注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

守诚阁

基督徒世界观 译介圣经神学

 
 
 

日志

 
 

神学问答56:无条件拣选的教义是否会剥夺人的责任  

2011-08-24 00:52:00|  分类: 改革宗神学 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

56. 无条件拣选的教义是否会剥夺人的责任?


Doesn't the doctrine of unconditional election take away human responsibility?
诚之获授权翻译。
原文载于:http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/qna/responsibility.html

在罗马书第9章中,保罗非常明确地、无可反驳地宣告上帝在拣选时主权的选择,此拣选是唯独根据祂自己良善的旨意和所喜悦的计划。保罗发出一个假设性的反驳:如果照你所说,救恩不在乎人的意志或努力,而取决于拣选人的上帝,那么,祂为何还要人负责任?换句话说,“祂为什麽还指责人呢?有谁抗拒祂的旨意呢?”(罗9:19)保罗的回应非常简单:“你这个人哪,你是谁,竟敢向神强嘴呢?受造之物岂能对造他的说:‘你为什麽这样造我呢?窑匠难道没有权柄从一团泥里拿一块作成贵重的器皿,又拿一块作成卑贱的器皿吗?’”(罗9:20-21)换句话说,造我们的上帝有权使用我们(译按:遗弃)来彰显祂公义的愤怒,或彰显祂白白的怜悯,而我们没有反对的理据。祂是我们的造物主,无论我们喜欢还是不喜欢,都要我们向祂负责任。
In Romans 9, when Paul is declaring very certainly and indisputably the sovereign choice of God in election, according to his own good pleasure and purposes alone, he raises up a hypothetical objection: If it is as you say, and salvation depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who elects, then how can he hold anyone responsible? Or in other words, “Why does he still find fault? for who has resisted his will?” (Rom. 9:19). Paul's response is very simple: “On the contrary, who are you, O man, to reply back to God? Shall the thing formed say to the one who formed it, 'Why have you made me thus'? Or does not the Potter have authority over the clay, out of the same lump to make one a vessel for honor and another a vessel for dishonor?” (Rom. 9:20-21). In other words, the God who made us has the right to use us either for the display of his just wrath or the display of his free mercy, and we have no grounds to object. He is our Creator and he does hold us responsible, whether we like it or not.

为了帮助我们认识此异议的愚妄,让我们考虑这种情况:一个愚蠢的浪荡子向银行借贷了数百万元;然后,他尽情挥霍,把所有的钱都浪费在狂欢淫荡的生活,无法还清债务。所以银行把他拖到法院,准备要让他坐牢。然后,从前有另一个人做过同样的事,有一个好心的慈善家决定替这个浪荡子还清所有的债务,只是对眼前的这个案子,他却毫无作为。好,如果这个愚蠢的浪荡子告诉法院,“我没有义务还债!那个慈善家白白地替别的浪子还清债务,但是他却选择不偿还我的债务,那是我付不起的——所以别找我的麻烦!”这样对吗?他自己无力还债,而那个慈善家主权地选择不去帮忙,所以错要算作这个慈善家头上?当然不是!虽然这个浪子无法偿付他的债务,而慈善家有能力帮他换却选择不这样做,而他以前曾选择白白地替其他人还清债务,不变的事实还是:这个愚蠢的浪子仍然要为他自己的行动负责。无论上帝选择要怜悯我们,还是不怜悯我们,我们还是要为所欠的罪债,向我们的造物主和赐予我们律法的上帝负责。
To help us understand the folly of this objection, let's consider a scenario: a foolish prodigal borrows millions of dollars from a bank; then, he squanders all the money in riotous living and is unable to repay his debt. So the bank hauls him to court, and is about to send him to debtor's prison. Now, another man had done the same thing before, and a goodhearted philanthropist decided to pay off that prodigal's debt entirely, but in this case, he does nothing. Now, if the foolish prodigal told the court, “I'm not responsible to pay you back! The philanthropist freely paid off the debt of the other prodigal, but he has clearly chosen not to pay off my debt, and I can't do it myself – I'm not at fault!”; would he therefore be right? He is unable to pay his own debt, and the philanthropist has sovereignly chosen not to help, so is the philanthropist the one at fault? Of course not: although the prodigal is unable to repay his debt, and although the philanthropist could pay it but chooses not to, even though he had chosen freely to repay the debt of the other, the fact remains that this foolish prodigal is still responsible for his own actions. How much more are we responsible for our sin debt to our Creator and Lawgiver, whether he chooses us for mercy or not?
  评论这张
 
阅读(313)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017