欢迎回到无耻教皇党。 Welcome back to Shameless Popery.
我是乔·赫施迈尔。 I'm Joe Heschmeyer.
今天我想为一个可能有争议的观点辩护，即基督教若没有圣餐便无法存在。 So today I want to defend a maybe controversial claim that Christianity cannot exist without the Eucharist.
我会在过程中解释我的意思，但实际上，圣餐是维系基督教的关键。 And I'll explain what I mean kind of as I'm going, but in a real sense it's that the Eucharist is what holds Christianity together.
它是使基督教其他部分有意义的粘合剂。 It's the glue that makes the rest of Christianity make sense.
如果你不明白这一点，你就错过了基督教中非常重要的东西。 And that if you don't understand this, you're missing something really vital about Christianity.
你不仅仅是错过了一条教义，而是错过了更深层次的东西。 You're not just missing like one doctrine, you're missing something much deeper than that.
但在此之前，我有一些令人兴奋的相关消息。 But before I get there, I have some exciting and related news.
我的新书《圣餐真的是耶稣》即将出版。 So my newest book called The Eucharist Is Really Jesus is coming out.
副标题是「基督的身体和血是我们信仰一切的关键」。 The subtitle is How Christ's Body and Blood Are the Key to Everything We Believe.
你可以想象这将如何与今天节目的主题联系在一起。 So you can probably imagine how that's going to be tied into the theme of today's episode.
在书中，我探讨了几个不同的问题。 But in the book, I explore several different questions.
例如，天主教徒对圣餐的信仰是什么，为什么？ Things like what do Catholics believe about the Eucharist and why?
圣餐与约之间有什么联系？ What's the connection between the Eucharist and the covenant?
你知道，新约，尤其是更广泛的约的概念。 You know, the new covenant, especially the idea of covenant more broadly.
圣餐如何解释十字架的血腥性质和旧约的祭祀？ How does the Eucharist make sense of the bloody nature of the cross and of Old Testament sacrifices?
基督徒的敬拜究竟是什么？ What is worship for a Christian anyhow?
然后，我如何在自己的灵性生活中融入对圣餐更大的爱？ And then how can I incorporate a greater love of the Eucharist in my own spiritual life?
在这里稍作无耻的自我宣传，很多好书都回答了第一个问题。 So just to give a little bit of shameless self-promotion here, a lot of good books exist that answer that first question.
天主教徒对圣餐的信仰是什么，为什么？ What do Catholics believe about the Eucharist and why?
在一本关于圣餐的书中，做这项工作是很重要的。 And it's important in a book on the Eucharist to do that work.
但我想做一些不同的事情，我没有看到其他书籍在做的，就是展示这些看 似无关的教义，这些看似无关的主题，实际上在圣餐中是如何统一的。 But I want to do something different that I don't see other books doing, which is show how all of these seemingly unrelated doctrines, these seemingly unrelated themes, are actually united in the Eucharist.
梵蒂冈第二次大公会议称圣餐祭献为基督信仰的源头和顶峰。 The Second Vatican Council refers to the Eucharistic sacrifice as both the source and the summit of the Christian faith.
基督信仰的源头，没有圣餐就没有基督教。 Source of the Christian faith, you don't have Christianity without the Eucharist.
这正是今天的主题。 That's very much the theme of today.
也是顶峰，最高点，一切都从圣餐流出，圣餐也是基督教的最高点。 Also the summit, the high point, that everything flows from the Eucharist, as well as the Eucharist being the high point of Christianity.
如果这两点都是真的，我们就会大量谈论圣餐是顶峰。 So if those two things are true, we talk a fair amount about the Eucharist being the summit.
这是一个大问题。 This is a big issue.
这是最大的问题。 It's the biggest issue.
你知道，我们可以在其他事情上有分歧，但这是一个非常重要的问题。 You know, we can disagree on other things, but this is a really important one.
然而，圣餐的观念实际上是约神学的源头。 But then the idea of the Eucharist actually is the source of covenant theology.
它是道德的源头。 It's the source of morality.
它是所有这些其他事物的源头。 It's the source of all these other things.
很多人会说，你到底在说什么？ A lot of people would say, what in the world are you talking about?
希望在这本书中，这会更有意义。 Well, hopefully in this book, it'll make a little more sense.
如果这听起来对你有趣，我鼓励你去看看。 So if that sounds interesting to you, I encourage you to check it out.
如果你是在周四这天看到这个视频，它将在四天后的周一发布。 If you're watching this the day this comes out on Thursday, it'll be out in four days on Monday.
如果你是在它首次发布后任何时间观看，它已经发布了。 If you're watching this basically any time after it first comes out, it'll be out.
它可能已经发布了。 It probably already is out.
所以，你可以在下面的链接中找到它。 So, you can get it in the links below.
你可以在亚马逊，shop.catholic.com上找到它， You can get it on Amazon, shop.catholic.com,
这是天主教答疑书店。 which is the Catholic Answers Bookstore.
如果你想批量购买，我知道如果你为你的堂区购买20本，或者你 在一个男士小组或女士小组，圣经学习小组等，会有很好的优惠。 If you want to do bulk deals, I know there's like really good deals if you get like 20 for like your parish or, you know, if you're in like a men's group or women's group, a Bible study, whatever.
希望所有这些事情都是好的和有帮助的。 All of those things hopefully are good and helpful.
但是，好吧。 But, okay.
我必须宣传一下，对吧？ I have to plug that, right?
我不能在一本关于圣餐的书出版时，做一个关于圣餐的主题节目而不提到它。 I can't have a book on the Eucharist come out, do a theme episode on the Eucharist and not mention that.
事实上，这周和下周，我将探讨一些我在书中涉及 的主题，并从中选取几个章节，将其转化为节目。 In fact, this week and next week, I'm going to be exploring some themes that I touch on in the book and just taking a couple of the chapters and then sort of turning them into episodes.
这不会涵盖该章节中的所有内容，也不会涵盖书中的所有内容。 This is not going to cover everything in that chapter, and this is not going to cover by any means everything in the book.
所以，如果这引起了你的兴趣，你说，我想听更 多关于这方面的内容，我知道你可以去哪里。 So if this strikes your interest and you say, I'd like to hear more about that, I know what place you can go.
好了，既然如此，我们如何为圣餐是基督教关键这一主张辩护呢？ All right, so with that said, how do we defend the claim that the Eucharist is key to Christianity?
我想从两点来说明。 And I want to do it in two points.
第一点是，新约对基督教至关重要。 The first point is just that the New Covenant is essential to Christianity.
如果你不理解新约，你就不理解基督教。 That if you don't understand the New Covenant, you don't understand Christianity.
我的意思是，这并不意味着你什么都不懂。 I mean, that doesn't mean you understand nothing.
这只是意味着你不明白基督教是什么。 It just means you don't understand what Christianity is.
我希望这听起来不会太苛刻，但它确实如此重要。 I hope that doesn't sound too harsh, but it really is that important.
我们可以通过一个相当简单的问题来展示这一点，那就是，新约是什么？ And we can show that in a pretty simple way by asking, what is the New Testament?
现在，如果我问你这个问题，你很可能不会错误地说出如下内容。 Now, if I asked you this, chances are you would not incorrectly say something like the following.
嗯，它是一本书，或者是一本书的一部分。 Well, it's a book or it's a part of a book.
它是圣经的一半。 It's half of the Bible.
你有旧约，你有新约。 You have the Old Testament, you have the New Testament.
或者说，它是27本书，合在一起成为一本更大书中的一部分。 Or it's 27 books that are put together as one sort of book within a broader book.
这很令人困惑，对吧？ It's confusing, right?
但我们会从文本的角度来思考。 But we'd be thinking in terms of texts.
马太、马可、路加、约翰、使徒行传，等等。 Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, and so on.
但「约」这个词实际上并不是这个意思。 But that's not what the word Testament actually means.
令人惊讶的是，尽管我们基督徒称之为旧约和新约，圣经从未称这两组书为旧约或新约。 And strikingly, even though we as Christians refer to the Old Testament and the New Testament, Scripture never calls either set of books the Old Testament or the New Testament.
那么，「约」这个词从何而来，我们为什么用它来描述这些书？ So where is this word Testament coming from, and why do we use it to describe these books?
「约」来自拉丁文Testamentum，是希腊文「约」的翻译。 Well, Testament comes from the Latin Testamentum, which was a translation of the Greek word for covenant.
因此，称这些书为新约，就是称它们为新约的书。 And so, calling these books the New Testament are calling them the books of the New Covenant.
正如本笃教宗在成为教宗之前在《多宗教，一约》中指出 的那样，他说，我们称构成基督信仰基础的薄卷为新约。 And as Pope Benedict, before becoming Pope, points out in a book entitled Many Religions, One Covenant, He says, we call the slim volume that forms the basis of the Christian faith the New Testament.
他说，这个词不是强加于圣经的，我们实际上在圣经中找到了它。 And he says this word isn't imposed on the Scriptures, we actually find it in Scripture.
然而，早期基督徒将这个词应用于这些书。 But nevertheless, the early Christians apply this term to the books.
他说，为什么？ And he says, why?
他说，这个词「约」在某种程度上是试图用一个总结性的表达 来陈述基督教的本质，而这个表达本身就来自这个基本来源。 He says, well, this very word Testament is, in a way, an attempt to utter the essence of Christianity in a single summary expression, which is itself drawn from this fundamental source.
换句话说，早期基督徒被迫说，我们要如何称呼这27本书？ In other words, the early Christians We're forced to say, what are we going to call these 27 books?
因为圣经通常只是称其为圣经。 Because Scripture often just calls it Scripture.
现在，圣经只是意味着著作。 Now, Scripture just means writings.
所以我们可以说，哦，是的，那本书。 So we could just say, oh yeah, the book.
有时人们确实这样说。 And sometimes people do.
那本书或好书。 The book or the good book.
但如果你想要一个术语让人们知道你在谈论哪本书，像圣 经或圣经书卷，或更具体的新约这样的术语是有帮助的。 But if you want a term so people know which book you're talking about, it's helpful to have a term like Bible or Scripture or, more specifically, New Testament.
所以，从主题上看，早期基督徒在说，这是神与他的子民立新约的故事。 So thematically, the early Christians were saying, this is the story of God creating a new covenant with his people.
你会听到不同的说法，稍有不同的说法，你知道，这是一个约的两种表达。 And there are different ways, slightly different ways you'll hear this worded, you know, that it's one covenant in two expressions.
首先是旧的表达，旧约，现在是新的表达，新约。 First in the old expression, the old covenant, now in a new expression, a new covenant.
这是一种方式。 And that's one way.
另一种方式是说他与他的子民立了新约。 Another way is to say that he's created a new covenant with his people.
我认为这是由Amara.org字幕组制作的字幕 That I think is Subtitles by the Amara.org
社区 我知道很多新教徒观看这个节目，你可能会 说，是的，拉青格枢机对我没有训导权的分量。 community I know many Protestants watch this show, and you might say, well, yeah, Cardinal Ratzinger doesn't carry magisterial weight with me.
这很合理。 Fair enough.
这不是一篇训导权的著作。 This isn't a magisterial writing.
也许你会说，我认为早期基督徒完全有可能在重大问题上出错。 And maybe you say, I think the early Christians are perfectly capable of getting major things wrong.
这很合理。 Fair enough.
然而，正如拉青格指出的，这取自新约中关于基督教发生的事情的描述。 Nevertheless, this is something that, as Ratzinger points out, is being drawn from the way the New Testament talks about what's going on in Christianity.
确实，没有地方说这些书应被称为新约。 So it's true, there's no point where it says, These books shall be called the New Testament.
但你确实有这样的事情。 But you do have things like this.
在哥林多后书三章，圣保罗谈到神使我们能承当 新约的执事，不是凭着字句，而是凭着圣灵。 In 2 Corinthians 3, St. Paul talks about how God has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code, but in the Spirit.
所以这里有一个明确的意思，就是新的东西是新约，或者你想 这样说，新约书卷，而这些是新约的执事，新约书卷的执事。 So there's a clear sense that what is new here is a new covenant, or if you want to put it that way, a New Testament, and that these are ministers of the New Covenant, ministers of the New Testament.
有很多新教徒实际上同意我迄今为止所说的一切。 There are a lot of Protestants who actually agree with everything I've said so far.
特别是在改革宗神学中，有时称为加尔文主义，你会发现这一点被非常强调和反复强调。 Particularly within Reformed theology, sometimes called Calvinism, you'll find this very much stressed and hammered home.
我会说，我们大约80-90%同意你会发现改革宗神学家所说的内容。 And we would agree, I would say, about 80-90% of the way with what you'll find Reformed theologians saying.
所以，举几个愉快的例子。 So, to give a couple happy examples.
19世纪的浸信会传道人查尔斯·司布真有一篇名为《不够但足够》的 讲道，其中他谈到了我们刚刚听到的哥林多后书三章中的那段经文。在 其中，他说，我们会看到保罗是如何说的，我们是新约的足够执事。 The 19th century Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon has a sermon called Not Sufficient and Yet Sufficient, in which he's talking about that passage we just heard from 2 Corinthians 3. And in it, he said, we'll see how Paul puts it, we're sufficient ministers of a new covenant.
然后他感叹，在一些会众中，人们从未听到「约」这个词。 And then he laments, in some congregations, people never hear the word covenant.
然而，理解这两个约的人拥有神学的钥匙。 And yet he that understands the two covenants has the key of theology.
这些约是使恩典的金门转动的钻石铰链。 The covenants are the diamond hinges on which the golden doors of grace are made to turn.
所以，正确理解约是非常关键的。 So, getting the covenant right is really critical.
这就是拉青格所说的，也是早期基督徒明确相信的 ，也是你会发现这些新教神学家和传道人所说的。 That's what Ratzinger says, it's what the early Christians clearly believed, it's what you find these Protestant theologians and preachers saying as well.
这可能会引发我们许多人一个问题，我们会说，好吧，那么，什么是约？ And that might raise for many of us a question, where we say, okay, well then, what is a covenant?
因为如果我甚至不熟悉约是什么，我怎么知道我是否正确理解了约？ Because how do I know if I understand the covenant correctly if maybe I'm not familiar with even what a covenant is?
好问题。 Good question.
我将在这里稍微深入一点，但不会太久。 I'm going to get a little bit in the weeds here, but not for long.
广泛来说，你会发现两组人。 Broadly speaking, you're going to find two groups.
你会发现有神学家说希伯来文中的「约」，如berith，代表两方之间的 关系，两个人之间的关系，两个国家之间的关系，神与他的子民之间的关系。 You're going to find theologians that say that the Hebrew word for covenant, like berith, stands for the relationship between two parties, between two people, between two nations, between God and his people.
这是一种理论，即它是关系本身。 And that's one theory, that it is the relationship itself.
另一种理论是，我在书中引用的荷兰旧约学者格特·夸克尔所主张的， 即更好地说它表示的是关系基础上的协议或惯例，并对其进行规范。 The other theory is, and the one that Gert Kwakel, the Dutch Old Testament scholar that I quote in the book, argues for, is that it's better to say that it denotes the agreement or convention that's at the base of a relationship and regulates it.
如果这听起来很奇怪且微妙，让我举个例子。 If that sounds really weird and nuanced, let me give an example.
你的婚姻是你与配偶的整个关系，还是你在祭坛上达成的协议？ Is your marriage The whole relationship you have with your spouse, or is your marriage the agreement that you make at the altar?
我想大多数人会说，嗯，两者都有。 And I think most people say, well, sort of both.
比如你可以说，这就是我进入婚姻的时候。 Like you can say, well, this is when I entered into my marriage.
我已经有了一段关系。 I already had a relationship.
现在它进入了一个新的阶段，你知道，发生了一些事情。 Now it's in a new key, you know, and something has happened.
如果我现在描述我与妻子的关系，而不提她是我 的妻子，我就无法充分描述我与妻子的关系。 And now if I were to describe my relationship with my wife, And not mention she's my wife, I would not be describing my relationship with my wife adequately.
要理解我与妻子的关系，我需要知道我们在神面前有这个协议，这超越了合同。 And to understand my relationship with my wife, I need to know that we have this agreement before God, something beyond a contract.
这个比喻之所以困难，是因为婚姻实际上是一个约，所以这根本不是一个比喻。 What makes this analogy difficult is marriage actually is a covenant, so it's not really an analogy at all.
这只是说，好吧，拿婚约这个具体例子来说。 It's just saying, okay, take the concrete case of a marriage covenant.
那是你在婚礼当天做的看似合同的事情吗？ Is that the contract-looking thing you did on your wedding day?
那是你拥有的整个关系吗？ Is that the whole relationship you had?
还是两者都有？ Or is it sort of both?
所以他会说，这是一个协议或惯例，A，是你关系的基础，B，规范你的关系。 And so he's going to say it's the agreement or the convention that A, is at the base of your relationship, and B, regulates your relationship.
这实际上具有准独立的地位。 That this actually has Quasi-independent standing.
一个很好的测试方法是，你可以想象一对夫妇说，你知道吗，让我们有一个开放的婚姻。 And a good way to test that is you can imagine something where a couple says, you know what, let's have, you know, people have like an open marriage.
让我们双方同意违反我们的婚姻誓言。 Let's both violate our marriage vows, consensually.
也许你不能指出双方之间的某些东西，因为双方同意了，但无论如何 ，这仍然是对你们共同进入的这个准独立事物，即约的相互违反。 Well, maybe you can't point to something between the parties because the parties agreed to it, but nevertheless, there's still a mutual violation of this quasi-independent thing, the covenant that you've entered into together.
好吧，希望这有意义。 Okay, hopefully that makes sense.
我知道这可能是一个奇怪的例子，但思考婚姻可能有助于思考神与他的子民之间的约。 I know it's kind of a Maybe a weird example, but thinking about marriage could help in terms of thinking about the covenant between God and his people.
好吧，另一个我想看的关于回答什么是约的是一位名叫J.I . Packer的改革宗神学家，他有一个很好的介绍。 Okay, the other one I want to look at in terms of answering the what is a covenant is a Reformed theologian by the name of J.I. Packer, who has a great introduction.
我将再次同意，大约80-90%。一个名为《论约神学》的伟大介绍。 I'm going to agree with it again, like 80-90%. A great introduction called On Covenant Theology.
这实际上是他为一本旧改革宗神学家的书的再版写的介绍。 It's actually an introduction he wrote to a reprint of an older Reformed theologian's book.
他将其描述为约，作为创造者与基督徒之间约关系的包罗万象的基石现实。 And he describes it as the covenant, as the life-embracing bedrock reality of the covenant relationship between the Creator and Christians.
他说，约关系是一种自愿的相互承诺，将每一方与另一方联系在一起。 And he says a covenant relationship is a voluntary mutual commitment that binds each party to the other.
然后他指出，你可以通过几种方式进入这种关系。 And then he points out you can enter this into a couple ways.
你可以有一个协商的，比如说，商业合并。 You can have a negotiated one, you know, a business merger, say.
或者婚姻合同。 Or a marriage contract.
或者你可以有一些单方面强加的东西。 Or you can have something unilaterally imposed.
他指出神的所有约。 He points out all of God's covenants.
你知道，神不会说，你带上你最好的律师，我带上我最好的律师，我们来敲定一些东西。 You know, God doesn't say, you bring your best lawyer, I'll bring my best lawyer, we'll hammer something out.
神向人们介绍约，说，这是你要做的，这是我将给你的回报。 God introduces the covenant to the people, saying, here's what you're going to do, here's what I'm going to give you in return.
这就是约。 That's a covenant.
但你可以有单方面的，也可以有双方面的。 But you can have a unilateral, you can have a bilateral.
如果你真的想深入探讨，约有不同的形式。 If you really want to get in the weeds, there's different forms of covenant.
所以在古代世界，像一个强国可能会对弱国施加一个约。 So in the ancient world, like a stronger nation might impose a covenant on weaker nations.
然而，它是关系的条款。 Nevertheless, it's the terms of the relationship.
帕克继续说道。 Packer goes on.
关系的现实仅仅取决于双方接受并承诺了相互的义务。 The reality of the relationship depends simply on the fact that mutual obligations have been accepted and pledged on both sides.
所以我希望很清楚，约听起来非常法律化和技术化，但它是深刻的关系性的。 So I hope it's clear that covenant sounds very legal and technical, but it is deeply relational.
这是学者们指出的。 And this is something that scholars point out.
例如，塞缪尔·弗格森在他的书《圣灵与关系人类学与保罗》中指出，约的范 式是以色列自我理解的核心，也是圣保罗背景的核心，本质上是关系性的。 So, for instance, Samuel Ferguson, in his book, The Spirit and Relational Anthropology and Paul, makes the point that the paradigm of the covenant, which is central to Israel's self-understanding, as well as to St. Paul's background, is inherently relational.
将约放在这里，将关系放在那里，或试图并列两者，是一个错误。 That it would be a mistake to put covenant over here and relationship over there, or try to juxtapose the two.
同样地，将你与配偶的关系视为独立于你们之间的约关系之外的东西也是一个错误。 In the same way that it would be a mistake to put your relationship with your spouse as something that's independent of your covenant relation with one another.
好吧，我想在这里提出的最后一点是来自斯科特·哈恩，因为我喜欢他描述这个的方式。 Okay, the last point I want to raise here is from Scott Hahn, because I love the way he describes this.
他说，合同通常交换财产、货物和服务，但约交换的是人。 He says contracts usually exchange property, goods, and services, but covenants exchange persons.
我认为这是理解约与合同之间区别的一个非常有帮助的方式。 I think that's a very helpful way of understanding the difference between a covenant and a contract.
合同说，我会为你做这个，你会为我做那个，而 约说的是更接近于「我是你的，你是我的」。 A contract says, I will do this for you, you will do that for me, where a covenant says something closer to, I am yours, you are mine.
现在，我们可以对所有这些定义尝试进行争论，因为再次，你可以有强国对弱国施加约。 Now, we can quibble with all of these kind of attempts at defining it, because again, you can have stronger nations imposing covenants on weaker ones.
但即使在那些情况下，它仍然是比「这是一个合同，我 们将给你送铁，你将给我们送木材」更深刻的东西。 But it's still, even in those cases, it's something deeper than just, here's a contract, we're going to send you iron, you're going to send us timber.
它是关于定义双方关系的更深刻和丰富的东西。 It's something deeper and richer than that, about defining the relationship between the parties.
所以约本质上是关系性的，我喜欢这个描述，因为他指出婚姻和收养都具有这些约的方面。 So there's something inherently relational about a covenant, and I like this description because he points out marriage and adoption both have these covenantal aspects to them.
它们是人的交换。 They are an exchange of persons.
如果你想要一个有帮助的例子，我从Focus传教士那里偷来的。 If you want maybe a helpful example, I've stolen this from Focus Missionaries.
他们可能从别处得来的。 They probably sold it from somewhere else.
我不知道。 I don't know.
他们举了一个住在街区上的家庭的例子。 And they give the example of a family living on a block.
如果你是你父亲的儿子，你可能会被期望去割草坪。 If you are a son of your father, you might be expected to mow the lawn.
所以有一些工作必须要做。 So there's some work that has to be done.
但那项工作并不创造你的关系。 But that work doesn't create your relationship.
而你的关系比「你为我割草，我为你工作」更深刻。 And your relationship is deeper than You mow the lawn for me, I go to work for you.
应该是这样，对吧？ It better be, right?
所以邻居家的孩子可能会过来说，这周我可以割草吗？ And so the neighbor kid might come over and say, this week, could I mow the lawn?
我想赚点外快。 I'd like to earn some extra money.
好的。 Okay.
你可以过来割草坪。 You can come over and mow the lawn.
那是一个合同。 That's a contract.
如果你割草坪，我会给你这笔钱。 I'll give you this money if you mow the lawn.
但你与孩子或父子之间的关系是约的，即使两者都涉及割草坪。 But what you have with your child or between father and son there, that's covenantal, even though both of them involve mowing the lawn.
有更深层次的东西在进行，这与人的交换有关。 There's something deeper going on, and it has to do with the exchange of persons.
我想，我们稍后会回到这个主题。 And we're going to return to that motif, I think, in a little bit.
但重要的是要理解，在我们的语境中，约意味着神与他的子民的关 系，以及神与他的子民关系的条款，神对他与子民关系的承诺。 But it's important to get this idea that covenant means, in our context, God's relationship with his people and the terms of God's relationship with his people, the promises God's making about his relationship with his people.
那么为什么它如此重要？ So why is it so important?
为什么我们如此关心约？ Why do we care about covenant so much?
我想回到帕克，这位我说过有一篇很好的文章的改革宗神学家。 I want to return to Packer, the Reformed theologian I said has a largely good essay.
他提出了一个非常大胆的主张。 And he makes a really bold claim.
他说，圣经教义从头到尾都与神与人之间的约关系有关。 He says biblical doctrine, from first to last, has to do with covenantal relationships between God and man.
他给出了几个例子。 He gives several examples.
圣经伦理与表达神与我们之间的约关系以及我们与他人之间的约关系有关。 Biblical ethics has to do with expressing God's covenantal relationship to us and covenantal relationships between ourselves and others.
也就是说，神与人之间相互关系的一部分是神说，我希望你善待你的邻舍。 That is, part of the mutual relations between God and man is that God says, I want you to treat your neighbor well.
我希望你爱你的仇敌。 I want you to love your enemies.
我希望你这样做，你知道，你不能爱神却恨你的邻舍。 I want you to, you know, so you can't love God and hate your neighbor.
这在我们上周看的约翰一书中非常清楚，因为神呼召你做的事情之一就是爱你的邻舍。 This is very clear in 1 John, which we looked at last week, because one of the things God has called you to do is love your neighbor.
所以当我们谈论圣经伦理时，一个错误是将其从约的 领域中剥离，因为那样你就只剩下一个道德规范。 So when we're talking about biblical ethics, a mistake would be to take it away from the realm of the covenant, because then you'd be left with just a moral code.
而对于许多人来说，这就是他们对基督教的理解。 And that for many people is what they understand Christianity to be.
他们会说，我为什么需要 他们的意思是，我可以在没有神的情况下做到约的这一部分。 And they'll say, why do I need What they're saying is, I can do this part of the covenant without God.
这就像邻居在割草。 That's like the neighbor mowing the grass.
这很合理，你可以在某种程度上做到。 Fair enough, you can, to a certain extent.
但这并不是事情的核心。 But that's not really the heart of this.
这不是我们在谈论的。 That's not what we're talking about.
有更深层次的东西在进行，但如果你失去了约的维度，你就错过了。 There's something deeper going on, but you're missing that if you lose the covenantal dimension to it.
好吧，那是伦理。 Okay, that's ethics.
基督教宗教具有约生活的性质，其中神是我们信仰、盼望、爱、敬 拜和服务的直接对象，所有这些都因对恩典的感激而充满活力。 Christian religion has the nature of covenant life, in which God is the direct object of our faith, hope, love, worship, and service, all animated by gratitude for grace.
换句话说，如果你考虑基督教的每一个方面，它都关乎两件事之一。 Another way of putting that would be, if you think about every aspect of Christianity, it's all about one of two things.
我如何爱神？ How do I love God?
或者我如何因爱神而爱邻舍？ Or how do I love neighbor out of love of God?
这就是一切，对吧？ That's everything, right?
当耶稣被问到时，他总结基督教为全心、全意、全力爱神，并爱邻舍如同自己。 When Jesus is asked, he sums up Christianity as loving God with all your heart, mind, and soul, and loving your neighbor as yourself.
这是两条大诫命。 These are the two great commands.
抱歉，他是这样总结律法的，但这也是基督教全部的双重实现。 Excuse me, he sums up the law that way, but this is also the twofold fulfillment of all of Christianity.
所以如果你在做这些事情，那就是一切。 So if you're doing those things, that's everything.
但这一切都是约的，对吧？ But all of that is covenantal, right?
比如，我如何正确地爱神？ Like, how do I properly love God?
看向约。 Look to the covenant.
我如何正确地爱我的邻舍？ How do I properly love my neighbor?
看向约。 Look to the covenant.
所以，这就是为什么约神学如此关键。 So, that's why covenant theology is so crucial.
帕克接着说，从迄今为止所说的内容来看，他实际上说 了比我刚才给你的更多的东西，有三件事情变得明显。 Well, Packer's going to go on and say that from what's been said so far, and he actually says a lot more than what I just gave you, three things become apparent.
这三件事情是，首先，神的福音只有在约的框架内才能被正确理解。 Those three things are, first, the gospel of God is not properly understood until it is viewed within a covenantal frame.
第二，神的道，他在这里指的是圣经，只有在约的框架内才能被正确理解。 Second, the word of God, he means here the Bible, is not properly understood until it is viewed within a covenantal frame.
用他的话说，约神学是一种圣经诠释学，意味着 一种解释圣经的方法，以及圣经教义的表述。 In his words, covenantal theology is a biblical hermeneutic, meaning a way of interpreting the Bible, as well as a formulation of biblical teaching.
希望这很清楚。 So hopefully that's clear.
他说的是，我们从圣经中了解约，但我们也通过约的视角理解圣经。 What he's saying is we know about the covenant from the Bible, but we also make sense of the Bible through the lens of the covenant.
第三件事。 The third thing.
神的实质只有在约的框架内才能被正确理解。 The reality of God is not properly understood until it is viewed within a covenantal frame.
现在他在这里提出了一个相当大胆的主张，我们 可能会在边缘上争论，但基本思想是这样的。 Now here he's making a pretty bold claim, and we might quibble around the edges, but the basic idea is this.
神启示自己为三位一体，圣父、圣子、圣灵的三位一体的相交。 God reveals himself to be a trinity, a triune communion of persons, Father, Son, and Spirit.
而这看起来非常具有约的性质。 And there's something that looks very covenantal about that.
想象从永恒开始，神与自己签订合同或形成法律协议是一个错误。 It would be a mistake to imagine, you know, from all eternity, God signing a contract with himself or forming a legal agreement with himself.
但有一些结构化和关系性的条款，三位一体的每一个位格都有其角色。 But there's something structured and relational with terms, as it were, that there are roles each person of the Trinity plays.
例如，圣子成为肉身而不是圣父或圣灵是有原因的。 There's a reason, for instance, the Son becomes incarnate and not the Father or the Spirit.
在三位一体中有一个秩序和结构，尽管这三者在威严和荣耀上是平等的。 There is an order and structure within the Trinity, even though these three are co-equal in majesty and glory.
然而，存在结构、秩序、关系，所有这些。 Nevertheless, there's a structure, order, relationship, all of that.
所有这些看起来都非常具有约的性质。 All of that looks very covenantal.
所以你可以用几种方式来说。 So you can say that in a couple of ways.
你可以描述为三位一体内的一个约。 You could describe it as a covenant within the Trinity.
我认为那样说太过了。 I think that's going too far.
更好的方式可能是说，神的这种结构化的内在生命被表达和揭示 出来。换句话说，神学的一个基本原则是，如果你想理解神的内 在生命，我们没有直接的途径，你通过神的外在生命来理解。 A better way might be to say this structured inner life of God is expressed and revealed In other words, a basic principle of theology is if you want to understand the inner life of God, which we have no direct access to, you understand that through the outer life of God.
他如何在世界上表达自己？ How does he express himself in the world?
就像如果你想了解一个作者，你不能读他的心思，但你可以读他的书。 In the same way that if you want to get to know an author, you can't read his mind, but you can read his books.
通过读他的书，你可以说，哦，你知道，斯蒂芬·金对缅因州和酗酒等很着迷。 And in reading his books, you can come to say like, oh, you know, Stephen King is obsessed with Maine and alcoholism or whatever.
这些事情是我们了解任何作者的方式。 Those kind of things are how we get to know any author.
在你了解一个人的意义上，你遇到你的邻居，你遇到你的配偶，你的孩子，任何人。 In the sense that you get to know a person, you encounter your neighbor, you encounter your spouse, your kids, whoever.
如果你想了解他们，可能是通过他们向你展示的东西，他们在外部做的事情。 If you want to get to know them, it's probably going to be from what they show you, what they're externally doing.
你不是在读他们的心思。 You're not reading their mind.
你在和他们交谈。 You're talking to them.
你在观察他们。 You're watching them.
你在观察他们。 You're observing them.
同样地，如果你想了解神的内在生命，你这样做。他在世界上以这种关系性、结 构化的方式行事，这有点像他描述自己内在生命的方式，圣父、圣子和圣灵。 Well, likewise, if you want to know about the inner life of God, you do that And he acts in the world in this relational, structured way that is kind of an echo of the way he describes his own inner life, Father, Son, and Spirit.
所以所有这些都在说，约神学是非常重要的。 So all that's to say, covenant theology is pretty darn important.
他继续给出——实际上，这是在那之前，我在文章 中跳回去，但这是一个很好的例子，我想提出来。 He goes on to give—actually, this is before that, I'm jumping back in the essay, but this is such a nice example that I want to draw it up.
他举了一个地球仪的例子。 He gives the example of a globe.
想象一个地球仪，如果你在看YouTube而不是 听，你会看到我这里有错误的海洋，但这是印度洋。 So imagine a globe, and if you're watching YouTube instead of listening, you'll see I've got the wrong ocean here, but the Indian Ocean.
我找不到一个真正好的非版权的地球仪放大到太平洋。 I couldn't find a really good non-copyrighted globe zoomed in on the Pacific Ocean.
令人惊讶的是，很难找到。 It was surprisingly hard to find.
然而，假设你在寻找一个波利尼西亚岛屿，你用手指，你知道，你在 试图找到密克罗尼西亚、斐济、图瓦卢，或任何地方，瓦努阿图。 Nevertheless, suppose you're looking for a Polynesian island, and you've got your finger, you know, you're trying to find Micronesia, Fiji, Tuvalu, wherever, Vanuatu.
你可能会错过的是，因为它实际上太大了，以至于 有点跳出页面，是那些巨大的特定海洋的字样。 What you can miss there, because it's actually so big it sort of jumps off the page, are the giant word-specific ocean.
他建议有时作为基督徒，我们也会这样做。 And he suggests that sometimes as Christians this is what we do as well.
他说，圣经中神的恩典之约是那些太大而不容易被看到的东 西之一，特别是当一个人的思维被设定为看更小的东西时。 He says God's covenant of grace in Scripture is one of those things that are too big to easily be seen, particularly when one's mind is programmed to look at something smaller.
因此，我们有可能过于专注于试图找到某个特定的教义或细节，以至于错过了大局。 And so we run the risk of focusing in so much on trying to find some particular doctrine or detail, That we miss the big picture.
我们如此寻找特定的树，以至于错过了整个森林。 We're so looking for the particular tree that we miss the whole forest.
这就是他所说的。 That's what he's saying.
这就是约有多大的意义。 That's how big covenant is.
正如斯科特·哈恩指出的，这不仅仅是改革宗基督徒理解约的方式。 As Scott Hahn points out, this isn't just true of the way Reformed Christians understand covenant.
这也是天主教徒理解它的方式，更是犹太人以前理解它的方式。 This is true of how Catholics understand it, but even more how Jews understood it before.
他说，因为约为基督徒和犹太人定义了宗教。 He says, For the covenant defines religion for Christians and Jews.
如果我们不默想他的约，我们就无法辨别神的设计或他的旨意。 We cannot discern God's design or his will if we do not meditate upon his covenant.
因此，约是将新约与旧约、圣经与传统、神学的各个分支与其他所有分支联合起来的原则。 The covenant, then, is the principle that unites the New Testament with the Old, the Scriptures with tradition, and each of the various branches of theology with all the others.
约不仅仅是弥合这些元素之间的差距。 The covenant does more than bridge the gaps between these elements.
它填补了这些差距。 It fills in the gaps.
因此，圣经学术、教义神学和训导权都站在共同的基础上，坚实的基础上。 So the biblical scholarship, dogmatic theology, and magisterial authority all stand on common ground, solid ground.
所以如果你想理解基督教中的任何事情，正确理解约是非常重要的。 So if you want to make sense of anything in Christianity, it's really important that you're getting the covenant right.
否则，你可能对一棵树有准确的看法，但如果你不了解森林，你仍然无法真正理解那棵树。 Otherwise, you might have an accurate vision of the one tree, but you still don't really get the tree if you don't get the forest.
我希望这有意义，真正理解，比如肝脏，只有在你理解身体的情况下才有可能。 I hope that makes sense, that really understanding, like, the liver, is only possible if you understand the body.
这并不是说你不能将肝脏与身体区分开来。 It's not that you can't distinguish the liver from the body.
而是说，理解肝脏及其作用只有在身体的更广泛背景下才有意义。 It's that making sense of the liver and its role only makes sense within the broader context of the body.
同样地，这在约中也是如此，它将整个事情结合在一起。 Well, this is true as well here with covenant, that it's binding the whole thing together.
这是协议、关系、条款和条件，将基督教的所有 部分以及之前犹太教的所有部分结合在一起。 It's the agreement, the relationship, the kind of terms and conditions that put all of these parts of Christianity and before that all these parts of Judaism together in one package.
好的，这就是第一点，新约对于理解基督教至关重要。 Okay, so that's the first point, that the New Covenant is vital for understanding Christianity.
如果你不理解这一点，你就没有看到森林，你就没有真正理解基督教的本质。 If you don't understand that, you're not getting the forest, you're not really getting the essence of Christianity.
第二点是，圣餐对新约至关重要。 The second point, then, is that the Eucharist is essential to the New Covenant.
就像不理解约的人不理解基督教一样，不理解圣餐的人不理解新约。 That just as someone who doesn't get the Covenant doesn't get Christianity, someone who doesn't get The Eucharist doesn't get the New Covenant.
在这里，我想与帕克稍微分道扬镳。 And here I want to part ways a little bit with Packer.
还记得我刚刚给出的地球仪例子吗？ Remember the globe example I just gave?
他描述了所有这些问题。 Well, he describes all of these issues.
他指出信仰、救恩计划、耶稣基督、神人、我们的先知、祭司和君王、两约中的教 会，以及割礼、逾越节、洗礼、圣餐、旧约崇拜的复杂性和新约对应的简单性。 He points out faith, the plan of salvation, Jesus Christ, the God-man, our prophet, priest, and king, the church in both Testaments, along with circumcision, Passover, baptism, the Lord's Supper, the intricacies of Old Testament worship, and the simplicities of its New Testament counterpart.
以及许多其他类似的事情。 And many more such things.
他将所有这些视为小岛，每一个都锚定在太平洋中，我们需要在约的海洋中理解。 He puts all of those as just little islands, each one anchored in the Pacific, that we need to understand within the ocean of the covenant.
但你可能注意到，他只是将圣餐作为众多教义之一放在那里。 But you may notice that he just dropped the Lord's Supper in there as one doctrine among many.
我的意思是，就此而言，他将耶稣基督作为众多教义之一放在那里。 I mean, for that matter, he drops Jesus Christ in there as one doctrine among many.
我认为我们想要的是，不，那就是我们分道扬镳的地方。 And I think we want to No, that's where we would part company.
那不是一个好的理解方式。 That's not a good way of understanding it.
现在，实际上有几个地方我们会与改革宗对约的理解分道扬镳。 Now, there's actually a few places in which we would part company from the Reformed understanding of covenant.
我们会说，改革宗神学家说约是关键的，这一点绝对正确。 We'd say the Reformed theologians are absolutely right to say covenant is crucial.
但当你问他们关于约时，他们有一个非常奇怪的理解，他们会说有一个与亚当 的约，这在圣经中没有提到，但对我们理解圣经非常重要，称为行为之约。 But when you ask them about covenant, they have a really strange understanding, where they'll say there's a covenant with Adam that isn't mentioned in the Bible, but is really important for how we understand the Bible, called the covenant of works.
而且它不被称为约。 And it's not called a covenant.
在所有关于约的圣经讨论中从未提到过。 It's never mentioned in all of the biblical discussions of a covenant.
但无论如何，我们要相信那是一个约。 But nevertheless, we're to believe that is a covenant.
然后在堕落时发生的恩典之约取代了它。 And then the covenant of grace, which happens at the moment of the fall, is what replaces it.
所以当改革宗神学家谈到两个约时，他们通常指的是这两个。 So when Reformed theologians speak of two covenants, they usually mean those two.
你有这个想象中的行为之约，或者，也许，我不想过于夸张。 You have this imaginary covenant of works, or maybe, maybe, I don't want to go too excessive.
你可以读到神对亚当说的话，他告诉他在园中工作，并说也许 有一些隐含的承诺，如果他这样做，他将被荣耀并进入天堂。 You can read what God says to Adam, where he tells him to work in the garden, and say maybe there were some implicit promises that if he did this he would be glorified and go to heaven.
神从未这样说过，但也许那会发生。 God doesn't ever say that, but maybe that would have happened.
那是改革宗神学家想象中必须存在的第一个约。 That's the first covenant Reformed theologians imagine must be there.
第二个约是神当时没有提到的，在堕落时发生的恩典之约。 And the second covenant is the one that God doesn't mention at the time, a covenant of grace that happens at the moment of the Fall.
这使得新约的决定性创造是罪，奇怪的是，或者是堕落。 That makes a decisive creation of the New Covenant sin, strangely enough, or the Fall.
在创世记三章的某个地方你得到了新约。 It's somewhere in Genesis 3 you get the New Covenant.
但这些都不是真的。 But none of that is true.
基督教，当圣保罗成为新约的执事时，他的意思是基督创造了一个新约，不是亚 当和夏娃通过罪，不是魔鬼引导人们犯罪，而是耶稣基督自己创造了一个新约。 Christianity, when St. Paul's becoming a minister of the New Covenant, he means that Christ has created a New Covenant, not Adam and Eve through sin, not the devil by leading people into sin, but that Jesus Christ himself has created a New Covenant.
所以，这不仅仅是一个，你知道，耶稣和圣餐不仅仅是这个约的大海中的小岛。 So, This is not just like one, you know, Jesus and the Eucharist are not just little islands in this big ocean of covenant.
相反，我们需要理解耶稣，特别是我们需要理解圣餐中的耶稣。 Rather, we need to understand Jesus, and specifically we need to understand Jesus in the Eucharist.
现在，我如何证明这一点？ Now, how would I prove that?
我会通过问一个问题来证明。 I'd prove it by asking a question.
耶稣明确提到新约的次数有多少？ How often does Jesus explicitly mention the New Covenant?
在新约中。 In the New Testament.
记住，整个新约被命名为新约是因为耶稣来到世界并带来一个新约的故事。 Remember, the whole New Testament is named the New Testament because the story of Jesus coming into the world and bringing a new covenant.
那么，耶稣明确提到新约的次数有多少？ So, how often does Jesus explicitly mention the New Covenant by name?
你知道吗？ Do you know?
因为只有一次。 Because it's one time.
你知道那一次在哪里吗？ Do you know where that one time is?
你可能可以从上下文中猜到。 You could probably guess from context.
是在最后的晚餐。 It's at the Last Supper.
耶稣从那里继续，但在马太、马可、路加和约翰中有不同的记载，但很明显，这里 的理解是他举起杯子，就好像他说，这就是了，孩子们，太平洋，用帕克的比喻。 Jesus And he goes on from there, but there's different accounts in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but it's very clear that the understanding is that here he is lifting the chalice, and it's as if he said, here it is, boys, the Pacific Ocean, to use Packer's analogy.
这是将其他一切结合在一起的东西。 This is the thing that holds everything else together.
这是新约的血。 This is the blood of the new covenant.
新的永恒之约就在这里。 The new and everlasting covenant is right here.
就好像他在说这一切。 It's as if he is saying all of that.
所以，如果你不理解约，你就无法理解基督教，如果 你要听耶稣关于约的教导，就在最后的晚餐这里。 So, you can't understand Christianity without understanding the covenant, and if you're going to listen to what Jesus teaches on the covenant, it's right here at the Last Supper.
现在，有几件事情由此而来。 Now, a few things follow from this.
我认为这改变了我们对基督教的理解。 I think this changes how we understand Christianity.
让我回到我之前提到的斯科特·哈恩的观点，合同通常是财产、货物和服务的交换。 Let me go back to the Scott Hahn thing I mentioned earlier, that contracts are an exchange of property, goods, and services typically.
约是人的交换。 Covenants are an exchange of persons.
那么，这就是一个人的交换。 Well, this is an exchange of persons.
耶稣将自己赐给我们，与我们相交。 Jesus is giving himself to us to enter into communion with us.
他正在创造这种完整的人的交换。 He's creating this full exchange of persons.
许多人有这样的冲动，如果我们错过了那个关系的 维度，我们就错过了基督教中至关重要的东西。 There is this impulse that many people have to say we're missing something crucial about Christianity if we miss that relational dimension.
你会发现人们以一种有点愚蠢的方式说出来。 And you'll find people say it in kind of silly ways.
这不是关于规则，而是关于关系。 It's not about rules, it's about relationship.
或者你甚至会听到人们说这不是关于宗教，而是关系。 Or you'll even hear people say it's not about religion, it's relationship.
这些不是理解它的好方式，因为基督教非常明确地是一个宗教。 Those aren't good ways of understanding it because Christianity is very explicitly a religion.
它在新约中称自己为宗教。 It refers to itself as a religion in the New Testament.
但无论如何，他们正确地看到这个关系的核心是关系性的。 But nevertheless, they're right to see the heart of this relationship as something relational.
我应该说这个宗教的核心是关系性的。 I should have said the heart of this religion is something relational.
本笃十六世，我非常喜欢他在一天开始时按照Caritas的要求所说的方式。 Benedict XVI, I really love the way he puts it at the beginning of the day as Caritas asked.
他说，成为基督徒不是伦理选择或崇高思想的结果，而是与一个 事件、一个人的相遇，这赋予生命新的视野和决定性的方向。 He says being Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or of a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction.
所以这是一个相遇，这是一个关系，这是与一个人以及一个事件的相遇。 So it's something that's an encounter, it's something that's a relationship, it's an encounter with a person as well as an event.
这就是我们在最后的晚餐中发现的，我们正在遇见耶稣。 And that's what we're finding here at the Last Supper, that we're encountering Jesus.
他不仅给我们新的教导，他把自己给了我们。 And he's giving us not just a new teaching, he's giving us himself.
他不仅给我们新的指示，他把自己给了我们。 He's not just giving us new instructions, he's giving us himself.
这其中有一些深刻的约的性质和深刻的关系性质。 There's something deeply covenantal and deeply relational about that.
所以这就是我们应该理解的方式。 So that's how we should be understanding this.
现在，如果在最后的晚餐中，耶稣把自己给了我们，所有这些都是有意义的。 Now, All of that makes sense if, at the Last Supper, Jesus is giving us himself.
这预设了耶稣在说「这是我的身体，这是我的血」时确实是这个意思。 This presupposes that Jesus actually means what he says when he says, this is my body, this is my blood.
他把自己赐给我们接受，并以这种不可思议的方式与我们联合。 That he's giving himself to us to receive, and he is uniting himself with us in this incredible way.
我们可能会在另一期节目中探讨这个问题。 We can probably explore this in another episode.
我没有具体的计划。 I don't have specific plans for it.
我知道我以前提到过。 I know I've mentioned it before.
但早期教父们非常明确的一点是，我们是有身体和灵魂的。 But the early church fathers were really clear about something, that one of the key things to recognize here is that we are body and soul.
我们不仅仅是没有灵魂的身体，也不是没有身体的灵魂。 We're not just bodies without souls, but neither are we souls without bodies.
我们不是动物，我们不是天使。 We're not animals, we're not angels.
我们是这种迷人的生物，拥有永恒的灵魂，但仍然是有身体的。 We're this fascinating creature that is ensouled with an everlasting soul, but is still bodily.
因此，圣巴西尔指出，如果我们只是灵魂，单凭信心就是我们遇见基督的方式。 And so, St. Basil points out that if we were just spirits, faith alone would be how we would encounter Christ.
但因为我们是有身体的，我们与他相交不仅仅是在信心层面的 智力上，而是身体上，他指出圣餐就是发生这种情况的地方。 But because we're bodily, we commune with him not just intellectually at the level of faith, but bodily, and he points to the Eucharist as where that happens.
尼撒的格雷戈里，抱歉，我说的是巴西尔，但尼 撒的格雷戈里，巴西尔实际上说了类似的话。 Gregor of Nyssa, excuse me, I said Basil, but Gregor of Nyssa, Basil actually says similar things.
所有这些都在说，我们与基督有这种不可思议的相遇，这应该是基督教的形状和形式。 All that to say that there is this incredible encounter that we have with Christ, and this should be the shape and form of Christianity.
正如我所说，无论我们在谈论伦理还是神学，无论我们在谈论什么， 如果我们要理解这些事情，我们应该用这些关系的术语来理解它们。 As I've said, whether we're talking ethics or whether we're talking theology, whether we're talking you name it, if we're going to make sense of any of those things, we should be understanding them in these relational terms.
比如，这如何表达我对神的爱？ Like, how is this an expression of my love of God?
这如何表达我对邻舍的爱？ How is this an expression of my love of my neighbor?
但是，这就是我们与那些认为不是宗教而是关系 的人分道扬镳的地方，健康的关系是有界限的。 But, and this is the part where we would part company with the not religion but relationship folks, is that a healthy relationship has boundaries.
就像你和你的妻子，你和你的丈夫一样，这不仅仅是在爱的名义下为所欲为。 In the same way that you and your wife, you and your husband, It's not just do whatever you want in the name of love.
你的关系是有界限和条款的。 There are boundaries and terms to your relationship.
这就是使其健康的原因。 That's what makes it healthy.
我们生活在一个依赖模糊关系的文化中，这种关系让 人们对被挫败和滥用的期望感到深深的不安和不满。 We live in a culture that thrives on ambiguous relationships that leave people deeply upset and unhappy with expectations that get thwarted and abused.
基督教不是这样的。 Christianity is not like that.
这不是自由的爱。 It's not free love.
这不是任何这些东西。 It's not any of those things.
这是过度的、极端的爱，但不是自由的爱。 It's excessive, extreme love, but it's not free love.
爱是无限的，但不是未定义的或无界限的。 Love that's infinite, but not undefined or unbounded.
所以它是有条款的。 So it has terms to it.
我们在圣餐中看到这一点，基督以一种特定的方式、形状和形式将自己赐给我们。 And we see this in the Eucharist, that Christ gives himself to us in a particular way, shape, and form.
这其中有一些仪式性的东西。 There's something ritual about it.
你可能会注意到，从他的话中，这与即将在十字架上发生的事情有关。 It's connected, you may notice from his words, to what's about to happen on the cross.
他提到这是约的血，为多人流出。 He refers to this being the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.
为赦罪。 For the forgiveness of sin.
所以在这几句话中，你有这样的概念，这是一个约 的关系，但也是与十字架相连的，是罪的补救。 So in those few words, you have the idea this is a covenantal relationship, but also one that's connected with the cross and as a remedy for sin.
所有这些都包含在这里。 All of that is wrapped up in here.
如果你明白这一点，如果你明白这一点，那么你 就理解了约的故事，也理解了基督教的故事。 If you get that, if you get that, then you understand the story of the covenant and you understand the story of Christianity.
如果你不明白这一点，如果你忽视了约的主题，或者如果你相信约 但忽视了圣餐的现实及其作为约的表达，那么我会说回去重读。 If you don't get that, if you've overlooked the theme of the covenant, or if you believe in the covenant but have overlooked the reality of the Eucharist and its being the expression of the covenant, then I would say go back and reread.
如果你想读点别的，你可以拿起我的新书。 And if you want something else to read, you can pick up my new book.
我是乔·赫施迈尔，为无耻教皇党。 For Shameless Popery, I'm Joe Heschmeyer.
顺便说一下，下周将更多地讨论圣餐，看看这对基督徒敬拜意味着 什么，因为很多人一直在试图弄清楚作为基督徒敬拜意味着什么？ Next week, by the way, is going to be more on the Eucharist, looking at what this means about Christian worship, because a lot of people have been Trying to figure out what does it mean to worship as a Christian?
这个词是什么意思，我们该如何做？ What does that word mean and how do we do it?
我们如何知道我们是否真的在敬拜神？ How do we know if we're actually worshiping God or not?
非常感谢。 Thanks a lot.
愿神祝福。 God bless.