_1_Our Position

WE take the position that Holy Scripture, in contradistinction to all other books in the world, is God’s own infallible Word and therefore the only source and norm of Christian doctrine. Prevailing conditions in the Church make it necessary for the author of a treatise on Christian dogmatics to state clearly and emphatically where he stands on the question of the source and nature of Christian Theology. Until about 1750, Protestant dogmaticians were quite generally agreed that nothing but what Scripture teaches should have a place in Christian dogmatics. But today the situation has changed completely. The representative theologians of modern Protestantism with but a few exceptions deny that Holy Scripture is by inspiration the very Word of God. Accordingly they refuse to regard and employ Holy Scripture as the sole source and standard of theology. A mass movement away from Holy Scripture has set in. The human Ego, euphemistically called the “Christian consciousness,” the “regenerate I,” “experience,” etc., has been made the norm of theology.

我们的立场是，圣经，与世界上所有其他书不同，是上帝自己的可靠的话，因此是基督教教义的唯一来源和规范。当下教会的流行气氛，使得基督教教义学论著的作者必须明确和强调他对基督教神学的起源和本质问题所持的立场。直到大约1750,新教教义学家普遍同意,只有圣经教导的东西才应该在基督教教义学中占有一席之地。但今天,情况完全改变了。现代新教的主流神学家,否定圣经是上帝圣灵默示的话，仅有少数例外。因此，他们拒绝把圣经视为神学的唯一来源和标准。一场远离圣经的群众运动已经开始。人类的自我，被委婉地称为“基督徒意识”、“重生的我”、“个人经验”等等，已经成为神学的规范。

This away-from-Scripture movement has created a situation in modern Protestantism which has its counterpart in Romanism. In the Roman Catholic Church the sole source and norm of doctrine is not Holy Scripture but in reality the Ego of the Pope, who “boasts that all rights exist in the shrine of his heart” (Smalc. Art, Concordia Triglotta, 495, 4). Modern Protestant theologians do the very same thing when they refuse to derive and determine Christian doctrine from Holy Writ and make “the pious self-consciousness of the theologizing subject”1 the source and norm of theology. In the Papacy only so much of Scripture is regarded as binding as the Pope approves and confirms; just so modern Protestantism accepts only so much of Scripture as the pious theologizing subject has found acceptable.

这一远离圣经的运动在现代新教中创造的局面在罗马主义中亦有对应的情形。在罗马天主教会中，教义的唯一来源和标准不是圣经，而是现实中自负的教皇本人，他“夸口说一切律法都在他的心坎里”。现代新教神学家拒绝从圣经中得出和确定基督教教义，并将“虔诚作为神学主题的自我意识”引入作为神学的源泉和规范时，这样做与天主教没有什么不同。在教皇制中，只有部分圣经有约束力，因为需要教皇的批准和确认；同样，现代新教只接受部分的圣经，因为只有虔诚的神学主题被认为是可以接受的。

This, then, is the sad situation: The overwhelming majority of modern theologians refuses to identify Scripture and the Word of God; and accordingly they do not make Scripture but their own heart the source and judge of Christian doctrine. And this false principle does not merely disturb the order of things in the Christian Church, but turns it upside down. It is an outright revolt against the divine order.

这是可悲的情况：绝大多数现代神学家拒绝承认圣经和神的话是基督教教义的唯一源泉和规范; 因此，他们不是把圣经，而是他们自己的心，作为基督教教义的源泉和最终裁决。这个错误原则不仅扰乱了基督教教会的秩序,而且把它颠倒了。这是对神圣秩序的彻底反叛。

We, on our part, stand for the supreme and sole authority of Holy Scripture. We maintain that Scripture, by virtue of the singular divine act of inspiration, is God’s own infallible Word, “God’s Book,” 2 from which alone, to the end of time, the Christian doctrine, every single part of it, is to be taken and determined. And we do not ask men to bear with us for taking this position; we insist that it is the only position one may take.

我们，坚持自己的立场，持定圣经是最高的权威并唯一的权威。我们认为，圣经——凭借神圣的圣灵启示——是上帝可靠的道，“上帝的书”，直到时间的末了，基督教教义的每一条，都应该单单来源于圣经并由圣经决定。我们不强求别人与我们一起持定这一立场；我们坚持认为这是唯一可以采取的立场。

In taking this position we are following great exemplars. There is the example of Christ and His holy Apostles. They fully “identified” Scripture with the Word of God: , “It is written,” Scriptura sacra locuta, res decisa est. Then there is the example of the Reformer, Luther, who faithfully followed the authoritative norm set by Christ and the Apostles. When Luther declares, “The Word they still shall let remain,” he is speaking of the Holy Scriptures. Luther admonishes all readers of the Bible — and he does not exclude the theologians —: “When you read the words of Holy Scripture, you must realize that God is speaking them.”3 And he tells us theologians in drastic words that we shall become theological “monsters” (portenta), monsters like the Scholastics, if we depart from Scripture, for Scripture “alone is the fountain of all wisdom.”4 True, in our day men assert, at times very emphatically, that Luther took a “rather free,” a “more liberal” attitude toward Scripture than did the later Lutheran theologians. This assertion, however, if made bona fide, ignores the historical facts. We shall have more to say on this point in the chapter on “Holy Scripture.”

在持定这一立场上，我们紧紧跟随伟大的范例。其中的典范如基督和他的使徒。他们完全“承认”圣经是上帝的话语：“经上记着说，”圣经发话了，此事已经决定了。接着，有一个改革者路德的例子，他忠实地遵循了基督和使徒们所设定的权威标准。当路德说:“他们还要说的话,”他在谈论圣经。路德告诫圣经的所有读者——他没有排除神学家——“当你读圣经的话时，你必须意识到是上帝在说话。”他用激烈的话告诉我们神学家们，如果我们离开圣经，我们将成为神学的“怪物”，怪物喜欢的学者，因为“单单圣经是所有智慧的泉源。”的确，在我们这个时代，人们断言，有时非常强调，路德对待圣经非常自由，比后来的路德神学家对待圣经的态度更自由。但是，即使这种说法是真诚的，却忽视了历史事实。在“圣经”一章中，我们将更多地谈论这一点。

Modern theologians substitute their own “Christian consciousness” for Scripture as the source and norm of theology and claim that it is just this Christian consciousness and their highly developed “sense of realities,” based on science, which keeps them from identifying Scripture and the Word of God. If they appeal to their “experience” and “sense of realities,” so may we. With millions of Christians we experience, by the grace of God, right along that the Holy Scriptures are indeed the Word of God. And this experience is wrought by Holy Scripture itself. It was the Word itself which produced in the hearts of the Corinthian Christians the experience that the oral word of the Apostles was the Word of God (1 Cor. 2:1-5). And through the same means we experience that the written Word is God’s Word. Since Holy Scripture is God’s Word, it does not ask the Pope or any other theologizing individual for its credentials, but through the operation of the Holy Ghost, which is inseparably connected with it, the Word creates the very faith which recognizes it as God’s Word. The works of God in the realm of nature present an analogous case. They attest themselves as divine works. They do not need to be certified as such by the naturalists.

现代神学家用自己的“基督教意识”代替圣经作为神学的来源和规范，声称正是这种基督教意识和他们高度发达的“现实感”才是科学的，这阻止他们把圣经等同于上帝的话。如果他们可以诉求于自己的“经验”和“现实感”，那我们也可以。数以百万的基督徒的经验,藉著神的恩典,持续见证着圣经确实是神的话。这些经历是由神的话来塑造。是神的话本身在哥林多信徒的心中生出这样的经验——使徒的话语就是上帝的道（林前2：1-5）。同样的方式使我们经验到圣经所记的话就是上帝的道。既然圣经是神的话语，它就不需要教皇或任何其他神学家“颁发的资格证书”，圣灵在做工，而且圣灵与圣经不可分割地联系在一起，神的话创造了这样的信心，这信心承认圣经为神的话。神在自然界的工作也是类似的情形，显明自己是神的作品。这不需要自然主义者们的证明。

And mark well that the experience created by Scripture is a reality, while the experience of those who base their faith on anything else but Scripture and seek to derive the knowledge of the truth from their own hearts is a delusion. Scripture is the sole basis of faith, the sole source of the knowledge of the truth. Christ tells us clearly and definitely that only through His Word can men learn the truth. “If ye continue in My Word … ye shall know the truth,” …  (John 8:31-32). All who imagine that they have found the truth elsewhere are deluding themselves. If we theologians would know and teach the truth and not error, we must continue in the Word of Christ. And we have this Word of Christ in the Word of His Apostles; to the end of time we shall have it in no other way. Christ, too, states this most clearly when He says that all shall believe on Him “through their Word,”    (John 17:20).

显然圣经创造的经验是真实的，而那些将信心建立在别的根基上而不是圣经上的经验并试图从自己的心中得出真理知识是一种妄想。圣经是信心的唯一基础，真理知识的唯一来源。基督清楚明确地告诉我们只有通过祂的话语人才能知道真理。“你们若持守我的道...你们必认识真理，”（约8：31-32）。所有想象他们在别处找到真理的人都在欺骗自己。如果我们神学家想要知道并教导真理而不是错谬，我们必须继续持守基督的话语。藉着基督的使徒们的教导，我们有了基督的道，直到时间的末了，我们不应该有其他的方式。这一点，基督也明确地说过，当他说那些“因他们的话”而信他的人时。

It will, therefore, never do for the theologian to retreat from the Word of the Apostles and Prophets and to seek refuge in the theological Ego. In theology it is absolutely necessary that the theologian disqualify his own Ego. The theologian must disregard all thoughts and opinions of his own, which come to him as unwelcome guests; he will permit only such thoughts, words, and doctrines to make their abode in his heart as are found in Christ’s Word.

因此，当神学家离开使徒和先知的教导，转而在神学家的自我中寻求庇护时，这将是毫无益处的。在神学中，神学家去除自己的自我是绝对必须的。神学家必须不顾自己的所有想法和意见，这些是他不受欢迎的客人; 他将只允许那些符合基督的道的想法、话语和教义在他心中留下。

Some have called the complete submergence of the theologian’s Ego a disgraceful “bondage” and a “letter worship.” Christ, however, teaches that this is the glorious liberty which we as Christian theologians are privileged to enjoy. “If ye continue in My Word … ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,” (John 8:31-32). To be held in bondage by one’s own false opinions is the most disgraceful form of human slavery. And the purpose for which Christ gave us His own Word through His Apostles and Prophets is to deliver us from the bondage of our own false notions in matters pertaining to our salvation and that of all men. Therefore our slogan dare never be: “Away from Scripture!” It must remain: “Into Scripture, into Scripture as the sole source and standard of theology!” Luther thanked God for the wonderful grace that he could at once discard all thoughts that came to him “without Scripture.”

有些人把神学家的自我的完全淹没称为可耻的“束缚”和“文字崇拜”。然而，基督却教导说这是我们基督教神学家特别享有的好的无比的自由。“如果你们常常遵守我的道...你们必晓得真理。真理必叫你们得以自由。”（约8：31-32）被自己的虚假意见束缚是人类奴役的最可耻的形式。基督通过他的使徒和先知教导我们的目的就是要使我们脱离所有有关我们自己和所有人的得救的虚假概念的束缚。因此，我们的口号永远不会是：“离开圣经！”我们的口号是：“进入圣经，并将圣经作为神学的唯一来源和规范。”路德感谢上帝的美好恩典，他可以立刻舍弃他所有“没有圣经经文”的想法。

Furthermore, the results show that the theology which has moved away from Scripture into the domain of the “pious faith-consciousness” is in a bad way. One of the deplorable products of this theology is its denial of the satisfactio Christi vicaria. Hofmann, for instance, who has been called the father of the subjective theology (Ich-theologie) among the conservative Lutheran theologians of the nineteenth century, has very definitely denied the substitutional atonement of Christ. And today the denial of the satisfactio vicaria is about as universal as the denial of the inspiration of Holy Scripture. And right here we have the real reason why Scripture is not recognized as Christ’s Word. Whoever denies the satisfactio vicaria does not know the Christ whom Scripture shows us. (John 1:29: “Behold the Lamb of God, etc.”; Matt. 20:28: “to give His life a ransom for many.”) And one who does not know Christ cannot know Christ’s Word. Christ Himself makes the statement: “Why do ye not understand My speech? Even because ye cannot hear My Word…. He that is of God heareth God’s words; ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of God.” (John 8:43, 47.)

此外，事实表明，从圣经迁移到“虔诚的信仰意识”领域的神学是一种坏的方式。这种神学的一个可悲的产物是它否认了基督的完美代赎。 例如霍夫曼，在十九世纪保守的路德宗神学家中被称为主观神学的父亲（Ich-theologie），已经绝对否定了基督的替代性赎罪。而今天，否认基督的完美代赎与拒绝圣灵默示一样普遍。在这里，我们有真正的原因，为什么圣经不被承认为基督的话。 任何人否认完美代赎就是不知道圣经向我们显示的基督。（约1：29：“看啊！上帝的羔羊”；太20：28：“并且牺牲性命，作许多人的赎价。”）所以一个不知道基督的人不可能明白基督的话。基督自己也宣告：“你们为什么不明白我的话呢？无非是因为你们不能听我的道...出于神的，必听神的话；你们不听，因为你们不是出于神。”（约8：43，47）

We do not call into question the personal faith of every theologian who from the safe retreat of his study or lecture room attacks the satisfactio vicaria. Luther, too, takes cognizance of such a “felicitous inconsistency” when he says of the theologians whom Erasmus quoted against him that the language they used inter disputandum was not the language their heart spoke before God.5 But our present concern is to show that there is necessarily a causal connection between the denial of Christ’s vicarious satisfaction and the rejection of Scripture as the Word of God. And, conversely, the knowledge of Christ as the sinner’s Savior and the recognition of Scripture as the Word of God go hand in hand. This will be shown more fully in the chapter on Scripture.

我们不质疑那些神学家的个人信仰,他们从自己的书房或讲台的安全撤退,攻击基督的代赎。路德也注意到这种“奇怪的不一致性”，当他说到神学家伊拉斯莫为反驳他而引用的语言，他们用来争辩的语言，不是他们的心在上帝面前说的语言。但我们目前的关注是要表明，在否认基督的完美代赎和拒绝圣经作为神的话语之间必然存在因果关系。相反，基督作为罪人的救主的知识和承认圣经是神的话，是携手并进的。 这将在《论圣经》一章更充分地说明。

Another evil product of subjectivism (Ichtheologie) is doctrinal chaos and discord. There can be no unity of faith in a church body which bases its teaching on the subjective opinions of the theologians and not on the one doctrinal foundation, the Word of the Apostles and Prophets (Eph. 2:20: “And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets”). Men tell us, indeed, that doctrinal unity is possible even though the divine authority of Scripture be surrendered. They are confident that the “purely subjective vagaries” would be easily recognized as such and eliminated by “the communal spirit of the Church.” But the same author who makes this statement also reports that while there is a general agreement on the new dogmatical principles, there are also “uncounted divergencies in the application of these principles, these divergencies being due to the differences in the religious individualities of the dogmaticians or in the degree of their scientific consistency.”6

主观主义（哲学）的另一个邪恶产物是教义的混乱和冲突。在一个教会机构中，如果它的教导是基于神学家的主观意见，而不是基于一个教义基础，基于使徒和先知的话语（弗2:20：“建立在使徒和先知的基础“），那么就没有信仰的统一。人们告诉我们，如他们所说的，纵然圣经的神圣权威被打折，教义统一却是可能的。他们相信，“纯粹主观的变幻莫测”将容易像上面那样得到承认，并被“教会的共同精神”消除分歧。但是，作出上述结论的同一作者也报告说，虽然关于新教义的原则有一个普遍的共识，但是在这些原则的应用中也存在着数不清的分歧，这些分歧是由于神学家宗教个性的差异或其科学一致性的不同。

There is only one cure for this scandalous doctrinal disunity. The theologians must forsake the Ego basis and return to that foundation on which the whole Christian Church is built, namely, the Word of the Apostles and Prophets of Christ, the Word of Christ, the Holy Scriptures. That will make Christian theologians, theologians as described by Luther: “Let that be our boast that we are catechumens and pupils of the Prophets; let us simply repeat and preach what we have heard and learned from the Prophets and be sure that the Prophets have taught it. The Old Testament calls those the children of the prophets who did not produce anything of their own, anything new, as did the Prophets, but taught what they received from the Prophets.”7

这种可耻的教义分裂只有一种治疗方法。 神学家必须放弃自己的自负，回到整个基督教会的根基，这根基就是基督的使徒和先知的教导，基督的道，也就是圣经。 这将使基督教神学家成为路德所描述的神学家：“让我们夸口我们是先知的初学者和学生; 让我们简单地重复和宣扬我们从先知那里听到和学到的东西，并确保先知曾教导它。” 旧约称那些没有像先知一样加添自己的、任何新的东西，而只是教导从先知那里学到的东西的人为先知的继承者。