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.
如果你在发布当天观看这个视频，那么今天是圣周 四，也就是耶稣受难日的前一天，复活节前几天。 So, if you're watching this on the day it's released, it is Holy Thursday, the day before Good Friday, a few days before Easter Sunday.
所以，祝圣周四快乐。 And so, happy Holy Thursday.
对你来说可能不是圣周四。 It may not be Holy Thursday for you.
对我来说现在还不是圣周四，但如果你恰好正在庆祝，那么祝你圣周四快乐。 It's actually not Holy Thursday yet for me, but if you happen to be celebrating that right now, then happy Holy Thursday to you.
这似乎是个讨论最后晚餐之奥秘，更是十字架之奥秘的好时机。 It seemed like a good time to address the mystery of the Last Supper, and even more, the mystery of the cross.
所以，我认为很多人，无论是基督徒还是非基督徒，都有 这样一个问题，那就是十字架到底是如何发挥作用的？ So, this is a question I think a lot of people, both Christian and non-Christian, have, which is, how does the cross work exactly?
你知道，作为基督徒，我们说耶稣在十字架上为我们的罪而死。 You know, as Christians, we say, Jesus died on the cross for our sins.
而非基督徒，甚至根据你成长的基督教背景不同，可能会问，这是什么意思？ And someone who's not Christian, or even depending on the kind of Christian you grew up, might say, what does that mean?
这怎么能说得通呢？ How does that make any sense?
为什么耶稣在十字架上的死能为我的罪做什么呢？ Why would Jesus' death on the cross do anything for my sins?
而且，再次强调，是如何做到的？ And what's more, again, how?
基督在一世纪的十字架上的死，通过什么机制在今天为我做了些什么？ What's the mechanism by which Christ's death on the cross, back in the first century, somehow does something for me today?
所以，这就是我想探讨的。 So, that's what I want to explore.
我想在一开始就给出一个警告，那就是，这是一个非常复杂和多方面的问题。 And I want to kind of give a caveat at the very beginning, which is to say, this is a really complicated and multifaceted dimension.
仅在新约中就使用了许多图像来描述这一点，比如基督是我们的赎价，他是所谓的 「得胜的基督」，就像胜利的弥赛亚，他是我们的赎罪，所有这些不同的模式。 There are a number of images used to describe this in the New Testament alone, that Christ is our ransom, that he is, you know, what's called Christus Victor, like the victorious Messiah, that he's our atonement, all of these different models.
因此，有不同的模式或主题。 And so, there's different models or motifs.
我不会在这个视频中争论我们必须选择其中一个而排除其他的，因为那不是真的。 And I'm not going to argue in this video that we have to choose one of those to the exclusion of the others, because that's not true.
在圣经中，我们没有看到选择其中一个而排除其他的情况。 In the Bible, we don't see one of those being chosen to the exclusion of the other.
要用言语来表达正在发生的事情及其方式是很困难的。 This is a difficult thing to put into words, what's going on and how.
这是一个深奥的属灵现实。 It's a profound spiritual reality.
我要说的是，十字架最流行的观点之一实际上是错误和危险的，但 错误的方式很微妙，如果你做一些非常重要的调整，它就是对的。 What I am going to say is that one of the most popular visions of the cross is actually wrong and dangerous, but wrong in a kind of subtle way, wrong in a way that if you make a few really important tweaks, it's right.
如果你不做这些调整，最终，正如我们将看到的，会使基督教看起来更像异教。 If you don't make those tweaks, it ends up, as we're going to see, making Christianity look much more like paganism.
它与三位一体相悖，与良好的基督论相悖，也与神的公义相悖。 And it's contrary to the Trinity, contrary to good Christology and contrary to the justice of God.
你可能会想，那么，这是什么样的十字架观？ And you might be wondering, well, what vision of the cross is that?
这种观点被称为刑罚替代论。 That vision is called penal substitution.
现在，我应该给出第二个警告。 Now, I should give a second caveat.
有许多不同的神学体系都被称为刑罚替代论。 There are a number of different theological systems that go by the name of penal substitution.
刑罚替代论，刑罚如同惩罚，替代，基督承受我们的惩罚，所以我们不必承受。 Penal substitution, penal like penalty, substitution, Christ suffers our penalties so we don't have to.
有不同形式的神学导致类似的结论。 There's different forms of theology that lead to something like that conclusion.
我并不是在批评所有这些神学。 I'm not critiquing all of them.
我不能声称理解所有这些神学。 I can't claim to understand all of them.
我想特别关注一些改革宗思想家所教导的刑罚替代性赎罪或刑罚替代论的形式。 I want to specifically focus on the forms of penal substitutionary atonement or penal substitution that are taught by a number of Reformed thinkers.
首先是加尔文，然后是许多20世纪和21世纪的改革宗思想家，其中许多人非常受欢迎。 First and foremost, John Calvin, but then by a number of 20th and 21st century Reformed thinkers, many of whom are very popular.
约翰·麦克阿瑟、R.C.斯普劳尔、约翰·派博，诸如此类的人。 John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, John Piper, people like that.
所以这就是我想要解释的内容。 And so that's what I want to unpack to explain.
这更接近于对十字架的误解和某种异教的牺牲观念，而不是任何基督教的观念。 That is much closer to the misunderstanding of the cross and kind of the pagan vision of sacrifice than it is to anything Christian.
考虑到这一点，让我们来看看两种不同的十字架观。 So with that in mind, let's look at the two different visions of the cross.
一边是阿兹特克人的祭祀，另一边是最后的晚餐。 So you've got on the one side, an Aztec sacrifice, and on the other side, you've got the Last Supper.
这两者都是对牺牲的描述。 Those are both depictions of sacrifice.
但我认为不需要火箭科学家就能意识到这些是对牺牲的根本不同理解。 But I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to realize those are radically different understandings of sacrifice.
所以让我们先看看第一个，也就是那个不好的，阿兹特克人的。 And so let's go to the first of those, the bad one, the Aztec one.
这是异教徒对十字架的误解。 That's the pagan misunderstanding of the cross.
当我这么说时，我并不是贬义的。 And when I say that, I don't mean that in a pejorative way.
我的意思是字面上的，这就是古代异教徒理解牺牲的方式。 I mean that literally, this is how pagans understood sacrifice in the ancient world.
而这也是今天一些人理解牺牲的方式。 And this is how some people understand sacrifice today.
所以，让我继续播放一小段——这是一个历史播客，一 个历史频道，不是历史频道——关于异教祭祀的内容。 So with that, let me go ahead and just play a little bit from—this is a history podcast that—and a history channel, not the History Channel—looking at pagan sacrifice.
我认为这给我们一种感觉，阿兹特克人的祭祀是什么样的？ And I think it gives a sense of what did sacrifice look like for the Aztecs?
祭司会在举刀向天之前吟诵，然后将刀落下，锐利地在牺牲者的躯干上划一道线。 A priest would chant before raising a blade to the sky, bringing it down and sharply cutting a line through the victim's torso.
他们的心脏会被剜出，仍在跳动，举向太阳。 Their heart would be ripped out and still beating, held towards the sun.
然后，他们会以一种看似不太庄重的方式，将牺牲者的尸体推下金字塔。 They then, in a move that seems a bit unceremonious, push the body of their sacrifice off the pyramid.
尸体会被带走，要么火化，要么给最初捕获他们的战士。 The body would be carried away and either cremated or given to the warrior who captured them to begin with.
战士会将尸体的部分送给重要人物，因为谁不喜欢在邮件中收到一个拇指呢？ The warrior would either send parts of the body to important people, because who doesn't love getting a thumb in the post?
所以这就是阿兹特克版本，对吧？ So that's the Aztec version, right?
你抓一个无辜的牺牲者，剜出他们的心脏，然后献给众神。 That you take an innocent victim, you rip their heart out and you offer it to the gods.
然后你丢弃尸体。 And then you discard the body.
我甚至没有提到其他一些可怕的因素。 I didn't even get into some of the other horrific factors.
有时他们会吃掉尸体。 Sometimes they would eat the body.
我的意思是，这简直是——这是一个可怕的制度。 And I mean, it was just—it was a ghastly system.
这太可怕了。 It was horrible.
这是魔鬼般的。 It was demonic.
我说这话并不是夸张。 I mean that not in an exaggerated sort of way.
你在为折磨和谋杀无辜者而欢欣。 You're delighting in the torture and murder of the innocent.
我想很多非基督徒看待基督教时会说，嗯，这不就是你们在耶稣受难日所做的吗？ And I think many non-Christians look at Christianity and say, well, isn't that what you guys are doing with Good Friday?
按照你们的说法，你们不是在为历史上最无辜的人被折磨和谋杀而欢欣吗？ Aren't you delighting in the torture and murder of the most innocent person in history, according to you?
你们不是在说这就是你们的神想要的吗？ And aren't you saying that's what your god wants?
他想要这种可怕的血祭？ That he wants this horrible blood sacrifice?
不仅是基督的心，还有他被残害和折磨致死的身体？ Not just Christ's heart, but his mutilated and tortured body killed?
这就是需要做出一些非常重要区分的地方。 And this is where some really important distinctions have to be made.
不幸的是，许多受欢迎的基督教演讲者和作者不仅没有 做出这些区分，反而真的倾向于阿兹特克式的牺牲观。 And unfortunately, a lot of popular Christian speakers and authors are not only not making those distinctions, but they're really leaning into the kind of Aztec vision of sacrifice.
他们真的在倾向于，是的，这一切都是关于神圣的暴力和流血。 They're really leaning into, yeah, this is all about divine violence and bloodshed.
这是一个深刻而危险的误解。 And that is a profound and dangerous misunderstanding.
但我想让我批评的人先说说他们自己的神学。 But I want to let the people I'm critiquing kind of have the first word describing their own theology.
所以让我们来看看，有很多人是这样做的。 So let's get, there's plenty of people who do this.
正如我所说，你会发现刑罚替代论有不同的色调。 And as I said, you'll find different shades of penal substitution.
有些比其他的好或差。 Some are better or worse than others.
让我们从约翰·麦克阿瑟开始，他解释了他神学的 核心，就是神对待耶稣就好像耶稣本人是个罪人。 Let's start with John MacArthur explaining how at the core of his theology, it's the idea that God treats Jesus as if Jesus was personally a sinner.
事实上，不仅仅是罪人，而是历史上最坏的罪人。 And in fact, not just a sinner, the worst sinner in all of history.
这是麦克阿瑟自己的话。 So here's MacArthur in his own words.
好像他亲自犯了每个将来会相信的人所犯的每一个罪，尽管实际上他一个也没有犯。 As if he had personally committed every sin ever committed by every person who would ever believe, though in reality he committed none of them.
这在神学上导致了一些真正令人震惊的结论。 And this leads to some really shocking kind of places theologically.
因为如果你相信圣父认为耶稣是历史上最坏的罪人， 或者知道他不是，但仍然要像对待罪人那样对待他。 Because if you believe that God the father believes that Jesus is the worst sinner in all history or, or knows he isn't, but it's still going to treat him like he is.
那么，神应该如何对待历史上最坏的罪人呢？ Well, how should God treat the worst sinner in all of history?
结论是，嗯，他必须诅咒他。 And the conclusion is, well, he would have to damn him.
所以我要警告你，下一个片段的语言有点强烈，而且确实很强烈，但这是R.C. 斯普劳尔说的，他是改革宗基督教中最受欢迎的传教士、思想家和知识分子之一。 And so I will warn you, the next clip is a little strong in the language and it is really strong, but it's R.C. Sproul, one of the most popular preachers, thinkers, intellectuals within Reformed Christianity.
他最近去世了，但他在改革宗基督教中是一个巨人。 He recently passed, but he was kind of a giant among Reformed Christianity.
在他最后的一次露面中，他宣讲神诅咒耶稣并咒诅他。 And one of the final appearances that he made, preaching that God cursed Jesus and damns him.
这是斯普劳尔自己的话。 And here's Sproul in his own words.
所以显然他曾经体验过圣父的美好，直到那一刻我的罪 被加在他身上，那位纯洁的不再纯洁，神诅咒了他。 So obviously he had some, some experience of the beauty of the father until that moment that my sin was placed upon him and the one who was pure was pure no more and God cursed him.
就好像天上传来一声呐喊，请原谅我的用语，但我无法更准确地表达，就好像神，耶 稣听到了这样的话：神诅咒你，因为这就是被诅咒、被咒诅、被父亲弃绝的意思。 It was as if there was a cry from heaven, excuse my language, but I can be no more accurate than to say, it was as if God, Jesus heard the words, God damn you, because that's what it meant to be cursed, to be damned, to be under the anathema of the father.
那么这个体系有什么问题呢？ So what are the problems with this system?
正如你可能想象的那样，这是有问题的。 As you might imagine, is problematic.
所以我要列出我看到的以这种方式理解的刑罚替代论的六个问题。 So I'm going to list six problems that I see with penal substitution understood in this way.
第一个我们称之为三位一体的问题。 The first of them we'll call the Trinitarian problems.
这个想法很简单，就是耶稣是神。 And the idea is really simple that Jesus is God.
所以说神诅咒耶稣或神咒诅耶稣就等于说神咒诅神。 And so to say that God cursed Jesus or that God damns Jesus is to say that God damns God.
这是事实。 Now it's true.
父不是子，子也不是父，但父与子在威严、尊严和荣耀上是平等的。 The father is not the son and the son is not the father, but the father and the son are equal in majesty, dignity, and glory.
他们同样是神圣的。 They are equally divine.
所以第一个三位一体的问题很简单，就是你不能以这种方式将父、子和圣灵分开。 And so the first Trinitarian problem is quite simply that you cannot separate the father, son, and spirit in this way.
你不能把其中一位看作比其他两位更神圣，这会导致一些非常深刻的神学问题。 And you can't treat one of them as more God than the other ones, that running into some really profound theological problems.
我考虑过放一些R.C.斯普劳尔实际解释这一点的片段，但我 认为这已经足够清楚了，这是基督教对三位一体的理解，至少在 理论上，斯普劳尔、派博、麦克阿瑟，所有这些人都会同意。 And I thought about putting some clips up where R.C. Sproul actually explains this, but I think this is clear enough that the Christian understanding of the Trinity, and this is something that at least on paper, Sproul, Piper, MacArthur, all these guys are going to agree to.
父、子和圣灵是同等的。 The father, son, and Holy Spirit are co-equal.
他们都完全是神或真正是神。 They're all fully God or truly God.
麦克阿瑟和斯普劳尔之间实际上有一个有趣的辩论，关于我们应 该说耶稣是完全的神和完全的人，还是真正的神和真正的人。 And there's actually a funny debate between MacArthur and Sproul about whether we should say Jesus is fully God and fully man or truly God and truly man.
斯普劳尔的观点是，如果你说完全是神，那听起来就像他只是神，无论你想怎么说。 And Sproul's point is, well, if you say fully God, that makes it sound like he's only God, whichever way you want to say it.
我们的意思是耶稣完全是神性的，也完全是人性的。 We mean that Jesus is entirely divine and entirely human.
这当然就引出了基督论的问题，这是第二组问题，就像你不能通过让父诅 咒子来分离三位一体一样，你不能让三位一体的第一位谴责三位一体的第 二位，你不能让第一位憎恨三位一体或将第二位从三位一体中切断。 So that leads, of course, to the Christological problem, which is the second set of problems, that just as you can't separate the Trinity by having the father damn the son, you can't have the first person of the Trinity condemning the second person of the Trinity, you can't have the first person hating the Trinity or cutting the second person from the Trinity off.
当你深入基督论时，由于道成肉身的本质，耶稣是完全的 神，完全的人，正如我刚才所说，真正的神，真正的人。 When you get into Christology, Jesus is, due to the nature of the incarnation, fully God, fully man, as I just said, truly God, truly man.
这是很重要的。 And this is significant.
他仍然是天上三位一体的第二位，神圣的神。 He remains the second person of the Trinity in heaven, the divine God.
他没有离开天堂。 He doesn't leave heaven.
现在，这可能是斯普劳尔和麦克阿瑟会有分歧的一个领域，因为他 们都说过一些似乎暗示他们认为神在道成肉身时离开了天堂的话。 Now, this is perhaps an area in which Sproul and MacArthur will disagree because they've both said things that seem to suggest that maybe they think God left heaven in the incarnation.
这是早期异教徒对基督教的误解。 That was an early pagan misunderstanding of Christianity.
早期的基督徒不得不说，不，那不是真的。 And the early Christians had to say, no, that's not true.
但我知道，如果是这样的话，如果那些人误解了，那不是标准的改革宗立场。 But I know that if that is the case, if those guys are misunderstanding it, that is not the standard reform position.
加尔文非常清楚地表示，在道成肉身中，神仍然在天上。 Calvin was very clear that God remains in heaven in the incarnation.
这包括神，子，神的儿子，三位一体的第二位，在成为人的时候，并没有离开天堂。 And that includes God, the son, that God, the son, the second person of the Trinity, in becoming man, does not leave heaven behind.
他同时在加利利海岸的马槽里，统治宇宙，并在自己里面掌管一切。 That he is at once in the manger on the shores of Galilee and ruling the cosmos and holding all things together in himself.
如果你说他离开了天堂，你就不得不说，三位一体som ehow解体了，而且基督所维系的整个宇宙也解体了。 That if you were to say he left heaven, you would have to say, both the Trinity somehow dissolves and that all the universe, which Christ holds together, dissolves.
这是糟糕的神学，对吧？ That's a bad theology, right?
所以从神学上讲，你不能说三位一体... So theologically, you just can't say that the Trinitarian...
看，当我们谈论三位一体的内住时，我们经常说的是圣父、圣子和圣灵来住在我里面。 Look, when we talk about Trinitarian indwelling, we often talk about that in terms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit coming to dwell within me.
但同样真实的是，圣父、圣子和圣灵彼此相交。 But it's also true, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in communion with each other.
他们是位格的相交，是不可分离的位格相交。 They are a communion of persons, an inseparable communion of persons.
因此，以这种方式理解的刑罚替代论的问题是，父惩罚子，父转眼不看子，这完全 破坏了三位一体的相交，以及本体层面的相交，也就是所谓的基督内的位格联合。 And so the problem with penal substitution as understood in this way, the father is punishing the son and the father turns his eyes away from the son, is that it totally undermines both that inter, intra, excuse me, Trinitarian communion and the communion at the ontological level, what's called the hypostatic union within Christ.
因为这样一来，要么三位一体在咒诅自己，要么 三位一体的一部分在咒诅三位一体的另一部分。 Because then either the Trinity is damning itself or part of the Trinity is damning part of the Trinity.
三位一体的一部分不与三位一体的另一部分交谈。 Part of the Trinity isn't talking to part of the Trinity.
或者耶稣在本性上有这种不可思议的精神分裂， 他的神性和人性不和谐，只是共享同一个身体。 Or Jesus in his nature has got this incredible schizophrenia where his divine and human natures aren't getting along and they're just sharing the same house.
这是糟糕的基督论。 This is bad Christology.
我们实际上可以通过阅读约翰·麦克阿瑟所说的话来看到这种糟糕的基督论。 And we can actually see this bad Christology on display by reading something John MacArthur said.
我相信这实际上是2000年的一篇讲道。 And this is actually, I believe, a 2000 homily.
我在网上找不到，但他们的网站上有一份文字记录。 I couldn't find it online, but they have a transcript on his website.
他说，如果你没有永恒的三位一体，你就有了错误的神。 He says, now if you do not have an eternal Trinity, you have the wrong God.
如果你有了错误的神，你就有了错误的耶稣和错误的福音。 If you have the wrong God, you have the wrong Jesus and the wrong gospel.
这是一个广泛的异端，因为它是一个源头异端，实际上污染了所有其他的神学。 This is a sweeping heresy, because it is a fountainhead heresy that literally pollutes all the rest of theology.
阿们。 Amen.
绝对如此。 Absolutely.
如果你在三位一体神学上出错，其他一切都会搞砸。 If you get Trinitarian theology wrong, everything else is going to be screwed up.
完全同意。 Completely agree.
但在同一篇讲道中，他接着说在基督里没有疏离。 But in the same homily, he goes on to say that within Christ, there is no alienation.
这不是一个罪人。 This is not a sinner.
他在这里谈论的是基督的洗礼，耶稣受洗不是因为他犯罪。 And he's talking here about the baptism of Christ, that Jesus isn't baptized because he sins.
他受洗不是因为他需要恢复与神的相交。 He isn't baptized because he needs to be restored into divine communion.
所以没有疏离。 So there is no alienation.
这不是一个罪人。 This is not a sinner.
那种关系中没有破裂。 There is no breach in that relationship.
他在这里谈到的是三位一体的关系。 He speaks here of the Trinitarian relationship.
从永恒到永恒，中间的时间里，没有分离。 There is no separation from eternity, through eternity, through time in the middle.
当耶稣道成肉身时，他与父的交流从未中断过。 When Jesus was incarnate, there never was a break in communication with the Father.
如果他就此打住，那将是完全正统的，深刻正统的。 If he'd stopped there, that would be perfectly, profoundly Orthodox.
但接着他说，除了在十字架上耶稣说「我的神，我的神，为什么离弃我」的那一刻。 But then he says, except that moment on the cross when Jesus said, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
当神为我们所有的罪处决耶稣的时候。 When God was executing Jesus for all our sins.
但除了那一刻，没有存在过疏离。 But apart from that moment, no alienation existed.
现在，让我们花点时间来分析一下这个。 Now, let's just unpack this for a minute.
他刚刚说神的永恒本质是这种三位一体的内住。 He's just said the eternal nature of God is this Trinitarian indwelling.
而在道成肉身中，这个人性被带入三位一体的第二位格。 And that in the incarnation, this human nature is brought into the second person of the Holy Trinity.
不是说神有了变化，而是他将人性带入自己。 Not that there's a change in God, but he takes a human nature to himself.
这个人性享受这种三位一体的内住。 And this human nature enjoys this Trinitarian indwelling.
用专业术语来说，基督享受，我们会这样说。 Christ enjoys, in technical terms, we would say it this way.
基督在他的一生中享受着真福直观。 Christ enjoys the beatific vision his entire life.
他里面有三位一体第二位格的内住，不仅仅是我 们通过洗礼、收养等方式可能拥有的那种方式。 And he has the dwelling of the second person of the Holy Trinity in him, not merely the way we might through baptism, through adoption, and so forth.
相反，他是一个有人性的神圣位格。 But rather, he is a divine person with a human nature.
所以这不像是一个人里面飘荡着神性。 So it isn't like he's a human person who has a divine nature floating around in there.
不，他是一个有人性的神圣位格。 No, he's a divine person with a human nature.
所以说这是一个永恒的真理，除了那三个小时，这是疯狂的。 And so it is insane to say, yes, this is an eternal truth, except for three hours.
因为对神来说，一切事物都是永恒存在的。 Because for one, to God, all things are eternally present.
所以当你说有这三个小时的间隙，三位一体停止了是三 位一体，或者道成肉身的神停止了是道成肉身的神。 So when you say there's this three hour gap where the Trinity stopped being the Trinity, or when the, you know, the incarnate God stopped being the incarnate God.
如果你一旦做出这种逻辑跳跃，那就直接说你不相信三位一体吧。 If once you make that kind of logical leap, then just say you don't believe in the Trinity.
直接否认三位一体，说我不再是基督徒了，因为你已经到了这个地步。 Just deny the Trinity and say, I'm no longer a Christian, because that's where you're at.
因为这是一个最深刻的错误。 Because this is, that's as profound as it gets of an error.
正如他刚才所说，如果你搞砸了永恒的三位一体，那 么你所有其他的神学都建立在非常不稳固的基础上。 As he just said, if you screw up the eternal Trinity, then all the rest of your theology is on really shaky ground.
因为这是一种优先级真理。 Because this is a one kind of priority truth.
如果你从早期基督教就能知道这一点，这就是他们想确保每个人都正确理解的事情。 And if you can know that just from looking at early Christianity, this was the thing they wanted to make sure everybody got right.
而他在一个非常深刻的层面上搞错了，他暗示三 位一体中存在一种在神学上毫无意义的疏离。 And he's getting it wrong, you know, in a really profound way, by suggesting an alienation in the Trinity that makes no theological sense.
这根本行不通。 It just doesn't work.
它不可能行得通。 It can't work.
但我想继续讨论第三点。 But I want to go on to the third thing.
这些是道德和法律问题。 These are the moral and legal problems.
我发现人们在抱怨替代性赎罪、刑罚替代性赎罪或刑罚替代论的问题时，通常 从这里开始，因为这确实使神看起来更像一个非常强大的恶魔，而不像神。 And this is actually where I find people usually start when they're complaining about the problems with the substitutionary, penal substitutionary atonement, or penal substitution, is that it certainly makes God out to look more like a very powerful demon than like God.
这是一个似乎喜欢折磨无辜者并让有罪者逍遥法外的神。 That this is a God who seems to delight in torturing the innocent and letting the guilty go free.
这可能听起来像是一种讽刺性的夸张描述。 And that may sound like a caricature.
但从外部来看，它确实是这样的。 But that's certainly from the outside how it looks.
所以让我们给约翰·麦克阿瑟一个机会来解释他认为有吸引力的地方。 So let's give John MacArthur kind of a chance to explain what he sees as an appeal.
他将用一个法官的比喻，说明法官不能就这样让有罪的人走。 So he's going to make this analogy about a judge, and how a judge can't just let the guilty person go.
所以我会先让麦克阿瑟说，然后我会回应为什么我认为这是一个虚假的问 题，以及为什么我认为他以一种灾难性的方式解决了这个虚假的问题。 So I'm going to give MacArthur the first word, and then I'm going to kind of respond to why I think it's a fake problem, and why I think he solves that fake problem in a kind of disastrous way.
法官，有个人来到你的法庭，他被控告犯了各种罪行，而他已经认罪了。 The judge, and the guy comes into your court, and he has been indicted for all kinds of crimes to which he has confessed.
他对你说，法官大人，我有罪，我全都做了。 And he says to you, I'm guilty, Your Honor, I've done them all.
我是个杀人魔。 I'm a mass murderer.
我杀了25个人。 I've killed 25 people.
我把他们砍碎了。 I've chopped them up.
我吃了其中几个，其余的埋在我的院子里。 I've eaten a few of them buried the rest in my yard.
我对所有这些都有罪。 I'm guilty of all of it.
但我现在感觉真的很糟糕。 But I feel really bad now.
我非常抱歉我做了那些事，我确实想悔改。 And I'm so sorry I did that, and I do want to repent.
你能原谅我并让我走吗？ Would you please forgive me and let me go?
如果法官说，当然，我是个好人。 If the judge said, sure, I'm a nice guy.
我心里充满了怜悯。 I've got a lot of mercy in my heart.
你可以走了。 You're free to go.
他就不再是一个法官了。 He wouldn't be a judge anymore.
法官的责任是什么？ What's a judge's responsibility?
维护什么？ Uphold what?
法律。 The law.
这是他的责任。 That's his responsibility.
你不能那样做。 You can't do that.
你不能就这样让那个人走。 You can't just let that man go.
那将是不公正的。 That would be unjust.
所以我之前提到，我认为这是一个虚假的问题。 So I mentioned before, I think this is a fake problem.
我认为这是一个虚假问题的原因是，神不仅仅是某个巡回法庭的法官。 And the reason I think it's a fake problem is because God isn't just some circuit court judge.
这是整个宇宙的神。 This is God of the entire universe.
因此，把法律置于神之上实际上是使神失去主权。 And so to put the law above God is to actually make God not sovereign.
因为主权者可以自由赦免违法行为。 Because the sovereign can freely pardon offenses against the law.
这是一个非常关键的观念，不仅在神学中，甚至在政治中也是如此，对吧？ That's a really critical idea, not just in theology, but even in politics, right?
总统可以发布赦免令。 The president can issue pardons.
国王可以发布赦免令。 The king can issue pardons.
州长可以对州级犯罪发布赦免令。 A governor can issue pardons against state crimes.
我们看到本丢·彼拉多把巴拉巴和耶稣放在那里，问他应该赦免哪一个。 We see Pontius Pilate putting Barabbas and Jesus up there asking which of them he ought to pardon.
所以，不，一个赦免的主权者不会被当作法官废黜。 So no, a sovereign who pardons isn't thrown out as a judge.
这与主权者的角色完全一致。 That's perfectly consistent with the role of a sovereign.
同样，法官也可以说，在这种情况下我们不会盲目地遵循法律。 Well, likewise, a judge can also say, we aren't going to just blindly follow the law in this case.
一个很好的例子是如果你有一个悔改的罪犯。 And a good example of that is if you have a repentant criminal.
如果有人感到懊悔，你不认为监禁实际上会对他们有任何好处。 If you have someone who's remorseful, you don't think prison time is actually going to do them any good.
所以我要说的第一件事是，不，神可以自由地赦免。 So the first thing I'd say is, no, God freely can pardon.
现在我们将看到神选择不仅仅是让我们不悔改就赦免我们所有的罪。 Now we're going to see God chooses not just to let us go unrepentant, pardoned from all of our sins.
他选择了另一条道路，阿奎那给出了几个他选择那条道路的原因，其中最重要的是这条 道路，十字架上道成肉身的道路，更好地向我们展示了神的爱，并且更符合人的尊严。 He chooses another course, and Aquinas gives several reasons why he chooses that course, not least of which is that this road, the road of the incarnation in the cross, better shows us God's love and is more in keeping with human dignity.
但认为他必须这样做是因为他受法律约束的想法是荒谬的。 But the idea that he had to do this because he was bound by the law is nonsensical.
这是令人发指的。 It's outrageous.
尽管罪是对我们亏欠神的违背，但被冒犯的人总是可以自由地放过对他们的冒犯。 And as much as sin is a violation of what we owe to God, well, the person violated is always free to let offenses go against them.
你知道，法官不能原谅他无法控制的事情。 You know, a judge can't forgive something he doesn't have control over.
法官可能会说，嗯，我个人可能对此没有问题，但我受法律约束。 And the judge may say, well, I may have no personal problem with this, but I'm bound by the law.
这些都不适用于神，对吧？ None of that applies to God, right?
罪是对我们与神关系的违背。 Sin is a violation of our relationship with God.
这是对我们亏欠神的违背。 It's a violation of what we owe to God.
神可以自由地说，我要放过它，无论冒犯多么严重。 And God could freely say, I'm going to let it go, no matter how grave the offense is.
所以我在这里要说的第一件事是，就他所争辩的那样， 哦，不，他必须惩罚某人，否则他就不是一个好法官。 So the first thing I'd say here is that in as much as he argues, oh, no, he has to punish somebody or else he's not a good judge.
这误解了作为法官的含义，更深刻地误解了作为主权者的含义。 That misunderstands what it is to be a judge, and it misunderstands even more profoundly what it is to be a sovereign.
而神既是主权者又是法官。 And God is both sovereign and judge.
但现在让我们更深入地思考一下他刚才所说的。 But now let's think a little deeper about what he's just said.
嗯，你有这个可怕的食人杀人犯，他说他想被赦免，但法官不能就这样赦免他。 Well, you've got this horrible cannibal murderer, and he says he wants to be pardoned, but the judge can't just pardon him.
所以法官决定折磨和杀害另一个人。 So the judge decides to torture and kill somebody else.
这怎么能成为问题的解决方案呢，对吧？ How is that a solution to the problem, right?
他要折磨和杀害一个无辜的人来代替？ He's going to torture and kill an innocent person instead?
这当然毫无道理。 This of course makes no sense.
这行不通。 This does not work.
这样的惩罚对犯罪者来说是个人的。 Punishment like this is personal to the offender.
你不能就这样转移它。 You can't just transfer it.
你不能就说，你知道，史密斯犯了死罪，我们本来要处决他，但他死了。 You can't just say, you know, Smith committed capital crimes and we were going to execute him, but he died.
所以我们要杀他的邻居来代替。 And so we're going to kill his neighbor instead.
不，这行不通。 No, it doesn't work.
那将是不道德的，令人发指的，疯狂的。 That would be immoral, outrageous, insane.
再次强调，这更接近异教或魔鬼，而不是基督教。 And again, something closer to pagan or demonic than Christian.
这种认为良善和慈爱的神，那个说「我就是爱」的神，会充 满愤怒到开始折磨一个无辜的人，他自己的儿子，的想法。 The idea that the good and loving God, the God who says, I am love, is so filled with wrath that he's going to start torturing an innocent person, his own son.
这在神学上站不住脚。 It doesn't sit theologically.
不仅仅是因为它冒犯了现代人的感受。 It's not just that, oh, it offends modern sensibilities.
这就是刑罚替代论的支持者如何将其讽刺化的。 This is how it kind of gets caricatured by penal substitution defenders.
不，不。 No, no.
如果你对正义有任何了解，就会发现这根本不符合正义。 It's like, if you understand anything about justice, that makes no sense of justice.
你可以说神的正义高于我们的，但神的正义不会低于我们的。 You can say God's justice is higher than ours, but God's justice isn't lower than ours.
而做这种事的人的行为甚至低于人类的正义。 And a person who did this is acting in a way lower than even human justice.
所以在我看来，认为这somehow符合并且是司法正义所要求的这种观点是行不通的。 So that vision that this is somehow consistent with and required by judicial justice doesn't work as I see it.
它不仅仅是行不通。 It more than doesn't work.
它是在回应一个虚假的问题，它忽视了赦免的存在，而创造了一 个可怕的问题，那就是它想象神自由选择折磨和杀害无辜者。 It's responding to a fake problem that it just ignores that pardons exist by creating a monstrous problem, which is it imagines God choosing freely to torture and kill the innocent.
如果他对自己的儿子都这样做，那么为什么他不能在最后的审判中说，你知道，我答应过 你们得救，但我要折磨和杀害你们所有人来代替，因为在我的正义中，这就是我所做的。 And if he does that to his own son, why couldn't he then, you know, take the last judgment, say, you know, I promised you guys salvation, but I'm going to torture and kill you all instead, because in my justice, that's just what I do.
所以，如果你相信一个完全不顾我们所理解的正义的神，这 实际上会破坏我们对神的良善或我们自己得救的任何信心。 So it actually undermines any confidence we would have in the goodness of God or in our own salvation if you believe in a God who has no regard for what we would understand as justice in any way, shape, or form.
所以不，神的正义并不要求这样。 And so no, God's justice does not demand this.
这是一种人为的发明，它误解了法官，误解了主权者， 并以一种深刻且坦率地说是令人震惊的方式误解了神。 This is a human invention that misunderstands judges, misunderstands sovereigns, and misunderstands God in a profound and frankly scandalous kind of way.
现在，R.C.斯普劳尔实际上看到了这里的一些问题，并试图绕过它们。 Now, R.C. Sproul actually sees some of the problems here and tries to work around them.
所以我要给你——因为他创造了一个假设情况，说，嗯，你不会让一个妈妈介入。 So I'm going to give you the—because he creates a hypothetical and says, well, you wouldn't have a mom step in.
但然后他试图弄清楚如何，比如，嗯，也许对神来说是不同的，我会让 你决定是否认为他这种为这明显的怪诞行为辩解的说法有任何分量。 But then he tries to figure out how, like, well, maybe it's different for God, and I'll let you decide if you think there's any weight to his kind of excuse out of this apparently monstrosity, this apparent monstrosity.
为什么神惩罚耶稣承担我们的罪是公正的，而人类法官做类似的事却是如此不公正？ Why is God just to punish Jesus for our sins when doing a similar thing would be so unjust for a human judge to do?
非常好的问题。 Very good question.
当耶稣死时，他说，父啊，时候到了。 When Jesus died, he said, Father, the hour has come.
荣耀你的儿子，也荣耀你自己。 Glorify your Son and glorify yourself.
父回答说，我已经荣耀了我的名，我还要再荣耀。 And the Father came back and said, I have glorified my name, and I will glorify it again.
他说，荣耀你的儿子，也荣耀你自己。 And he said, Glorify your Son and glorify yourself.
父回答说，我已经荣耀了我的名，我还要再荣耀。 And the Father came back and said, I have glorified my name, and I will glorify it again.
理解耶稣在神的愤怒下替代性死亡的方式是，他 这样做是为了荣耀、彰显神荣耀的无限价值。 The way to understand Jesus' substitutionary death under God's wrath is that he is doing it in such a way as to glorify, magnify the infinite worth of the glory of God.
神的荣耀被我们这样的人践踏了。 God's glory has been trampled by people like us.
每次我们选择其他事物而不是神的荣耀时，我们就贬低了神的荣耀，我们每天都在这样做。 Every time we prefer something to the glory of God, we demean the glory of God, and we do it every day.
既然他的荣耀被诽谤和贬低，他就必须通过惩罚罪 人来高举他的荣耀，说，我的荣耀是无限宝贵的。 Since his glory has been impugned and belittled, he has to exalt his glory by punishing sinners and saying, My glory is infinitely valuable.
如果你践踏我的荣耀，你就失去荣耀，我通过你失去荣耀来恢复我的荣耀。 If you trample my glory, you lose glory, and I restore my glory by your losing glory.
耶稣进入其中，他能做到没有人能做到的事。 Jesus enters in, and he is able to do what no human could do.
这就是为什么有区别。 This is why there's a difference.
在法庭上没有人能做到这一点。 No human ever could do this in a court of law.
他是如此完美，他受了如此多的苦，他的动机如此向着神，以至 于当他死在十字架上时，所显明的是，看神的荣耀是多么宝贵。 He is so perfect, and he suffers so much, and his motives are so God-ward, that when he dies on the cross, what is manifest is, look how valuable the glory of God is.
如果一个母亲在法庭上站出来说，让我代替我的儿子。 If a mom stepped forward in a courtroom and said, Let me take my son's place.
请让我代替我的儿子。 Let me take my son's place, please.
我们都知道那将是不公正的。 We all know that would be unjust.
她去坐电椅，而这个儿子继续犯更多的罪。 She goes to the electric chair, and this son goes on to sin more.
嗯，两个区别是，她这样做不是为了彰显国家，神的价值。 Well, the two differences are, she's not doing that to magnify the worth of the state, God.
她这样做是为了彰显她儿子的价值，这不是十字架上发生的事，第二，她释放了 未经改变的儿子，让他进入世界继续犯罪，这正是耶稣之死的两个不同之处。 She's doing it to magnify the worth of her son, and that's not what's happening at the cross, and number two, she's freeing the son, untransformed, to go into the world and sin some more, and those are the very two things that are different about the death of Jesus.
耶稣死不是为了彰显罪人的价值，而是为了彰显 神的价值，他死了并改变那些从地狱逃脱的人。 Jesus dies not to magnify the sinner's worth, but to magnify God's worth, and he dies and changes those who escape from hell.
他不只是释放更多的罪到世界上。 He doesn't just release more sin upon the world.
他将圣灵放在我们的生命中，开始将我们转变成 基督的形象，使我们比留在罪中更能荣耀父。 He puts the Holy Spirit in our lives and begins to transform us into the image of Christ, so that we bring more glory to the Father than if we had been left in our sin.
所以，正如我所说，我不觉得这令人信服。 So, as I said, I don't find that convincing.
我实际上不明白这些区别有什么重要性。 I don't actually understand how any of those distinctions would matter.
哦，这是为了国家的利益，或者是为了法律的利益。 Oh, it's for the good of the state, or it's for the good of the law.
这些都不能让你以这种方式折磨无辜者或惩罚无辜者。 None of that would let you torture the innocent or punish the innocent in this way.
所以，我认为斯普劳尔实际上并没有解决这个问题，但他认识到这一点是好的。 So, I don't think Sproul actually resolves the problem, but it's good that he recognizes.
他认识到我们所阐述的神学似乎是不道德的，这很好。 It's good that he's recognizing, hey, the theology we're articulating appears to be immoral.
我们所阐述的神学似乎把神变成了一个道德怪物，而不是圣经中所呈现的良善的神。 The theology we're articulating appears to make God a moral monster and not the good God that's presented in the Bible.
我认为他解决得不好，但至少他认识到关于正义的某 些方面，我们似乎在这个表述中搞砸了，这是好的。 I think he resolves it badly, but it's good that he at least recognizes something about justice seems like we've gotten it screwed up in this presentation.
所以，我现在要继续讨论下一个问题，这是我对这种神学的 六个问题中的第四个，那就是它似乎要求基督永远受诅咒。 So, I'm going to move on now to the next problem, the fourth of the six problems I have with this theology, which is that it seems to require Christ's eternal damnation.
现在，我要说这里有一个分歧。 Now, I will say there's a division.
你知道，我提到过有许多不同形式的刑罚替代论，有些实 际上支持这一点，有些则不支持，即基督是否下地狱。 You know, I mentioned there's a bunch of different forms of penal substitution, and some actually argue for this and some don't, that Christ goes to hell or Christ doesn't go to hell.
约翰·麦克阿瑟认为基督没有下地狱，但他并不真正理解为什么或这如何说得通。 John MacArthur argues that Christ doesn't go to hell, but he doesn't really understand why or how that kind of makes sense.
问题是这样的。 The problem is this.
如果你说基督承受我们的罪的惩罚，好吧，我们的罪的惩罚是什么？ If you say Christ suffers our penalties for sin, okay, what's our penalty for sin?
永远与神隔绝和在地狱中永远受诅咒。 Eternal separation from God and eternal damnation in hell.
对于既是神又是人的人来说，永远与神隔绝是说不通的，因为你必须 取消道成肉身并撕裂三位一体，但永远受诅咒同样说不通，对吧？ Eternal separation from God doesn't make sense for someone who is both God and man, because you'd have to undo the incarnation and tear apart the trinity, but eternal damnation makes no more sense, right?
但如果你相信基督承担我们罪的后果，你就必须相 信这一点，因为我们罪的后果是永远与神隔绝。 But that is what you'd have to believe if you believe that Christ bears our consequences for the sins, because our consequences for the sins are eternal separation from God.
所以这里麦克阿瑟试图解释为什么他可以绕过这一点，然后我会给 你一些其他的改革宗神学家，他的前辈加尔文，他认为这行不通。 So here's MacArthur trying to explain why he can kind of work around this, and then I'm going to give you some other Reformed theologian, his predecessor John Calvin, who thinks that doesn't work.
但这里先说麦克阿瑟。 But here's MacArthur first.
在十字架上，神将所有将要相信的人的所有罪的所有愤怒都倾倒在他的儿子身上。 On the cross, God poured out on his Son all the wrath for all the sins of all the people who would ever believe.
所有将要相信的人的所有罪的所有审判都倾倒在基督身上。 All the judgment for all the sins of all the people who would ever believe was poured out on Christ.
你说，等一下。 You say, wait a minute.
当我分析十字架时，这实际上只发生在三个小时内。 As I analyzed the cross, there really were only three hours when this took place.
所有这些都发生在三个小时内。 All of that took place in three hours.
人类历史上的罪人将下地狱并永远在地狱里，他们在地狱里永远都无法为自己 的罪付出代价，但基督却能在三个小时内为所有将要相信的人的所有罪付出全 部代价，这怎么可能呢？我唯一能给你的答案是因为他是一个无限的位格。 How is it possible that the sinners of human history will go to hell and be in hell forever and ever, and all of them in hell forever will never pay the price for their sins, but Christ can pay the price in full for all the sins of all who would ever believe in three hours, and the only answer I can give you is because He is an infinite person.
他有无限的能力来承受那个审判。 He has an infinite capacity to absorb that judgment.
所以这里有几点让我觉得很惊讶。 So a couple of things are striking to me about that.
首先，将耶稣基本上视为神圣愤怒的容器，这对耶稣基督的位格真的是一种 冒犯，我的意思是，当然，这对圣父也是一种真正的冒犯，但它完全不同于 我们在圣经中看到的耶稣的牺牲，那是出于对父的爱，非常个人化的。 First, the vision of Jesus basically is just a receptacle for divine wrath is really offensive to the person of Jesus Christ, and I mean, of course, really offensive to God the Father, but it totally really stands apart from the way we see Jesus's sacrifice, which is intensely personal, out of love for the Father, described in Scripture.
现在，你可能会想，在这一点上，请记住，我还没有提出一个积极的十字架观。 Now, you may be like, at this point, bear in mind, I'm not laying out a positive vision of the cross yet.
这是我接下来要做的第二部分。 That's the second half of what I'm going to do here.
现在，我只是说这是一个流行的十字架观，它以一种无法理解三位一体、 基督论、神的良善的方式把事情搞得非常危险和深刻地错误，而且它甚至 没有遵循自己的逻辑结论，因为你有——这是我要说的三点中的第二点。 Right now, I'm just saying this is a popular vision of the cross that gets things really dangerously profoundly wrong in a way that cannot make sense of the trinity of Christology, of the goodness of God, and that it doesn't even follow its own logical conclusions because you've got—this is my second of three points that I was going to make.
麦克阿瑟说，嗯，这怎么可能在三个小时内完成？ MacArthur's saying, well, how could this work in three hours?
他说，嗯，他是一个神圣的位格。 And he says, well, he's a divine person.
他是永恒的。 He's eternal.
但这实际上说不通，对吧？ But that doesn't really make sense, right?
在地狱中度过永恒的概念并不是我们在地狱中度过永恒然后就还清了所有债务。 The notion of eternity in hell isn't we spend eternity in hell and then we've paid it all off.
是神是永恒的。 It's God is eternal.
地狱不是永恒的。 Hell is not eternal.
它是无尽的。 It's unending.
这是有区别的。 There's something different.
这两个词的意思不一样。 Those two words don't mean the same thing.
我知道我们用它们的方式是一样的。 I know we use them the same way.
那么，说基督在三个小时内做这件事然后就不再做是什么意思？ And so, what does it mean to say Christ does this in three hours and then no longer?
无论如何，他认识到他的体系中另一个明显的缺 陷是好的，因为这怎么可能在三个小时内完成？ In any case, good that he recognizes another apparent shortcoming in his system, because how would this work in three hours?
这看起来不像是承担我们罪的后果。 That doesn't look like it's bearing the consequences for our sins.
我们罪的后果不仅仅是肉体的死亡。 The consequences of our sins are not just bodily death.
它们不仅仅是在今生与神疏离。 They're not just alienation from God in this life.
它们还包括我们死后与神永远分离。 They're also eternal separation from God after we die.
嗯，约翰·加尔文认识到这一点，加尔文走到了麦克阿瑟不敢涉足的地方。 Well, John Calvin recognizes this, and Calvin goes where MacArthur fears to tread.
他在评论信经时说，除了信经之外，我们必须寻求对基 督下地狱的确切解释，因为使徒信经说基督下到地狱。 He is commenting on the creed, and he says, apart from the creed, we must seek for sure exposition of Christ's descent to hell, because the Apostles' Creed said Christ descends into hell.
现在，顺便说一下，使徒信经中的地狱并不是指诅咒的地狱。 Now, the Apostles' Creed, as an aside, does not mean the hell of damnation.
但加尔文似乎不理解这一点。 But Calvin does not seem to understand this.
他说，如果基督只忍受了肉体的死亡，那就什么都没有完成。 He says, nothing had been done if Christ had only endured corporeal death.
所以，你刚刚听到约翰·麦克阿瑟说，足够了，在十字架上三个小时，那承担了全部重量。 So, you just heard John MacArthur saying, good enough, three hours on the cross, that bears the full weight.
而在刑罚替代模式中，基本上发明了刑罚替代论的加尔文说，不，那行不通。 And in a penal substitutionary model, Calvin, who basically invents penal substitution, says, nah, that doesn't work.
那是不够的。 That's not going to be good enough.
如果基督只忍受了肉体的死亡，那就什么都没有完成。 Nothing had been done if Christ had only endured corporeal death.
为了介入我们和神的愤怒之间，满足他公义的审判，他有必要感受到神圣报复的重量。 In order to interpose between us and God's anger and satisfy his righteous judgment, it was necessary that he should feel the weight of divine vengeance.
因此，他也有必要与地狱的权势和永恒死亡的恐怖进行近距离的交锋。 Whence also it was necessary that he should engage, as it were, at close quarters with the powers of hell and the horrors of eternal death.
然后他接着说，因此，说他下到地狱并不奇怪， 因为他忍受了愤怒的神加在恶人身上的死亡。 Then he goes on to say, therefore, there's nothing strange in being said that he descended to hell, seeing he endured the death which is inflicted on the wicked by an angry God.
愤怒的神加在恶人身上的死亡是什么？ And what is the death inflicted on the wicked by an angry God?
根据加尔文的说法，就是神把他送到地狱。 According to Calvin, that God sends him to hell.
所以，刑罚替代似乎需要基督被诅咒下地狱。 So, penal substitution seems like it requires Christ's damnation to hell.
你明白为什么这是个问题吗？ Do you see why that's a problem?
我的意思是，你明白为什么说神在地狱里是一个非常严重的基督论、神学和道德问题吗？ I mean, do you see why this is a very serious Christological, theological, and moral problem to say first that God is in hell?
因为要这么说，你就必须说神在地狱里。 Because to say that, you'd have to say God is in hell.
神把神送到地狱。 God sends God to hell.
在那种情况下，地狱还有什么意义？ What does it even mean to be hell at that point?
这是像冯·巴尔塔萨这样的人的回应。 This is the response of people like von Balthasar.
嗯，如果你说神去了受苦的地狱，那么也许永恒的救赎就是结果，因为怎么还会有地狱呢？ Well, if you say God goes to the hell of suffering, then maybe eternal salvation is the result because how could there still be hell?
如果神刚刚去了那里，怎么还会有与神永远分离的情况？ How could there still be eternal separation from God if God just went there?
所以，这实际上是一种糟糕的地狱神学。 So, it actually is a bad theology of hell.
这似乎会导致普救论。 It would seem like it would lead to universalism.
而且，是的，这简直是可怕的。 And also, yeah, it's just monstrous.
而且这在逻辑上毫无意义。 And it just doesn't make any logical sense.
所以，你有人说，是的，耶稣在十字架上用三个小时 完成了，或者他在那三个小时加上圣周六完成了。 And so, you've got people who say, yes, Jesus did it in three hours on the cross, or he did it in those three hours plus Holy Saturday.
但在圣周六，他在地狱里。 But then on Holy Saturday, he was in hell.
但是，从逻辑上看，如果你真的想接受刑罚替代并说基督承担了 我们的惩罚，那么你就必须说，耶稣，不，他没有在天上登基。 But it seems, again, logically, like if you really want to accept penal substitution and say Christ bore our penalties, then you have to say, Jesus, no, he's not enthroned in heaven.
他永远在地狱里。 He's in hell for all eternity.
因为否则，他就没有承担我们的后果。 Because otherwise, he's not bearing our consequences.
因为我们犯罪而没有任何解决方案的后果是永远与神分离和在地狱中永远受折磨。 Because the consequences of us sinning without any kind of resolution of that problem is eternal separation from God and eternal torment in hell.
而这实际上不是任何相信刑罚替代的人认为耶稣所在的地方。 And that's not actually where anyone who believes in penal substitution thinks Jesus is.
所以，他们实际上并没有解决他们的问题。 So, they don't actually resolve their problem.
我并不是在说他们中的任何人认为耶稣仍在地狱里，感谢神。 I'm not arguing that any of them think Jesus is still in hell, thanks be to God.
我的论点是，正因为如此，他们实际上都不认为耶稣承担了罪的全部后果。 I'm arguing that because of that, none of them actually think Jesus bears the full consequence of sin.
只有当这是你的十字架模型时，这才是一个问题。 That's only a problem if this is your model of the cross.
有一个更好的模型，这就不会是问题。 There's a better model that this wouldn't be a problem.
但我们会讲到那个。 But we'll get to that.
好的。 Okay.
但接下来，我想讨论第五个问题，相对来说比较小。 But next, I want to go to the fifth problem, which is comparatively small.
看，我的意思是，考虑到我们刚刚讨论的内容，最后两 个问题相比之下可能看起来较小，但它们仍然很重要。 Look, I mean, given the stuff we've just talked about, the last two might seem smaller in comparison, but they're still important.
第五个问题是基督的祭司职分被摧毁了。 The fifth problem is that Christ's priesthood is destroyed.
所以，记住我们刚刚听到的语言，神在处决他的儿子 ，神在将他的愤怒倾倒在他的儿子身上，所有这些。 So, remember the language we've just heard, that God is executing his son, God is pouring out his wrath on his son, all of this stuff.
我的意思是，字面上，当我说神在处决他的儿子时，那是麦克阿瑟的用语。 I mean, literally, and when I say God is executing his son, that is MacArthur's language.
他说当神为我们所有的罪处决耶稣时，基督在十字架上呼喊。 He says that Christ cries out on the cross when God was executing Jesus for all of our sins.
现在，这似乎既使耶稣不是神，也使牺牲的祭司成为父而不是子。 Now, that both seems to make Jesus not God, but also makes the priest of the sacrifice the father and not the son.
为什么这是个问题？ Why is that a problem?
嗯，这是个问题，因为圣经说的恰恰相反。 Well, it's a problem because scripture says the opposite.
圣经说耶稣是我们的大祭司。 It says Jesus is our great high priest.
因此，正如我们将看到的，有一个更好的十字架模型，其中耶 稣是向父献祭的那一位，但在刑罚替代论中，情况并非如此。 And so, as we're going to see, there is a better model of the cross in which Jesus is the one offering the sacrifice to the father, but in penal substitution, that's not the case.
耶稣只是受害者。 Jesus is simply the victim.
他是神圣愤怒的容器，圣父是牺牲的祭司，杀死他的儿子。 He's the vessel of divine wrath, that God the father is the priest of the sacrifice, killing his son.
而且，这常常以非常深刻的方式被那些为之辩护的人明确地表述出来。 And this is often, in really profound sort of ways, presented quite explicitly by the people defending it.
所以，约翰·麦克阿瑟实际上有一本书，恰如其分地 名为《耶稣的谋杀》，他似乎在论证圣父是凶手。 So, John MacArthur actually has a book where he lays this out called, fittingly enough, The Murder of Jesus, and he seems to argue that God the father is the murderer.
现在，他不认为这是谋杀，但他认为圣父是牺牲的祭司。 Now, he doesn't think it's murder, but he thinks that God the father is the priest of the sacrifice.
现在，这里只说几句关于牺牲的话。 Now, just a couple words on sacrifice here.
因为我们通常不使用祭司或牺牲的语言，为了确保你理解，献祭的人被称为祭司。 Because we often don't use the language of priesthood or sacrifice, just to make sure you're understanding, the person who offers a sacrifice is called a priest.
祭司就是献祭的人。 What a priest is, is one who offers sacrifice.
因此，你不能将牺牲和祭司职分分开理解。 And so, you can't understand sacrifice and priesthood apart from each other.
它们是相关的术语。 They're co-relative terms.
祭司就是献祭者。 A priest is a sacrificer.
如果你经常听这个播客，我总是这么说，但这是因为有一个我认为人 们没有理解的非常重要的观点，那就是当我们谈论基督是我们的祭司 时，我们的意思是他是献祭的那一位，他献上自己完美的牺牲。 If you listen to this podcast regularly, I say this all the time, but it's because there is a really important point that I think people don't get, that when we talk about Christ as our priest, we mean he's the one who offers the sacrifice, and he offers the perfect sacrifice of himself.
但在这个模型中，父是献祭的那一位。 But in this model, the father is the one offering the sacrifice.
所以，这是约翰·派博。 So, here's John Piper.
现在，我没有这个的视频。 Now, I don't have a video for this.
这只是一个音频片段，他用相当明确的术语谈论这 个，描述父基本上谋杀耶稣，父是牺牲的祭司。 This is just an audio clip in which he talks about this in pretty explicit terms, describing the father basically murdering Jesus, the father being the priest of the sacrifice.
现在，再次强调，这在阿兹特克模型中运作得很好，在那里 祭司抓一个无辜的受害者，折磨并杀死他们，然后献上。 Now, again, this works really nicely in like an Aztec model, where the priest takes an innocent victim and tortures and kills them, and then offers that up.
那是一种牺牲。 That is a sacrifice.
那不是基督教的牺牲，在基督教的牺牲中，耶稣献上自己。 That is not the Christian sacrifice in which Jesus offers himself.
但这是派博的描述。 But here's Piper's description.
顺便说一下，我不知道这是不是他在说话，但我知道他写了这些话。 I don't know if this is him speaking, by the way, but I know he wrote these words.
我不知道是不是他在说这些话。 I don't know if he's the one saying them or not.
就像亚伯拉罕举起刀对着他儿子以撒的胸膛，但后 来因为灌木丛中有一只公羊而饶恕了他的儿子。 Just as Abraham lifted the knife over the chest of his son Isaac, but then spared his son because there was a ram in the thicket.
所以，圣父举起刀对着他自己的儿子耶稣的胸膛，但没有饶恕他，因为他就是那只公羊。 So, God, the father, lifted his knife over the chest of his own son, Jesus, but did not spare him because he was the ram.
他是替代者。 He was the substitute.
好的。 All right.
所以，我要提出的六个问题中的最后一个是最后的晚餐被认为是多余的。 And so, the final of the six problems I want to raise is that the Last Supper is rendered superfluous.
再次强调，这最后两个问题肯定看起来比我提出的前四个反对意见要小。 And again, these last two certainly look smaller than the first four objections that I raised.
这很公平。 And fair enough.
我不想从那些小事开始。 I didn't want to start with like the tiny stuff.
我想从大事开始。 I want to start with the big stuff.
但如果你理解牺牲背后的神学，它们真的很重要。 But they're really important if you understand the theology behind sacrifice.
这里一个重要的方面是，最后的晚餐显然是耶稣在准备的事情。 And one of the important aspects here is like the Last Supper is something Jesus is clearly preparing for.
他热切地渴望与使徒们分享这顿饭。 He's eagerly desired to share this meal with the apostles.
他告诉他们所有这些。 He tells them all that.
但不清楚为什么最后的晚餐发生是重要的。 But it's not clear why it's important that the Last Supper happens.
不清楚为什么它发生在他被处决前的晚上是重要的。 It's not clear why it's important that it happens the night before he's executed.
你知道，你可以说这只是一个很好的告别。 You know, you could just say it's a nice send-off.
你可以说这是一个很好的纪念。 You can say it's a nice memorial.
这是对十字架的一个很好的纪念。 It's a nice remembrance of the cross.
但你会注意到，在这些人阐述的神学中，没有任何东西 解释了最后的晚餐和十字架之间有任何有机的统一性。 But you'll notice there's nothing in the theology any of these guys are laying out that explains how there's any organic unity between the Last Supper and the cross.
这是一个问题。 And that's a problem.
因为早期的基督徒看到了这种统一性。 Because the early Christians saw there was a unity.
从圣周四到复活节星期日这段时期被称为三日庆典，有三天。 This period from Holy Thursday to Easter Sunday is called Triduum, with three days.
在计算三天三夜的时候，耶稣似乎认为一切都从最后的晚餐开始。 And with the numbering, the measure of the three days and three nights, Jesus seems to have in mind that everything begins with the Last Supper.
而且最后的晚餐真的很重要。 And that the Last Supper is really important.
那个星期四晚上，星期五白天，星期五晚上，星期六 白天，星期六晚上，然后是复活节星期日的早晨。 That Thursday night, Friday day, Friday night, Saturday day, Saturday night, and then the morning of Easter Sunday.
这就是你的三天三夜。 Those are your three days and your three nights.
如果你没有那个，你就真的没有三天。 If you don't have that, you don't really have the three days.
你没有三日庆典。 You don't have the Triduum.
奇怪的是，一些新教徒注意到了这一点，并想出了一些奇怪的解决方法。 And strangely, some Protestants have noticed this and come up with some weird workarounds.
所以詹姆斯·多布森博士，我记得小时候听过，我相信是他。 So Dr. James Dobson, I remember as a kid listening, I believe it was him.
是新教电台上的某个人。 It was someone on the Protestant radio station.
如果这不是多布森，我道歉。 If this wasn't Dobson, I apologize.
我想是多布森博士，他建议也许最后的晚餐更早，比如星 期二，或者也许基督是在星期三之类的时候被处决的。 I think it was Dr. Dobson, suggested maybe the Last Supper was earlier, like Tuesday, or maybe Christ was executed on like a Wednesday or something.
他试图弄清楚如何从中得到三天？ He was trying to figure out how do you get three days out of this?
答案是，因为最后的晚餐与耶稣受难日密切相连。 And the answer is, because the Last Supper is intimately connected to Good Friday.
如果你理解这个牺牲，这是有道理的，如果耶稣是这个牺牲的祭司。 If you understand the sacrifice, this makes sense, if Jesus is the priest of the sacrifice.
但如果不是这样，如果这仅仅是关于耶稣是受害者，仅此而已，那就不是。 But if that's not the case, if this is just about Jesus being the victim, and that's it, that's not.
你现在已经切断了最后的晚餐和耶稣受难日之间的联系。 You've now severed the connection between the Last Supper and Good Friday.
好了，关于这个说得够多了。 Okay, so enough about that.
这就是为什么我不喜欢那整个体系。 That is why I don't like all of that system.
我确实用这些异教的术语来描述它。 And I did describe it in these pagan terms.
你可能会说，这似乎太强烈了。 And you might say, that seems really strong.
对此，我只想说，耶稣似乎用更强烈的措辞来描述它。 Well, to that, I would just say, Jesus seems to depict it in even stronger terms.
在约翰福音第八章中，耶稣说，你们的父是魔鬼，你们愿意行你们父的私欲。 In the Gospel of John, in John chapter eight, Jesus says, you have your father, the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.
他从起初是杀人的，不守真理，因为他心里没有真理。 He was a murderer from the beginning and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him.
他说谎是出于自己的本性，因他本来是说谎的，也是说谎之人的父。 When he speaks, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
我将真理告诉你们，你们就不信我。 Because I tell you the truth, you do not believe me.
你们中间谁能指证我有罪呢？ Which of you convicts me of sin?
我既然将真理告诉你们，为什么不信我呢？ If I tell you the truth, why do you not believe me?
耶稣呈现了这场宇宙战争，在他和那些试图定他有罪 的人之间，那些试图让他承担那种后果的人之间。 That Jesus presents this cosmic battle between him and those who would attempt to convict him of sin, those who would attempt to make him bear those kinds of consequences.
他将其呈现为魔鬼的工作，魔鬼是杀人的，是说谎的。 And he presents that as demonic of the work of the devil, who's a murderer and a liar.
因为看，把耶稣呈现为对整个人类历史中所有罪都有罪，这是呈现一个有意的虚构。 Because look, to present Jesus as guilty of all the sins throughout all of human history is to present an intentional fiction.
这是一个谎言。 It's a falsehood.
这是把神变成一个说谎者和杀人犯。 It's to make God a liar and a murderer.
这是把神变成更像撒但的东西。 It's to make God into something more like Satan.
这是耶稣在约翰福音第8章中的见证。不，你们不能定他有罪。 That's Jesus's testimony in John 8. No, you don't convict him of sin.
他是无罪的。 He is without sin.
他是无瑕疵的羔羊。 He is the lamb without blemish.
这实际上是使基督的牺牲如此美丽和有价值的原因。 And that's actually what makes the sacrifice of Christ so beautiful and so worthwhile.
那么，什么是积极的愿景？ So with that, what's a positive vision?
所以在阐述十字架的积极愿景时，也许首先要说的是，会有一些相同的元素。 So in laying out a positive vision of the cross, maybe the first thing to say is that there are going to be some elements that are the same.
例如，我们可以说神恨恶罪，这是有道理的。 So for instance, there is a sense in which we can say God hates sin.
神对罪有愤怒。 There's a wrath of God for sin.
不是对罪人。 Not for sinners.
他显然爱罪人。 He clearly loves sinners.
他来是为了拯救罪人。 He comes to save sinners.
但他憎恨罪。 But he has a hatred of sin.
憎恨罪的原因是因为罪使我们与他分离。 And the reason for the hatred of sin is because sin makes us, it separates us from him.
它使我们在一种真实和深刻的方式上不配在他面前。 It makes us unworthy to be in his presence in a real and profound way.
因为他爱我们，他憎恨那些扭曲和损害我们的东西。 And because he loves us, he hates those things that distort and mangle us.
所以我们要保留神对罪有愤怒这个元素。 So we want to preserve the element that there is a divine wrath for sin.
不是把神变成道德怪物，而是真正反映神的良善。 Not in making God a moral monster, but really reflecting the goodness of God.
不是那种「哦，我太纯洁了」的良善。 Not goodness, like, oh, I'm just too pure.
我太好了，配不上这个。 I'm too good for this.
而是那种他爱我们、关心我们的良善。 But goodness, like he loves us and he cares for us.
所以任何与我们的利益相违背的事，任何伤害我们 与他、与自己或与他人关系的事，他都会憎恨。 And so anything that's contrary to our good, anything that hurts our relationship with him or with ourselves or with one another, he's going to hate that.
就像父母憎恨看到他们的孩子做出真正有害、破坏性的生活决定一样。 In the same way a parent hates watching their kids make really damaging, destructive life decisions.
但不仅如此。 But more than that.
所以保留神对罪的愤怒。 So preserve divine wrath for sin.
我们也想保留基督将我们的罪担在自己身上，或者他除 去我们的罪，或者有这种意味，这在圣经中明确提到。 We want to preserve also that there is this sense in which Christ takes our sins upon himself, or he takes our sins away, or there's some sense of that, and this is clearly spoken to in the scriptures.
第三，我们想在两个系统中都保留的第三件事是这是一种牺牲的真实感。 And third, the third thing we want to keep in both systems is this real sense this is a sacrifice.
但关键的区别是这个。 But the critical difference is this.
这是一种自愿的自我牺牲。 This is a voluntary self-sacrifice.
这不像阿兹特克人的牺牲。 This is not like the sacrifices that the Aztecs had.
你知道，阿兹特克人不需要你的同意就可以做开心手术。 You know, the Aztecs didn't need your consent to do open heart surgery.
他们只是要把你的心脏挖出来。 They were just going to rip your heart out.
在那些情况下，正如我们刚刚看到的，受害者根本不需要他们的合作或同意。 The victim in those cases, as we've just seen, there's no need for their cooperation or their consent at all.
他们不必相信阿兹特克宗教。 They don't have to believe in the Aztec religion.
他们根本不需要成为参与者。 They don't have to be participants at all.
所以我们不想要一个看起来像那样的十字架模型， 因为那既不忠于神的良善，也不忠于圣经的见证。 And so we don't want a model of the cross that looks like that, because that is not faithful either to the goodness of God or to the scriptural testimony.
相反，对十字架的正确理解是基督献上自己。 Instead, a proper understanding of the cross is one in which Christ gives himself.
他既是祭司又是牺牲。 He is the priest and the victim.
但作为牺牲，他不是父的愤怒的受害者。 But in being the victim, he's not the victim of the father's wrath.
相反，他将自己交给所有邪恶的力量，包括这个世界的和黑暗的力量。 He is rather, he submits himself to all the forces of evil, both in this world and the forces of darkness.
他让它们尽其所能地作恶。 And he lets them do their worst.
而它们能做的最坏的事就是加略山。 And the worst they can do is calvary.
它们能做的最坏的事就是把他钉在十字架上。 The worst they can do is crucify him.
而他战胜了。 And he triumphs.
这种自我牺牲的行为比世界上所有其他事物加起来都更有价值。 And this act of self-sacrifice is worth more than everything else in the world combined.
所以想想看，你知道，电影中经常有人为他人挡子弹的桥段。 So think of it, you know, there's this common movie trope of the person throwing themselves in front of the bullet.
这种桥段之所以常见是有原因的，因为其中有些 东西在一个非常本能的人性层面上吸引着我们。 And this is a trope for a reason, because something in that appeals to us at a very visceral kind of human level.
但这种行为最深刻的展示，就像我们在电影院里看到的最大的例子，甚至不是在银幕上。 But the most profound demonstration of this, like the biggest instance of this we've seen in a theater wasn't even on screen.
2012年，在科罗拉多州的奥罗拉，发生了那起臭名昭著的电影院枪击案。 In 2012, in Aurora, Colorado, there was the infamous movie theater shooting.
枪手闯入并开始向电影院开枪。 Gunmen came in and started shooting up the theater.
那里有四个不同的男人。 And there were four different men there.
亚历克斯·特雷维斯、马特·麦奎因、约翰·布伦克和约翰 ·拉里默，他们为自己的女朋友或约会对象挡住了子弹。 Alex Trevis, Matt McQuinn, John Blunk, and John Larimer, who threw themselves in front of bullets for their girlfriends or for their dates.
这是一个令人难以置信的爱的行为。 That is an incredible act of love.
你可以看着这个说，人间没有比这更大的爱了，为朋友舍命。 That you can look at that and say, no greater love has man than this and to lay down his life for his friend.
这就是自我牺牲。 That is self-sacrifice.
这非常明确地就是我们在新约中所处理的那种牺牲，耶稣完全献出自己。 And that is very explicitly the kind of sacrifice that we're dealing with in the New Testament, that Jesus is giving himself totally.
他为我们舍命。 He's laying his life down for us.
正是这种自我牺牲的行为使一切都变得有价值。 And it's that act of self-sacrifice that makes it all worthwhile.
你知道，那四个女人和我们所有人，可以看着那个说，多么深刻的爱啊。 That, you know, those four women and all of us, by extension, can look at that and say, what profound love.
这不是说，我们需要这四个人死来平息我们的愤 怒，或者我们需要，你知道，根本不是那样。 And it's not, we need these four men to die to avenge our wrath, or we need, you know, it's nothing like that.
那是可怕的。 That's monstrous.
相反，愿意为他人这样做的人是在行动上展示爱的深度，而不仅仅是在言语上。 It's rather the person willing to do this for someone else is demonstrating a profundity of love in action, not just in words.
这是关键。 That's the key.
这是十字架的关键。 That's the key to the cross.
圣托马斯·阿奎那在《神学大全》中是这样说的。 St. Thomas Aquinas puts it like this in the Summa.
他恰当地赎罪的方式是提供被冒犯者同等或更爱的东西，超过他憎恨冒犯的程度。 He properly atones for an offense who offers something which the offended one loves equally or even more than he detested the offense.
现在，我们可以很简单地想象这一点，对吧？ Now, we can think of this really simply, right?
比如，如果我三岁的女儿从她一岁的弟弟那里拿走了一 个玩具，她现在就有智慧，迅速尝试给他另一个玩具。 Like, if my three-year-old takes a toy from her one-year-old brother, she has the wisdom, even now, to quickly try to give him another toy.
如果他同样喜欢或更喜欢另一个玩具，那就没问题了。 And if he likes the other toy just as much or better, no problem.
一切都好。 Everything is okay.
他没有生她的气。 He's not upset with her.
这就是赎罪。 There's atonement.
他们和好了，这就是赎罪的意思。 They are at one, which is what atonement means.
所以没有不和。 So there's no disunity.
没有冲突。 There's no conflict.
她能够通过给他一些他更想要的东西来避免或解决冲突。 She's able to avoid the conflict or resolve it by giving him something that he wants even more.
因此，阿奎那说，基督出于爱和顺服而受苦，给 予神的比补偿整个人类的罪所需要的还要多。 And so, Aquinas says, by suffering out of a love and obedience, Christ gave more to God than was required to compensate for the offense of the whole human race.
所以，想想我们所有罪加在一起的重量。 So, think about the weight of all of our sins put together.
阿奎那说，是的，耶稣给父的，这种自我牺牲的 爱的行为，意味着比你所有的罪加起来还要多。 Aquinas says, yeah, what Jesus gives the Father, this act of self-sacrificial love, means more than all of your sins combined.
这就是十字架的工作原理。 That's how the cross works.
现在，注意这里有一个有趣的特点。 Now, notice there's an interesting feature here.
这不是等于，而是多于。 This is not equal to, this is more than.
在刑罚替代模式中，基督承担我们的罪的惩罚，你追求的是一种平等。 In the penal substitution model, where Christ bears our penalty for sin, there's a certain equality that you're striving for.
你知道，这是我们欠的，所以父要从他的儿子身上取走那一磅肉。 You know, this is how much we owed, and so the Father is going to take that pound of flesh out of his Son.
他要折磨耶稣这么长时间，来弥补他本应折磨我们的时间。 He's going to torture Jesus for this much time to make up for the amount of time he would have tortured us.
尽管在十字架上三个小时为什么是正确的数量这一点并 不太合理，阿奎那会说，这甚至不是我们要寻找的。 And despite the fact that it doesn't make a ton of sense why three hours on the cross is the right quantity for that, Aquinas would say, that's not even what we're looking for.
新约的模式不是耶稣给予最低限度的应付。 The New Testament model isn't Jesus gives the bare minimum due.
不。新约的模式是耶稣给予更多，无限地更多。 No. The New Testament model is Jesus gives more, infinitely more.
在罪恶泛滥的地方，恩典更加泛滥。 That where sin abounded, grace abounds all the more.
基督的自我牺牲是过度的。 That there's an excessiveness to Christ's self-sacrifice.
这不仅仅等同于我们所有的罪。 That this is not just equal to all of our sins.
这比我们所有的罪都大。 This is greater than all of our sins.
他会说这在几个方面是真实的。 And he's going to say this is true in a couple ways.
首先，因为他受苦的超越爱心。 First, because of his exceeding charity from which he suffered.
其次，因为他整个生命的尊严，他的整个生命是一个自我牺牲和顺服父的生命。 Second, on account of the dignity of his entire life, and that his whole life is a life of self-sacrifice and of obedience to the Father.
第三，在某种程度上是因为苦难的程度。 And third, on kind of the extent of the sufferings.
所以，你有极度的爱心，你有终生的顺服和爱，你有极度的苦难。 So, you've got the extreme charity, you've got the lifelong obedience and love, and you've got the extreme kind of suffering.
因此，他说，基督的受难不仅足够，而且是为人类罪过的超级丰富的赎罪。 And so, he says, Christ's passion was not only sufficient, but a super abundant atonement for the sins of the human race.
然后他引用约翰一书2:2，他为我们的罪作了挽 回祭，不是单为我们的罪，也是为普天下人的罪。 And then he quotes 1 John 2.2, that he is a propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
这实际上是一个非常重要的事情，有很多原因我们不会深入讨论。 This is actually a really important thing for a lot of reasons we're not going to get into.
我一直引用的那些人认为耶稣的十字架只延伸到选民。 The same guys I've been quoting from think that Jesus's cross only extends to the elect.
这是一种有限赎罪的观点。 And this is a view of limited atonement.
所以，这是一个非常小的十字架。 So, it's a very small cross.
而阿奎那说，不，它更大。 And Aquinas is saying, nope, it's bigger.
它要大得多。 It's much, much bigger.
圣经甚至说它对整个世界来说要大得多。 And scripture even speaks of it being much bigger for the whole world.
而且不仅如此，恩典在十字架上为我们合而为一。 And more than that, that graces are one for us on the cross.
这里有一整套神学，不仅仅是支付最低限度的代价。 That there's a whole theology here that this is not just paying the bare minimum out.
所以，希望你能看到表面上有一些相似之处，但这是一个主要的区别。 So, hopefully you can see how there are some surface level similarities, but this is a major difference.
在这里的自我牺牲中，父不是反派。 That self-sacrifice here, the father is not the villain.
他不是道德怪物。 He's not a moral monster.
相反，父对他的儿子感到满意，因为他的儿子正在做一些极其美丽、慈善和无私的事。 The father instead is pleased with his son, because his son is doing something tremendously and profoundly beautiful and charitable and selfless.
他正在过着完美的生活。 He is living the perfect life.
因此，阿奎那实际上要论证这解释了另一个问题。 And so, Aquinas is actually going to argue this explains another problem.
记得我之前说过，为什么神不直接原谅我们的罪？ Remember earlier I said, well, why doesn't God just forgive our sins?
你知道，国王可以赦免罪过而不会有任何进一步的问题。 You know, the king can pardon sins without any further problem.
他可以直接说，别担心。 He could just say, eh, don't worry about it.
他可以对罪置之不理。 He could shrug off the sin.
但他没有那样做。 But he doesn't do that.
为什么不呢？ Why not?
阿奎那给出了五个理由。 Aquinas gives five reasons.
他说，首先，这样我们就能知道神有多爱我们，从而被激励去回报他的爱。 He says, first, so that we can know how much God loves us and thereby be stirred to love him in return.
这是人类救赎的完美。 And this is the perfection of human salvation.
不仅仅是，哦，我要避免下地狱，而是我真的爱神，我效法基督。 Not just, oh, I'm going to avoid hell, but I actually love God and I'm conformed to Christ.
因此，他引用罗马书五章八节，神在我们还作罪人的 时候，基督为我们死，神的爱就在此向我们显明了。 And so, he quotes Romans five, verse eight, that God commended his charity toward us for when as yet we were sinners, Christ died for us.
也就是说，神通过这个向我们显明他的爱。 That is, God is showing us his love through this.
现在，注意在刑罚替代模式中，不清楚圣父如何向我们显示爱。 Now, notice in the penal substitution model, it is not clear how God the father is showing us love.
看起来他在向我们显示他的愤怒，一种如此误导的愤怒，以至于他会将其加在无辜者身上。 It looks like he's showing us his wrath, a wrath so misguided that he'll place it on the innocent.
但阿奎那说，不，在这种观点中，神差遣耶稣来 展示对我们的爱，这种爱真的让我们惊叹不已。 But Aquinas is saying, no, in this view, that God sends Jesus to demonstrate love for us of a kind that really takes our breath away.
这实际上向我们展示了神圣之爱的某些方面，神并没有在我们的罪中抛弃我们。 That actually shows us something of divine love that God doesn't just abandon us in our sin.
第二，这给了我们一个顺服、谦卑、恒心、公义等的榜样。 Second, that this gives us a model of obedience, humility, constancy, justice, and the like.
在这里，阿奎那引用彼得前书2:21，基督也为你们 受过苦，给你们留下榜样，叫你们跟随他的脚踪行。 And here, Aquinas quotes first Peter, 221, Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow in his steps.
现在，我们稍后会讨论这一点，但这是一个重要的细节，因 为在刑罚替代模式中，似乎基督受苦是为了让我不必受苦。 Now, we're going to cover this in a little bit, but this is an important detail because in the penal substitution model, it seems that Christ suffered so I don't have to.
但如果你读新约中的任何内容，你会意识到它不断地 说要背起你的十字架，基督受苦了，现在轮到你了。 But if you read anything in the New Testament, you realize that it's constantly take up your cross, Christ suffered, and now it's your turn.
这在刑罚替代模式中没有意义，但如果基督在执行完美的自我牺 牲行为，然后邀请我们以自己不完美的自我牺牲行为来配合，而 这些行为是他以他的恩典赋予我们力量的，那就有意义了。 And that doesn't make sense in the penal substitution model, but it does if Christ is performing the perfect act of self-sacrifice and then inviting us to cooperate with our own imperfect acts of self-sacrifice, which he empowers by his grace.
第三，基督通过他的受难确实将我们从罪中拯救出来，但他也为 我们赢得了在幸福荣耀中称义的恩典，这不仅仅是避免下地狱。 Third, Christ, by his passion, delivers us from sin, sure, but he also merits justifying grace for us in the glory of bliss, that it's more than just the avoidance of hell.
他为我们赢得了天堂的荣耀。 He is meriting for us glory in heaven.
因为你可以想象，好吧，罪的债已经还清了，但 我们没有理由因此自动赢得天堂的永恒荣耀。 Because you can imagine, okay, well, the debt of sin is paid, but there's no reason we thereby automatically earn eternal glory in heaven.
如果我们确实赢得了天堂的永恒荣耀，我们享受的是什么级别或我们处于什么层次？ And if we do earn eternal glory in heaven, what level do we enjoy or what tier are we at?
从刑罚替代模式来看，这些都没有太大意义。 None of that makes a ton of sense from the penal substitution model.
但如果基督付出的超出了所需，你可以看到这种过度的付出意味 着我们不仅避免了地狱，而且实际上通过他的功德赢得了天堂。 But if Christ is paying over and above, you can see how that excessive payment means that not only do we avoid hell, but we're actually meriting through his merits, heaven.
第四，作为阻止我们犯罪的一种方式，他在这里引用圣保罗在哥林多前 书6:20的话，你们是重价买来的，所以要在你们的身子上荣耀神。 Fourth, as a way of discouraging us from sin, and here he quotes St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 620, that you were bought with a great price, glorify and bear God in your body.
第五，这是我实际上想要关注的，因为它有助于人更大的尊严。 And fifth, and this is what I want to actually focus on, because it redounds to man's greater dignity.
这个想法很简单，罪因人而进入世界。 And the idea is really simple, that sin comes into the world because of man.
亚当和夏娃自由选择犯罪，他们被魔鬼战胜和欺骗。 Adam and Eve freely choose to sin, they were overcome and deceived by the devil.
神决定不抛弃我们，而是拯救我们。 And God decides that he's going to not abandon us, but save us.
很好，对吧？ Good, right?
我们已经讨论过这一点。 We've already covered that.
但他不仅仅是要不顾我们而拯救我们，他要通过我们来拯救我 们，这意味着神的儿子成为我们中的一员，他成为真正的人。 But he's not just going to save us in spite of us, he's going to save us through us, meaning that God the Son becomes one of us, he becomes a true man.
这是一个非常重要的细节，因为你可以想象他说，好吧，人类把一 切都搞砸了，所以这里有一个救赎计划，我们要绕过人类来工作。 This is a really important detail, because you can imagine him saying, okay, humans screw up everything, so here's this plan of salvation, and we're going to work around humans.
我们有办法完成这个，我们要为他们做这件事，但我 们不会让他们参与其中，因为他们碰什么都会搞砸。 There's some way we can accomplish this, and we're going to do it for them, but we're not going to let them have any part in it at all, because everything they touch, they screw up.
但相反，他允许我们成为胜利的一部分。 But instead, he allows us to be part of the victory.
因此，阿奎那在这里引用圣保罗在哥林多前书15章的话，感谢神，使我们借 着我们的主耶稣基督得胜，他给了我们胜利，让我们成为获胜团队的一部分。 And so here, Aquinas quotes St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 15, thanks be to God who has given us a victory through our Lord Jesus Christ, that he's given us the victory, he's let us be part of the winning team.
所以我认为团队的比喻是一个很好的比喻。 And so the team imagery, I think, is a good one.
你可以想象一个团队获得了一个了不起的球员。 You can imagine a team acquiring an amazing player.
我是酋长队的球迷，我们有我的主场，所以我们知道对于团队中其他成员 来说，你知道，可能很好，可能不太好，被真正的伟大带动是什么感觉。 I mean, I'm a Chiefs fan, we've got my home, so we know what it's like for other members of the team that are, you know, maybe good, maybe not good, to be carried along by true greatness.
这里有类似的情况，基督加入了人类团队，然后成为全明星，事实上是完美的球员。 There's something like that here, that Christ joins the human team and then is an all-star, and in fact is the perfect player.
他完美地执行了这一点，所以因为我们与他联合，我 们是他团队的一部分，他的胜利就是我们的胜利。 He performs this perfectly, and so because we've been united to him, we're part of his team, his victory is our victory.
这就是这个想法。 That's the idea.
所以注意，这实际上解决了我们甚至没有谈到的刑罚替代的另一个问题。 So notice, this actually solves another problem that we didn't even talk about with penal substitution.
不清楚基督的功德如何应用到我们身上。 It's not clear how Christ's merits get applied to us.
比如，这种替代性赎罪是如何实现的？ Like, how is this substitutionary atonement being made?
如何实现？为什么？ How and why?
而且，你知道，这整个调换是以什么方式发生的？ And why, you know, in what way does this whole switcheroo happen?
因为记住，刑罚替代模式是建立在一个谎言之上的。 Because remember, the penal substitution model is built on a lie.
它建立在一个叫做归算的谎言上——神宣告无辜的耶稣有罪，宣告有罪的我们无辜。 It's built on a lie called imputation—that God declares Jesus, who is innocent, guilty, and declares us, who are guilty, innocent.
现在，这可能听起来像是一种恶意的误解，所以我 要引用约翰·麦克阿瑟的话，或者让他自己来说。 Now, that might sound like a mean mischaracterization, so I'm going to quote John MacArthur, or let him actually speak on it for himself.
他过着完全无罪的生活，这被记入你的账户。 He lived a complete sinless life that is credited to your account.
在十字架上，神看着基督，看到了你。 On the cross, God looked at Christ and saw you.
现在他看着你，看到了基督。 Now he looks at you and sees Christ.
你的罪归算给他。 Your sin imputed to him.
他的义归算给你。 His righteousness imputed to you.
现在，重要的是要知道，在这个意义上的归算是16世纪的一个新想法。 Now, it's important to know that imputation, in this sense, is a novel idea in the 16th century.
所以加尔文主义历史学家阿利斯特·麦格拉思承认了这一点。 So Alastair McGrath, the Calvinist historian, acknowledges this.
他说这与之前的一切都不连续，他称之为神学新事物，16世纪的新奇事物。 He says it's in discontinuity with everything that's come before it, and he calls it a theological novum, a novelty of the 16th century.
这种神宣告无辜者有罪，有罪者无辜的法律观念，这就是宗教改革的新内容。 This legal idea that God declares the innocent guilty and the guilty innocent, that's what's new to the Reformation.
神拯救不敬虔的人并使他们变得敬虔的观念，那是旧观点。 The idea that God takes the ungodly and saves them and makes them godly, that's the old view.
但当神宣告我们为义时，他实际上使我们成为义。 But when God declares us righteous, he actually makes us righteous.
我在天主教答疑的同事特伦特·霍恩对此有一个很好的例子。 Trent Horn, my colleague at Catholic Answers, had a really good example of this.
他说，当神说要有光的时候，它并不是继续保持黑暗，然后他们只是把光的标签贴在上面。 He said, when God says, let there be light, it doesn't just continue to be dark, and then they just put the label light on it.
同样，归算模式只是神把有罪和无辜的标签贴在错误的人身上，这是一个谎言。 Well, likewise, the imputational model is just God putting the label guilty and innocent on the wrong people, and that's a lie.
我的意思是，这和把男人叫做女人或把女人叫做男人没有什么不同。 I mean, it'd be no different than calling a man a woman or a woman man.
显然，我们永远不会那样做。 We would never do that, obviously.
但那就是这个想法。 But that's the idea.
你不能仅仅错误地给某人贴标签就把它作为你的神学，但这就是归算的工作方式。 You can't just mislabel somebody and have that be your theology, but that is how imputation works.
所以注意，这不是阿奎那的十字架模型的工作方式。 So notice that's not how Aquinas's model of the cross works.
这不是历史上基督教十字架模型的工作方式。 This is not how the historic Christian model of the cross works.
这不是天主教徒理解十字架的方式。 This is not how Catholics understand the cross.
这是自愿的自我牺牲。 It's involuntary self-sacrifice.
这不是给耶稣和罪人贴错标签。 It's not, let's mislabel Jesus and sinners.
不，不是这样的。 It's, no, no.
耶稣实际上真正加入了人类团队，不仅仅是被贴上人的标签。 Jesus actually joins the human team, truly, not just having the label man slapped on him.
他实际上成为了人。 He actually becomes man.
道成了肉身。 The word became flesh.
因此，我们实际上可以说一个人向基督献上了完美的牺牲。 And so, we can actually say a man offered the perfect sacrifice to Christ.
是的，人犯了罪。 That yes, man sinned.
是的，我们一路走来历史相当坎坷。 Yes, we have a pretty bumpy history along the way.
但是，也看看这个真正伟大的人的一生。 But also, look at this one really great man who lived.
这一切都是真的。 And all of that's true.
因为道成肉身，这不是谎言。 It's not a lie because of the incarnation.
这救赎了人类。 And that redeems the human race.
尽管我们做了那么多糟糕的事，我们有这个光明闪耀的人，这个亚 当的儿子，这个马利亚的儿子，他做了人类历史上最伟大的事。 That for all of the lousy stuff we do, we've got this one bright shining man, this son of Adam, this son of Mary, who does the greatest thing in human history.
不仅是人类历史上，而是所有历史中最伟大的事。 The greatest thing in all of history, not just human history.
这比任何天使所做的任何事都更有价值。 That's worth more than anything any angel's ever done.
这比任何其他人所做的任何事都更有价值。 It's worth more than anything any other man has ever done.
这就是我们的救赎。 That is our redemption.
这就是这个想法。 That's the idea.
这是一种自愿的自我牺牲行为。 And it's this voluntary act of self-sacrifice.
所以，希望这是有道理的。 So, hopefully, that makes sense.
希望你能看到它如何保留了刑罚替代模式所追求的所有东西。 And hopefully, you can see how it preserves all of the things that the penal substitution model is trying for.
我认为这是合理的尝试，你知道，确保我们意识到神不喜欢罪，所有这些。 And I think reasonably trying for, you know, making sure we realize God doesn't like sin, all that.
但它这样做并没有把神变成道德怪物。 But it does so without making God a moral monster.
它以一种更忠实于圣经的方式做到这一点。 It does so in a way that's more faithful to Scripture.
我认为他是正确的。 And I think he's correct.
当你听到这个时，很难理解为什么有人会更喜欢刑罚替代 模式而不是之前的模式，因为似乎有一些明显的优势。 And when you hear it, it's hard to see why one would prefer the penal substitution model over the model that came before because it seems like there's some obvious advantages.
让我们探讨一下这些优势。 Let's explore a few of those advantages.
好的。 Okay.
首先，它使圣经中的债务语言有意义。 So, first of all, it makes sense of the debt language in Scripture.
现在，这是一个微妙的细节，但可能是一个重要的细节。 Now, this is a subtle detail, but maybe an important one.
记住这个例子，你知道，你不能随意惩罚一个无辜的人。 Remember the example of, oh, you know, you can't just punish an innocent person.
但也许如果是为了法律的荣耀，以及你之前从斯普劳尔和麦 克阿瑟那里听到的所有这些奇怪的东西，你就可以这样做。 But maybe you could if it was for the glory of the law and all this weird stuff that you heard from Sproul and MacArthur earlier.
嗯，所有这些都是假设罪的司法层面是类似于监禁或死刑之类的东西。 Well, all of that is presupposing that the judicial dimension of sin is something like a jail term or capital punishment or something like that.
但这实际上不是圣经用来描述它的语言。 But that's not actually the language Scripture uses to describe it.
相反，圣经使用债务的语言。 Instead, Scripture uses the language of a debt.
为什么这很重要？ And why does that matter?
因为你可以偿还别人的债务。 Because you can pay somebody else's debt.
当你这样做时，你并没有受到惩罚。 And you're not being punished when you do that.
你是自愿选择减轻别人的惩罚。 You're voluntarily choosing to alleviate someone else's punishment.
对吧？ Right?
所以，如果你的邻居遇到一些法律麻烦，他们欠了 停车罚单之类的东西，你可以说，是的，我来付。 So, if your neighbor gets into some trouble with the law and they owe, you know, parking ticket or something, you can say, yeah, I'll pay that.
你不能代替他们服刑，但你可以为他们支付罚款。 You can't serve a prison sentence for them, but you can pay a fine for them.
你可以偿还债务。 You can pay a debt.
所以，注意，这是很明显的，但圣经用债务的语言来说这一点是相当重要的。 And so, notice, this is pretty obvious, but it's pretty significant that Scripture speaks of this in debt language.
所以，在马太福音18章，彼得来到耶稣面前说 ，主啊，我弟兄得罪我，我当饶恕他几次呢？ And so, you have in Matthew 18, Peter comes up to Jesus and says, Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me?
我饶恕他七次可以吗？ And I forgive him as many as seven times.
耶稣说，不是七次，乃是七十个七次，你知道，其他变体是七十七次 。然后他说，因此，下一节说，天国好比一个王要和他仆人算账。 Jesus says, not seven, but 70 times seven, you know, other variations, 70 times 77. And he says, therefore, this is the next verse, the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants.
于是，有一个仆人欠王一万他连得，他无法偿还。 And so, one of the servants owes the king 10,000 talents, and he can't pay.
所以，他跪下说，主啊，宽容我，我必全然偿还你。 So, he falls on his knees and he says, Lord, have patience with me and I will pay you everything.
耶稣说，那仆人的主人就动了慈心，把他释放了，并且免了他的债。 And Jesus says, out of pity for him, the Lord of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.
现在，注意那里，王可以这样做。 Now, notice there, the king could do that.
他没有说，然后王因为没有服从法律，而法律somehow 高于王，就被赶出去了，你知道，他不能再做法官或国王了。 He doesn't say, and then the king, because he didn't serve the law, which was somehow higher than the king, was bounced out of, you know, he could no longer be a judge or a king.
不，这些都没有发生。 No, none of that happened.
斯普劳尔和麦克阿瑟以及这些人在这一点上完全错了。 Sproul and MacArthur and these guys are totally wrong about that.
不，王可以自由地赦免，但他自由赦免的是一笔债务。 No, the king can freely forgive, but what he's freely forgiving is a debt.
现在，在这种情况下，被免了大额债务的人没有免除他邻居的小额债务。 Now, in this case, the man who's forgiven the large amount doesn't forgive his neighbor a small amount.
所以，他被带回到王面前，王收回了赦免，说，你 这恶仆，我免了你那么多债，是因为你央求我。 And so, he's brought back to the king and the king unforgives him and says, you wicked servant, I forgave you all that debt because you besought me.
你不应当怜恤你的同伴，像我怜恤你吗？ And should you not have had mercy on your fellow servant as I had mercy on you?
主人就大怒，把他交给掌刑的，等他还清了所有的债。 And in anger, his Lord delivered him to the jailers till he should pay all his debt.
你们各人若不从心里饶恕你的弟兄，我天父也要这样待你们了。 So, also, my heavenly Father will do to every one of you if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.
这是一段非常关键的经文，用来解释救恩是如何运作的， 以及罪的赦免是如何运作的，因为这正是耶稣所说的。 This is a pretty critical passage to explain how salvation works and how forgiveness of sins works, because this is exactly what Jesus is speaking about.
它就像一笔债务，而且是我们无法偿还的债务。 It's like a debt, and it's a debt we cannot pay off.
耶稣可以偿还它。 Jesus can pay it off.
他也可以自由地赦免它。 He can also freely forgive it.
如果这要发生，他也期望我们原谅他人。 He also expects us to forgive others if this is going to happen.
所以，我要更深入地解释它，因为我认为这是相当清楚的。 So, I'm going to unpack it more than that, because I think it's pretty clear.
想想看，你知道，唯独因信称义的模式，你无条件地被称义，你实际上不必原谅别 人欠你的债，你知道，这怎么能与「免我们的债，如同我们免了人的债」相符呢？ Think about whether the model, you know, Sola Fide, where you're unconditionally justified, you don't actually have to forgive others their debts to you, you know, how does that fit with forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors?
这怎么能与马太福音18章相符？这怎么能与整个模型相符？ How does that fit with Matthew 18? How does that fit with this entire model?
但因为这里的重点是十字架的功效，我的观点很简单， 罪在这里被比作债务，而基督可以超额偿还那个债务。 But because the focus here is on the efficacy of the cross, my point is really simple, that sin is being compared here to a debt, and Christ can overpay that debt.
你知道，如果你在酒吧欠了100美元的账单，而你的 朋友进来说，这里有500美元，他们可以这样做。 You know, if you run up $100 bar tab or something, and your friend goes in and says, here's $500, they can do that.
他们可以超额支付。 They can overpay.
他们被允许这样做。 They're allowed to do that.
这不是说，我需要惩罚你的朋友。 It's not, I need to punish your friend.
不，根本不是那样。 No, it's not that at all.
但他们可以说，嘿，我想把事情弄对。 But they could say, hey, I want to make things right.
这是为你的麻烦准备的，对吧？ Here's something for your troubles, right?
这是一种超级丰富。 There's a super abundance to it.
好的。 Okay.
第二，阿奎那描述的模型更好地解释了旧约的祭祀。 Second, the model that Aquinas describes makes better sense of Old Testament sacrifices.
我这么说是什么意思？ And what do I mean by that?
改革者们不理解旧约的祭祀。 That the reformers don't understand Old Testament sacrifices.
他们想象它们的工作方式类似于阿兹特克人的祭祀，但事实并非 如此。旧约的祭祀有一种特殊的神学，大多数基督徒都不了解。 They're imagining that they work something like the Aztec sacrifices do, and they just don't. That Old Testament sacrifices have a particular kind of theology to them that most Christians are unaware of.
我只给你一个例子。 And I'm going to give you just one example.
在出埃及记24章，有立约的第一个法律的开始。 In Exodus 24, there's the inauguration of the first law of the covenant.
所以当希伯来书谈到这一点时，当它谈到没有流血就没有赦罪时，它指的就是这段经文。 So when Hebrews talks about this, when it talks about how without the shedding of blood, there's no forgiveness of sins, it points to this passage.
它相当明确地将这段经文与最后的晚餐和十字架联系起来。 And it connects it pretty explicitly between this passage and then the last supper in the cross.
所以在出埃及记24章，摩西清早起来，筑了一座坛，并召集以色列人。 And so in Exodus 24, Moses gets up early, builds an altar, and he brings Israel together.
他们向耶和华献平安祭，就是牛。 They sacrifice peace offerings of oxen to the Lord.
然后摩西将血一半洒在坛上。 And then Moses took half of the blood, and he throws it on the altar.
然后他拿约书，念给百姓听。 And then he takes the book of the covenant, reads it to the people.
他们说，耶和华所吩咐的，我们都必遵行。 They say, all the Lord has spoken, we will do, and we will be obedient.
然后他把另一半血洒在百姓身上。 And then he takes the other half of the blood, and he throws it on the people.
他说，看哪，这是立约的血，是耶和华按这一切话与你们立约的凭据。 And he says, behold, the blood of the covenant, which the Lord has made with you in accordance of all these words.
现在，这种语言应该让人想起最后的晚餐，「看哪，这是立约的 血」的语言，因为这与耶稣在最后的晚餐上所说的非常相似。 Now, that language should recall the last supper, the behold the blood of the covenant language, because this is very similar to what Jesus says at the last supper.
所以我们应该问，这里到底发生了什么？ And so we should be asking, what on earth is going on here?
为什么摩西要把血洒在人身上和祭坛上？ Why is Moses flinging blood on people and on the altar?
长期以来，许多新教神学家认为这是一种威胁，他 洒血是在说，如果你们不这样做，你们就会死。 And for a long time, many Protestant theologians had a vision that it was a threat, that he's putting the blood saying, if you don't do this, you will die.
这种解释的问题是，那么，为什么他要把血洒在祭坛上呢？ And the problem with that is, well, then why would he put blood on the altar?
因此，旧约学者G. Hinton Davies解释说，这是一种误解， 实际上这是在分享生命，而不是死亡，就当前的事情而言，神和人这两个伙伴 在给予和接受耶和华的话语，以及被宰杀动物的血这方面是结合和联合的。 And so G. Hinton Davies, who's an Old Testament scholar, explains that this misunderstands it, that actually this is a sharing in life, not in death, that both partners, divine and human, are joined and united so far as the matter at hand is concerned, the giving and accepting of the words of the Lord, and the blood of the animals which have been slaughtered.
所以在给予和接受耶和华的律法时，人们作为立约的伙伴彼此对立。 So in giving and accepting the law of the Lord, the people stand over and against each other as contracted partners.
你做这个，我做那个。 You do this, I do that.
在血的仪式中，他们现在变得有机地联系在一起，成为一体。 In the blood ritual, they now become organically related and become united.
他说这是立约关系的圣礼性赎罪，是在血中的分享。 He says this is the sacramental atonement of the covenant relationship, that there's a sharing in the blood.
所以如果你想要一个非常清晰的形象来说明这是什么样子 ，如果你曾经像结拜兄弟那样，这总是一个奇怪的例子。 So if you want a really clear image of what this looks like, if you ever were like blood brothers, this is always a weird example.
但就像，你是个孩子，你和某人是朋友，你说， 我割我的手，你割你的手，我们把血放在一起。 But like, you're a kid, and you're friends with somebody, and you're like, I'll cut my hand, you cut your hand, we'll put the blood together.
如果你从未听说过这种事，你认为我是个疯子，相信我，其他人也这样做过。 If you've never heard of this, and you think I'm a crazy person, trust me, other people have done this.
我的意思是，我可能是个疯子，但不是因为这个。 I mean, I might be a crazy person, not for this.
那不是威胁。 That's not a threat.
你不是在说和我做朋友，否则我就杀了你。 You're not saying be friends with me, or I'll murder you.
不，这是对血是神圣的，血就是生命的认识。 No, there's this recognition that blood is sacred, that blood is life.
所以在分享这个的时候，你是在分享你最深处的部分，你 通过血来表达一些你真的无法用其他方式表达的东西。 And so in sharing in this, you're sharing in the deepest part of yourself, that you're expressing through blood, something that you really couldn't express any other way.
你可以往手上吐口水然后握手，但那就是不一样。 You can spit on your hands and shake, it just isn't the same.
可以说，那血真的说明了一些本能的东西，这里有双关语的意思。 That blood really speaks to something visceral, so to speak, pun intended there.
圣经也谈到了这一点。 And scripture speaks to this.
利未记17章说，活物的生命是在血中。 In Leviticus 17, it says the life of the flesh is in the blood.
这就是为什么犹太人不能吃动物的血，因为这就像与动物进行圣餐。 This is why the Jews couldn't eat animal blood, because it was like a communion with the animal.
所以他说，活物的生命是在血中，我把这血赐给你们，可以在坛上为你们的生命赎罪。 And so he says, the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I've given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls.
因血里有生命，所以能赎罪。 For it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life.
以色列的祭祀制度不是关于一个嗜血的神，他只想要死亡，死亡，死亡。 The sacrificial system in Israel is not about a bloodthirsty God who just wants death, death, death.
不，血是生命的象征。 No, the blood is an image of life.
这是一种神圣的表达。 It's a sacred expression.
既然神和人正在立约，神不能只是割破自己的手腕，然后把它放在人的手上握手。 And since God and man are forming a covenant, God can't just cut his wrist and then put it to man's hand and shake on it.
所以你取动物的血，你取一只动物，把一半的血洒在祭坛上 ，代表神的一半，一半的血洒在人身上，代表他们的一半。 And so you take an animal blood, you take an animal and you put half the blood on the altar, representing God's half, half the blood on the people representing their half.
这是在血中的分享。 It's a sharing in the blood.
我说神不能只是割破他的手，但在道成肉身中，他可以。 I said God can't just cut his hands, but in the incarnation, he can.
当耶稣成为人时，他现在有能流血的手，而且它们在十字架上确实流血了。 When Jesus becomes man, now he has hands that can bleed, and they do on the cross.
因此，你在基督里看到了所有这些血祭的应验。 And so you have the fulfillment of all of these bloody sacrifices in Christ.
但再次强调，这不是关于一个嗜血的神。 But again, it's not about a bloodthirsty God.
这就像与耶稣基督结拜为兄弟。 This is like being blood brothers with Jesus Christ.
在某种意义上，我们已经通过共同的人性与他分享了血。 We already shared in the blood with him in one sense through common humanity.
现在我们以一种更深刻的意义分享，他可以把血洒在祭坛上和人身上。 We now share in a much more profound sense that he can put the blood both on the altar and on the people.
这就是这个想法，这里有一些非常深刻的东西，如果你理解旧约 的祭祀制度，那么你就能看到这个模式，耶稣自愿把自己献给神 ，自由地舍弃自己的生命，这不是关于耶稣成为愤怒的对象。 That's the idea, that there's something really profound about this, that if you understand the Old Testament sacrificial system, then you can see that this model, Jesus voluntarily giving himself to God, laying down his life freely, this is not about Jesus being the object of wrath.
这是关于耶稣是完美的人和神。 This is about Jesus being the perfect man and God.
这就引出了第三个优点，那就是父明显对儿子的牺牲感到满意。 So that leads to the third advantage, which is that the father is clearly pleased with the son's sacrifice.
这感觉应该是一个显而易见的细节。 This feels like it should be an obvious detail.
但当所有这些刑罚替代的说法设想父亲转离儿子并 背弃儿子时，这忽视并严重扭曲了圣经的记载。 But when all of these accounts of penal substitution envision the father turning away from the son and turning his back on the son, this ignores and screws up the biblical account pretty profoundly.
所以，我给你一个经常被误用的经文例子。 So, I'll give you one example of a passage that gets misused pretty regularly.
在哥林多后书5章，我们被告知要为基督作使者，与神和好。 In 2 Corinthians 5, we're told to be ambassadory for Christ, to be reconciled to God.
保罗说，神使那无罪的，替我们成为罪，好叫我们在他里面成为神的义。 And Paul says, for our sake, he made him to be sin, Amartya, who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
你可以想象，改革宗神学家对这段经文大做文章，但这里有一个问题。 As you might imagine, Reformed theologians have a field day with this passage, but there's a problem.
说耶稣成为罪，这实际上不是他们所相信的，对吧？ To say that Jesus becomes sin, that's not actually what they believe, right?
他们相信耶稣被当作有史以来最有罪的人对待，但他们不认为他实际上是罪。 They believe Jesus is treated as the most sinful man who ever lived, but they don't think he's actually sin.
因此，即使在改革宗的观点中，在刑罚替代的观点中，也不清楚如何理解这段经文 ，因为他们并不是说基督成为罪人，或者基督虽然不是罪人，但被当作罪人对待。 And so, even in the Reformed vision, the kind of penal substitution vision, it's not clear how you make sense of this passage, because they're not saying Christ became a sinner or Christ, although not a sinner, was treated as a sinner.
不，它说的是成为罪。 No, it says became sin.
那么，这里到底发生了什么？ So, what is going on here?
好消息是。 Well, good news.
有一个解释。 There's an explanation.
但和上一点一样，你必须了解一些关于旧约的知识。 But as with the last point, you have to know something about the Old Testament.
你必须了解一些关于犹太制度，犹太背景的知识。 You have to know something about the Jewish system, the Jewish background.
换句话说，你必须像一世纪的犹太人那样阅读这段经文，而不是像16世纪的新教徒那样。 In other words, you have to read this like a first-century Jew and not like a 16th-century Protestant.
一世纪的犹太人会知道希伯来语中的'罪'这个词有双重含义。 And a first-century Jew would know that the word for sin in Hebrew has a double meaning.
它既表示罪，也表示赎罪祭。 It means both sin and sin offering.
我是个书呆子。 I'm a nerd.
这被称为自反义词或对立词，我喜欢这些东西。 This is called an autoantonym or a contronym, and I love these things.
比如，'cleave'可以表示分开或结合在一起。 So, like, cleave can mean either to separate or to join together.
肉刀是用来分开的。 A meat cleaver separates.
你与妻子结合。 You cleave to your wife.
你们结合在一起。 You join together.
你给蛋糕撒糖粉。 You dust a cake.
你在添加粉末。 You're adding dust.
你打扫房间。 You dust the room.
你在除尘。 You remove dust.
这些词，根据上下文，可能表示一件事或完全相反的事。 These words, depending on the context, could mean one thing or the polar opposite.
'Oversight'可能意味着你在监督某事，或者你忽视了某事。 Oversight could mean you're watching something or you're not watching something.
哦，这是一个疏忽。 Oh, it was an oversight.
不，没有疏忽，因为我有很好的监督。 No, there wasn't an oversight because I had good oversight.
这些东西，你必须根据上下文来理解它们。 Those kind of things, just contextually, you have to make sense of them.
为什么这很重要？ Why does that matter?
因为'hamartia'是用来翻译旧约中既表示罪又表示赎罪祭的希伯来词的希腊词。 Because hamartia is the Greek word used to translate the Hebrew word for both sin and sin offering in the Old Testament.
因此，例如在新约的希伯来书中，当它提到赎罪祭时， 它只说'perihamartias'，就是为罪。 And so, in Hebrews, for instance, in the New Testament, when it refers to sin offering, it just says perihamartias, just for sins.
实际上没有'祭'这个词，但我们知道它实际上不是在说把罪献给神。 There's no actual word for offerings, but we know it's not actually talking about sins being offered to God.
它说的是为罪献给神的祭。 It's talking about offerings for sins being offered to God.
所以，我们在英语中加上'祭'这个词来使它有意义。 And so, we add the word offerings in English to make it make sense.
因为说基督成为'hamartia'，可能意味着基督成为罪。 Because in saying that Christ becomes hamartia, it could mean that Christ becomes sin.
为什么这很重要？ Why does it matter?
这没有意义，但它可能意味着那个。 That doesn't make sense, but it could mean that.
它也可能意味着，而且从上下文来看显然是指， 基督成为我们的赎罪祭，他是为罪献上的祭。 It could also mean and contextually clearly does mean that Christ becomes our sin offering, that he is the sacrifice for sin.
为什么这很重要？ Why does that matter?
因为赎罪祭被视为至圣的。 Well, because the offering from sin was treated as most holy.
利未记6章说了这一点。 Leviticus 6 says that.
因此，赎罪祭不是主所厌恶的东西。 And so, the offering from sin isn't something the Lord is disgusted by.
他不会看着赎罪祭说，哦，那让我想起了罪。 He doesn't look at the offering for sin and say, oh, that reminds me of sin.
哦，我对那感到恐惧。 Oh, I'm horrified by that.
我必须转离它。 I have to turn away from it.
不，完全相反。 No, it's completely the opposite of that.
它被描述为馨香之气。 It's described as a fragrant odor.
所以，父对儿子的牺牲感到满意，我们在约翰福音10章中很明确地看到这一点。 So, the Father's pleased with the Son's sacrifice, and we see this in John 10 very explicitly.
耶稣说，父爱我，因为我将命舍去，好再取回来。 Jesus says, for this reason, the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
没有人夺我的命去，是我自己舍的。 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.
注意这一点。 Notice that.
父不是在谋杀我。 The Father's not just murdering me.
这是自愿的自我牺牲，它使父感到喜悦。 This is a voluntary self-sacrifice, and it makes the Father happy.
我有权柄舍了，也有权柄取回来。这是我从我父所受的命令。 I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again, this charge I've received from my Father.
因此，他说，我父爱我，不是恨我，不是将他的愤 怒倾倒在我身上，而是爱我，他在十字架上爱他。 For this reason, he says, my Father loves me, not hates me, not pours out his wrath on me, loves me, that he loves him on the cross.
倾向于刑罚替代论的神学家喜欢指出耶稣呼喊：我的神，我的神，为什么离弃我？ Theologians who are of the penal substitution variety like to point to Jesus crying out, my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
他们忽略了紧接着耶稣说的话：父啊，我将我的灵魂交在你手里。 And they miss the very next line where Jesus says, Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.
即使他经历了所有被遗弃的情感，他知道他实际上并没有 被遗弃，他引用的是一篇诗篇，其中诗人得到了辩白。 That even as he's experiencing all the emotions of abandonment, he knows he's not actually abandoned, and he's quoting a psalm in which the psalmist is vindicated.
他引用的是一篇诗篇，其中诗人预见到有人被钉十字架并得到神的辩白。 He's quoting a psalm in which the psalmist foresees someone being crucified and vindicated by God.
他实际上并没有对神绝望。 He's not actually despairing of God.
他实际上并没有被神遗弃，但他感受到了被遗弃的深 刻，在人性层面上，他感受到了这一切的全部重量。 He's not actually abandoned by God, but he feels the profundity of abandonment, that at a human level, he feels the full weight of this.
这是一个奥秘，我实际上会推荐托马斯·约瑟夫·怀特神父的一篇精彩文 章，从神学角度解释了这一点，我们如何以一种尊重三位一体道成肉身和 耶稣拥有真福直观的方式来理解这一切，即耶稣始终享有这种直观。 That is a mystery, and I would recommend, actually, Father Thomas Joseph White has a fantastic article on this explaining theologically, well, how do we make sense of all of that in a way that's respectful of the incarnation of the Trinity and of Jesus having the beatific vision, that Jesus always enjoys the vision.
即使在他的人性中，他也享有对神的直观，你不 能说他没有，否则就是对道成肉身的真正不敬。 Even in his humanity, he enjoys the vision of God, that you can't say he didn't without doing some real disservice to the incarnation.
即使在十字架上，他仍然享有对父的完全直观，同时经历着这种深 刻的苦难，这种深刻的痛苦，所以他可以呼喊出来，这些话听起来 好像他已经完全被神遗弃了，但他仍然可以将自己交托给神。 And even on the cross, he's still enjoying the full vision of the Father while experiencing this profound suffering, this profound pain, and so he can cry out, and these words sound like he's just been totally abandoned to God, and yet he can still abandon himself to God.
注意这里又有一种自反义词。 Notice another kind of autoantonym there.
他可以完全将自己交给父，说：父啊，我将我的灵魂交在你手里。 He can give himself entirely to the Father and say, Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.
他可以说，在这样做时，父爱他，不恨他，不将他的愤怒倾倒在他身上，而是爱他。 And he can say that in doing this, the Father loves him, doesn't hate him, doesn't pour his wrath upon him, loves him.
好的。 Okay.
我提到这在祭祀上是神所喜悦的，对吧？ I mentioned this was pleasing to God, sacrificially, right?
记住赎罪祭。 Remember the sin offering.
以弗所书5章描述耶稣爱我们，为我们舍了自己，当作馨香的供物和祭物献给神。 Ephesians 5 describes Jesus as having loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
现在，显然，那种馨香的供物的语言有点比喻性。 Now, obviously, that fragrant offering language is a little metaphorical.
圣保罗不只是在说耶稣闻起来很香。 St. Paul's not just saying Jesus smelled nice.
不，他指的是令人喜悦的祭物被这样描述的事实。 No, he's referring to the fact that pleasing sacrifices were described this way.
例如，在创世记8章，诺亚献燔祭，经上说，耶和华闻 那馨香之气，就心里说，我不再因人的缘故咒诅地。 So, for instance, in Genesis 8, Noah offers burnt offerings and says, when the Lord smelled the pleasing odor, he said in his heart, I'll never again curse the ground.
所以，是这个意思，对吧？ So, that idea, right?
这是一个令人喜悦和可接受的祭物。 This is a pleasing and acceptable sacrifice.
这就是他成为馨香的供物的意思。 That's what it means for him to be a fragrant offering.
这与刑罚替代模式非常不同，父没有转离子。 That is very, very different from the penal substitution model, that the Father is not turning away from the Son.
父喜悦的不是子的受苦，而是子的彻底自我牺牲。 The Father is enjoying, not the Son's suffering, but the Son's radical self-sacrifice.
就像我们不会因为四个人在电影院被谋杀而感到高 兴，但我们被他们愿意这样做的事实深深打动。 The way that we don't enjoy the fact that four men got murdered in a movie theater, but we are profoundly moved by the fact that they were willing to do it.
所以，我们可以看着那个说，那是好的。 So, we can look at that and say, that is good.
再说一遍，不是说他们被谋杀是好事，而是他们愿意被谋杀。 Again, not that they got murdered, but they were willing to be murdered.
同样，受难日是好的，不是因为耶稣被谋杀，而是 因为他愿意被谋杀，他愿意为我们走上十字架。 So, too, Good Friday is good, not that Jesus was murdered, but that he was willing to be murdered, that he was willing to go all the way to the cross for us.
这就是使受难日成为好日子的原因。 That is what makes Good Friday good.
不是罗马人，不是把他钉在十字架上的人，而是耶稣和他的自我牺牲。 Not the Romans, not the people who nail him to the cross, but Jesus and his self-sacrifice.
因此，圣彼得在彼得前书1:18-19中描述了我们如何被赎回，不是凭着 能坏的金银等物，乃是凭着基督的宝血，如同无瑕疵、无玷污的羔羊之血。 And so, St. Peter in 1 Peter 1, 18-19, describes how we were ransomed, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.
这种无瑕疵羔羊的形象实际上被反复使用。 And that spotless lamb imagery is actually used pretty repeatedly.
这是相当重要的，因为许多刑罚替代模式所看重的主题是替罪羊的概念。 This is pretty significant because the motif that a lot of penal substitution model looks to is the notion of the scapegoat.
不深入讨论替罪羊的整个问题，可能值得指出的是， 这不是新约使用的主题，不是新约使用的牺牲主题。 Without getting into the whole thing with the scapegoat, it's probably just worth pointing out that's not the motif, the sacrificial motif, that the New Testament uses.
它使用的是神的羔羊，这只令人喜悦且完美的羔羊。 It uses the lamb of God, this lamb that's pleasing and is perfect.
它是无瑕疵的。 It is without blemish.
它是无玷污的。 It is without spot.
基督献上一个完美的礼物给父，父以爱接受。 That Christ sacrifices one of the perfect gift to the Father that the Father accepts with love.
希望这是清楚的。 Hopefully, that's clear.
希望很清楚为什么这与刑罚替代模式有根本的对立。 Hopefully, it's clear why that's really radically opposed to the penal substitution kind of model.
但第四个优点是，这使新约的故事恰当地关于爱和顺服，而不是神圣的暴力。 But the fourth advantage, this makes the New Testament story properly about love and obedience, not divine violence.
在刑罚替代模式中，父对罪如此愤怒，他需要打击某人，于是他打击自己的儿子。 In the penal substitution model, you have the father so outraged with sin, he needs to beat up somebody, and he beats up his own son.
这是一个奇怪地缺席于新约圣经页面的故事。 That is a story strangely absent from the pages of the New Testament.
相反，阿奎那表明这是一个关于爱和顺服的故事。 Instead, Aquinas shows this is a story of love and obedience.
是的，我们没有像应该的那样爱神。 Yeah, we didn't love God like we should.
是的，我们违背了神。 Yeah, we disobeyed God.
但后来有一个人来了，他完美地爱神，完美地顺 服神，因为他既是完全的神，又是完全的人。 But then a man came, and he loved God perfectly, and he obeyed God perfectly, because he was fully God, fully man.
这与旧约和新约中所说的一切相符，但特别是爱、顺服和牺牲之间的联系。 And this comports with what everything in the Old and New Testament says, but the connection between love and obedience and sacrifice.
例如，在撒母耳记上15章，先知撒母耳说，耶和 华喜悦燔祭和平安祭，岂如喜悦人听从他的话呢？ 1 Samuel 15, for instance, Samuel, the prophet, says, well, has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord?
听命胜于献祭；顺从胜于公羊的脂油。 Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice and to hearken than the fat of rams.
这是我们需要理解的关键一句。 That's a critical line that we need to understand.
最高的牺牲是顺服的牺牲。 The highest sacrifice is the sacrifice of obedience.
你可以把你所有的东西都给神。 You can give God all of your stuff.
你可以向他献祭动物。 You can sacrifice animals to him.
你可以放弃你所有的财产。 You can give up all your possessions.
但如果你不愿意真正顺服他，如果你不愿意真正听从他，这一切都毫无价值。 But if you're not willing to actually obey him, if you're not willing to actually listen to him, all of that counts for nothing.
好吧，所以在这里，按照刑罚替代模式，我们只需要找个人来献血就行了。 Well, so here, with the penal substitution model, we just need somebody to we can offer the blood for that.
哦，好的，很好。 Oh, okay, good.
我们找到了一个无限的人。 We found an infinite person.
我们可以把他钉在十字架上，然后他的血就足够了。 We can put him on the cross, and then his blood will be good enough.
但这根本不是圣经的模式。 And that's not actually the biblical model at all.
不，有比自我牺牲更高的东西，或者说，比动物祭祀更高的东西。 No, there's something higher than self-sacrifice, or excuse me, than an animal sacrifice.
有顺服的牺牲，就是你说，我要做神要我做的事的自我牺牲。 There's the sacrifice of obedience, the self-sacrifice where you say, I'm going to do what God wants me to do.
因此，基督在十字架上献上了那更高的牺牲，这是一个顺服的牺牲。 And so Christ offers that higher sacrifice on the cross, and it's a sacrifice of obedience.
在刑罚替代模式中，顺服奇怪地缺失了。 Obedience is weirdly lacking in the penal substitution model.
没有对顺服的要求。 There's no requirement for obedience.
你可以进行整整两个小时关于刑罚替代的讨论，而不提及基督 是自愿参与者或顺服父的任何内容，这是极其不符合圣经的。 You can have an entire two-hour talk on penal substitution without any reference to Christ being a voluntary participant or obeying the Father or anything like that, and that is profoundly unbiblical.
接下来，在罗马书5章，圣保罗指出了同样的事，就如一人的过犯叫 众人定罪，亚当，照样，一人的义行也叫众人称义得生命，对吧？ Next, in Romans 5, St. Paul points out this same thing, that as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, Adam, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men, right?
就像，人类把我们带入了这个困境，人类又把我们带出了这个困境。 Like, the human race got us into this mess, and the human race got us out of this.
一个人，亚当，把我们带入了这个困境。 One man, Adam, got us into this.
一个人，耶稣，把我们带出了这个困境。 One man, Jesus, got us out of it.
因一人的悖逆，众人成为罪人；照样，因一人的顺从，众人也成为义了。 For as by one man's disobedience, many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience, many will be made righteous.
这是关于一个人完美地、无限地顺服神，因为他既是神又是人。 That this is about a human obeying God perfectly, infinitely, because he's both divine and human.
在罗马书5章中，这一点很重要，这是一个人。 It matters in Romans 5, this is a man.
这就是重点所在。 That's literally the point.
但我认为，这一点在其他十字架模型中被忽视了。 But that point is, I think, lost in other models of the cross.
在罗马书5章的前面，我已经提到了这段经文。 Earlier in Romans 5, I already alluded to this passage.
保罗说，当我们还软弱的时候，基督就按所定的日期为罪人死。 Paul says, while we were yet helpless at the right time, Christ died for the ungodly.
为义人死，是少有的。 But one will hardly die for a righteous man.
为仁人死，或者有敢做的。 Perhaps for a good man, one will dare even to die.
惟有神显明他的爱给我们。 But God shows his love for us.
因我们还作罪人的时候，基督为我们死。 While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
这是关于自我牺牲。 This is about self-sacrifice.
这是关于顺服。 This is about obedience.
这是关于爱。 This is about love.
这完全解释了十字架如何运作，而不需要诉诸于神需要杀某人。 And that fully explains how the cross works without any recourse to, God needed somebody to kill.
神需要伤害某人。 God needed somebody to hurt.
这些都不存在，也不需要这些，因为这些都不是真的。 There's none of that, and none of that is required, because none of that is true.
好的，第五，它为我们的十字架留下了空间。 All right, fifth, it leaves room for our crosses.
这是一个简短的观点，但值得深思。 Now, this is a quick point, but it's worth contemplating.
耶稣说，若有人要跟从我，就当舍己，背起他的十字架来跟从我。 That Jesus says, if any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
那么，这怎么说得通呢？ Well, how does that make sense?
我以为重点是耶稣死在十字架上，所以我不必死。 I thought the whole point was Jesus died on the cross, so I don't have to die.
他承担了我的刑罚，对吧？ He bore my penalty, right?
事实证明，这并不是真的。 Well, it turns out that isn't true.
耶稣死在十字架上，而我现在必须背起我的十字架跟随他。 Jesus dies on the cross, and I now have to take up my cross and follow him.
他是父所喜悦的祭，现在我也需要成为献给父的祭。 And he was a pleasing sacrifice to the Father, and now I need to be a sacrifice to the Father as well.
哥林多后书2章说，我们在神面前是基督馨香之气，对吧？ Second Corinthians 2, that we are the aroma of Christ to God, right?
我们现在要成为那使神喜悦的燔祭。 We are now to be that burnt offering that's pleasing to God.
通过在我们生活中有这些自我牺牲的行为，我们现在与基督 完美的牺牲联合，我们不完美的牺牲与他完美的牺牲联合。 By having these acts of self-sacrifice in our life, we are now united to Christ's perfect sacrifice, that our imperfect sacrifices are united to his perfect one.
他这样做不是为了消除我们做这件事的需要。 He isn't doing this to take away our need to do this.
他这样做是为了使我们能够向父献上有价值的东西。 He's doing this to make possible our offering something to the Father that's worth something.
因此，这在歌罗西书1章24节中得到了深刻的表达。圣保罗说，我为你们受苦， 倒觉欢乐；并且为基督的身体，就是为教会，要在我肉身上补满基督患难的缺欠。 And so, this is really profoundly expressed in Colossians 1, verse 24. I rejoice, St. Paul says, I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's affliction for the sake of his body, that is, the church.
你读到这个，你会想，这是什么意思？ You read that, and you just think, what in the world?
刑罚替代模式告诉我基督承担了这一切，所以我不需要做任何事。 The penal substitutionary model told me Christ bore all this, so I didn't have to do anything.
现在你告诉我还缺少什么，而且是我的受苦？ Now you're telling me something's lacking, and it's my suffering?
惊讶吗？ Surprise?
这是因为刑罚替代模式是错误的，基督提供了这个完美的爱和顺服的祭，这 使我们有可能与他联合，献上我们自己的牺牲、受苦、爱和顺服的行为。 Well, that's because the penal substitutionary model is wrong, that Christ offers this perfect offering of love and obedience and that makes it possible for us to be united with him in offering our own acts of sacrifice, of suffering, of love and obedience.
注意，这种受苦与基督在十字架上的受苦是相连的。 And notice this suffering is connected with the suffering of Christ on the cross.
现在，我们的苦难和基督的苦难结合在一起。 Now, our afflictions and Christ's afflictions are combined.
为什么我要指出这一点？ Why do I point this out?
这是一个明显的观点，但当我们受苦时，我们不会说神在向我们倾倒他的愤怒。 This is an obvious point, but when we suffer, we don't say God is pouring out his wrath on us.
不，我们说他所爱的，他必管教，或者基督允许我们为自己的荣耀而受苦，或类似的话。 No, we say the ones he loves he disciplines, or that Christ permits us to suffer for our own glorification, or anything like this.
我们不会只说基督在倾倒他的，或者抱歉，神在向我们倾倒他的愤怒。 We don't just say Christ is pouring out his, or excuse me, that God is pouring out his wrath upon us.
所以如果这对我们的苦难不是真的，我们的苦难是对基督苦难的回应 和联系，那么也许这对基督的苦难来说也是一个糟糕的模型，对吧？ And so if that's not true of our afflictions, our afflictions are this echo and connection to Christ's afflictions, then maybe that's a bad model for Christ's affliction as well, right?
所以如果你对基督苦难的理解使我们的苦难变得难以理解，而且不 明白为什么我们应该受苦，那么，这就是一个糟糕的十字架模型。 So if your understanding of Christ's affliction makes our afflictions incomprehensible, and it doesn't make sense why we should suffer, well, that's a bad model of the cross.
但如果相反，耶稣为一切付出，这样我们就可以与他联合，向父做出这些付出，因为 我们不仅仅是在试图偿还债务，我们实际上是在做超出的事，那么这就说得通了。 But if instead, Jesus pays for everything so we can then be united with him in making these payments to the Father, because we're not just trying to pay off a debt, we're actually doing over and above, well, it makes sense then.
那么我们的苦难就有价值了。 And then our sufferings are worth something.
它们实际上为他人赢得了恩典。 They actually win graces for others.
记住，阿奎那早些时候谈到这不仅仅足以把我们 从坟墓中拯救出来，而且是为我们赢得荣耀。 Remember, Aquinas was talking earlier about how this isn't just enough to save us from the grave, but this is winning glory for us.
同样，我们也可以成为这个赢得荣耀过程的一部分。 Well, likewise, we can be part of this winning glory process.
我们可以在自己的肉身上补满基督患难的缺欠，为了他的身体，就是教会，这 样我们就可以为我们的弟兄赢得荣耀，就像基督为他的弟兄赢得荣耀一样。 We can make up in our own flesh what is lacking in Christ's affliction for the sake of his body, the church, so we can win glory for our brothers, just as Christ won glory for his brothers.
这是一个深奥的神学，它真的值得比我刚才给予的更多的时间和关注。 That's a profound theology, and it really deserves more time and attention than I just gave it.
我现在只想说，如果这一切对你来说听起来完全陌生，如果歌罗 西书1:24对你来说听起来很奇怪，那应该是一个警告信号。 I would just say now, if that all sounds totally alien to you, and if Colossians 124 sounds bizarre to you, that should be a red flag.
天主教徒和东正教徒可以看这些东西并说，是的，这与我们的神学是一致的。 Catholics and Orthodox can look at these things and say, yeah, this makes sense with our theology.
我们可以为他人奉献这些。 We can offer these things up for others.
对天主教徒来说，当你受苦时说「把它奉献出去」，这是一个被过度使用的短语。 Catholics, it's like a really overused phrase when you're suffering to say, offer it up.
你在自己的生活中做出这个小小的祭司式牺牲，将你的牺牲与基督的牺牲联系起来。 You make this little priestly sacrifice in your own life, connecting your sacrifice with Christ's sacrifice.
这一切都说得通。 All that makes sense.
这解释了为什么我们是祭司。 It makes sense why we are priests.
这解释了为什么我们向神献上赞美的祭和在我们自己身体上的祭，我们的属灵敬拜。 It makes sense why we're offering to God this sacrifice of praise and sacrifices in our own bodies, our spiritual worship.
这一切都是有效的，基督这位大祭司有一大群祭司与他同在，就是我们所有 人，这就引出了这个系统的第六个也是最后一个优点，它明确地将基督置于 大祭司的位置，顺便说一下，它也向我们展示了为什么最后的晚餐很重要。 All of that works, that Christ the high priest has a whole slew of priests with him, all of us, and that leads to the sixth and final advantage of this system, which is this squarely leaves Christ as the high priest, and by the way, it shows us why the Last Supper matters.
所以，希伯来书2章明确指出，耶稣必须在各方面与他的弟兄相同， 为要在神的事上成为慈悲忠信的大祭司，为百姓的罪献上赎罪祭。 So, Hebrews 2 makes the obvious point that Jesus had to be made like his brethren in every respect so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God to make expiation for the sins of the people.
现在，这是一个重要的细节，基督是祭祀的祭司，我 已经提到这一点好几次了，现在可能提得太多了。 Now, this is an important detail, that Christ is the priest of the sacrifice, and I've mentioned this several times now, too many times now.
为什么这很重要？ Why does this matter?
因为如果父在十字架上转脸不看耶稣，他就是在转脸不看献祭的人，也不看那祭物。 Because if the Father turns his face away from Jesus on the cross, he's turning his face away from the one offering the sacrifice, as well as from the sacrifice.
那就是被拒绝的祭，然后十字架被拒绝，我们都死在罪中，我们没有希望。 That's a rejected sacrifice, and then the cross is rejected, we all die in our sins, we have no hope.
但事实上，新约模式与此相反，基督是我们的大祭司，他将自己作为令人喜悦的祭献给父。 But in fact, the New Testament models the opposite of that, that Christ is our high priest, and he makes this pleasing sacrifice of himself to the Father.
我之前引用了约翰福音10章，但注意他使用了大祭司的语言，他说，我为羊舍命 ，父爱我，因为我将命舍去，好再取回来。没有人夺我的命去，是我自己舍的。 I quoted John 10 earlier, but notice he uses high priestly language, he says, I lay down my life for this sheep, for this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, let me take it up again, no one takes it from me, but I lay it down in my own accord.
这都是祭司的语言。 That is all priestly language.
但这引出了一个重要的问题，他在哪里做这件事？ But this leads to an important question, where does he do this?
大祭司在哪里献上自己？ Where does the high priest offer himself?
他在哪里将自己作为祭物献给父？ Where does he present himself as an offering to the Father?
我们有明确的圣经证据，是在最后的晚餐上。 Well, we have clear biblical evidence, it's at the Last Supper.
他说，拿着吃，这是我的身体，然后他拿起杯来，说，你们都 喝这个，因为这是我立约的血，为多人流出来，使罪得赦。 He says, take, eat, this is my body, and then he takes the chalice, and he says, drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
他明确地说，我把我的身体给你们，我把我的血给你们，我要我的血为赦罪而流出，他将自 己与我们联合，不仅在我们共同的人性中，而且在最后晚餐的这个圣餐中更深刻地联合。 He's explicitly saying, I'm giving you my body, I'm giving you my blood, and I want my blood to be poured out for the forgiveness of sins, that he is uniting himself to us, not just in our common humanity, but even more profoundly in this communion in the Last Supper.
这就是他将自己献给父的行动。 And that is the action in which he is sacrificing himself to the Father.
现在你可以看到为什么三日庆典是三天，因为牺牲从这里开始。 Now you can see why Triton is three days, that the sacrifice begins here.
现在，我将非常简短地解释一下，如果可以的话，旧约的祭祀是如何与逾越节一起运作的。 Now, here I'm going to just explain very briefly, if I can, the way the Old Testament sacrifices work with the Passover.
在逾越节，你有两个事件。 With the Passover, you have two events.
你有所谓的预备日，你杀羊羔。 You've got what's called Preparation Day, you kill the lamb.
然后你有逾越节的晚餐。 And then you've got the Passover meal.
在犹太历上是第二天，我们会说是那天晚上。 It's the following day on the Jewish calendar, we would say it's that night.
然后你吃羊羔。 And then you eat the lamb.
现在这真的很关键。 And now this is really critical.
你在预备日流羊羔的血，在逾越节吃羊羔。 You shed the lamb's blood on Preparation Day, and you eat the lamb on Passover.
在吃羊羔时，那祭就应用到你身上了。 And on eating the lamb, that sacrifice becomes applied to you.
因为我可以去圣殿杀一只羊羔。 Because I could go to the temple and kill a lamb.
那是为谁准备的？ Well, who is that for?
我怎么知道？ How do I know?
对吧？ Right?
就像这是我之前试图强调的刑罚替代问题。 Like this is a penal substitution problem I tried to highlight before.
好的，基督死在十字架上。 Okay, Christ dies on the cross.
那是为谁？ Who is that for?
我们怎么知道？ And how do we know?
一个人如何成为那个牺牲祭品的参与者？ How does one become a participant in that sacrificial offering?
嗯，有实际的方式让你成为牺牲祭品的参与者。 Well, there are actual ways you become a participant in a sacrificial offering.
最常见的方式之一是吃祭品。 One of the most common ones is to eat the sacrifice.
在逾越节中，你有两种方式。 In the Passover one, you have two modes.
你把血涂在门框上，然后吃祭品。 You smear the blood on the doorposts, and you eat the sacrifice.
那么这一切预示着什么？ So what is all of that prefiguring?
预备日是受难日的预表。 Preparation Day is a prefigurement for Good Friday.
约翰在他的福音书中将受难日描述为预备日。 John, in his gospel, describes Good Friday as Preparation Day.
基督的血涂抹在十字架的木头上。 And the blood of Christ is smeared on the wood of the cross.
但我们仍然需要吃祭品来与这个祭联合。 But we still need to eat the sacrifice to be united with this sacrifice.
这就是我们在最后的晚餐和此后的每一台弥撒中所做的。 And that's what we do at the Last Supper and at every Mass since.
我知道这是一个超长的节目，我为此道歉。 I know this was a super long episode, and I apologize for that.
但我不想亏欠十字架。 But I didn't want to do a disservice to the cross.
我不想亏欠十字架的神学。 I didn't want to do a disservice to the theology of the cross.
我认为重要的是，我们要理解将十字架视为阿兹特克祭祀 和将十字架视为犹太祭祀之间存在一些非常大的差异。 I think it's important that we understand there's some really big differences between thinking the cross is like an Aztec sacrifice, or thinking of the cross is like a Jewish sacrifice.
因为这些是天壤之别。 Because those are a world apart.
作为犹太祭祀，基督既是大祭司又是祭品。 And as a Jewish sacrifice, Christ is both the high priest and the victim.
这是一个自愿的牺牲。 This is a voluntary sacrifice.
这不是神圣愤怒的牺牲，而是神圣之爱的牺牲。 This is a sacrifice not of divine wrath, but of divine love.
父向我们显明的是他的爱，而不是他的恨，基督向我们显明他对我们的爱，他为朋友舍命。 The Father is showing us his love, not his hatred, and that Christ is showing us his love for us, that he laid down his life for his friends.
这是好消息。 This is good news.
这是最伟大的消息。 This is the greatest news.
这是有史以来最好的消息。 This is the best news that ever existed.
所以我希望你从中获得灵魂。 So I hope you take souls from this.
我希望这能帮助你理解圣周四，如果你今晚要庆祝的 话，以及受难日，更广泛地说，理解基督徒的生活。 I hope this helps you to make sense of Holy Thursday, if that's what you're going to celebrate tonight, of Good Friday, and of just the Christian life more broadly.
非常感谢你们。 Thank you guys so much.
愿神祝福你。 God bless you.
感谢你收听无耻教皇党，这是天主教答疑播客网络的一个节目。 Thank you for listening to Shameless Potpourri, a production of the Catholic Answers Podcast Network.
访问catholicanswerspodcast.com找到更多精彩节目 Find more great shows by visiting catholicanswerspodcast.com
或在你收听播客的任何地方搜索天主教答疑。 or search Catholic Answers wherever you listen to podcasts.