to agree with the atheists.
而且，大多数无神论者把神理解为一个竞争者。 Also, most atheists construe God as a competitor.
你知道，就是与我们竞争的对手。 You know, competition to us.
好像如果神得到荣耀，我就会得到更少的荣耀。 Somehow, if God gets the glory, I get less glory.
如果神掌权，你知道，我就不能掌权。 If God's in charge, I can't, you know, be in charge.
但这正是托马斯·阿奎那所看到的：神并不是我们的竞争对手。 But that's exactly what Thomas Aquinas saw: that God is not a competitor to us.
如果神是我们存在的根基，我们越是将荣耀归给神，我们就越被提升。 If God is the very ground of our being, the more glory we give to God, the more we are elevated.
所以，我要说我倾向于同意大多数无神论者的观点，我认为他们否认这个虚假的神是对的。 So, I would say I tend to agree with most atheists; I think they're right in denying this false God.
但对于真正的神，我认为他们同样渴慕。 But the true God, I think they have just as much hunger for.
在离开他成长的埃及王宫多年流亡之后，一个名叫摩西的希 伯来人发现自己在西奈山坡上，为他的岳父叶忒罗放羊。 After many years of exile from the royal court of Egypt, where he had been raised, a Hebrew man named Moses found himself on the slopes of Mount Sinai, tending the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro.
他注意到一个奇异的景象：有一个荆棘在燃烧，却没有被烧毁。 He noticed a strange sight: a bush that was on fire but was not being consumed.
他决定走近看看。 He resolved to take a closer look.
当他走近时，他听见一个声音：「摩西，摩西，不要近前 来，当把你脚上的鞋脱下来，因为你所站之地是圣地。」 As he approached, he heard a voice: Moses, Moses, come no nearer; take off your shoes, for you are on holy ground.
然后那说话者表明了自己的身份：「我是你列祖的 神，是亚伯拉罕的神，以撒的神，雅各的神。」 Then the speaker identified himself: I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
这位神随后给了摩西一个使命，要解救他在埃及被奴役的百姓。 This deity then gave Moses the mission to liberate his enslaved people in Egypt.
当摩西询问这位向他说话的神的名字时，他听到：「我是自有永有的。」 When Moses asked for the name of this divine power who was addressing him, he heard: I am who I am.
摩西问的问题很合理，他想知道这是众多神明中的哪一位。 Moses was asking a reasonable enough question; he was wondering which of the many gods this was.
他知道有这地方和那地方的神明，有山神和河神，有这民族和那民族的神明。 He knew there were gods of this place and that, gods of the mountain, and the river, gods of one people or another.
他得到的答案是革命性的，因为这位神暗示他不是众多 神明中的一位，不是一个可以被限定或定义的存在。 The answer that he received was revolutionary, for this God was implying that He was not one god among many, not a being who could be delimited or defined.
他的名字就是那位自有者。遵循这些启示，公教神学传统的主流 拒绝将神称为一个存在，拒绝将他视为众多事物中的至高者。 His name was simply to be the One Who Is. Following these prompts, the mainstream of the Catholic theological tradition has refused to refer to God as a being, as a supreme thing among many.
相反，它倾向于将神称为存在本身，用托马斯·阿 奎那的拉丁文来说就是Ipsum Esse。 Rather, it tends to refer to God as Being Itself, Ipsum Esse in Thomas Aquinas' Latin.
阿奎那甚至说神不属于任何类别，即使是存在的 类别也不属于，这意味着神是无法被定义的。 Aquinas goes so far as to say that God is not in any genus, even the genus of being, which means that God cannot be defined.
坎特伯雷的圣安瑟伦著名地将神描述为无法想象有比他更大的那一位。 St. Anselm of Canterbury famously described God as that than which nothing greater can be thought.
乍看之下，你会说，好吧，这很简单，神是最高的事物。 At first blush, you say, Well, that's straightforward enough; God is the highest thing.
这个事物，最高的事物，加上世界，会比单独的最高事物更 大，因此，它就不会是无法想象有比他更大的那一位了。 The thing, the highest thing, plus the world, would be greater than the highest thing alone; therefore, it wouldn't be that than which nothing greater can be thought.
虽然这是一个至高的悖论：真正的神加上世界并不比单独的神更大。 Though it's a supreme paradox: the true God plus the world is not greater than God alone.
这一切都引导我们得出这样的结论：我们所有的言 语，所有的概念，都无法完全表达神真实的本质。 All of this conduces to the point where we say all of our words, all of our concepts, fall short of who God really is.
神本质上是奥秘。 God is essentially mystery.
这个词来自希腊语müen，意思是闭口。 That word comes from the Greek word müen, which means to shut the mouth.
二十世纪神学家卡尔·拉纳说，神是我们在陷入沉默之前应该说的最后 一件事，而奥古斯丁很久以前就说过，Si comprehendi s, non est Deus——如果你理解了，那就不是神。 The 20th-century theologian Karl Rahner said, God is the last thing we should say before falling silent, and St. Augustine long ago said, Si comprehendis, non est Deus—If you understand, that isn't God.
我们能够清楚容易理解的事物是我们周围的事物，世界上的事物。 The things that we can understand clearly and easily are the things right around us, things in the world.
所以你在那里，而你不在那边。 So there you are, and you're not over there.
你在那里，而你不是那个人。 There you are, and you're not that person.
通过比较和对照，我理解世界上的事物。 By comparing and contrasting, I understand the things of the world.
如果我说，我在这个地方，你在那里，哦，那里是神 ，这里是我，那里是柱子，不，这不是神的本质。 If I were to say, Here I am in this place, there you are, oh, and there's God, and here I am, and there's the pillar, well, no, that's what God is not.
世界上的一个项目——神不是周围最大的事物，不是你和我，然后还有一些更大的事物。 One of the items in the world—God is not the biggest thing around; it's you and me and then some bigger things.
神不是周围最大的事物。 God is the biggest thing around.
神不是周围最大的事物，神是存在本身。 God isn't the biggest thing around; God is Being.
当然，这要回到摩西的问题：你叫什么名字？ And of course, it goes back to Moses: What's your name?
当百姓问我，我该告诉他们什么？ When the people ask me, What should I tell them?
你叫什么名字？ What's your name?
这是一个常识性的问题：你是谁？ Well, that's a common-sensical question: Who are you?
我该如何定义你？ How do I define you?
神说，「我是自有永有的」，这对摩西来说其实什么也没说。 God says, I am who I am, which tells Moses precisely nothing.
这是在说，别问这些愚蠢的问题，这是个错误的问题。 It's a way of saying, Stop asking me stupid questions; that's the wrong question to ask me.
看，如果我知道你的名字，我就能呼唤你，你就会回应。 See, if I know your name, I can call you, and you respond.
我就能在某种程度上控制你。 I have to that degree control over you.
我可以在电话簿上查找你，可以在网上搜索你， 如果知道你的名字，我就能了解你很多事情。 I can look you up in the phone book; I can look you up on the internet; I can know a lot about you if I know your name.
所以，神啊，你叫什么名字？ So, God, what's your name?
我是自有永有的。 I am who I am.
你无法控制我。 You have no control over me.
因此，神学语言是为属灵生命服务的，这样，它的 目的是在你与神的关系中使你在属灵上得到改变。 So the theological language is in service of the spiritual life; that way, it's meant to change you spiritually in your relation to God.
神是那位我永远无法控制的一位。 God is the One whom I can never control.
在确认神不是一个存在时，我确实避开了偶像崇拜。 In affirming that God is not a being, I've certainly held off idolatry.
但我是否因此让我们陷入了理性的困境，注定只能对神保持沉默？ But have I left us thereby in an intellectual lurch, doomed simply to remain silent about God?
如果神在任何意义上都无法被定义，我们该如何解释大量的神学著作和论证？ If God cannot be in any sense defined, how do we explain the plethora of theological books and arguments?
毕竟，同样是托马斯·阿奎那说神不能被归入任何类别，却也写了数百万字来论述神。 After all, the same Thomas Aquinas who said that God cannot be placed in any genus also wrote millions of words about God.
出埃及记第三十三章为我们解决这个困境提供了线索。 The 33rd chapter of the Book of Exodus gives us a clue as to the resolution of this dilemma.
摩西热切地请求神向他显示他的荣耀，耶和华应允了。 Moses passionately asks God to reveal His glory to him, and Yahweh acquiesces.
主说：「我要显我一切的恩慈，在你面前经过，只 是不能看见我的面，因为人见我的面不能存活。」 The Lord specifies, saying, I will make all my goodness pass before you, but you cannot see my face, for no one shall see me and live.
神然后告诉摩西，当他的荣耀经过时，神要将他的仆人放在磐石穴中，遮住摩西的眼睛。 God then tells Moses that while the divine glory passes by, God will place His servant in the cleft of a rock and cover Moses' eyes.
他说，只有这样，在今生才能看见神，但只能通过他的受造物和作为间接地看见。 Only then, He says, can God indeed be seen in this life, but only indirectly through His creatures and effects.
我们可以理解他，但只能是间接地，仿佛从眼角瞥见他一样。 We can understand Him, but only obliquely, glimpsing Him, as it were, out of the corners of our eyes.
我们看见他的背影，就如它在他所造的世界的美丽、可理解性和偶然性中显明一样。 We see His back as it's disclosed in the beauty, the intelligibility, and the contingency of the world that He’s made.
我第一次接触托马斯·阿奎那关于神存在的论证是在14岁时，这个经历改变了我的生命。 I first encountered Thomas Aquinas' arguments for God's existence when I was 14, and the experience changed my life.
它给了我对神实在性的认识，这认识我从未失去过。 It gave me a sense of the reality of God that I have never lost.
托马斯在罗马道明会圣萨比娜修道院时，制定了这五个关于神存在的论证。 Thomas formulated those five arguments for God's existence when he was here at the Dominican Convent of Santa Sabina in Rome.
他们说托马斯在深思时会在这个修道院回廊快速地走动。 They say that Thomas would walk at high speed around this cloister when he was deep in thought.
他给了我们五个论证，我只展开其中一个，我认为是最根本、最基础的一个。 He gave us five arguments; I'll just develop one of them, the one I think is the most fundamental, the most basic.
这被称为偶然性论证。 It's called the Argument from Contingency.
这是我们日常经验中的一部分。 It is something that’s really part of our very ordinary experience.
它指出了事物产生又消逝的事实。 It names the fact that things come into being and they pass out of being.
想一想一朵雄伟的夏日云彩，在慵懒的八月午后升起又消散。 Think for a second of a great majestic summer cloud that billows up and then fades away in the course of a lazy August afternoon.
它出现，然后又以一种转瞬即逝的方式消失。 It comes into being and then, in a very evanescent way, it passes out of being.
现在想想所有生长又枯萎凋零的花草。 Now think of all the plants and flowers that have grown up and then withered and faded.
想想所有来过又离去的人。 Think of all the human beings who have come and gone.
诗篇九十篇说：「求你指教我们怎样数算自己的日子，好叫 我们得着智慧的心。我们早晨发芽生长，晚上割下枯干。」 Psalm 90 says, Lord, teach us to remember the shortness of our lives, that we're like grass that grows in the morning and by evening withers and fades.
这诗篇说我们的生命如叹息一般结束。 The psalm says our lives are over like a sigh.
即使是那些看似永恒的事物——想想落基山脉这样的大山脉。 Even those things that seem so permanent—think of a great mountain range like the Rocky Mountains.
如果我们有一台延时摄影机，能够拍摄数百万年来落基山脉的形 成、持续存在很长时间，然后被侵蚀的过程，当我们加速播放这 段影片时，落基山脉看起来就会像那转瞬即逝的夏日云彩一样。 If we had over the many eons and millennia a time-lapse camera that could film the emergence of the Rocky Mountains, their endurance for a long period of time, and then their erosion, and then we sped up that film, the Rocky Mountains would look for all the world like that fleeting summer cloud.
这就是托马斯论证的起点：事物产生又消逝。 Well, that's the starting point of Thomas' proof: things come into being and they pass out of being.
这是有含义的。 And this means something.
这意味着它们本身并不包含自己存在的理由，我们必须诉诸外在原因来解释它们。 It means they don't carry within themselves the reasons for their own existence; we have to explain them by appeal to an extrinsic cause.
所以回到那朵夏日的云彩。 So go back to that summer cloud.
你说，是什么导致它的存在？ You say, Well, what causes it to be?
哦，你提到空气中的水分，你提到风，你提到大气，就这些来说都很合理。 Oh, you mention the moisture in the air, you mention the wind, you mention the atmosphere, and that's fair enough as far as it goes.
但正如任何气象学家都会告诉你的，这些东西也是偶然的，它们也会产生和消逝。 But as any meteorologist will tell you, those things too are contingent; they come into being and pass away.
所以你进一步说，好吧，它们是由急流造成的，而急流是由行星运动造成的。 So you go a step further and you say, Well, they're caused by the jet stream, which is caused by the movement of the planet.
哦，但是行星本身也是偶然的。 Oh, but the planet itself is contingent.
科学家告诉我们它形成于四十亿年前，它也终将消逝。 Scientists tell us it came into being four billion years ago, and it too will one day pass away.
好吧，再进一步：行星是由太阳系内、银河系内的事件造成的。 Okay, another step: the planet's caused by events within the solar system, within the galaxy.
但这些也在变化，产生又消逝。 But those too change, coming into being and passing out of being.
于是你说，好吧，它们都基于宇宙的伟大结构。 So you say, Okay, they're all grounded in the great structures of the universe.
科学家告诉我们，宇宙本身是在一百三十亿年前通过大爆炸形成的。 Scientists have told us the universe itself came into being 13 billion years ago through the Big Bang.
关键在于：我们仍然没有解释那朵夏日云彩存在的原因。 Here’s the point: we have still not explained the existence of that summer cloud.
阿奎那的结论是，如果我们要避免无限回溯（这最终什么也解 释不了），我们必须最终达到某个通过自身而存在的实在。 Aquinas concludes that if we are to avoid an infinite regress, which finally explains nothing at all, we must come finally to some reality which exists through itself.
我们必须最终达到某个必然存在者，其本质就是存在。 We must come finally to some necessary being whose very nature it is to be.
他说，这就是人们所说的神。 This, he says, is what people mean by God.
然后他建立这个联系：记住这个证明，再想想摩西问神时得到的回答。 Then he makes this connection: keep that proof in mind, and then remember the answer that Moses got when he asked God.
如果他们问你的名字，我该告诉他们什么？ If they ask for your name, what will I tell them?
主回答说：「我是自有永有的。」 And the Lord responded, I am who I am.
在托马斯的理解中，神说的不是众多存在中的一个，不是众多 偶然实在中的一个，而是说，我是那位本质就是存在的一位。 Not one being among many, not one contingent reality among many, but God says, on Thomas' reading, I am the one whose very nature it is to be.
这就是基督徒所说的神的含义。 This is what Christians mean by God.
1968年，一位名叫约瑟夫·拉青格的年轻德国神学教授（ 后来成为本笃十六世）写了一本名为《基督教入门》的书。 In 1968, a young German theology professor named Josef Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, wrote a book entitled Introduction to Christianity.
在这本书中，拉青格提出了一个精妙的神存在的论证，我认为 这个论证在宗教和科学经常被对立起来的今天特别有意义。 In the course of that book, Ratzinger formulated a neat argument for God's existence, one that I believe is especially relevant to our time when religion and science are so often set in opposition to each other.
拉青格从这样的观察开始：我们所经历的有限存在，完全具有可 理解性的特征，有一种形式结构使其能够被探究的心智所认知。 Ratzinger begins with the observation that finite being, as we experience it, is marked through and through by intelligibility, by a formal structure that makes it capable of being known by an inquiring mind.
中世纪有一句格言：存在是可知的。 The medievals had a dictum: Being is knowable.
事实上，除非实践者相信这个奥秘的原则，否则任何科学都无法起步。 In point of fact, no science would ever get off the ground unless its practitioners believe this mystical principle.
如果心理学家不认为心灵具有可理解性，他怎么能有信心去研究心灵呢？ How could a psychologist go out to meet the psyche with confidence unless he thought it was marked by intelligibility?
如果物理学家不确信物理世界完全是可知的，他怎么能去研究物理世界呢？ How could the physicist go out to meet the physical world unless he was convinced that, through and through, it is knowable?
我不知道还有什么地方比坐落在亚利桑那州图森市外 高山上的梵蒂冈天文台更能体现宗教与科学的和谐。 I know no other place on Earth that better exemplifies the harmony of religion and science than the Vatican Observatory, perched on a high mountain outside of Tucson, Arizona.
现在，拉青格论证说，对这种普遍客观可理解性的唯一令人满意的 解释，就是某种伟大的主观智慧，某个将宇宙思考成存在的心智。 Now, Ratzinger argues that the only finally satisfying explanation for this universal objective intelligibility is some great subjective intelligence, some mind that has thought the universe into being.
我们的语言在这方面给了我们一个很有趣的线索，因为我们把认知行为 称为再认识——重新认知，字面意思是重新思考已经被思考过的东西。 Our language gives us a rather intriguing clue in this regard, for we speak of our acts of knowledge as moments of recognition—re-cognition, literally thinking again what has already been thought.
拉青格引用爱因斯坦本人的话来支持这个命题。 Ratzinger cites Einstein himself in support of this proposition.
这位伟大的科学家说，在约翰福音的序言中：约翰说他 用的希腊词是Logos，这也可以被翻译为心智。 The great scientist said in the prologue to his Gospel: St. John says his Greek term is Logos, which could just as well be translated as Mind.
他然后指出，万物是通过这个心智而造的。 He then specifies that through this Mind, all things came to be.
他由此暗示宇宙不是盲目地存在，而是智慧地存 在，是被一个伟大的创造性心智说出而存在的。 He implies thereby that the universe is not dumbly there; it's intelligently there, having been spoken into being by a great creative mind.
约瑟夫·拉青格提出的论证不过是这个伟大启示的具体说明。 The argument offered by Joseph Ratzinger is but a specification of this great revelation.
圣经不是科学书籍，而是神学和灵性的书籍。 The Bible is not a book of science; it's a book of theology and spirituality.
所以它在这种宇宙创造的叙事中讲述了一个伟大的宗教真理，就是神创造了整个宇宙。 So it’s telling, in this sort of cosmological myth, a great religious truth, which is that God creates the whole universe.
一切存在都来自神——这是圣经的观念。 All being comes from God—that's the biblical idea.
现在，具体是如何发生的，细节是什么，我不会过多地看圣经，而是会看科学来解释。 Now, how that happened precisely, what the details of it are, I won’t look to the Bible so much; I'll look to science to explain it.
关于大爆炸有一点很有趣。 Here’s something about the Big Bang that’s interesting.
托马斯·阿奎那是一位非常诚实的哲学家。 Thomas Aquinas was a very honest philosopher.
他说：「看，我无法从哲学上证明世界在时间中有一 个开始，」所以他找到了其他证明来论证神的存在。 He said, “Look, I can’t prove philosophically that the world had a beginning in time,” and so he found other proofs to get to the existence of God.
如果他知道我们所知道的，他会说证明神存在简单得很，因为一旦他说：「嘿 ，整个世界是在一次大爆炸中产生的，」那么，它必定有一个外在的原因。 If he had known what we know, he’d say it’s as easy as pie proving that God exists, because once he said, “Hey, the whole world came into being in one Big Bang,” well, it must have had a cause outside of itself.
但他非常诚实，在十三世纪时他说：「我不知道。」 But he was so honest; he said, “I don’t know” that in the 13th century.
如果他知道我们现在所知道的，这就容易多了。 If he knew what we know now, it would have been much easier.
所以我在这里引用它来支持他的证明，但实际上，这使得为他所说的辩护更容易了。 So I invoke it there to support his proof, but actually, that makes it easier to defend what he was saying.
如果我们查考亚当和夏娃的故事，我们会发现其中揭示了一 个最基本的属灵动态：罪人要么试图抓住神，要么逃避他。 If we consult the story of Adam and Eve, we find revealed one of the most fundamental spiritual dynamics: the tendency of the sinner either to grasp at God or to flee from Him.
让我先考虑这种抓取的倾向。 Let me consider that grasping tendency first.
在创世记的象征性语言中，分别善恶树代表了神独特的特权。 The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, in the symbolic language of Genesis, stands for that unique prerogative of God.
既然神自己是道德的根基，因此，当亚当和夏娃抓取那树上的果 子时，从象征意义上说，他们是在试图支配神，控制和操纵他。 Since God is Himself the ground of morality, therefore, when Adam and Eve grasp at the fruit of that tree, they are, symbolically speaking, attempting to dominate God, to control and manipulate Him.
神是无限的、无界的、浩大的，这就意味着神不能用我们普通的范畴来衡量。 God is infinite, unbounded, immense; it just means that God can’t be measured by our ordinary categories.
我们说神是永恒的，这只是意味着他在时间之外。 We say that God is eternal; it just means that He’s outside of time.
我们说神是非物质的、不变的，这意味着他与我们所见的任何物质和可变的事物都不一样。 We say that God is immaterial, immutable; it means He’s not like any of the material and changeable things that we see.
神是什么？ What is God?
我们真的不知道。 We really don’t know.
托马斯·阿奎那说，在今生，我们不知道神是什么，我们只知道神不是什么。 Thomas Aquinas said that in this life, we don’t know what God is; we know what God is not.
我一直在使用的这些词语都表明神的超越性，神的不同性。 All these terms I’ve been using signal the divine transcendence, the otherness of God.
它们都是在告诉我们：「不要抓取。」 They’re all ways of saying to us, “Don’t grasp.”
你看到我身后的科隆大教堂吗？ You see the great Cologne Cathedral behind me?
通过它的巨大规模和所有向上延伸的线条，整个 建筑都在诉说着神的超越性，神的根本不同性。 With its sheer immensity and all those upward-thrusting lines, the whole building is speaking of God's transcendence, God's radical otherness.
但如果我们片面强调神的超越性，我们就会陷入另一个属 灵的陷阱，在这里亚当和夏娃的故事再次具有教导意义。 But if we one-sidedly emphasize the transcendence of God, we can fall into another spiritual trap, and here again the story of Adam and Eve is instructive.
当他们试图抓住神的企图失败后，亚当和夏娃就躲避神，把自己藏在伊甸园的灌木丛中。 Once they were foiled in their attempt to grasp at God, Adam and Eve hid from God, hiding themselves in the underbrush of Eden.
但是，当然，神立刻发现了他们。 But, of course, God discovers them immediately.
关键是这样的：存在本身——神——是无法被抓住的，但同 时，存在本身也无法躲避神，他渗透到他所造的一切角落。 The point is this: Being itself—God—cannot be grasped, but at the same time, Being itself cannot be hidden from God; He insinuates Himself into every nook and cranny of what He’s made.
诗篇一百三十九篇是这样说的：「耶和华啊，你已经鉴察我，认识我。」 Psalm 139 puts it this way: Lord, you search me, and you know me.
「我坐下，我起来，你都晓得，你从远处知道我的意念。」 You know my resting and my rising; you discern my purpose from afar.
神知道我们的一切。 God knows everything about us.
同样这座科隆大教堂，它不仅雄辩地诉说着神的超越性，也诉说着神的临在性。 The same Cologne Cathedral that spoke so eloquently of the transcendence of God speaks as well of the imminence of God.
我们看到植物、动物、树木、人类、天使和魔鬼——自然界和超自然界。 We see plants and animals and trees and people and angels and devils—the natural and the supernatural.
神是他所有创造的根基和指引。 God grounds and informs all of His creation.
神与世界同在。 God is imminent to the world.
因此，同样这位在其超越性中无法被抓住的神，在其临在性中也无法向我们隐藏。 Therefore, the same God who cannot be grasped in His transcendence, in His imminence, cannot be hidden from us.
因此，神学传统用另一组词来表示神这种无法避免的特质。 So the theological tradition uses another set of words to designate this unavoidable quality of God.
比如，它谈到神的全能。 It speaks, for instance, of God's omnipotence.
这并不是说神是周围最强大的存在，而是说神以无条件的能力临到他所造的一切。 This doesn’t mean that God is the strongest being around; it means that God presses upon everything He’s made with unconditioned power.
它谈到神的全知。 It speaks of God's omniscience.
这并不是说神是周围最聪明的存在，而是说神以知识 使万物存在，因此他的知识先于并决定一切存在。 This doesn’t mean that God is the smartest being around; it means that God has known everything into being, and therefore that His knowing precedes and determines all that is.
它谈到神的无所不在。 It speaks of God's omnipresence.
这并不是说神像《星球大战》中的原力那样是一种包罗万象的能量 ，而是说神支撑着所有有限的实在，因此无可避免地临在其中。 This doesn’t mean that God is an all-enveloping energy like the Force in Star Wars; it means that God stands under all finite reality and is hence inescapably present to it.
就像歌中所说，神如此之高你无法越过，如此之低你无法钻过，如此之广你无法绕过。 God is, as the song says, so high you can't get over Him, so low you can't get under Him, so wide you can't get around Him.
我们应该停止试图抓住神，停止试图逃避他。 We should stop trying to grasp at God, stop trying to flee from Him.
我们应该爱上他。 We should fall in love with Him.
你知道，无论宇宙多么美好——它确实很奇妙——它都会消逝。 You know, no matter how good the universe is—and it is wonderful—it fades away.
自然和文化中所有美好、真实和美丽的事物都会来去。 All that's good and true and beautiful within nature and culture comes and goes.
我的意思是，即使这个伟大的地方已经存在很久了，自然界中所有荣耀的事物都会消逝。 I mean, even this great place has been around for a long time; everything glorious in nature fades away.
所以当人们相信有一位真正永恒的神，他创造了这一切，这一切都反映他却不 会消逝时，奥古斯丁可以说，唯有在神里面我的灵魂才得安息，因为我们的灵 魂在寻求那永恒的安全和永恒的满足，而在这地上的任何事物中都无法得到。 So when the belief came along that there is a God who is truly eternal, who made all these things, and that all these things reflect Him but do not fade away, St. Augustine can say, Only in God is my soul at rest, because our souls are looking for that eternal safety and that eternal satisfaction, and they won’t get it in anything here below.
圣经中最基本的观念之一就是神是万物的创造者。 One of the most fundamental ideas in the Bible is that God is the creator of all things.
你在基督教会最早的信经中就能看到这一点：我们信独一的神，全能的父，创造天地的主。 You find it reflected in the earliest creeds of the Christian Church: We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, the maker of heaven and earth.
如果神就是存在本身的纯粹行动，那么除神之外存在的任何事物必定完全来自神。 If God is the sheer act of being itself, then anything else that exists apart from God must have come in its entirety from God.
我想把这个观点与你在古代哲学和神话中所见的作一个对比。 I’d like to contrast this view with what you find in the ancient philosophies and mythologies.
在那里，你看到神或众神塑造预先存在的物质，或 通过力量将他们的意志强加于某个对立的力量。 There, you see God or the gods shaping pre-existent matter or imposing their will through power on some rival force.
但在基督教神学中没有这些。 But there’s none of this in Christian theology.
我们说神从无创造世界。 We say that God creates the world ex nihilo—from nothing.
这意味着神不是将他的意志强加于某个对立的力量，神也不是通过搏斗使某个对手屈服。 That means that God does not impose His will on some rival power; God does not wrestle some opponent into submission.
相反，神通过一个纯粹慷慨、非暴力的爱的行动，使万物产生。 Rather, through a sheerly generous, non-violent act of love, God gives rise to all things.
这也意味着创造不仅仅是遥远过去的一个事件，而是正在发生的事。 This also means that creation is not simply an event in the distant past; rather, creation is happening now.
托马斯·阿奎那谈到持续创造。 Thomas Aquinas talks about creatio continua, continual creation.
这暗示被造物与神的关系，与其说是拥有，不如说被造物本身就是与神的关系。 It implies that creatures don't so much have a relationship to God; rather, creatures are a relationship to God.
这就是为什么艾克哈特大师说，属灵生活与其说是攀 登山峰去寻找遥远的神，不如说是沉浸于神之中。 That’s why Meister Eckhart said that the spiritual life is not so much climbing the mountain to the distant God as sinking into God.
创造的教义也暗示了万物的相互联系。 The doctrine of creation also implies the interconnectedness of all things.
当我找到我最深的中心——那个此时此地我正被神创造的地方— —我也必然找到了宇宙中其他每个人和每件事物最深的中心。 When I find my deepest center—that place in me where I am here and now, being created by God—I’ve also necessarily found the deepest center of everyone else and everything else in the cosmos.
每个其他人都是我在本体论上的兄弟姐妹。 Every other human being is my ontological sibling.
事实上，根据创造的教义，我可以大胆地像亚西 西的圣方济各一样谈论太阳兄弟和月亮姐妹。 In fact, in light of the doctrine of creation, I can make bold to speak with St. Francis of Assisi of Brother Sun and Sister Moon.
现在，这位持续创造宇宙、以最亲密的方式临在于万物的神，必须被描述为有预见的。 Now, this God who is continually making the universe, who is present to all things in the most intimate way, must be described as provident.
神不是一个遥远的自然神论力量，给宇宙的钟表上发条后就退休了。 God is not a distant Deist force who wound up the clockwork of the universe and then retired.
不，用智慧书的话说，神有力地从这一端伸展到那一端，温和地安排万物。 No, God, in the language of the Book of Wisdom, stretches from end to end mightily and orders all things sweetly.
神按照他的旨意推动、牵引、吸引他的宇宙，就像艺术家按照他的设计塑造他的材料一样。 God is pushing, pulling, drawing His universe according to His purposes, much as an artist shapes his material according to his design.
这有助于解释为什么世界仍然有一种未完成的特质。 This helps to explain why there’s still a kind of unfinished quality to the world.
宇宙就像一个艺术家的工作室。 The universe is like an artist’s studio.
神从无创造的行为是非暴力的，他不是在操纵什么，不是在支配什么。 God’s creation from nothing is non-violent; He’s not manipulating something, not dominating something.
他从无中创造世界。 He makes the world from nothing.
圣经现在将其描绘为一个纯粹慷慨的言语行动：「要有光」，就有了光。 The Bible depicts that now as a sheerly generous act of speech: Let there be light, and there was light.
这表达了创造的非暴力、非干预的特质这一观念。 It’s getting at that idea of the non-violence, the non-interventionist quality of creation.
你看，这在各个方面都有深远的含义。 And see, that has overtones all across the board.
神如何供应这个世界？ How does God provide for the world?
神如何指引和治理这个世界？ How does God direct and govern the world?
不是通过干预，不是通过对事物的强制操纵，而是如圣经所说 ，总是温和地——神温和地、间接地、非暴力地安排万物。 Not so much through intervention, not so much through an aggressive manipulation of things, but always sweetly, as the Bible says—God orders all things sweetly, indirectly, non-violently.
现在把这与耶稣关于非暴力的教导联系起来。 Now link it up to Jesus' teaching about non-violence.
我们说，好吧，是的，那是——我想，你知道，如 果你生活在一个幻想世界里，你可以那样生活。 We say, Well, yeah, that's— I guess, you know, if you're living in a fantasy world, you can live that way.
他所说的是要以一种使你接触到现实最深层次的方式生活。 What He’s saying is live your life in a way that puts you in touch with the deepest level of reality.
在最深的层次上，你会发现非暴力，所以你应该那样生活。 At the deepest level, you find non-violence, so you ought to live that way.
所以这一切总是一体的——创造的教义、护理的教义和耶稣的道德教导。 So it always is of a piece—there’s the doctrine of creation, the doctrine of providence, and the moral teaching of Jesus.
我意识到即使是那些跟随我论证逻辑的人，即使是那些倾向于相 信有一位护理的神存在的人，仍然会在邪恶的问题上犹豫不决。 I realize that even those who are following the logic of my argument, even those predisposed to believe in the existence of a provident God, still balk at the problem of evil.
如果神存在，为什么世界上会有这么多邪恶？ If God exists, how could there be so much evil in the world?
十九世纪英国哲学家约翰·斯图尔特·密尔这样表述这个反对意见：如果神 像古典基督教神学所说的那样是全知、全能和全善的，就不应该有邪恶。 The 19th-century British philosopher John Stuart Mill formulated the objection this way: If God is, as classical Christian theology says, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, there should be no evil.
如果他是全知的，他就会知道；如果他是全能的，他就 能做些什么；如果他是全善的，他就会想做些什么。 If He’s omniscient, He’d know about it; if He’s omnipotent, He could do something about it; and if He’s omnibenevolent, He’d want to do something about it.
因此，如果有邪恶存在，这样的神就不可能存在。 Therefore, if there’s evil, such a God cannot exist.
在十三世纪，圣托马斯·阿奎那更简洁地表述了这个反对意见。 In the 13th century, St. Thomas Aquinas formulated the objection even more pithily.
托马斯说：「如果两个对立面中的一个是无限的，另一个就会完全被消灭。 Thomas said, “If one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed.
但神被称为无限的善；因此，如果神存在，就不应该有邪恶。 But God is called the infinite good; therefore, if God exists, there should be no evil.
但是有邪恶存在；因此，就没有神。 But there is evil; therefore, there’s no God.”
这些都是有力的论证。 Powerful arguments, those.
我不知道在地球上还有什么地方比在奥斯维辛集中营更能感受到这些论证的力量。 I don’t know any place on the face of the Earth where the force of them is felt more than here at the Auschwitz concentration camp.
如果存在一位全善、全知、护理的创造主神，你要如何开始解释这里发生的事？ If an all-good, all-knowing, provident creator God exists, how do you begin to explain what happened here?
这是所有神学问题中最难、最令人烦恼和最令人困惑的。 This is the hardest, most vexing, and puzzling theological question of all.
我们给出的任何答案必然都是不充分的，但至少我们可以朝着答案的方向作出一些提示。 Any answer we give will necessarily be inadequate, but at least we can perhaps gesture in the direction of an answer.
第一个观察是：从严格意义上说，邪恶并不存在，因为它总是一种缺失 ，是应该存在的东西的缺乏——就像牙齿中的蛀洞或损害器官的癌症。 The first observation to make is this: evil, in the strict sense, does not exist, for it is always a deprivation, a lack of what ought to be there—like a cavity in a tooth or a cancer compromising an organ.
因此，我们永远不应该说神创造了邪恶，也永远不应该把邪恶看作是与神对抗的积极力量。 Therefore, we should never speak of God as creating evil, and we should never think of evil as a positive force opposing God.
但这只是暂时推迟了问题：为什么神允许邪恶存在于他的创造中？ But this just postpones the question a bit: why does God permit evil in His creation?
奥古斯丁、阿奎那和他们的大批追随者阐述的经 典答案是，神允许邪恶是为了带来更大的善。 The classical answer, articulated by Augustine, Aquinas, and a whole army of their followers, is that God permits evil so as to bring about a greater good.
我们都时不时经历过这种情况；某些大灾难——疾病、失败、失去所爱 的人——随着时间的推移带来了一些用其他方式永远不会出现的善。 We all have experienced this from time to time; some great calamity—an illness, a failure, the loss of a loved one—results over time in some good that would never have come about in another way.
我们有时感觉成长来自痛苦，但面对真正深重的邪恶——我 们在这里感受到的那种——这种解释是否显得有点肤浅？ We sometimes sense that growth comes through pain, but in the presence of truly profound evil—the kind that we sense here—doesn't that explanation seem a tad facile?
圣经理解这一点。 Well, the Bible understands this.
看看约伯记。 Look at the Book of Job.
约伯一下子失去了他所珍视的一切和所有人。 In one fell swoop, Job loses everything and everyone dear to him.
他失去了财富、生计、家人和健康。 He loses wealth, livelihood, family, and health.
七天里，他郁郁寡欢地坐在灰堆上哀悼。 For seven days, he sits in sullen mourning on an ash heap.
三个朋友来和他一起坐着，但最后，这些朋友开口说话，他们表达了我们 大多数人会认为很合情理的论点：约伯，你一定做了什么得罪神的事。 He’s joined by three friends who sit with him, but finally, the friends speak, and they articulate what most of us would take to be a pretty commonsensical argument: Job, you must have done something to offend God.
约伯啊，你这可怕的苦难一定是你犯罪的结果。 Somehow, Job, this terrible suffering of yours must be the result of your sin.
但约伯知道自己是正直的，所以他抗议。 But Job knows he’s righteous, and so he protests.
最终，他打发走了三个朋友，然后，在圣经中最戏剧性的场景之 一中，他把神叫到被告席上，质问神为什么允许他这样受苦。 Eventually, he dismisses the three friends, and then, in one of the most dramatic scenes in the Bible, he calls God into the dock, challenging God to explain why He has allowed him to suffer this way.
在这里，约伯为所有经历不应得苦难的人说话。 Here, Job speaks for anyone who’s gone through undeserved suffering.
第三十八章记载了神的回应。 Chapter 38 features God’s response.
那时耶和华从旋风中回答约伯说：「谁用无知的言语使我的旨意暗昧不明？」 Then the Lord addressed Job out of the storm and said, Who is this that obscures divine plans with words of ignorance?
「你要如勇士束腰，我问你，你可以指示我。」 Gird up your loins now like a man; I will question you, and you will give me the answers.
「我立大地根基的时候，你在哪里呢？」 Where were you when I founded the earth?
「你若有聪明，只管说吧。」 Tell me, if you have understanding.
「你若晓得就说，是谁定地的尺度？」 Who determined its size?
「你知道吗？」 Do you know?
「你自生以来，曾命定晨光，使清晨的日光知道本位吗？」 Have you ever in your lifetime commanded the morning or shown the dawn its place?
「你曾进到海源，或在深渊的底下行走吗？」 Have you entered into the sources of the sea and walked about in the depths of the abyss?
神继续不断地带领约伯游览宇宙，让他认识到宇 宙无限的奥秘，以及其中所有的谜题和异常。 God goes on and on, taking Job on a great tour of the cosmos, acquainting him with its infinite mysteriousness, with all of its puzzles and anomalies.
这暗示神是一位艺术家，他的画布是所有的空间和所有的时间。 The implication is that God is an artist and that His canvas is all of space and all of time.
神正在创作一个极其复杂的作品，明暗交织形成的图案，原则上我们甚至无法开始看懂。 God is producing a work of extraordinary complexity, the darks and lights coming together to form patterns that we, in principle, couldn’t even begin to see.
在我身后是乔治·修拉的点彩派杰作《大碗岛的星期天下午》。 Behind me is Georges Seurat's great pointillist masterpiece, Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte.
据说修拉画这幅画时，坐在高凳上，用长画笔小心翼翼地一点一点地涂上颜色。 They say that when Seurat painted this picture, he sat on a high stool and carefully applied the colors point by point with long brushes.
如果你把鼻子贴在这幅画上看，你只能看到一些色块。 If you look at this picture with your nose pressed against it, all you’ll see are a few blotches.
但如果你退后一步，你就开始看到这些点是如何形成图案的。 But if you step back, you begin to see how the points have formed themselves into patterns.
然后，当你退得更远时，你会看到这些图案是如何组合成人物和群组的。 Then, as you step back even further, you see how those patterns have arranged themselves into figures and groups.
当你站在房间的后面时，你可以看到整幅画；你看到所有这些色点 ，所有的明暗，是如何组合成一幅令人惊叹的和谐有序的构图。 When you stand now at the back of the room, you take in the entire picture; you see how all of those points of color, all the light and darkness, have arranged themselves into a composition of stunning harmony and order.
神是一位艺术家。 God is an artist.
但当我们看着我们这一小片时空中神的创造时，我们看到了什么？ But what do we see in God’s creation as we look at our little swath of space and time?
只是一些色块，也许有一些图案的暗示。 Just a few blotches, perhaps a hint of patterns.
只有当我们从神自己的视角来观察创造时，我们才能看到自然和 历史中的所有点，所有的明暗，是如何组合成伟大的图案的。 It’s only when we survey creation from the vantage point of God Himself that we can see how all of the points of nature and history, all the darks and lights, have arranged themselves into the great pattern.
我可以沿着这些思路提出另一个类比。 I might propose another analogy along these lines.
美国哲学家威廉·詹姆斯讲述了一个关于他的图书馆和他的狗的故事。 The American philosopher William James told the story about his library and his dog.
詹姆斯说，他的狗每天结束时都会进入主人的书房。 James said that his dog would come into his master's study at the end of the day.
它会环顾四周，看到一切：书架上的书，桌子上的文件，角落里的地球仪。 He'd look around and see everything: the books on the shelves, the papers on the desk, the globe in the corner.
詹姆斯意识到，虽然狗看到了一切，但它几乎什么都不理解。 It occurred to James that though the dog saw everything, he understood almost none of it.
如果他的主人试图向它解释——所有那些书，或者那些页面的集合，上面是代 表词语的符号，而这些词语又表示着思想；那个地球仪，是我们共同生活的这 个在太空中飞驰的星球的象征性表示——好吧，狗会完全不理解地看着他。 And if his master had tried to explain it to him—all those books, or collections of pages on which are symbols of words that in turn signify ideas; that globe, that's a symbolic representation of the planet that we both live on, that's hurtling through space—well, the dog would have looked at him with perfect incomprehension.
威廉·詹姆斯随即意识到：我们对于那个安排和治理宇宙的伟大智慧也是如此。 It then occurred to William James: so are we vis-à-vis that great intelligence that orders and governs the universe.
虽然我们看到一切，但我们理解的很少。 Though we see everything, we understand very little of it.
而且考虑到我们心智的局限性，神甚至原则上都无法开始向我们解释。 And given the limited capacity of our minds, God could not even in principle begin to explain it to us.
还是不满意吗？ Still unsatisfied?
很好。 Good.
虽然所有这些图像、观点和见解都很有启发性，但最终都无法解 决如何调和一位慈爱的神与一个充满巨大残酷的宇宙这个问题。 Though all these images, perspectives, and insights are illuminating, none finally solves the problem of reconciling a loving God and a universe marked by great cruelty.
对基督信仰来说，这个困境唯一充分的解决方案是神自己在耶稣基督的十字架上所实现的。 For the Christian faith, the only adequate resolution of this dilemma is the one affected by God Himself on the cross of Jesus Christ.
在那十字架上，人类处境的黑暗遇见了神爱的完全，并发现自己被转变为生命。 On that cross, the darkness of the human condition met the fullness of divine love and found itself transfigured into life.
在那十字架上，神走到了被神弃绝的极限，使死亡本身也成为了希望之地。 On that cross, God went to the limits of god-forsakenness and made even death itself a place of hope.
谢谢。 Thank you.
到目前为止，我所说的关于神的几乎一切都可能得到虔 诚的犹太教徒或穆斯林——独一神的信徒——的认同。 Thus far, almost everything I’ve said about God could be echoed by a faithful Jew or Muslim, believers in the one God.
那么是什么使基督教的神论具有独特性呢？ So what is it that makes the Christian doctrine of God distinctive?
答案在于我们每次画十字圣号时呼求的三个位格：圣父、圣子和圣灵。 The answer is given every time we make the sign of the cross when we invoke the three divine persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
神是一，但神不是单一的一。 God is one, but God is not monolithically one.
相反，在他的合一中，他是一个共融，一个爱的家庭。 Rather, in His unity, He’s a communion, a family of love.
这个教义从何而来？ Where did this doctrine come from?
像往常一样，试金石是耶稣。 As usual, the touchstone is Jesus.
耶稣始终称自己是被父所差遣的。 Jesus consistently referred to Himself as one who was sent by the Father.
在这方面，他似乎与亚伯拉罕、摩西或以赛亚没有什么不同。 Well, in this regard, He would seem little different than, say, Abraham or Moses or Isaiah.
但耶稣有一些完全独特的地方，使他与那些人物不同。 But there was something altogether unique about Jesus, something that set Him apart from those figures.
他以神的身份说话和行事；因此，耶稣是被他承 认为神的另一位所差遣的，而他自己也是神。 He spoke and acted in the very person of God; therefore, Jesus was sent by another whom He acknowledges as divine, and yet He Himself was divine.
此外，耶稣应许他和他的父会差遣另一位保惠师，一位引导教会进入一切真理的灵。 Moreover, Jesus promised that He and His Father would send another Advocate, a Spirit who would lead the Church into the fullness of truth.
正是这位神的灵在五旬节降临教会，并维系着早期基督徒团体。 It was this divine Spirit who invaded the Church at Pentecost and who sustained the early Christian community.
最早的基督徒都是犹太人，受过以色列严格的一神论训练。 The very first Christians were all Jews, trained in the strict monotheism of Israel.
他们都热切持守申命记第六章的伟大示玛宣告：「 以色列啊，你要听，耶和华我们神是独一的主。」 They all held passionately to the great Shema declaration from the 6th chapter of Deuteronomy: Hear, O Israel: The Lord your God is Lord alone.
然而他们知道这位独一的神通过耶稣和圣灵启示了新的事。 And yet they knew that the one God had revealed something new through Jesus and the Spirit.
信仰的先驱中没有人比圣约翰更简洁地总结了这个新 事，他在他的第一封书信中简单地说，神就是爱。 None of the pioneers of the faith summed up this novelty more succinctly than St. John, who in his first letter said simply, God is love.
他不是在维护神有爱或爱是神的属性之一这个命题，而是在说爱道出了神的本质。 He wasn’t defending the proposition that God has love or that love is one of God's attributes; rather, he was saying that love names the very essence of God.
这意味着神在他自己的生命中必定是爱者（圣父）、被爱者（ 圣子）和共享之爱（圣灵）的互动。因此，圣经留给伟大传统 的是一个张力，一个困境：如何调和示玛与神就是爱的宣称？ This means that God must be in His own life a play of lover (the Father), beloved (the Son), and shared love (the Holy Spirit). What the Bible bequeathed to the great tradition, therefore, was a tension, a dilemma: how to reconcile the Shema with the claim that God is love?
嗯，教会历史上一些最伟大的思想家花了几个世纪才理清这个关系。 Well, it took several centuries for some of the greatest minds in the history of the Church to work out that relationship.
大约在公元400年，有史以来最伟大的天才之一，希波的圣 奥古斯丁写了一部关于三位一体的伟大著作《论三位一体》。 Around the year 400, one of the greatest geniuses who ever lived, Saint Augustine of Hippo, wrote a great text called De Trinitate about the Trinity.
在这部论著的第九卷中，奥古斯丁为三位一体提出了一个引人入胜的类比。 In the ninth book of that treatise, Augustine proposed a fascinating analogy for the Trinity.
他从创世记中知道我们人类被独特地按照神的形象和样式造的。 He knew from the Book of Genesis that we human beings have been made uniquely in the image and likeness of God.
我们的独特之处在于智力。 What's distinctive to us is the intellect.
因此，奥古斯丁试图在心智本身的动态中找到三位一体的镜像：心智、自知、自爱。 Therefore, Augustine sought to find within the very dynamics of the mind itself a mirror of the Trinity: mens, notitia sui, amor sui—mind, self-knowledge, self-love.
心智并不分裂成三，但这一个心智以三种模式或关系存在。 The mind doesn’t split into three, but the one mind subsists in three modalities or relations.
因此，圣父是神的心智，神心智的本源；圣子是神的自知，是 父的自我拥有；而圣灵是神的自爱，是父与子之间呼出的爱。 So the Father is the mens of God, the primordial ground of the divine mind; the Son is the notitia sui of God, the self-possession of the Father; and the Spirit is the amor sui of God, the love breathed out between the Father and the Son.
这意味着神是一，但神以关系的互动而存在——一个给予和接受，一个呼入和呼出。 This means that God is one, but God subsists in a play of relationships—a give and take, a breathing in and a breathing out.
我知道这一切听起来多么抽象，但实际上并不是。 I realize how abstract all this can sound, but actually, it’s not.
每当你说「我在想什么？」 Every time you say, What was I thinking?
或「我在做什么？」 or What was I doing?
你正在例证奥古斯丁所说的，因为你把自己作为自己问题的对象。 you’re exemplifying exactly what Augustine is talking about, because you’re posing yourself to yourself as the object of your own question.
你同时是同一个问题的主体和客体。 You are simultaneously the subject and object of the same question.
你并没有分裂成两个东西，但你的心理有两个维度。 You haven’t split into two things, but there are two dimensions to your own psychology.
你在语言中可以看到这种反映；法语中「我想知道」的表达是j e m'interroge，字面意思是「我问我自己」。 You see it reflected in the languages; the expression in French for I wonder is je m'interroge, literally I ask me.
西班牙语也一样：Yo me pregunto，我问我自己。 The same thing in Spanish: Yo me pregunto, I ask me.
再说一次，你并没有分裂成两个，但你在识别心智中的两种模式，两个要素。 Again, you’re not splitting into two, but you’re identifying two modalities, two elements within your mind.
现在进一步思考：假设在与好朋友的多次长谈中，或 在治疗或属灵指导的过程中，你更深地认识了自己。 Now push it further: suppose in the course of many long conversations with a good friend, or in the course of therapy or spiritual direction, you come to know yourself much more deeply.
然后你会更彻底地爱自己。 You then come to love yourself more thoroughly.
心智、自知、自爱。 Mens, notitia sui, amor sui—mind, self-knowledge, self-love.
不是三个事物，而是同一个自我中的三个要素、三个运动、三个动态。 Not three things, but three elements, three movements, three dynamics within the same self.
这就是奥古斯丁所说的三位一体的形象。 That’s the imago Trinitatis, the image of the Trinity that St. Augustine is talking about.
你知道，在礼仪中，我们使用香。 You know, in the liturgy, we use incense.
你在祭坛周围焚香，在某种程度上，这象征着我们的祷告上达于神。 You put incense around the altar, and to some degree, that symbolizes our prayers going up to God.
但我们现任教宗本笃十六世说，香也象征着如何遮蔽你的视 线；烟如何进入你的眼睛使你看不见，阻碍你接近祭坛。 But our present Pope Benedict XVI said that the incense also symbolizes how you’re meant to block your vision; how smoke gets in your eyes and you can’t see, and it blocks your approach to the altar.
这就是神学语言的一部分。 Well, that’s part of theological language.
它本该进入你的眼睛；它本该有些模糊；它本该使你困惑。 It’s meant to get in your eyes; it’s meant to obfuscate a bit; it’s meant to confuse you.
因为当你说「哦，我明白了。 Because the minute you say, “Oh, I got it.
哦，是的，我理解了。 Oh yeah, I understand.
所以我看见你；我看见世界上的事物。 So I see you; I see things in the world.
哦，是的，我也理解神了」的那一刻，你就失去了。 Oh yeah, I understand God too,” then you don’t have it.
那不是神。 That isn’t God.
所以奥古斯丁的观点是，当你有了一个清晰的概念时，就放下它。 So Augustine's thing is that the minute you’ve got a clear concept, drop it.
那不是真相。 That isn’t it.
神学语言在某种程度上确实有这个目的——使你困惑。 Theological language does have, to some degree, that purpose—to confound you.
当然，一个很好的例子就是神既是三又是一。 A very good example, of course, is that God is both three and one.
神是至高的合一，而神又是三个位格。 God is supremely one, and God is a Trinity of persons.
好吧，你想想看！ Well, go figure!
这就是它的部分目的：阻碍心智，阻挡我们对事物那种鹰眼般的接近方式。 That’s part of the purpose of it: to block the mind and to obstruct the kind of eagle-eye approach we have to things.
明白了，明白了，看到了，理解了？ Got it, got it, see it, understand it?
不，你没有。当谈到神时，我们问很多问题，但有 一个特别的问题，哲学家称之为存在之后的问题。 No, you don't. When it comes to God, we ask about many things, but there is a particular question that philosophers call the question after being.
这不是对这个或那个特定事态的探究，而是对一切意义的探究。 It is the inquiry not into this or that particular state of affairs, but rather into the meaning of it all.
这一切是为了什么？ What is it all about?
基督教对这个问题的答案是爱，因为神就是爱。 The Christian answer to that question is love, for love is what God is.