以经解经 Interpreting Scripture by Scripture 霍顿 如同保罗对提摩太的提醒，“圣经都是神所默示的，于教训、督责、使人归正、教导人学义都是有益 的”（提后 3：16）——全部的圣经，不只是“生命经文”（life verses）。 As Paul reminded Timothy, "All Scripture is inspired by God and is [therefore] useful for teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16)--all Scripture, not just our "life verses." 与此同时，威敏思特信仰告白（Westminster Confession）正确地提醒我们，不是所有的经文都是同 样清楚或同等重要的（译按：WCF，第一章，第 7 条）。我们必须在比较清楚的经文的亮光下，来解释比较 困难的经文，而且我们是藉着研读经文的各部分来认识整体的意义，也是靠学习经文整体的意义来学习各 部分的意义。我们需要拼图的盒顶盖（有整个拼图的图案），也同时需要那些拼图片。 At the same time, the Westminster Confession properly reminds us that not everything in Scripture is equally plain or equally important. We have to interpret the more difficult passages in the light of clearer ones. Scripture interprets Scripture, and we learn the whole meaning of Scripture by studying its parts and its parts by learning the whole. You need the box-top and the puzzle-pieces. 当然，哪些经文是“困难的”，哪些是“清楚的”，哪些是更为重要的，有着许多不同的看法。我认 为，我们都同意一件事，就是基督降到阴间的意义，不如祂的道成肉身、祂主动与被动的顺服、祂的复活 升天和再来的意义来得清楚，也没有来得那么重要。然而，在其他的一些要点上，就有许多不同意见了。 大多数的福音派人士，会把教会治理模式（church government）放在“无关紧要”的类别中。这虽然不 是信仰的核心，但是此一观点却严重到足以使改革宗传统在圣公会、长老会和公理会的教会体制中造成分 裂。对东正教人士来说，主教制对教会的存在，是最根本的；而罗马天主教则更进一步，坚持罗马的主教 才是首要的。 Of course, there is disagreement about which verses are "difficult" and which are "clear," as well as which are more important. I think we'd all agree that the meaning of Christ's descent into hell is less clear and less important than his incarnation, active and passive obedience, resurrection, ascension, and return. Nevertheless, on a host of other points the roads diverge. Most evangelicals would place church government in the "Who Cares?" category. Far from being at the core of the faith, such a view was at least important enough to divide the Reformed tradition over Episcopal, Presbyterian, and Congregational polities. For Eastern Orthodoxy, episcopacy is essential to the very existence of the church, and Rome takes it one step further, insisting on the primacy of the bishop of Rome. 即使论及福音，也有许多相当不同的意见。东正教认为清楚和重要的经文强调人的“神化”（theosis） ——一个被模造成基督样式的过程，藉着恩典与自由意志的结合，得到最终的拯救。罗马天主教的传统主 张清楚和重要的经文教导的是：在教会中的人，藉着教会对功绩（treasury of merit）的管理，使人与 神和好。 Even when it comes to the gospel, there are quite different assumptions at play. Eastern Orthodox churches think that the clear and important passages emphasize theosis--a process of being conformed to Christ-likeness that leads to final salvation through a combination of grace and free will. Roman Catholics have traditionally maintained that the clear and important passages teach the reconciliation of humanity in the church through its management of the treasury of merit. 阿民念认为清楚和重要的经文教导：神的爱，普世的恩典，以及人类绝对的自由意志（libertarian free will）是居于首位的（比其他的属性更重要）。虽然改革宗神学从来没有教导神的主权（预定）要作为一 1 个“中心教条”（central dogma），即所有其他的教义必须由此推导而出，在标准的阿民念系统中，神的 爱和绝对的自由意志的确有这种作用。阿民念者经常会注意到一个僵持不下的局面（a stand-off）：加尔 文者把神的主权和预定奉为神明，而他们把神普世的爱和人的自由意志作为规范。“你们有你们的经文， 我们有我们的经文”，是经常听到的遁词，这只会削弱信徒对圣经的统一性、前后一致性和可靠性的信心。 Arminians think that the clear and important passages teach the primacy of God's love (over other attributes), the universality of grace, and the libertarian free will of human beings. While Reformed theology never teaches God's sovereignty (predestination) as a central dogma from which every other doctrine is deduced, the love of God and a libertarian view of free will do function that way in standard Arminian systems. Arminians often acknowledge a stand-off: Calvinists enshrine God's sovereignty and predestination, while they make God's universal love and human freedom normative. "You have your verses and we have ours," is the oft-heard shrug that can only weaken the believer's confidence in the unity, consistency, and reliability of Scripture. 愿真理显明，我们没有“我们的经文”，他们也没有“他们的经文”；只有上帝有“祂的经文”，也 因此，所有这些经文都属于“我们”。如果我们有的只是“我们的经文”，那么，我们并没有真的理解这 些经文真正教导的。毕竟，只有圣经能解释圣经，而如果为了维持前后的一致，我们感到不得不只拥抱一 些经文而放弃一些经文，我们就还没有真正认识到“我们的经文”。 Truth be told, we don't have "our verses" and they don't have "their verses." God has "his verses," and therefore all of them belong to "us." If we have "our verses," then not even these teach what we think they do. After all, Scripture interprets Scripture, and if we feel compelled to embrace some passages over others in order to maintain consistency, we haven't really understood "our verses." 阿民念派的神学家克拉克•宾诺克（Clark Pinnock）和约翰•桑德斯（John Sanders）一个共同的预 设前提，就是神所有的属性都不能和祂的爱相比，而且，祂计划要拯救所有的人。事实上，祂把这些要点 视为其预设前提或“公理”，所有的释经必须以此来检验（注 1）。例如，从阿民念的前提出发，宾诺克为 “包容主义”（inclusivism）辩护。包容主义是主张即使人对基督没有完全的信心，只要能对神