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.
我想探讨我的一个论点，即耶稣关于婚姻和教会的激进教导 是许多现代基督徒不理解的，而且这些问题并非毫无关联。 I want to explore a thesis that I have, which is that Jesus has these radical teachings about marriage and about the church that many modern Christians don't understand, and that these are not unrelated issues.
耶稣的婚姻教导解释了他关于教会的教导，反之亦然 。如果你误解了其中一个，很可能也会误解另一个。 That Jesus's marriage teaching explains his teaching about the church and vice versa, and that when you get one wrong, you're likely to end up getting the other one wrong as well.
所以，请听我说。 So, hear me out.
我很想听听你的想法。 I'd love to hear what you think.
让我们先快速回顾一下。 Let's start with a quick recap.
上周我做了一整集关于耶稣激进婚姻教导的节目，所以我会很快地过一遍这部分。 Now, last week I did an entire episode on Jesus's radical marriage teaching, so I'm going to go very quickly through this part.
但对于那些刚刚收听并不想花一整个小时来了解的人，耶稣 提出了一个婚姻教导，他回到创世记说二人要成为一体。 But for those who maybe are just tuning in and don't want to watch an entire, you know, hour to get caught up, Jesus presents a marriage teaching where he goes back to Genesis and says the two shall become one.
所以，他们不再是二人，乃是一体。 So, they're no longer two, but one.
因此，他在马可福音第十章第九节说，所以神配合的，人不可分开。 And therefore, he says, in Mark 10 verse 9, what therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.
这看起来是对试图解除基督徒婚姻的全面禁止。 Now, that looks like a blanket prohibition against trying to dissolve a Christian marriage.
果然，在接下来的两节经文中，他说凡休妻另娶的，就是犯奸淫，辜负他的妻子。 Sure enough, in the next two verses, he says that whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her.
说这是奸淫就是说婚姻实际上并没有解除。 Now, to say it's adultery is to say the marriage isn't actually dissolved.
他不只是说他们在犯淫乱或婚外的性罪，不，这实际上是奸淫的罪。 He's not just saying they're committing fornication or sexual sin outside of—no, it's actually the sin of adultery.
这是相当重要的。 That's pretty significant.
因此，你会发现非常清晰的经文，看起来是一种真正激进的观点，即严格禁止离婚和再婚。 And so, you find very clear passages that look like a really radical view that divorce and remarriage is strictly prohibited.
现在，那些为此辩护例外的人倾向于引用马太福音第十九章第九节， 其中似乎给出了一个例外条款，涉及一个希腊词叫做pornea。 Now, those who defend an exception to this tend to cite to Matthew 19 verse 9, which gives what appears to be an exception clause for a Greek word called pornea.
这常被误译为奸淫。 This is often mistranslated to be adultery.
但正如我们上周所看到的，pornea这个词不是希腊语中表示奸淫的词 ，奸淫一词在马太福音第十九章第九节中出现了两次，但不在例外条款中。 But as we saw last week, the word pornea is not the Greek word for adultery, which appears twice in Matthew 19 verse 9, but not in the exception clause.
事实上，pornea是犹太人用来指外邦人那 种在犹太法律下不被允许的无效婚姻的术语。 And then, in fact, pornea was the Jewish term for invalid marriages of the kind that the Gentiles had that were not permissible under Jewish law.
所以，对马太福音更好的理解是，耶稣表明这种禁止离婚和再婚的规定只 适用于有效的婚姻，即神所配合的婚姻，而不是凯撒试图结合的婚姻。 So, the better understanding of Matthew is that Jesus is showing that this prohibition against divorce and remarriage applies to only valid marriages, those marriages which God has joined together, not those marriages which Caesar has tried to join together.
凯撒可以说两个男人可以结婚，三个人可以结婚，等等，但神对婚姻有特定的看法。 Caesar can say two men can marry, three people can marry, whatever, but God has a particular vision of marriage.
因此，如果是神配合的，那么离婚和再婚是不可能的，而p ornea条款只是在说明，如果不是这样，这就不适用。 And so, if God has joined it together, then divorce and remarriage are impossible, and the pornea clause is just making the point that, if not, this doesn't apply.
希望这很清楚。 Hopefully, that's clear.
正如我上周所说，这是一个真正激进的教导，正如你从下一 节经文中看到的，门徒们回应说，若是这样，倒不如不娶。 As I said last week, this is a truly radical teaching, as you get from the very next verse, which the disciples responded by saying, well, if this is the case with marriage, it's better not to get married.
然后，耶稣提出了一个同样激进的关于独身的教导，我们甚至不打算涉及。 And then, Jesus presents an equally radical teaching on celibacy, which we're not even going to touch.
今天，我想转向并说，好的，要理解这个激进的教导，你需要去一个地方。 Today, I want to turn now and say, okay, to make sense of this radical teaching, you need to go to one place.
圣经一次又一次地指向那个地方。 And scripture points you to that one place over and over again.
那就是教会。 It's the church.
这是约的忠诚。 It's covenant faithfulness.
所以，这又是一条双向道路。 And so, this is, again, it's a two-way road.
如果你想理解基督与教会关系的本质，你需要理解婚姻。 If you want to understand the nature of Christ's relationship to the church, you need to understand marriage.
如果你想理解婚姻，你需要理解基督与教会的关系。 If you want to understand marriage, you need to understand Christ's relationship to the church.
我们在各处都看到这一点，从旧约开始。 We see this all over the place, beginning in the Old Testament.
玛拉基书第二章是我上周引用的主要经文之一。 Malachi 2 is one of the primary texts that I quoted from last week.
我引用的是玛拉基书第二章第十六节，神说，我恨恶休妻。 And the verse I quoted was verse 16 of Malachi 2, where God says, I hate divorce.
好的，非常清楚，非常直接。 All right, very clear, very straightforward.
我当时没有告诉你，现在我很高兴告诉你的是，这种对离婚的谴责 源于对利未人约不忠的讨论，即祭司和利未人没有忠于摩西之约。 What I didn't tell you then, and I'm happy to tell you now, is that this condemnation of divorce arises from a discussion of Levitical covenant unfaithfulness, that the priests and Levites hadn't been faithful to the Mosaic covenant.
所以，在玛拉基书第二章，神说，众祭司啊，这诫命是传给你们的。 So, in Malachi chapter 2, God says, and now priests, this command is for you.
他指责他们不忠于，正如他所说的，我与利未所立的约。 And he accuses them of being unfaithful to, as he says, my covenant with Levi.
从第十三节开始，他说，你们又行这事，使眼泪、哭泣和叹息遮 盖耶和华的坛，以致他不再看顾那供物，也不从你们手中收纳。 Beginning in verse 13, he says, you cover the Lord's altar with tears, with weeping and groaning, because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor at your hand.
你们问，这是为什么呢？ You ask, why does he not?
因耶和华在你和你幼年所娶的妻中间作见证。她虽 是你的配偶，又是你盟约的妻，你却以诡诈待她。 Because the Lord was witness to the covenant between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.
神岂不是使二人成为一体，共有灵的残余吗？ Has not the one God made and sustained for us the spirit of life?
他为何如此呢？ And what does he desire?
是要得虔诚的后裔。 Godly offspring.
所以当谨守你们的心，谁也不可以诡诈待幼年所娶的妻。 So, take heed to yourself and let none be faithless to the wife of his youth.
现在，我希望从这里清楚的是，在这样斥责祭司时，他并不是字面上指他们说，你们 知道，在你们的家里，除了祭司的职责外，你们都在欺骗你们的妻子，对她们不忠。 Now, what I hope is clear from this is, in scolding the priests in this way, he's not literally referring to them saying, you know, in your homes, apart from your priestly duties, you're all cheating on your wives and you're being unfaithful to them.
不，未能生育、未能生子的形象，以及对约不忠的形象，相当明确地在谈论利未人之约。 No, the image of failing to reproduce, failing to beget children, and the image of being faithless to the covenant are talking about the Levitical covenant pretty explicitly.
正是在这个背景下，神说，休妻的事和以强暴待妻的人都是我所恨恶的。 And it's in this context that God says, for I hate divorce, and covering is one garment of violence.
所以你们当谨守你们的心，不可行诡诈。 So, take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless.
这是第一点。 So, that's the first.
甚至在我们谈到新约中的耶稣之前，你就已经看到神在以色列 中清楚地说，神与利未人之约的关系非常像一个盟约的婚姻。 Just even before we get to Jesus in the New Testament, you've got God clearly saying in Israel that what's going on between God and the Levitical covenant is very much like a covenantal marriage.
好，让我们跳到新约。 Well, let's jump forward to the New Testament.
有几个不同的地方。 There's several different places.
罗马书第七章是我认为非常有趣的一处，因为在这个上下文中，圣保罗只是在谈论称义。 Romans 7 is one place I think is really interesting, because in the context, St. Paul is just talking about justification.
但他说，弟兄们，我现在对明白律法的人说，你们岂不晓得律法管人是在活着的时候吗？ But he says, Do you not know, brethren, from seeking to those who know the law, that the law is binding on a person only during his life?
就如女人有了丈夫，丈夫还活着，就被律法约束。 Thus, a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives.
丈夫若死了，就脱离了丈夫的律法。 But if her husband dies, she is discharged from the law concerning her husband.
所以，丈夫活着，她若归于别人，便叫淫妇。 Accordingly, she'll be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive.
丈夫若死了，她就脱离了那律法。 But if her husband dies, she is free from that law.
虽然归于别人，也不是淫妇。 And if she marries another man, she is not an adulteress.
所以，你可能会想，为什么他要对婚姻法进行这样的详细阐述？ So, you just think, like, why is he going on this excursus through marriage law?
他将在第四节解释。我的弟兄们，这样说来，你们藉着基督的身体，在律法上 也是死了，叫你们归于别人，就是归于那从死里复活的，叫我们结果子给神。 Well, he's going to explain in verse 4. Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God.
然后在第六节，他进一步澄清，我们既然在捆我们的律法上死了，现今就脱离了律法。 And then in verse 6, he really clarifies, we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive.
换句话说，在这个约的体系的变化中，基督的到来和他的死成全了旧约，并在最后的晚餐 上创立了新约，我应该说，这很像玛拉基书第二章所描述的古老婚姻之约已经结束了。 In other words, there's in this change with the covenantal system, Christ coming in and fulfilling the old law with his death and creating a new law at the Last Supper, a new covenant, I should say, that this is very much like the ancient marital covenant that was described in Malachi 2 has been brought to an end.
它以某种方式完成了，因为婚姻中的一方现在已经死了。 It's been completed in a way because one of the parties in the marriage is now dead.
这就是这个想法。 That's kind of the idea.
所以现在，哦，现在你可以自由再婚了。 So now, oh, now you're free to marry again.
所以，这种新约的创立，都是一种约的性质。 So, this creation of a new covenant, that's all a covenantal kind of thing.
这就是圣保罗所使用的比喻。 That's the imagery that St. Paul is using.
因此，如果你理解玛拉基书第二章，罗马书第七章就更有意义了。同样，以弗所书第五 章也是如此。在以弗所书第五章中，圣保罗著名地描述了我们在婚姻中应如何相处。 And so, that makes a lot more sense in Romans 7 if you understand Malachi 2. Well, likewise with Ephesians chapter 5. In Ephesians 5, St. Paul famously gives descriptions about how we should interact with each other in marriage.
又当存敬畏基督的心，彼此顺服。 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.
你们作妻子的，当顺服自己的丈夫，如同顺服主。 Wives, be subject to your husbands as to the Lord.
但请注意，在试图解释家庭生活和婚姻时，保罗很快就转向了教会。 But notice how quickly in trying to explain family life and trying to explain marriage, Paul has to turn to the church.
他说，因为丈夫是妻子的头，如同基督是教会的头。他又是教会全体的救主。 He says, for the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its savior.
他又说，教会怎样顺服基督，妻子也要怎样凡事顺服丈夫。 And then he says again, as the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
然后他说，你们作丈夫的，要爱你们的妻子，正如基督爱教会，为教 会舍己。要用水藉着道把教会洗净，成为圣洁，可以献给自己，作个 荣耀的教会，毫无玷污、皱纹等类的病，乃是圣洁没有瑕疵的。 And then he says, husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, baptism, that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
所以，如果你想理解如何对待你的丈夫，如果你想理解如何 对待你的妻子，你需要理解基督与教会之间的约的关系。 So, if you want to understand how to treat your husband, if you want to understand how to treat your wife, you need to understand the covenantal relationship between Christ and the church.
以弗所书第五章二十八节，保罗说，丈夫也当照样爱妻子，如同爱自己的身子。 Ephesians 5, verse 28, even so, Paul says, husbands should love their wives as their own body.
这是一个关键的句子。 This is a critical line.
爱妻子便是爱自己了。 He who loves his wife loves himself.
你会注意到，在以弗所书第五章中，圣保罗通过两个方面来看教会来描述婚姻。 You'll notice in Ephesians 5 here, St. Paul is describing marriage by looking to the church and looking to the church in two aspects.
一方面，教会是基督的新妇，另一方面，教会是基督的身体。 One, that the church is in one way, the bride of Christ, and two, the church is in one way, the body of Christ.
在以弗所书第五章二十八节中，他将这两个形象结合在一起，二人 成为一体是如此彻底，以至于基督爱教会实际上就是基督爱自己。 And here in Ephesians 5, 28, he's brought these two images together, that the two becoming one is so radical that Christ loving the church is really Christ loving himself.
我们不这样谈论教会。 We don't talk about the church this way.
这是一个非常激进的教会观。 That is a really radical vision of the church.
这也是一个非常激进的婚姻观，即当一个男人爱他的妻子时，他就是在爱自己。 It's also a really radical vision of marriage, that when a man loves his wife, he's loving himself.
如果他亏负她，就是亏负自己。 If he does ill to her, he's doing ill to himself.
爱人如己这一部分，对你的邻舍是好的，但你被邀请进入一个更深刻、 更profound的境界，在那里不仅仅是爱他人如己，而是意识到 在真实的意义上，你是在爱自己，也在爱这个约定联合的另一方。 That this loving your neighbor as yourself part, that's good for your neighbor, but you're invited into something much more deeper and more profound, where it's not just loving the other as yourself, but realizing that in a real way, you are loving yourself and loving the other party of this covenantal union.
以弗所书5:29，保罗接着说，从来没有人恨恶自己的身子， 总是保养顾惜，正像基督待教会一样，因我们是他身上的肢体。 Ephesians 5, 29, Paul goes on to say, no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.
所以如果你读以弗所书第五章并问，保罗是在谈论婚姻还是在谈论教会？ So if you were to read Ephesians 5 and say, is Paul talking about marriage or is Paul talking about the church?
你无法回答这个问题。 You can't answer that.
是的，答案就是肯定的。 Yes, the answer is just yes.
他在谈论两者，而且他无法说出一句关于其中一个的话而不提到另一个。 He is talking about both, and he can't get a sentence out about one without bringing up the other.
这就是这两个主题在他的神学中如何紧密相连。 That's how intimately connected these two themes are in his theology.
这在下一节经文中会变得非常清楚，因为就像耶稣在谈论婚姻 时，当他表明离婚实际上是完全不可接受的，他指向神在创世 记中的原初计划，创世记2:24，那里谈到二人成为一体。 And that's going to become really clear in the next verse, because just as Jesus, when he's talking about marriage, when he shows that divorce is actually completely unacceptable, points us back to God's original plan in Genesis, Genesis 2, verse 24, where it talks about the two becoming one flesh.
保罗在以弗所书5:31中引用了这段话。你以为他会 说，这解释了婚姻，但他实际上说，这解释了教会。 Paul quotes that here in Ephesians 5, 31. And you think he's going to say, this explains marriage, but he actually says, this explains the church.
他用这些真正圣事性的术语来表达。 And he puts it in these really sacramental terms.
他说，这是一个极大的奥秘，mysterion，希腊语中表示圣事的词。 He says, this is a great mystery, mysterion, the Greek word for sacrament.
这是一个极大的奥秘，我是指着基督和教会说的。 This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ in the church.
但他也不能停止谈论婚姻。 But he can't stop talking about marriage as well.
所以他说，然而你们各人都要爱妻子，如同爱自己一样。妻子也当敬重她的丈夫。 So he says, however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife sees that she respects her husband.
所以我要说，比任何其他经文更甚，以弗所书第五章表明你不理解婚姻就无法理解教 会，不理解教会就无法理解婚姻，因为保罗无法将两者分开，它们是如此紧密相连。 So more than any other passage, I would say, Ephesians 5 shows that you can't understand the church without understanding marriage, and you can't understand marriage without understanding the church, because Paul can't separate the two because they're that connected.
还有很多其他我们可能忽视的经文也指向同样的方向。 There's plenty of other passages that point in the same direction that maybe we've overlooked.
例如，在约翰福音第三章，施洗约翰说，你们自己可以给 我作见证，我曾说，我不是基督，是奉差遣在他前面的。 So for instance, in John chapter 3, St. John the Baptist, he says, you yourselves bear me witness that I said, I am not the Christ, but I've been sent before him.
但他如何描述他的关系呢？ But how does he describe his relationship?
他说，娶新妇的就是新郎，那就是基督。 He says, he who has the bride is the bridegroom, that's Christ.
新郎的朋友站着听见新郎的声音就甚喜乐，那就是施洗约翰。 The friend of the bridegroom who stands and hears him rejoices greatly at the bridegroom's voice, that's John the Baptist.
所以约翰对自己是谁、基督是谁的整个理解，都是通过这种婚姻的比喻来表达的。 So John's whole understanding of who he is, and who Christ is, is expressed in this kind of marital imagery.
同样，我们可以在启示录第19章看到。在启示录19章，接近启示录结尾 处，有这样的天上的合唱：哈利路亚！因为主我们的神，全能者作王了。 Likewise, we can see in Revelation 19. In Revelation 19, towards the end of the book of Revelation, there's this heavenly chorus, hallelujah for the Lord our God, the almighty reigns.
我们要欢喜快乐，将荣耀归给他。因为羔羊婚娶的时候到了，新妇也自己预备好了。 Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory for the marriage of the lambs come and his bride has made herself ready.
就蒙恩得穿光明洁白的细麻衣。 It was granted her to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure.
约翰在这里补充说，这细麻衣就是圣徒所行的义。 And then John adds here for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.
所以在约翰所看到展开的这个天上的奥秘中，教会就是新妇。 So the church is the bride in this heavenly mystery that John kind of sees unfolding.
这是一个反复出现的圣经主题，我实际上只是触及了旧约和新 约中所有关于以色列和后来的教会作为新妇的引用的表面。 This is a recurring biblical theme, and I'm actually just scratching the surface of all of the Old and New Testament references to first Israel and then the church being the bride.
不过，启示录19:9有一个我想确保我们理解的令人难以置信的 邀请，天使对约翰说，你要写上，凡被请赴羔羊之婚筵的有福了。 Revelation 19, verse 9 though, has this incredible invitation I want to make sure we get, where the angel says to John, write this, blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the lamb.
所以这羔羊的婚筵，羔羊的婚宴，就是所有这些都指 向的，这是新郎和新妇之间令人难以置信的相遇。 So this marriage supper of the lamb, the wedding feast of the lamb, that's what all this is pointing to, this incredible encounter between the bridegroom and the bride.
如果你了解犹太人的婚姻是如何运作的，它们分为两个阶段。 And if you understand how Jewish marriages work, they were in two stages.
我做过其他视频讲解这个，你会先合法结婚，但之后新郎会 出去为新娘准备一个家，然后他会来接新娘进入他的家。 I've done other videos on this, where you'd get legally married, but then the bride, or excuse me, the bridegroom would go out and prepare a house for the bride, and then he would come and take the bride into his house.
耶稣在最后的晚餐上表明他的目标就是这样做，他在我们前面去为我们预备地方。 And Jesus at the last supper presents his goal as doing this, and he goes before us to prepare a place for us.
这非常像新郎的语言，在启示录第19章中达到高潮，就是羔羊的婚宴。 This is very much bridegroom kind of language, and it culminates here in Revelation 19 in the wedding feast of the lamb.
这是犹太婚礼的第二个阶段。 That's the second stage of the Jewish wedding.
显然，这里包含了很多内容，很多礼仪的东西，很多与圣餐有关的主题。 So that's, obviously, there's a lot there, a lot of liturgical stuff, there's a lot of Eucharistic themes to that.
但我现在想要表达的是，基督与教会的关系以及新 娘-新郎的关系之间存在某种非常深刻的联系。 But what I want to get right now is just, there's some kind of very deep connection in Christ's relationship to the church and in the bridal-bridegroom relation.
如果我们不理解这一点，我们就会错过关于两者的重要内容。 And if we don't get that, we're missing something important about both.
我一直在说这个，但那种联系是什么呢？ So I keep saying that, but what is that connection?
好吧，我想这样来表述，如果你想简单地理解这种联系 ，它是一种不可摧毁的、神圣创造的、约定的联合。 Well, I want to present it this way, that if you want to understand the connection very simply, it is an indestructible, divinely created, covenantal union.
一个不可摧毁的、神圣创造的、约定的联合。 An indestructible, divinely created, covenantal union.
你可以用「二人成为一体」来概括所有这些特征。 You can capture all of those features together by saying that the two become one.
如果二人成为一体，他们就只成为一个。 And if the two become one, they become only one.
所以耶稣不会有多个身体。 So Jesus ahead doesn't have multiple bodies.
作为新郎的基督不会有多个新娘。 Christ the bridegroom doesn't have multiple brides.
如果这种对教会的圣经理解是正确的，那么就意味着只有一个 教会，基督不是一个一夫多妻者，他没有许多不同的新娘。 There is, if this biblical understanding of the church is correct, it follows that there's one church, that Christ isn't a polygamist, he doesn't have a ton of different brides.
我们实际上会在这一集的最后讨论这个问题。 And we'll actually get into that at the very end of this episode.
但这就是我想让你看到的，如果你正确理解婚姻，你就能明白为什么只有一个教会。 But that's what I want you to see, that if you get marriage right, you can see why there's one church.
如果你正确理解教会，你就能明白为什么离婚和再婚是不可能 的，因为存在这些不可摧毁的、神圣创造的、约定的联合。 If you get the church right, you can see why divorce and remarriage are impossible, because there are these indestructible, divinely created, covenantal unions.
那么，这对教会特别意味着什么呢？ Now, what does that mean for the church in particular?
我想标出几段经文。 I want to flag a couple of passages.
马太福音16章18节。现在，这是天主教徒和新 教徒关于教皇制度的一个热点话题，原因有很多。 Matthew 16, verse 18. Now, this is a hot button topic for a lot of reasons for Catholics and Protestants with the papacy.
我会省略大部分内容，直接略过，只指出一个特点。 And I'm going to elide most of them and glide right past it and point you to just one feature.
在马太福音16章18节，耶稣对圣彼得说，我告诉 你，你是彼得，我要把我的教会建造在这磐石上。 In Matthew 16, verse 18, Jesus says to St. Peter, I tell you, you are Peter, rock, and on this rock, I will build my church.
然后他说，阴间的权柄不能胜过这教会。 And then he says that the gates of Hades, or hell, won't overcome the church.
但请注意，它是神圣创造的，就像神使真正的婚姻结合一样。 But notice, it's divinely created, just as God joins together a true marriage.
在这里，真正的教会是由神造的，不是由人造的。 Well, here, a true church is made by God, not by man.
这非常重要，因为如果耶稣从未说过这些话，那 么他的追随者就必须去开始他们自己的宗派。 And that's really important, because if Jesus had never said those words, then his followers would have to go start their own denominations.
比如，他的追随者不得不说，嘿，我想跟随耶稣，但他没有给我 们留下一个教会，所以我们必须建立一个人为的组织来跟随他。 Like, his followers would have to say, hey, I want to follow Jesus, but he doesn't leave us a church, so we've got to make a man-made organization and follow him that way.
很多人的行为好像耶稣没有建立教会，但耶稣告诉我们相反的事，他确实建立了一个教会。 And a lot of people act as if Jesus didn't build a church, but Jesus tells us the opposite, that he did build a church.
所以我们不必去建立某个人为的宗派。 So we don't have to go make some man-made denomination.
我们不必建立自己的教会，因为耶稣已经为我们做了这项工作。 We don't have to build our own church, because Jesus already did that work for us.
这是第一点，神圣设立的。 That's the first thing, divinely instituted.
第二，存在真实的参与。 Second, that there's a real participation.
现在，那些圣餐的主题又要出现了。 Now, here, those Eucharistic themes are going to come out again.
在哥林多前书10章16节，圣保罗说，我们所祝福的杯，岂不是同领基督的血吗？ In 1 Corinthians 10, verse 16, St. Paul says, the cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ?
我们所擘开的饼，岂不是同领基督的身体吗？ The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
这种参与基督的身体和血的观念是一个非常重要的 主题，我在这里无法充分阐述，但我想指出一点。 This idea of participating in the body and blood of Christ is a really great theme, and I'm not going to do it justice here, but I want to point to one thing.
在第17节，保罗说，因为只有一个饼，我们虽多 ，仍是一个身体，因为我们都是分受这一个饼。 In verse 17, Paul says, because there is one bread, or the word has to be translated, because there's one loaf, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
所以圣餐是使我们真正与基督合而为一的原因。 So the Eucharist is what causes us in a real way to become one with Christ.
就像在婚姻中，婚姻的行为使二人成为一体。 Just as in marriage, the act of the marriage act, the two become one flesh.
所以在这里，在教会的生活中，这种在圣餐中与基督身体的相遇使二者成为一体。 So here, in the life of the church, this encounter with the body of Christ in the Eucharist makes the two become one flesh.
这是一种有趣的方式，就像这些身体结合的行为，如果 你愿意这么说的话，这里有一个不是巧合的平行关系。 And that is an interesting way, like, these acts of physical union, if you will, there's a parallel there that's not a coincidence.
从人的角度来看，这是最亲密的结合表达，因为看，你是一个人，你有身体 和灵魂，所以当你想表达结合时，我们经常在身体层面上找到表达的方式。 It's the most intimate expression of union from a human perspective, because look, you're a human being, you have body and soul, and so when you want to express union, we often find ways of doing that at a bodily level.
这可以是从握手到拥抱的任何事情，你知道，成为血兄弟，你割 破手掌，把你的血与他们的血压在一起以显示这种结合，甚至在 血液中，到这里丈夫和妻子的拥抱，在圣餐中与基督完全结合。 That can be anything from a handshake to a hug, you know, becoming blood brothers where you cut your hand and press your blood against theirs to show this union, even in the blood, to the embrace of a husband and wife in here, in His fullness in the Eucharist with Christ.
所以这就是那个观念，二人成为一体。 So that's the idea, the two become one flesh.
那么它是如何发生的呢？ And how does it happen?
正如圣保罗告诉我们的，它是以圣餐的方式发生的。 Well, it's happening, as St. Paul tells us, in a Eucharistic way.
与基督成为一体意味着什么？ What does it mean to become one flesh with Christ?
保罗也告诉了我们这一点。 Well, Paul tells us that as well.
在以弗所书第1章，他在第22节告诉我们，神将万有服在基督的脚下， 使他为教会作万有之首。教会是他的身体，是那充满万有者所充满的。 In Ephesians chapter 1, he tells us in verse 22 that God has put all things under Christ's feet and has made Him the head over all things for the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
换句话说，保罗让你知道，当他说教会是基督的身体时，他的意思是教 会是基督的完全，如果你有耶稣而没有教会，你就没有完全的基督。 In other words, Paul is letting you know when he says that the church is the body of Christ, he means that the church is the fullness of Christ, that you don't have the full Christ if you have Jesus and not the church.
这就像认识一个人却不认识他的妻子。 It's like knowing somebody and not knowing their wife.
你对他们的了解是相当不完整的，要真正理解他们是谁，你 必须看到他们的另一半，因为二人实际上已经成为一体。 You know them pretty incompletely, that to really understand who they are, you have to see the other half of them, because the two have actually become one flesh.
在这里，保罗说，是的，这二者实际上是一体的。 Well, here, Paul's saying, yeah, the two actually are one.
你也可以从其他方面看到这一点。 You can see this in some other ways as well.
例如，在约翰福音14章6节，耶稣著名地说，我就是道路、真理、生命。 So, for instance, in John 14, verse 6, Jesus famously says, I'm the way, the truth, and the life.
在使徒行传中，教会如何描述自己？ What does the church say about herself in the Acts of the Apostles?
她称自己为道路。 Well, she refers to herself as the way.
我们在使徒行传24章15节等处看到这一点。所以，即使是新约中教会对自己的描述 也表明，她理解自己只是耶稣在地上的延续，这是他的身体以一种神秘的方式继续在地 上化身，是的，身体上，耶稣已经升天了，他升到天上去了，但他并没有抛弃我们。 We see that in places like Acts 24, verse 15. So, even the description the church has for herself in the New Testament shows that she understands herself to simply be a continuation of Jesus on earth, that this is his body continuing to be incarnate in a mysterious way on earth, that, yes, bodily, Jesus has gone to heaven, he ascended into heaven, and yet he hasn't abandoned us.
为什么他没有抛弃我们？ Why has he not abandoned us?
因为在另一种意义上，他的身体仍在地上，因为他的新妇仍在地上。 Because there's another sense in which his body is still on earth, because his bride is still on earth.
因此，具有讽刺意味的是，新郎和准新娘被认为是 一体的，在哪里看到教会，就在哪里看到耶稣。 And so, ironically, are bridegroom and bride-to-be identified one with another, that where you see the church, you see Jesus.
这就是为什么教会可以不亵渎地称自己为道路。 That's why, without blasphemy, the church can refer to herself as the way.
因为，再次记住保罗的话，爱妻子的就是爱自己了，他将这应 用于基督和教会，当基督爱教会时，他实际上是在爱自己。 Because, again, remember Paul's words, he who loves his wife loves himself, and he applies this to Christ and the church, that when Christ loves the church, he's really loving himself.
现在，这对于新教改革这样的事情来说是很重要的。 Now, that's big for something like the Protestant Reformation.
为什么？ Why?
因为反对教会就是反对基督。 Well, because opposing the church is opposing Christ.
你不能说，我爱耶稣，但我恨教会。 You don't get to say, I love Jesus, but I hate the church.
在基督教中没有这样的余地。 There's not room for that in Christianity.
使徒行传5章38和39节，我们几周前看过的 迦玛列谈到这一点，尽管他甚至不是基督徒。 Acts 5, verse 38 and 39, Gamaliel, who we looked at a few weeks ago, he talks about this, even though he's not even a Christian.
他是一个犹太领袖。 He's a Jewish leader.
他是一个法利赛人。 He's a Pharisee.
他说到使徒运动，若这计谋或这事业出于神，你们就不能overthrow他们。 And he says about the apostolic movement that, if this undertaking is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them.
你们甚至可能是在抵挡神。 You might even be found opposing God.
这些话确实似乎是预言性的，因为几章之后，对不起，在使徒行传第 9章，一个名叫扫罗的年轻人正在对主的门徒口吐威吓凶杀的话。 Well, those words certainly appear to be prophetic, because a few chapters later, excuse me, in Acts chapter 9, a young man by the name of Saul of Tarsus is breeding threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.
现在，注意这一点。 Now, catch that.
他不会试图去捕捉和杀害耶稣。 He's not going to try to go capture and kill Jesus.
耶稣已经活过、死过、复活、升天了。 Jesus has lived, died, risen again, gone to heaven.
那不是扫罗的使命。 That's not Saul's mission.
他试图迫害基督徒。 He's trying to persecute Christians.
他试图迫害教会。 He's trying to persecute the church.
所以，他去见大祭司，求文书给大马士革的各会堂，若是找 着信奉这道的人，无论男女，都准他捆绑带到耶路撒冷。 So, he goes to the high priest and asks for letters, so that if he finds any belonging to the way, men or women, he might bring them from Damascus to Jerusalem.
但当他在去大马士革的路上，他被击倒在地，听见有声音对他说。 But as he's on the way to Damascus, he's knocked to the ground, and he hears a voice saying to him.
这声音没有说，扫罗，扫罗，你为什么逼迫我的教会？ And the voice doesn't say, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute my church?
它没有说，你为什么逼迫我的追随者？ It doesn't say, why do you persecute my followers?
它只是说，扫罗，扫罗，你为什么逼迫我？ It simply says, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?
从天上听到这样的话是令人困惑的，因为你怎么能逼迫天上的人呢？ And that is a baffling thing to hear from heaven, because how could you be persecuting someone in heaven?
他们在天上。 They're in heaven.
扫罗感到困惑，他说，主啊，你是谁？ And Saul's confused, and he says, who are you, Lord?
答案回来了。 And the answer comes back.
我就是你所逼迫的耶稣。 I am Jesus, whom you're persecuting.
逼迫教会就是逼迫耶稣，反对教会就是反对耶稣。 That to persecute the church is to persecute Jesus, to oppose the church is to oppose Jesus.
如果教会只是自己说这些话，你可能会看着说，这是亵渎。 If the church had just said those things about herself, you could look at that and say, that's blasphemous.
但这实际上是圣经所说的，因为这是耶稣所说的。 But this is actually what Scripture says, because this is what Jesus says.
所以，希望你能看到基督教中的婚姻教导是真的激进。 So, hopefully, you can see the marriage teaching in Christianity is really radical.
基督教中关于教会的教导也是真的激进，两者在彼此的光照下是有意义的。 The teaching on the church in Christianity is also really radical, and the two make sense in light of each other.
二人成为一体。 The two become one flesh.
所以，你可能会问，发生了什么？ So, you might ask, what happened?
我们中的许多人是如何失去了对这两个激进教导的认识的？ How did we lose sight, so many of us, of these two radical teachings?
这是一个更难充分回答的问题，我无法在一个视频中完成。 That is a more difficult question to answer adequately than I can do in one video.
但我想提出一个有些简化的答案。 But I want to propose a somewhat simplified answer.
首先，改革者重新定义了教会。 First, the Reformers redefine the church.
改革者重新定义了教会。 Reformers redefine the church.
所以，他们在纸面上保留了关于教会的教导，但他们只是改变了教会这个词的含义。 So, they keep on paper the teaching about the church, but they just change the meaning of the word church.
所以，当你在圣经背景下谈论教会时，耶稣说的是这样的话，你们是世上的光。 So, when you talk about the church in the biblical context, Jesus says things like, you are the light of the world.
城造在山上是不能隐藏的。人点灯，不放在斗底下，是放在灯台上，就照亮一家的人。 A city set on a hill cannot be hid, nor do men light up a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house.
你们的光也当这样照在人前，叫他们看见你们的好行为，便将荣耀归给你们在天上的父。 Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.
所以，有两个特征需要注意。 So, there's two features to notice.
第一，教会是可见的。 Number one, the church is visible.
它在山上，你可以看到它。 It's on a hill where you can see it.
它是一盏你不能放在斗底下的灯。 It's a light that you can't put under a bushel basket.
它不能被隐藏。 It cannot be hidden.
第二，它是有组织的。 And number two, it's organized.
它是有结构的。 It's structured.
我们到处都能看到这一点。 And we see this all over the place.
人们为了某些事情去教会。 People go to the church for things.
当有问题时，你把它带到教会。 When there's a problem, you take it to the church.
在圣经时代，人们清楚地知道教会在哪里，是什么。 People clearly know where and what the church is during the times of the Bible.
那么，发生了什么？ So, what happens?
好吧，我将只关注我刚刚从马太福音第5章引用的话的重新解释。还有很多可 以说的，但我认为这是一个重要的问题，因为在马太福音第5章，耶稣告诉我 们这些关于教会的事，然后不久之后，他谈到了离婚和再婚的不可能性。 Well, I'm going to focus just on the reinterpretation of the words I just quoted you from Matthew 5. There's much more that could be said, but I think this is a big one because in Matthew 5, Jesus tells us this about the church, and then shortly after that, he talks about the impossibility of divorce and remarriage.
这两者都在登山宝训中。 Both of these are in the Sermon on the Mount.
我认为这不是巧合。 I would suggest not coincidentally.
那么，我们如何得到这种对山上之城的重新定义？ So, how do we get this redefinition of what the city on a hill is?
幸运的是，因为「山上之城」这个短语在美国政治中从清教徒到像罗纳德·里根这样的 人都扮演着非常重要的角色，它被用来描述美国，有一些不是神学家的人实际上追溯了 这段历史，这种从外部视角看人们仅仅为了其他原因探索这个问题的情况挺有趣的。 Well, fortunately, because the phrase city on a hill has this really important role to play in American politics from the Puritans on to like Ronald Reagan, where it's applied to describe America, there's a number of people who aren't theologians who've actually traced this history, which is kind of fun seeing people from an outside perspective, just exploring this for other reasons.
其中之一是理查德·M·甘布尔和他的书《寻找山上之城：一个美国神话的形成与解构》。 So, one of those is Richard M. Gamble and his book In Search of the City on a Hill, The Making and Unmaking of an American Myth.
他追溯了这段经文的解释是如何最终采用耶稣在登山宝训中的话，并最 终被用来描述美国的，无论你知道与否，美国在耶稣时代是不存在的。 And he traces, well, how did interpretations of this passage end up taking Jesus's words in the Sermon on the Mount, and they end up being used to describe the US of A, which wasn't around, whether you know it or not, in Jesus's day.
甘布尔说，早期教父们理解城市的可见性表达的意义与耶稣在下一节经 文中指出的灯台上灯的可见性和照亮整个房子的灯的高度是一样的。 And Gamble says the early church fathers had understood the city's visibility as expressing the same meaning as Jesus is pointing the following verse about the lamp's visibility on the stand and the height of the lamp that's illuminating the whole house.
所以，当这些神学家，再次说，早期基督徒，转向城市本身的图像时，他们 以各种方式解释它，但总是在一个相当狭窄的范围内，并且总是参照教会。 And so, when these theologians, again, the early Christians, turned to the picture of the city itself, they interpreted it in a variety of ways, but always within a fairly narrow range, and always in reference to the church.
所以，他们可能从这段经文中得出不同的主题，但他们总是理解这是耶稣关于教会的教导。 So, they might draw different themes from the passage, but they always understood this to be Jesus's teaching about the church.
这不仅仅是早期基督教。 And that's not just early Christianity.
甘布尔指出，至少到13世纪的阿奎那时期，情况 仍然如此，所有这些作者都对其含义达成一致。 Gamble points out that continues to be the case down through Aquinas, at least, in the 13th century, that all of these writers agree on the meaning.
引用，这是耶稣对他的教会作为他自己的身体的比喻，对他持续的教导事工的比 喻，对他门徒生活中显著的教义的比喻，以及对跟随他们的道的教师的比喻。 Quote, it was Jesus's metaphor for his church as his own body, for his ongoing teaching ministry, and for the conspicuous doctrine in the life of his disciples, and the teachers of the word who followed after them.
好的，这就是宗教改革前的观点。 Okay, so that's the pre-Reformation view of things.
宗教改革发生了什么？ What happens with the Reformation?
在天主教-新教的辩论、对话和交谈中发生了什么，使得这个概念被重新定义？ What happens in Catholic-Protestant debate and dialogue and conversation that makes this get redefined?
好，在这里，我想转向亚伯兰·C·范·英根的书《山上之城：美国例外论的历史》。 Well, here, I want to turn to Abram C. Van Ingen, in his book, City on a Hill, A History of American Exceptionalism.
你会再次看到，那些想了解美国故事的人必须做大量工作来解析这个山上之城的事情。 You'll see, again, people who want to know the U.S. story have to do a lot of work unpacking this city on a hill thing.
范·英根说，对天主教徒来说，马太福音5:14这节经文 将真正的教会定义为一个永久的、可见的、普世的机构。 And Van Ingen says, for Catholics, the verse, Matthew 5.14, define the true church as a permanent, visible, universal institution.
对吧，我们刚刚看到它是如何做到这一点的，对吗？ And, right, we just saw how it does that, right?
耶稣的真正追随者被安置在山上，让所有人都能看到。 Jesus's true followers were set on a hill to be seen by all.
由于新教徒在16世纪才首次出现，由于他们在一千多年的时间里实际上是不存在的、不可 见的、不为人知的或看不见的，他们如何能争辩说他们是源自基督的生平和教导呢，对吧？ Since Protestants first appeared in the 1500s, since they'd been effectively nonexistent, invisible, unknown, or unseen for over a millennium, how could they argue that they were descended from the life and teachings of Christ, right?
所以，如果你是新教徒，你必须说以下三件事之一。 So, if you're a Protestant, you have to say one of three things.
第一，哦，是的，新教一直都存在。 Number one, oh, yeah, Protestantism's always been around.
现在，这在历史上是站不住脚的，有人会告诉你，好吧，那就给我看证据。 Now, that's historically untenable, and someone's going to tell you, okay, well, show me the evidence.
所以，你可以转向第二个立场，即新教一直都存在，但是，你知道，它隐藏了一千年。 So, you can go to position two, which is Protestantism's always been around, but, like, it was hiding, you know, for a thousand years.
我们在山里，人们销毁了我们所有的记录，所以你不知道我们。 We were in the mountains, and people destroyed all of our records, and so you didn't know about us.
好吧，那你就不是真正的山上之城。 Well, then you weren't really a city on a hill.
你在斗底下藏了一千年。 You were under a bushel basket for a millennium.
或者第三，你就咬紧牙关说，是的，所有这些独特的神学思想，所有将我们 与天主教徒分开的核心教义，这些都是至少一千年来没有人相信的东西。 Or number three, you just bite the bullet and say, yeah, all of these distinctive theological ideas, all of the core doctrines that divide us from Catholics, these were things that, for at least a thousand years, nobody believed.
好吧，那你听起来也不像是山上之城。 Okay, well, you don't sound like a city on a hill there, either.
所以，无论你如何解释你自己的宗教改革前的历史，如果你是新 教徒，你似乎并不是一座清晰可见并明确教导福音的山上之城。 So, however you interpret your own pre-Reformation history, if you're a Protestant, it doesn't seem to be that you were a city on a hill that was clearly visible and clearly teaching the gospel.
这似乎并不是事实。 That just does not appear to have been the case.
因此，范·恩格伦说，此外，天主教徒补充道，耶稣使他宣告的理由非常清楚。 And so, Van Engelen says, Moreover, Catholics added, Jesus made the reason for his declaration abundantly clear.
教会必须是公开和可见的。 The church had to be public and visible.
它必须是罗马公教会的山上之城，这样所有基督徒都知道在哪里寻求指导。 It had to be the city on a hill of the Roman Catholic church so that all Christians would know where to turn for guidance.
那么，为什么会这样呢？ Well, why is that?
因为在每个时代，基督徒都被告诫要遵守教会的教导，对吧？ Because in every age, Christians were admonished to obey the teachings of the church, right?
比如，希伯来书13:17告诉我们要顺从我们的领袖。 Like, Hebrews 13, 17 tells us to obey our leaders.
它谈到我们的教会领袖是那些将来要交账的人。 It's talking about our church leaders as those who will have to give account.
所以，如果我应该顺从神在我生命中设立的某个属灵领袖，我需要知道那个领袖是谁。 So, if I'm supposed to be obeying some spiritual leader God has put in authority over my life, I need to know who that leader is.
这听起来不像是神告诉我去选择自己的导师，去选择一个与我已有想法一致的牧师。 And it doesn't sound like God's telling me to go choose my own guru, go choose my own pastor who agrees with what I already think.
不，他告诉我要顺从，这只有在我可能不想这样做的情况下他才会告诉我。 No, he's telling me to obey, which he would only be telling me if I might not want to do that.
但如果我找不到教会，我就无法顺从。 But I can't obey if I can't find the church.
因此，教会是可见的原因之一是因为否则基督教是不可能的。 And so, one of the reasons the church is visible is because otherwise Christianity is impossible.
如果没有你可以找到并顺从的教会，你就无法遵守耶稣的命令。 You just can't obey Jesus's commands if there is no church that you can find to obey.
所以，在每个时代，基督徒都被告诫要遵守教会的教导。 So, in every age, Christians were admonished to obey the teachings of the church.
天主教徒想知道，在过去的一千多年里，如果人们实际上不知道哪 个教会是真实的或在哪里可以找到，他们怎么可能做到这一点。 The Catholics wondered how anyone could have done so for the past millennium and more they'd not actually known which church was true or where it could be found.
所以，你可能会说，好吧，这似乎是一个合理的论点。 So, you might say, okay, that seems like a sound argument.
当时所有的新教徒是如何回应的？ How did all the Protestants at the time respond?
范·英根说，嗯，起初，新教徒的回应是完全忽视这节经文。 And Van Ingen says, well, at first, Protestants responded by simply ignoring the verse altogether.
他们只是不去碰它。 They just didn't mess with it.
他们没有好的回应。 They didn't have a good response.
但最终，他们意识到他们不能就这样放过这节经文。 But eventually, they realized they couldn't just leave the verse alone.
他们不想就这样把一节经文让给对方。 They didn't want to just cede a verse of scripture to the other side.
因此，为了解析和重新解释它，他们开始争辩说基督从未向任何人承诺永久的可见性。 And so, to unpack and reinterpret it, they began by arguing that Christ never promised perpetual visibility to anyone.
这成为故事中一个非常关键的点。 That becomes a really critical point in the story.
现在，如果你对这如何从那里发展到每个地方社区都成为山上 之城，然后清教徒用它来描述新英格兰实验，再到殖民者用它 来描述13个殖民地，然后是美国，那就是故事的其余部分。 Now, if you're interested in how that goes from there to each local community being a city on a hill, to then the Puritans taking that to describe the New England experiment, to then the colonists taking that to describe the 13 colonies, and then the US of A, that's the rest of the story there.
正如你可能想象的那样，有很多关于这方面的书。 And there's a bunch of books on that, as you can probably imagine.
但我实际上想关注故事的这一部分，即改革者没有一个好的论点。 But I want to actually focus on this part of the story, that the reformers don't have a good argument.
但他们意识到他们与天主教徒之间的关键区别在于他们重新定义了教会。 But they realize that the key difference between them and the Catholics is that they've redefined church.
约翰·加尔文实际上对此相当坦率。 John Calvin is actually pretty open about this.
如果你不熟悉的话，他是最早的改革者之一。 If you're not familiar, he's one of the earliest reformers.
所以，你有马丁·路德，然后你有改革宗新教徒。 So, you've got Martin Luther, and then you have the reformed Protestants.
约翰·加尔文某种程度上是那个的领袖。 And John Calvin is kind of the head of that.
这有点松散，但你某种程度上是那个的领袖。 It's a little loose, but you're kind of the head of that.
在《基督教要义》的开头，他有一个给弗朗西斯国王的序言。 And at the beginning of Institutes of Christian Religion, he has a prefatory address to King Francis.
他告诉他们主要问题是什么。 And he tells them what the major issues are.
他说，争议的关键点是这些。 He says, the hinges on which the controversy turns are these.
首先，他们主张教会的形式总是可见和明显的。 First, and they're contending that the form of the church is always visible and apparent.
也就是说，天主教徒声称，教会的形式总是可见和明显的，对吧？ That is, Catholics claim, form of the church is always visible and apparent, right?
因为我们已经看到，当然是这样。 Because we already saw, of course it is.
其次，他们将这种形式置于罗马教会及其等级制度之中。 And secondly, and they're placing this form in the sea of the Church of Rome and its hierarchy.
现在，加尔文是对的。 Now, Calvin is right.
这是两个独立的问题。 These are two separate issues.
有人可能相信教会是可见的，但仍然拒绝它是罗马的，例如东正教。 Someone could believe that the church is visible and still reject that it's Roman, the Eastern Orthodox, for example.
他们会说，是的，没错。 They're going to say, yep, that's right.
确实有一个可见的教会，但那是我们，不是罗马。 There is a visible church, but it's us, not Rome.
这是一个连贯的立场。 That's a coherent position.
第二点是天主教、东正教和科普特教会以及其他人的争论所在。 That second thing is where Catholic, Orthodox, and Coptic, and whoever else, that's where that debate is going to be.
但天主教-新教的辩论，以及东正教-新教的辩论，科普特-新教的辩论，并不在于此。 But the Catholic-Protestant debate, and for that matter, the Orthodox-Protestant debate, the Coptic-Protestant debate, isn't on that.
问题不是，我们在哪里找到可见的教会？ It's not, where do we find the visible church?
问题是，基督真的首先建立了一个可见的教会吗？ It's, well, did Christ really find a visible church in the first place?
教会总是可见和明显的吗？ Is the church always visible and apparent?
加尔文说，不是。 And Calvin says, no.
他说，相反，我们坚持认为教会可能存在而没有任何明显的形式。 He says, we, on the contrary, maintain both that the church may exist without any apparent form.
而且，教会的形式不是由他们愚蠢地崇拜的外在辉煌来确定的。 And moreover, that the form is not ascertained by that external splendor, which they foolishly admire.
所以他又在进行廉价的抨击。 So again, he's taking cheap potshots.
哦，你只是喜欢罗马有多漂亮。 Oh, you just like how pretty Rome is.
但主要观点是，加尔文说，新教的主张是教会可以存在而没有任何明显的形式。 But the main point there is, the Protestant claim, says Calvin, is that the church can exist without any apparent form.
它就像这样，不像一个有形体的身体，而像一缕烟，像一个没有形体的灵。因此，我们确定 教会的形式，不是通过任何明显的东西，而是通过纯正地宣讲神的道和适当地施行圣事。 It's just like this, not like a body, which has a form, like a puff of smoke, like a spirit, which doesn't. And so, we ascertain the form, not by anything apparent, but rather by the pure preaching of the Word of God and the due administration of the sacraments.
这种对教会的重新定义的问题在于，它认为教会存在于神的道 被纯正宣讲和圣事被正确施行的任何地方，这是完全主观的。 The problem with that redefinition of the church, where the church is wherever the Word of God is preached purely and the sacraments are administered properly, is it's completely subjective.
你心中对正确讲道的理解可能完全相反。 Your idea of sound preaching in mind might be 180 degrees opposed.
你心中对良好圣事规范的理解可能完全相反。 Your idea of good sacramental discipline in mind might be 180 degrees opposed.
加尔文承认，每当教会不能用手指指出时，天主教徒就会大声抗议。 And Calvin acknowledges that Catholics make an outcry whenever the church cannot be pointed to with the finger.
就像，你重新定义了教会，使得没有人能说它在 哪里或不在哪里，它看起来相当主观和模糊。 Like, you've redefined church where no one can say where it is or isn't, and it looks pretty subjective and pretty amorphous.
我必须顺服教会，否则就是违背基督并与他对抗，除非我确信 教会错了，因为它不再正确地宣讲神的道或正确地施行圣事。 I have to obey the church on penalty of disobeying Christ and fighting him unless I'm convinced the church is wrong because it's no longer preaching the Word of God properly or administering the sacraments correctly.
你看到这是多么循环论证吗？ Do you see how question-begging that is?
它基本上是说你必须同意，除非对方错了。 It basically says you have to agree unless the other side's wrong.
而顺服的全部意义在于，只有当你有理由认为你 可能是对的而掌权的人是错的时候，它才重要。 And the whole point of obedience is it only matters when you have reason to think you might be right and the people in charge are wrong.
如果这不是问题所在，那么顺服就很容易。 If that's not the issue, then obedience is easy.
如果你的教宗、主教、神父、牧师，无论是什么，长老，随你怎么称呼，只 是说一些你认为很精彩并且你完全同意的事情，那就没有必要呼吁你顺服。 If your pope, bishop, priest, pastor, whatever, elder, you name it, just says things that you think are brilliant and you agree with all of it, there's no need to call you to obedience.
你会去做的。 You're going to do it.
顺服，真正的考验在于，当你实际上对某事的谨慎性 、某事的智慧、解释等所有这些事情存在分歧时。 Obedience, where the rubber hits the road, is where you actually disagree about the prudence of something, the wisdom of something, the interpretation, all of that stuff.
因此，加尔文通过这种方式重新定义教会，使教会成为一个完全模糊 的东西，基本上不可能再有分裂，因为谁能说谁是分裂者谁不是？ And so, Calvin, by redefining church in this way, has made the church this completely amorphous thing that's basically impossible to be in schism anymore because who's to say who is and isn't in schism?
每个人都会说自己的解释是正确的，是其他所有人在错误地宣讲神的道。 Everyone's going to say their interpretation is the right one and it's everybody else who's preaching the Word wrongly.
这就是加尔文。 So, that's Calvin.
马丁·路德说了非常相似的话。 Martin Luther says very similar things.
他有稍微不同的教会论。 He has a slightly different ecclesiology.
新教徒可以强调加尔文和路德对教会的看法之间的一些微妙差异，但他 也相信这种对教会的重新定义，并将其视为一个更加不可见的现实。 There's some subtle differences that Protestants can highlight between what Calvin's vision of the church is and Luther's, but he also believes in this kind of redefinition of the church and treating it as a much more invisible reality.
现在，路德的观点更加动态，路德和加尔文都相信一 些与那些只认为有一个不可见教会的人不同的东西。 Now, Luther's is a little more dynamic and both Luther and Calvin believe something different than those who say there's only an invisible church.
路德和加尔文都为可见的教会设定了角色，但正如你所看 到的，在加尔文看来，教会可能没有任何明显的形式。 Both Luther and Calvin have a role for the visible church, but as you can see, it's possible in Calvin for the church not to have any apparent form.
同样，路德说，因此，不想犯错的人应该清楚地记住 ，基督教是一个在一个信仰中的灵魂的属灵集会。 Well, likewise in Luther, he says, therefore, whoever does not want to err should remember clearly that Christianity is a spiritual assembly of souls in one faith.
所以，它不像是人类的身体聚集。 So, it's not like the bodily gathering of human beings.
它是灵魂的属灵集合，没有人因为他的身体而被视为基督徒。 It's this spiritual collection of souls and that no one is regarded as a Christian because of his body.
你看到这是多么脱离肉身化了，对吧？ Do you see how disincarnated this is, right?
早期基督徒告诉你教会是基督的身体的全部原因是因为它需要在地上有身体的存在。 The whole reason early Christians would tell you that the church is the body of Christ is because it needs to be bodily present on earth.
这不像诺斯底主义，你会找到一些隐藏的教导，但 路德重新定义了它，使得你的身体变得不重要。 This isn't like Gnosticism where you're going to find some hidden teaching, but Luther has redefined it so your body is just not important.
它完全是以这种不可见的方式关于你的灵魂。 It's all about your soul in this invisible way.
它是灵魂的属灵集会，而不是身体的集会。 It's a spiritual assembly of souls, not a bodily assembly.
因此，路德说，他应该知道自然的、真实的、真正的和本质的基督教 存在于灵里，而不是存在于任何外在的事物中，无论它被称为什么。 Therefore, Luther says, he should know that the natural, real, true, and essential Christendom exists in the spirit and not in any external thing, no matter what it may be called.
现在，路德会继续说有两种类型的教会，可见的教会和不可见的教会， 后来的新教徒会争论它们之间是否有关系，如果有的话是什么关系。 Now, Luther will go on to say there's two types of churches, the visible church and the invisible church, and subsequent Protestants will debate what, if any, relationship there is.
不可见的教会是可见教会的一个子集吗？ Is the invisible church a subset of the visible church?
它们是否像维恩图那样有重叠，或者有些人在一个中而不在另一个中？ Are they like a Venn diagram where there's an overlap or some people are in one and not the other?
但事实证明，他们只是发明了这个叫做不可见教会的东西。 But it turns out that they've just invented this thing called the invisible church.
不，我说发明。 No, I say invented.
他们从15世纪的约翰·威克里夫和扬·胡斯那里得到了这个。 They've gotten this from John Wycliffe and John Huss from the 1400s.
但他们正在为这种对教会的非常激进的重新定义辩护。 But they're defending this very radical redefinition of the church.
所以，这是我们必须处理的第一种重新定义，是的，他们会说 ，是的，我们必须跟随教会，但它不是基督有形可见的身体。 So, that's the first kind of redefinition we have to deal with that, yeah, they'll say, yeah, we have to follow the church, but it's not the incarnate visible body of Christ.
它是某处灵魂的属灵集会。 It's a spiritual assembly of souls somewhere.
这有很多S。当然，第二个重新定义是婚姻，因为他们也 要淡化耶稣关于离婚和再婚的教导，因为这是有道理的。 That's a lot of S's. The second redefinition, of course, is marriage because they're going to also water down Jesus's teaching on divorce and remarriage because it makes sense.
我的意思是，如果你要攻击基督的一个约定的联合，为什么不攻击所有的呢？ I mean, if you're going to attack one covenantal union of Christ, why not attack them all?
这是一种不友善的说法，但随着我的讲述，你会明白我的意思。 That's an uncharitable way of putting it, but you'll see what I mean as I go.
我实际上想转向几位新教作者，威廉·赫斯和戈登·温汉姆。 I want to actually turn to a couple of Protestant authors, William Hess and Gordon Wynham.
现在，他们一起写了一本书，名为《耶稣与离婚：福音派共识的问题》。 Now, they together wrote a book called Jesus and Divorce, The Problem with the Evangelical Consensus.
但威廉·赫斯在另一本名为《离婚与再婚：四种基督教观点》的书中，他是这 四种观点之一，谈到了一位法国耶稣会士亨利·考塞尔1971年的工作。他 称之为对最早期基督教作家对新约关于离婚和再婚教导理解的最全面研究。 But William Hess, in a separate book called Divorce and Remarriage, Four Christian Views, he's one of those four views, talks about the work of a French Jesuit, Henri Causel, from 1971. He calls it the most comprehensive study of the earliest Christian writers' understanding of the New Testament teaching on divorce and remarriage.
现在，我没有考塞尔的英文版书。 Now, I don't have Causel's book in English.
我哪里都找不到。 I couldn't find it anywhere.
但我有赫斯的总结，即在前五个世纪，除了一个人外，所有的希腊和拉丁作家，那个 例外是安布罗西亚斯特，或称伪安布罗修，他是一位匿名作者，长期以来人们以为他 是米兰的圣安布罗修，但实际上不是，他可能是一个伯拉纠异端，尽管对此有争议。 But I have Hess's summary of it, which is that the first five centuries, all Greek and Latin writers, except for one, Ambrosiaster is that one, or Pseudo-Ambrose, who is an anonymous author who, for a long time, they thought was St. Ambrose of Milan and isn't, and who may be a Pelagian heretic, although there's debates about that.
但无论如何，安布罗西亚斯特不像一个著名的早期教父。 But Ambrosiaster, either way, not like a prominent early church father.
所以，除了安布罗西亚斯特之外，东方和西方、希腊和拉丁教会 的所有人都同意，无论出于何种原因，离婚后再婚都是通奸。 So, everybody other than Ambrosiaster in the East and in the West and the Greek and in the Latin Church agree that remarriage following divorce for any reason is adulterous.
所以，没有人坚持有一个通奸例外可以让你再婚的想法。 So, nobody held to this idea that there was an adultery exception that let you get remarried.
因此，即使那些认为通奸是分居理由的人仍然认为，配偶受婚姻约束直到其中一方死亡。 And so, even those who believe that adultery was grounds for separation still held that the spouses were bound to the marriage until the death of one of them.
当一方配偶犯了不贞行为，通常被理解为通奸，另一方被期望分居但没有权利再婚。 When a marriage partner was guilty of unchastity, which was usually understood to mean adultery, the other was expected to separate but did not have the right to remarry.
现在，注意，这忽略了porneia在犹太背景下的含义，这是可以理解的， 因为这些人中很多都不是来自犹太背景，对犹太教的学术研究也不是一件大事。 Now, notice, that's missing the Jewish context of what porneia means, which is understandable because a lot of these people are not coming from a Jewish background and scholarship on Judaism isn't really a big thing.
但即使如此，他们也以一种与其他部分和谐的方式来解读这个除了porneia的条款。 But even then, they're reading this except for porneia clause in a way that's harmonious with the other parts.
因此，那些说如果有通奸或有时任何其他理由就可以离婚和再婚的现代新教徒必须将马 太福音与马可福音对立起来，因为耶稣在马可福音中明确说任何离婚和再婚都是通奸。 And so, modern Protestants who say that you can get divorced and remarried if there's adultery or sometimes any other kind of reason have to oppose Matthew to Mark because Jesus in Mark clearly says divorce and remarriage at all is adultery.
所以，他们只是把那个教导推到一边，基本上说，哦，不，我们更喜欢这个版本。 And so, they just kind of push that teaching to one side and say, oh, no, we like this version better, basically.
嗯，早期基督徒并没有这样做。 Well, the early Christians aren't doing that.
他们不是在挑选和选择。 They're not picking and choosing.
他们以一种可以与马可福音协调的方式来解读马太福音。 They're reading Matthew in a way they can harmonize with Mark.
因此，如果他们认为这允许离婚但不允许再婚，那么 你就没有离婚和再婚的问题，因为没有人在犯通奸。 And so, if they view it as allowing divorce but not remarriage, well, then you don't have the divorce and remarriage problem because no one's committing adultery.
他们只是因为通奸而分居或合法离婚。 They're just separating or legally divorcing because of adultery.
所以，希望这是清楚的。 So, hopefully, that's clear.
所以，有一种理解是，如果另一方有通奸行为，你可以分居，甚至可能获得民事离婚。 So, there was an understanding that if the other partner was adulterous, you could separate and maybe even get a civil divorce.
这仍然是天主教会所说的。 And that is still what the Catholic Church says.
这并没有不同，也不会造成尝试再婚时出现的通奸问题，因为处于 那种情况的人仍然如圣保罗在哥林多前书中所说，他们可以回到原 来的配偶那里，或者可以实际上保持单身，但他们不能再婚。 That's not different and that doesn't create the adultery problem that happens with attempting remarriage because the person in that position is still, as St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians, they can either go back to the person they were with or they can remain effectively single, but they can't remarry.
所以，我们看到威廉·哈斯和亨利·克罗泽尔谈到的早期基督徒的几个例子。 So, we see a couple examples of the early Christians that William Hath is talking about and that Henri Crozel is talking about.
例如，在公元150年左右的《第一护教书》中，圣殉道者游斯丁说，所有按人类法 律二次结婚的人在我们主的眼中都是罪人，就像那些看见妇女就动淫念的人一样。 So, for instance, in the mid-100s and First Apology, St. Justin Martyr says that all who by human law are twice married are in the eyes of our master sinners and those who look upon a woman to lust after her.
所以，这很清楚，对吧？ So, that's pretty clear, right?
这相当直接。 That's pretty direct.
阿特纳戈拉在他的《为基督徒辩护》中说，因为我们关注的不是对词 语的研究，而是对行为的展示和教导，一个人应该保持他出生时的状 态或满足于一次婚姻，因为第二次婚姻只是一种貌似合理的通奸。 Athenagoras says in his A Plea for Christians, For we bestow our attention not on the study of words, but on the exhibition and teaching of actions, that a person should either remain as he was born or be content with one marriage, for a second marriage is only a specious adultery.
再次强调，这是你今天在许多基督教讲坛上听不到的大胆语言。 Again, bold kind of language you don't hear from many Christian pulpits today.
那么，他从哪里得到这个的？ Well, where's he getting this from?
嗯，他是从圣经中得到的。 Well, he's getting it from scripture.
他引用耶稣的话说，凡休妻另娶的，就是犯奸淫，不 允许一个人休掉失去贞洁的妻子，也不允许再婚。 He quotes Jesus that whoever puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery, not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity is brought to an end nor to marry again.
好的。 Okay.
所以，这些是早期的基督徒。 So, those are the early Christians.
让我们再回到他，这次是和戈登·温德姆在他的《耶稣与离婚》一书 中，他们将把许多重新定义婚姻的问题归咎于鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟。 Let's turn back to him, this time with Gordon Wyndham in his Jesus and Divorce Book, and they're going to pin a lot of the redefinition of marriage problems on Erasmus of Rotterdam.
现在，伊拉斯谟是马丁·路德的同时代人，是路德的 朋友，有时也是对手。他有时被称为温和的改革者。 Now, Erasmus was a contemporary of Martin Luther, a friend, sometimes foe of Luther's. He was sometimes called a moderate reformer.
他死时是天主教徒，但他是一个人文主义者，在他那个时代，他的一些信仰相当自由。 He died a Catholic, but he's a humanist who was kind of liberal in his day in some of his beliefs.
因此，他推动了一些事情。 And so, he pushed for some things.
我认为有些人会同意其中的一些。 Some of them I think people would agree with.
有些是错误的。 Some of them were wrong.
他推动的一件错误的事是重新理解教会关于婚姻的教导。 One of the things he pushed for that was wrong was a re-understanding of church teaching on marriage.
他在1519年的一部名为《注释》的作品中做了这件事，其中他在研究哥林多前书第 7章。我们不会深入讨论，只是要说，正如温德姆和赫斯所说，他提出了两个论点。 He does this in 1519 in a work called Annotations in which he's looking at 1 Corinthians 7. We're not going to go deep on that except to say, as Wyndham and Heth do, that he makes two arguments.
第一，应该允许解除某些婚姻，不是偶然的，而是出于 非常严重的原因，由教会当局或公认的法官来决定。 Number one, it should be permissible to dissolve certain marriages, not fortuitously, but for very serious reasons by the ecclesiastical authorities or by recognized judges.
第二，给无辜的一方再婚的自由。 And number two, to give the innocent party the freedom to marry again.
所以，他似乎认为这些是特殊情况，教会或者可 能是民事当局可以批准离婚，然后允许你再婚。 So, he seems to think these are exceptional cases where the church or maybe a civil authority could grant a divorce that then permits you to remarry.
但是，每当你试图在极端情况下改变教会的教导 时，似乎总是最终打开了通向任何事物的大门。 But that, anytime you try to change church teaching just in like in extremis, it always ends up seemingly just blowing the doors open to anything.
总是有这种滑坡效应。 There's always this kind of slippery slope.
所以，一旦你说，是的，我99%的时间都同意耶稣，不久例外就会吞噬规则。 So, once you say, yeah, I agree with Jesus 99% of the time, it's not long before the exception swallows the rule.
所以，看看马丁·路德，他实际上非常清楚地表示婚姻必须由死亡来解除。 And so, looking at Martin Luther, he is actually really clear that marriage has to be dissolved by death.
他在登山宝训的注释中甚至说，只有死亡才能解除婚姻。 He even says in his commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, death alone dissolves marriage.
然而，他说通奸者已经离婚了，不是由人，而是 由神自己，因为在旧约法律下，通奸要受死刑。 Nevertheless, he says that an adulterer is already divorced, not by man, but by God himself, because under the old law, adultery incurred the death penalty.
所以，他的论点是，嗯，在摩西律法下，你会死， 因此，你从你的配偶甚至从这个生命中被切断了。 And so, his argument is, well, legally under the Mosaic law, you'd be dead, and therefore, you're cut loose from your spouse and even from this life.
我想我们大多数人都会认识到这是一个相当薄弱的论点。 I think most of us would recognize that's a pretty weak argument.
按照这个标准，似乎你犯的任何会导致死刑的罪，在旧约中有很 多这样的罪，也会解除婚姻，因为，哦，你在灵性上已经死了。 By that standard, seemingly any sin you committed that would have incurred the penalty of death, which is a lot of sins in the old covenant, would also dissolve a marriage because, oh, you're spiritually dead.
每当你犯了致死的罪，你的婚姻就结束了。 Anytime you commit a mortal sin, your marriage is over.
所以，这就是路德的论点。 So, that's Luther's argument.
他接着说，因为现在神在这里离婚，另一方完全被释放了。 And he goes on to say, because now God here divorces, the other party is fully released.
所以，他或她不必保持与已证明不忠的配偶的关系，无论他或她多么希望如此。 So, he or she is not bound to keep the spouse that has proved unfaithful, however much he or she may desire it.
所以，这成了你的特权。 So, it becomes your prerogative.
你可以再婚。 You can remarry.
你可以再次与那个人结婚。 You can marry that person again.
你可以认为自己是自由的，因为他们犯了这个罪。 You can consider yourself free because they've committed this sin.
但请注意，正如我们上周指出的，这创造了一个特殊的两级 制度，如果你是性罪的受害者，你可以自由离婚和再婚。 But notice, as we pointed out last week, this creates a special two-tiered system where if you're the victim of sexual sin, you're free to divorce and remarry.
但路德不想说，如果你犯了性罪，你就可以自由离婚和再婚。 But Luther doesn't want to say, and if you commit sexual sin, you're free to divorce and remarry.
所以，这造成了一个荒谬的立场，你说，嗯，这个约因为通奸而解除了。 So, this creates a ridiculous position where you say, well, this covenant was dissolved because of adultery.
好吧，如果你正确地遵循这一点，那么你可以通过欺骗你的配偶来结束任何婚姻。 Well, if you follow that correctly, then you can end any marriage just by cheating on your spouse.
然后，你知道，说，嗯，你对犯通奸感到抱歉，但现在你可以自由再婚了。 Then, you know, say, well, you're sorry about having committed adultery, but now you're free to get married again.
因为另一种选择，路德在这里描述的是，另一方完全被释放了。 Because the alternative, what Luther's described here, is that the other party is fully released.
为什么你不会被完全释放？ Why would you not be fully released?
你不能继续与一个人保持婚姻关系，按照路德的说法，神已 经解除了你们的婚姻，也许他们已经离开并与别人结婚了。 You can't stay married to a person who, according to Luther, God's dissolved your marriage, and maybe they've gone off and married somebody else.
这没有任何意义。 It doesn't make any sense.
所以，这就是路德的立场。 So, that's Luther's position.
你可以看到他正在引入这些漏洞，它们已经比伊拉斯谟的漏洞大得多。 You can see he's introducing these kind of loopholes, and they're already much bigger than Erasmus's loopholes.
约翰·加尔文，他稍晚于路德，所以我们按时间顺序来排列。 John Calvin, he's slightly after Luther, so we're putting them in kind of the time order.
他指出，实际上通奸例外并不太合理。 He points out that actually the adultery exception doesn't make a lot of sense.
他有点抛出这个问题，因为他说，好吧，如果通奸者在 摩西律法下应该被处死，那么谈论离婚有什么目的呢？ He sort of throws this out because he says, okay, well, if the adulterous deserve to be punished with death under the Mosaic law, what purpose does it talk—does it serve to talk about divorces?
如果通奸被处以死刑，为什么还会有通奸的例外？ Why would there be an exception for adultery if adultery was punished by the death penalty?
你的配偶已经死了。 Your spouse is dead.
你不必担心在摩西律法下你是否可以合法地与他们离婚。 You don't have to worry about can you legally divorce them or not under the Mosaic law.
这里到底发生了什么？ What is going on here?
所以，即使他似乎意识到这种解释有问题，但他并没有真正解决这个事实。 So, even he seems to realize there's something wrong with this interpretation, but he doesn't really resolve that fact.
相反，他只是争辩说，即使听起来耶稣完全谴责离婚和再婚，他并不是这个意思。 Rather, he just argues that even when it sounds like Jesus is completely condemning divorce and remarriage, he doesn't mean it.
他说，虽然基督谴责为通奸，但那人要娶被休的妻子。 He says, though Christ condemns as an adulterer, the man shall marry a wife that has been divorced.
这无疑仅限于非法和轻率的离婚。 This is undoubtedly restricted to unlawful and frivolous divorces.
所以，即使基督没有说只有非法和轻率的离婚，即使这样解读完 全破坏了整段经文的意思，他还是在那里读出了那种例外条款。 So, even though Christ doesn't say it's only unlawful and frivolous divorces, even though it completely undermines the entire passage to read it that way, he just reads that kind of exception clause in there.
现在，将这与耶稣在马可福音第10章的话对比 。凡休妻另娶的，就是犯奸淫，辜负他的妻子。 Now, contrast that with Jesus' words in Mark 10. Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her.
妻子若离弃丈夫另嫁，也是犯奸淫。 And if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
这是一个激进的教导，它本来就是要成为一个激进的教导。 This is a radical teaching and it's intended to be a radical teaching.
然而，他正在读出文本中没有任何暗示的隐含例外。 And yet he's reading in implied exceptions that are not in any way hinted at in the text.
事实上，加尔文提出论点说，犹太人在离婚和再婚方面基本上如此随 意，以至于马可根本没有给我们那些例外，所以没有回旋的余地。 In fact, Calvin makes the argument that the Jews were so basically promiscuous with divorce and remarriage that Mark just doesn't give us those exceptions, so there's no wiggle room.
他说，马可的意图是要表明我们的主谴责当时普遍存在 的腐败，即在自愿离婚后，双方都进入了新的婚姻。 He says, Mark intended to show that our Lord condemned the corruption, which was at that time universal, that after voluntary divorces, they entered on both sides into new marriages.
因此，他没有提到通奸。 And therefore, he makes no mention of adultery.
现在，我想确保你明白他在这里说的是什么。 Now, I want to make sure you get what he's saying here.
他说耶稣曾教导有一个通奸的例外。 He's saying Jesus had taught there was an adultery exception.
马可知道这一点。 Mark knew this.
马可不希望你滥用耶稣给予的那个特权。 Mark didn't want you to abuse that privilege that Jesus had given.
所以，马可掩盖了通奸的例外。 And so, Mark covers up the adultery exception.
他只是不提它，因为他不希望你拿着那个球就跑。 He just doesn't mention it because he doesn't want you to take that ball and run with it.
这是对马可福音的一个非常奇怪的解释。 That is a very strange interpretation of the Gospel of Mark.
根本没有任何证据支持这一点。 There is no evidence of that whatsoever.
事实上，除了马太福音之外，其他所有人都非常清楚地没有例外。 And in fact, everybody besides Matthew just has a very clear no exception.
所以，除非他们都在进行类似的掩盖耶稣教导的行为，否则这样解读他们是非常奇怪的。 So, unless they're all engaged in a similar kind of cover-up of Jesus' teaching, it's very strange to read them that way.
似乎更清楚的是，马太福音所谓的porneia例外根本不是一个例外。 It seems much clearer to say that Matthew's so-called exception for porneia isn't really an exception whatsoever.
这只是承认这个教导不适用于在神眼中从未有效 的无效婚姻，那些神没有结合在一起的婚姻。 It's just an acknowledgement that this teaching doesn't apply to invalid marriages that were never valid in the eyes of God, that God didn't join together.
好的。 Okay.
让我们再回到赫斯和温汉姆的《耶稣与离婚》，因为他们 将把所有这些称为标准的新教立场，尽管你会发现例外。 Let's return again to Heth and Winhems, Jesus and divorce, because they're going to call all of this, which is really the standard Protestant position, although you will find exceptions.
我不想忽视这一点。 I don't want to discount that.
你会发现例外，但这是一个相当标准的新教立场。 You will find exceptions, but this is a pretty standard Protestant position.
他们将称之为伊拉斯谟立场以纪念伊拉斯谟，但这就是他们所讨论的。 They're going to call this the Erasmian position in honor of Erasmus, but that's what they're talking about.
他们说，在许多新教教会中，伊拉斯谟对这些经文的解释已经盛行 了很长时间，以至于一些人无疑会觉得这证明其中一定有些道理。 And they say, in many Protestant churches, Erasmian exegesis of these texts has held sway for so long that some will no doubt feel this is proof that there must be something in it.
但这并不成立。 But that doesn't follow.
长期以来许多新教徒相信伊拉斯谟、路德、加尔文等人的观点，这一事实并不意味着他们实 际上有强有力的圣经依据，因为他们没有。温汉姆和赫斯指出，在伊拉斯谟的观点中，耶稣 被认为在某些情况下允许离婚后再婚，从而与沙买派犹太人一致，反对更自由的希勒尔派。 The fact that a lot of Protestants for a long time have believed Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, and the rest on this doesn't mean they actually have a strong biblical case, because they don't. On the Erasmian view, Winhem and Heth point out Jesus is made to agree with the Shammite Jews against the more liberal Hillelites by permitting remarriage after divorce in certain instances.
现在，你可能刚刚说，你刚才说什么？ Now, you might have just said, what did you just say?
你在说什么？ What are you talking about?
让我们快速做一个拉比式的旁论或稍微离题一下。 Let's do a quick rabbinical excursus or a little bit of an aside.
这是理解圣经文本和理解耶稣在马可福音第10章和马太福音第19章中所说的 内容的非常重要的背景。在申命记第24章，在摩西律法下，离婚是被允许的。 This is really important background to understanding the biblical text and understanding what Jesus is talking about in Mark 10 and in Matthew 19. In Deuteronomy 24, under the Mosaic law, divorce was permitted.
如果妻子在丈夫眼中不蒙喜悦，因为他发现她有什么不体面的事，男人就可以休妻。 A man could divorce his wife if she finds no favor in his eyes, because he's found some indecency in her.
Ervat davar是希伯来语。 Ervat davar is the Hebrew.
当然，我可能发音不准。 Sure, I'm butchering.
但那是某种不体面的事。 But that's some indecency.
问题是，如果你发现你的妻子有某种不体面的事，离婚意味着什么？ And the question is, what does it mean to get divorced if you find some indecency in your wife?
嗯，卢·格林伯格和犹太离婚法解释说，在公元前一世纪 有两个拉比学派。所以，这是在基督之前的一个世纪。 Well, Lou Greenberg and Jewish divorce law explains that there were two rabbinical schools in the first century BC. So, this is a century before Christ.
一种观点是沙买派的。 One view is that of Shammite.
这是一种更严格的解释。 It's a more strict construction interpretation.
它将ervat davar理解为字面上和专指通奸。 That views ervat davar as meaning literally and exclusively adultery.
所以，如果你的妻子犯了通奸，你可以离婚并在那里再婚。 So, if your wife commits adultery, you can get divorced and remarried there.
这是更严格的观点。 That's the stricter view.
希勒尔有一个更自由的观点，认为不体面的事就是任何让你对她不满意的事。 Hillel has a more liberal view that an indecency is just anything that displeases you about her.
你可以离婚。 You can get divorced.
一些拉比甚至说，如果你不喜欢你妻子的烹饪，你就可以离婚。 Some rabbis even said you'd get divorced if you didn't like your wife's cooking.
我的意思是，它就是那种程度的，是的，你不能离婚，除非有任何理由。 I mean, it was just that level of, yeah, you can't get divorced except for any reason.
你唯一想要离婚的时候是如果有什么让你不满意的地方。 The only time you're going to want to get divorced is if there's something that displeases you about it.
所以，希勒尔的观点就是按需离婚。 So, Hillel's view is just divorce on demand.
按需离婚和再婚。 Divorce and remarriage on demand.
沙买派的观点只适用于通奸的情况。 Shammite's view is only in the case of adultery.
现在，新教徒会说沙买派是对的。 Now, Protestants will say Shammite has it right.
耶稣说两者都错了。 Jesus said both had it wrong.
所以，他们来找他解决如何解释摩西律法的问题。 So, they come to him to settle this question of how to interpret the Mosaic law.
耶稣在马太福音9章8节回答说，摩西因为你们的心硬，所以允许你们休妻。 And Jesus responds in Matthew 9 verse 8, for your hardness of heart, Moses allowed you to divorce your wives.
但从起初并不是这样。 But from the beginning, it was not so.
所以，明确地说，耶稣并不是在说，让我们对摩西采取自由的观点或保守的观点。 So, explicitly, Jesus isn't saying, let's take a liberal view of Moses or let's take a conservative view of Moses.
他告诉你，在创造的秩序中，你被呼召要超越摩西律法对离婚的例外。 He's telling you, in the order of creation, you were called to more than the Mosaic exception for divorce.
所以，他的立场是没有例外。 So, no exceptions is where he goes.
许多新教徒的解释完全消除了这一点，他们认为耶稣真正想说的是 ，我同意沙买派而不是希勒尔，这不会是一个令人震惊的教导，不 会像我们看到使徒们惊讶地扬起眉毛那样，他们说最好不要结婚。 The interpretation so many Protestants have totally annihilates this, where what Jesus really meant to say is, I agree with Shammite and not Hillel, which wouldn't be a shocking teaching, which wouldn't have raised eyebrows as we saw the apostles' eyebrows raised, where they're saying to be better not to get married.
不，这将是一个完全普通的传统立场，在耶稣时代被广泛接受。 No, this would be an absolutely ordinary conventional position, which was widely held in Jesus's day.
耶稣显然不是在给出他那个时代广泛持有的立场。 Jesus is clearly not giving a widely held position of his day.
他采取了一个激进的立场，认为摩西律法的例外 已经结束，因为创造的秩序呼召我们做更多。 He's taking a radical position that the Mosaic law exception is over because the order of creation calls us to more.
好的，回到赫斯和温诺姆，这只是问题的开始。 Okay, going back to Heth and Winnom, that's just the beginning of the problem.
因为正如我解释的，为了证明福音书作者、传福音者和保罗在这方面跟随耶稣，他们必 须重新解释我们在哥林多前书中已经看到的所有福音书段落，涉及耶稣关于离婚的教导 ，以表明新约像沙买派一样，允许在涉及不道德行为时进行一些解除婚姻的离婚。 Because as I explained, in order to prove that the gospel writers, the evangelists and Paul followed Jesus in this respect, they have to reinterpret all the passages in the gospels that we've already seen in 1 Corinthians, touching on Jesus's teaching about divorce, to show the New Testament, like Shammite, allowed some dissolution divorces, where immorality was involved.
所以，你必须重新解释所有这些看起来没有例外的经文，好像有一个例外。 So, you have to reinterpret all these texts, which don't seem to have an exception, as if there is an exception.
他们说，我们努力表明这种解释是相当陌生的。 And they say, we've endeavored to show this interpretation is quite foreign.
它不符合马可、路加和保罗的观点。 It's out of Mark, Luke, and Paul.
当你阅读马可、路加和保罗的著作时，如果不试 图发明一个例外条款，你会发现根本没有例外。 When you read Mark, Luke, and Paul, without trying to invent an exception clause, you'll see there is none.
他们没有暗示任何人可以在离婚后再婚。 They give no hint that anyone may remarry after divorce.
它根本就不存在。 It simply is not there.
最终，他们说，这些解经的体操最终遇到了他们的滑铁卢。 Ultimately, they say, these exegetical gymnastics finally meet their Waterloo.
这是一个奇怪的混合比喻。 It's a weird mixed metaphor.
我不知道什么样的体操会以滑铁卢结束，我猜是拿破仑式的体操。 I don't know what kind of gymnastics ends in Waterloo, Napoleonic gymnastics, I guess.
但这些体操最终在早期教父的教导中遇到了他们的滑 铁卢，这些教导不能被重新解释为允许离婚后再婚。 But these gymnastics finally meet their Waterloo, in the teaching of the early church fathers, which cannot be reinterpreted to permit remarriage after divorce.
你不能说早期基督徒持有那种观点，因为他们显然没有。 You just can't say the early Christians held that view, because they clearly did not.
所以，然后你不得不说，好吧，也许早期的基督徒理解错了。 And so, then you have to say, well, maybe the early Christians got it wrong.
那么问题就是，为什么这么多人都理解错了呢？ And then the question there is, how did so many of them get it wrong, then?
因为威廉和赫斯指出，如果你要采取那种观点，你必须相信某个早期教父，比如 赫马斯，或其他一些不知名的早期教父，说服了教会其他人采取这一激进步骤。 Because William and Heth point out, if you're going to take that view, you have to believe that some early church father, like Hermas, or some other unknown early father, persuaded the rest of the church to take this drastic step.
是的，耶稣给了我们一个例外条款，但让我们忽视它。 Yeah, Jesus gave us an exception clause, but let's ignore that.
让我们采取比耶稣自己的标准更严格的标准。 Let's take a harder standard than Jesus' own standard.
而且每个人都同意了。 And everybody just went along with it.
他们说，坦白说，似乎不太可能这样一场社会态度 的革命会被一个次要人物的权威强加给整个教会。 And they say, well, frankly, it seems unlikely that such a revolution in social attitudes could have been foisted on the entire church, on the authority of a minor figure.
把它归因于像耶稣或保罗这样的人更可信，对吧？ It's more credible to ascribe it to someone like Jesus or Paul, right?
就像，如果耶稣或保罗教导了这一点，整个教会相信它是有道理的。 Like, if Jesus or Paul taught it, it makes sense the whole church would believe it.
但如果某个不了解教会婚姻教导的随机人教导了这一点， 为什么没有人说，嘿，我们都知道有这个通奸的例外？ But if some random person who didn't understand the church's teaching on marriage taught it, why did no one say, hey, there's this adultery exception we all know about?
因此，他们得出结论，早期教会的观点，即不允许离婚例外的观 点，使耶稣成为打破犹太人关于婚姻和离婚共识的伟大革命者。 And so, they conclude, the early church view, the no-exception-for-divorce view, makes Jesus the great revolutionary who broke with the Jewish consensus about marriage and divorce.
伊拉斯谟的观点仅仅使他成为沙买的门徒，即耶稣甚至没 有提出新的教导，即使他表现得好像在教导新的东西。 The Erasmian view merely makes him a disciple of Shammai, that Jesus isn't even presenting a new teaching, even when he presents it as if he's teaching a new teaching.
他只是在重复一个世纪前犹太拉比所教导的内容。 He's just regurgitating what prior Jewish rabbis had taught a century earlier.
这看起来显然是一个错误的教导。 That seems like an obviously false teaching.
所以，希望你能看到，发生的事情是伊拉斯谟、路德和加尔文重新解释了圣 经，在其中读出了不存在的例外条款，完全扭曲和改变了教会关于婚姻的教 导，同时路德和加尔文也完全重新解释和改变了关于教会的圣经教导。 So, hopefully, you can see there, what's happened is Erasmus, Luther, and Calvin have reinterpreted scripture, have read into it exception clauses that don't exist, have totally distorted and changed church teaching on marriage, simultaneous with Luther and Calvin, totally reinterpreting and changing biblical teaching on the church.
我只是在建议这两件事并非无关的举动，它们似乎有一个共同的缺陷。 And I'm just suggesting that these two things are not unrelated moves, that it seems to be a common flaw behind both of them.
因为如果你理解教会确实是基督的新妇，如果你理解神憎恶离 婚，那么你就不能为离婚和再婚辩护，也不能为分裂辩护。 Because if you understand the church really is the bride of Christ, and if you understand that divorce is hated by God, then you can't justify divorce and remarriage, and you can't justify schism.
但如果你要为分裂辩护，你就必须做大量工作来重 新解释所有那些经文，加入以前不存在的漏洞。 But if you're going to justify schism, you have to do a lot of work to reinterpret all those texts to put in loopholes that weren't there before.
最后，一个小附言，这一切对一夫多妻制意味着什么？ Finally, a little postscript, what does all this mean about polygamy?
因为事实证明，如果你对离婚和再婚的理解错误，对教会 的理解错误，你很可能也会对一夫多妻制的理解错误。 Because it actually turns out that if you get divorce and remarriage wrong, and you get the church wrong, you're likely to get polygamy wrong as well.
这是由上周视频中一位来自非洲背景的观众的问题引发的，要求我谈谈一夫多妻制。 This was prompted by a viewer's question from an African context on last week's video, asking me to address polygamy.
所以，首先，在我谈论一夫多妻制的背景下，我说的 是不可能娶你的继母，因为她与你父亲是一体的。 So, first, in the context of what I was saying about polygamy there, I was talking about the impossibility of marrying your stepmother because she's one flesh with your father.
这不是在说你父亲同时有两个妻子。 That's not talking about your father having two wives simultaneously.
这就像你有一个父亲和母亲，母亲去世，父亲再婚，父亲去世。 That's like you've got a dad and mom, mom dies, dad remarries, dad dies.
即使你的继母未婚，她可以自由地嫁给别人。 Even though your stepmom's unmarried, she's free to marry somebody else.
她不能嫁给你，你不能娶她。 She can't marry you, you can't marry her.
她是禁止的，因为她已经与你父亲成为一体。 She's off limits because she had become one flesh with your father.
所以在利未记18章下，这被认为是淫乱。 And so under Leviticus 18, that was considered porneia.
这基本上被认为是乱伦，即使你可以想象这是被允许的。 That was considered, basically, incest, even though you could imagine that being permitted.
现在，在哥林多前书中，圣保罗谈到了一个案例，在哥林多 ，似乎有类似的事情在哥林多基督徒眼中是可以接受的。 Now, in 1 Corinthians, St. Paul talks about a case where in Corinth, there seemed to be something like that that was acceptable in the eyes of the Corinthian Christians.
他感到厌恶。 And he was disgusted.
他称之为淫乱，并告诉他们不要允许这种性不道德。 He calls it porneia and tells them not to allow this kind of sexual immorality.
我们不知道更多的细节，所以我不想深入讨论。 We don't know more of the details of that, so I don't want to go deeper on that.
但我想用这个作为基础来说，正确理解关于婚姻的激进教导和关 于教会的激进教导，你就会明白为什么我们不允许一夫多妻制。 But I want to use this as a basis to say, get the radical teaching on marriage and the radical teaching on the church right, and you'll see why we don't allow polygamy.
圣托马斯·阿奎那在《神学大全》中谈到了这一点。 St. Thomas Aquinas talks about this in the Summa.
他谈到婚姻有三个目的。 He talks about how marriage has three purposes.
我会忽略前两个，只关注第三个。 I'll ignore the first two of those and just focus on the third one.
在信徒之间，这回想起基督在教会中的意义。 That between believers, this recalls the signification of Christ in the church.
因此，圣事被称为婚姻的一种美好，婚姻的一种 美好就是它是基督与教会关系的圣事性体现。 And thus, the sacrament is said to be a marriage good, that one of the goods of marriage is that it is a sacramental embodiment of Christ's relationship with his church.
所以，希望这是清楚的。 So, hopefully, that's clear.
他将说一夫多妻制与此相反，因为正如基督是一，教会也是一。 He's going to say that polygamy is contrary to that, because as Christ is one, so also is the church one.
而且基督只有一个身体。 And Christ has one body.
你无法想象一个头有两个身体。 You can't imagine one head with two bodies.
那是一个怪物。 That's a monster.
那不是耶稣。 That's not Jesus.
因此，同样地，你不能有一个新郎和两个新娘。 And so, likewise, you can't have one bridegroom with two brides.
这同时告诉我们关于只有一个真正的教会和一夫多妻制不被接受的事情。 That tells us something simultaneously about there being one true church and about polygamy being off the table.
所以，事实证明，当你拒绝第一个，拒绝唯一真 正的教会时，你也为一夫多妻制打开了大门。 So, it turns out when you reject the first of those, reject the one true church, you also open the door to polygamy.
马丁·路德向我们展示了这一点。 Martin Luther shows us this.
1526年，黑森的菲利普地方伯爵想知道他是否可以娶第二个妻子。 In 1526, the land grave of Hesse, Philip, wants to know if he can have a second wife.
路德说，我不能建议这样做，但强烈建议反对，特别是对基督徒来说 ，除非是高度必要的情况，比如你的妻子患有麻风病或类似的疾病。 And Luther says, I cannot advise it, but strongly advise against it, especially to Christians, unless it might be a case of high necessity, like if your wife has leprosy or is similarly afflicted.
所以，注意，他开始稍微打开门，允许一些一夫多妻制。 So, notice, he starts to open the door a little bit to allow in some polygamy.
这就是他明确在做的事。 That's just explicitly what he's doing.
正如我们之前在伊拉斯谟那里看到的，一旦你稍微打开那扇门，说，好吧 ，在极端情况下，一切都可能发生，那么现在你就无法再把它关上了。 And as we saw before with Erasmus, once you open that door a little bit and say, well, in extreme cases, all bets are off, well, now you can't close that back up again.
那扇门只会越开越大。 That door is just going to get wider and wider.
所以，五年后，亨利八世想要因为莫尼亚规则而使他的婚姻无效，实际上。 And so, five years later, Henry VIII wants to get his marriage annulled because of Mornea rules, actually.
我不打算深入所有的混乱。 I'm not going to get into all of the messiness.
罗伯特·巴恩斯代表国王写信，联系路德试图获得他的支持。 And Robert Barnes, writing on behalf of the king, reaches out to Luther to try to get his support.
这是讽刺的，因为亨利八世早些时候曾写文为七圣事辩护。 This is ironic, since Henry VIII had written in defense of the seven sacraments earlier.
实际上，可能是圣托马斯·莫尔写的，但它是以亨利八世的名义发表的，谴责路德。 Actually, probably St. Thomas More wrote it, but it was published under Henry VIII's name, denouncing Luther.
但现在他想要离婚，他去找路德，马丁·路德回答说，在我批准这样的离婚之前，我宁愿 允许国王娶另一个王后，根据古代族长和国王的例子，他们同时有两个妻子或两个王后。 But now that he wants a divorce, he's going to Luther, and Martin Luther replies, Before I would approve such a divorce, I would rather allow the king to take another queen, according to the examples of the ancient patriarchs and kings, who had two wives or two queens at the same time.
所以注意，在试图把我们带回摩西律法下，带着它对离婚和再婚的 例外，你可以在通奸的情况下这样做，也许在任何过错的情况下， 路德也把我们带回了一个不那么清楚我们需要一夫一妻制的地方。 So notice, in trying to bring us back under the Mosaic law, with its exceptions to divorce and remarriage, that you can do it in the case maybe of adultery, maybe of any fault, Luther has also brought us back where it's less clear that we need to be monogamous.
现在，这只是两句随意的话。 Now, those are just two throwaway lines.
我想建议这三件事都是相互关联的，正确理解教会，正 确理解婚姻，然后看到这意味着你不能有一夫多妻制。 I want to suggest those three things are all connected, getting the church right, getting marriage right, and then seeing how that means you can't have polygamy.
我主要是把这些作为一个论点来呈现，因为我没有看到任何人明确地说 改革者拒绝一个，这种拒绝某种程度上助长了他们对另一个的拒绝。 I'm presenting all this largely as a thesis, because I've not seen anyone explicitly say the reformers and rejecting the one, it kind of feeds their rejection of the other.
但考虑到这两者在理解像以弗所书5章这样的经文中彼此的重要性，我正在提出这个论点。 But given how important the two are to understanding each other in texts like Ephesians 5, I'm advancing that as an argument.
我很好奇你对此有什么看法。 I'm curious as to what you think about it.
所以我期待在下面的评论中看到你的想法。 So I look forward to your thoughts in your comments below.
愿神祝福你。 God bless you.