2024年9月29日 牧者之言

圣保罗讲道的实质

罗兰·艾伦

*作者罗兰·艾伦（1868-1947）于 1895 年至 1903 年在中国担任圣公会传教士。此后几年，他负责一个英国教区。在接下来的 40 年里，他一直在撰写有关传教原则的文章。

在《使徒行传》中，我们可以看到圣保罗布道的三个例子，即在彼西底安提阿的布道（13:16-41）、在路司得的布道（14: 15-17 ），以及在雅典的布道（17:22-31）。我们还有五处偶然提到其内容的地方：腓立比的占卜女孩所作的描述（16:17）、他在帖撒罗尼迦会堂的教导摘要（17:2-3）、以弗所的书记在集市上提出的一些让雅典人感到奇怪的观点（19:37）以及对以弗所长老的讲话（20:21）。此外，还有圣保罗本人在写给哥林多教会的第一封书信中对他在哥林多的布道的总结（林前2:2）。这些记载将保罗布道自然地分为两类：在会堂的布道和对外邦人的布道。布道分为三个部分，通过戏剧性的方式吸引听众的注意。
首先，圣保罗以犹太民族的过去历史为基础，表明他传的福音扎根于此，他的信息中并没有抛弃熟悉的事物，也没有否认对列祖们的旧启示的真实性；相反，以色列的整个历史都是上帝为弥赛亚的新启示所做的准备。
在第二部分中，他阐述了耶稣降世、遭人拒绝，以及随后被钉在十字架上的事实。在这里，令人吃惊的是，圣保罗以如此简单和毫不犹豫的直率面对这一巨大困难，这一困难在任何时候、任何地方都是福音被接受的最严重障碍——传教士的信息被他的百姓拒绝。他没有回避它，没有为此道歉，也没有试图掩盖其重要性。他明确清晰大胆地阐述了它；他把它作为他信息真实性的论据之一。这是预言的实现。然后，他拿出了确凿的证据，即使徒们见证的、先知们预言的复活。这是应许的实现。
在第三部分中，他向所有接受饶恕的人宣告饶恕的信息，并严肃警告拒绝饶恕将产生的后果。我们在这里可以看到圣保罗在犹太教堂布道的五个要素：

1. 诉诸过去，试图通过他和他的听众共同的真理陈述来赢得认同。
2. 这是一个事实的陈述，是一个可以被理解、领悟、接受、争论或证明的事物的断言。
3. 对于不可避免的反对意见和本能的抗议，答案是：布道者本国中最聪明、最有思想、最有正义感的人，都决定反对这里提出的主张。
4. 这是对人类灵性需求的呼吁，对饶恕的渴望，以及在新的教义中可以找到平安和信心的令人欣慰的保证。
5. 最后，是严厉的警告。拒绝上帝的信息会带来严重的危险。

这个福音与圣保罗最后一次向以弗所长老们讲话（徒20：17-35）时所记述的内容完全一致。主要内容包括：神的属性，独一、活生生的、充满愛心的；耶稣基督、神的儿子、死亡、复活的生平事实：意义及其满足人类灵性需求的力量；偶像崇拜的愚蠢；救赎之道：悔改和相信；天国的教义；审判的临近。
我们很容易理解，这样的福音会如何吸引圣保罗的听众。对于那些在多神教的相互冲突的主张和混乱的教义中，寻求世界本质和思想统一的人，福音带来了一种既简单又深刻的教义，即一个真实而又活生生的神，万物的创造者。
对于那些寻求对世界、其本质和终结进行合理解释的人们，福音揭示了一种道德目的，在这一目的的光照下，所有的困惑、不确定性和明显的矛盾都化解为一种神圣的和谐。
对于那些具有高尚道德本能、对周围社会的不纯洁感到震惊和沮丧的人们，福音提供了道德判断的保证。
对于那些被罪恶感所压迫的人们，福音带来了饶恕和释放的保证。
对于那些受压迫的、悲伤的、绝望的人们，福音打开了通往光明和自由王国的大门。
对于那些被邪恶灵魂的恐惧吓坏了的人，福音揭示了一种仁慈、警惕、永远存在、无所不能、只需一句话就能驱除黑暗力量的圣灵。
对于不满于偶像崇拜的人们，福音教导他们纯洁地侍奉唯一的真神。
对于那些想象力被恩典的恐怖和黑暗所淹没的人们，福音保证了在复活的主的福祉与和平中超越恩典的未来。
对于需要支持的弱者、被邪恶的锁链束缚的罪人、无法应对异教环境中低迷的道德的人们，福音带来了内在力量属灵的应许。
对于孤独的人，福音提供了友好的温暖和陪伴，所有人都热切地期盼着光明的一天，恩典会降临，这个世界的一切困惑和烦恼都会消失。难怪圣保罗所传的福音如此吸引人，激发了人们的想象力，让他们充满希望，并赋予他们力量去面对迫害。
一个人一旦有了信仰，他的生命就在于与基督的联合。因此，这意味着接受新的生命源泉。这意味着依靠基督来供应和维持生命。这意味着放弃旧的生命观念，甚至放弃生命本身。 就像他以前所知道的那样。这意味着抛弃所有以前的东西。
被拒绝的可能性始终存在。圣保罗并没有在一个地方站稳脚跟，然后继续向那些拒绝按照他的教导行事的人传道多年。一旦他把他们带到了一个地步， 当决定很明确时，他要求他们做出选择。如果他们拒绝他，他就拒绝他们。 ‘抖着衣襟’ 、 ‘跺下脚上的尘土’ （注：参尼5：13，太10：14）、拒绝教导那些拒绝按照教导行事的人，是保罗传福音的重要组成部分。他不是简单地‘走开’ ，而是公开拒绝那些表明自己不配接受他教导的人。福音的一部分就是让人们‘判断自己不配得永生’ 。这是一个需要认真考虑的问题，如果忽略这一要素，福音是否还能被真正地传扬出去。当遭受拒绝还在继续教导，那这还是一种真正的教导吗？(Can there be a true teaching which does not involve the refusal to go on teaching?) 如果我们继续在拒绝道德回应的地方进行教导，我们便停止了传福音；我们只是把教导变成了一种理智教育。这就是为什么我们在学校和禅修院中对福音的教导得再多，也是徒劳无功的。我们教导，但我们不以道德的方式教导。我们不要求道德回应。我们害怕抖动衣襟（注：参尼5：13）这一道义上应由我们承担的责任。如果学生拒绝关注我们，我们应该拒绝对他进行理智教导。我们同样可以拒绝对拒绝关注我们信仰的学生进行信仰教学。
悔改和相信是他布道的关键。悔改时，他们承认自己过去的过错；相信时，他们作为基督身体的肢体得到饶恕。悔改时，他们认识到自己的软弱；相信时，他们通过基督之灵的管理找到力量。悔改时，他们承认自己所走的路是一条死亡之路；相信时，他们在基督的国度中找到了生命之路。悔改时，他们与罪恶的世界决裂；相信时，他们进入教会。

*摘录自罗兰·艾伦 (Roland Allen) 所著《传教方法：圣保罗的还是我们的？》出版地：Grand Rapids, Michigan，出版社： Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2001. 62-77.

The Substance of St Paul’s Preaching

Roland Allen

• The author Roland Allen (1868-1947) was an Anglican missionary in China from 1895 to 1903. For a few years afterward he was in charge of an English parish. For the next 40 years he was writing on missionary principles.

Of St Paul’s preaching we have in the Acts three examples, the sermon at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13: 16-41), the speech at Lystra (Acts 14: 15-17), and the speech at Athens (Acts 17: 22-31). We have also five incidental references to its substances: a description given by the soothsaying girl at Philippi (Acts 16: 17), a summary of his teaching in the synagogue at Thessalonica (Acts 17: 2, 3), a not of the points which struck the Athenians in the Agora as strange made by the Town Clerk at Ephesus (Acts 19:37), and the reiteration the Ephesian elders (Acts 20: 21). Besides these, we have an account of his preaching at Corinth given by St Paul himself in his first Epistle to that Church (1 Cor 2: 2). These accounts are naturally divided into two classes: the preaching in the synagogue, and the preaching to the Gentiles.
The sermon is divided into three parts by dramatic appeals to the attention of his hearers.
In the first, St Paul builds upon the past history of the Jewish race and shows that his Gospel is rooted there, that in his message there is no casting away of the things familiar, no denial of the truth of the old revelation made to the Fathers; but rather that the whole history of Israel is the divinely ordered preparation for the new revelation in the Messiah.
In the second, he sets forth the facts of the coming and rejection of Jesus and His consequent crucifixion. Here it is startling with what simple and unhesitating directness St Paul faces at once this great difficulty, the difficult with has at all times everywhere been the most serious hindrance in the way of the acceptance of the Gospel—the rejection of the missionary’s message by his own people. He does not shrink from it, it does not apologize for it, he does not attempt to conceal weight. He sets it forth definitely, clearly, boldly; he makes it part of his argument for the truth of his message. It is the fulfilment of prophecy. Then he produces his conclusive proof, the Resurrection, witnessed by the apostles, foretold by the prophets, the fulfilment of the promise.
In the third part, he proclaims his message of pardon for all who will receive it, and utters a solemn warning of the consequences which will follow its rejection.
We may see here five elements and four characteristics of St Paul’s preaching in the synagogue. The five elements are there:

1. An appeal to the past, an attempt to win sympathy by a statement of truth common to him and his hearers.
2. There is a statement of facts, an assertion of things which can be understood, apprehended, accepted, disputed, or proved.
3. There is the answer to the inevitable objection, to the instinctive protests, that all the wisest and most thoughtful and most judicial minds among the speaker’s own people have decided against the claims here made.

1. There is the appeal to the spiritual needs of men, to the craving for pardon, and the comforting assurance that in the new teaching may be found peace and confidence.
2. Finally, there is the grave warning. The rejection of God’s message involves serious danger. The way of salvation may be refused, and is commonly refused, but not without peril.

This Gospel accords perfectly with the account with St Paul gives of his preaching in his last address to the Ephesian elders. The main elements include: The nature of God, one, living, personal loving; the facts of the life of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the death, the resurrection: the meaning and their power to supply the spiritual needs of men; the folly of idolatry; the way of salvation: repentance and faith; the doctrine of the kingdom; the nearness of judgment.
We can easily understand how such a Gospel would appeal to the minds of St Paul’s hearers. To those who, among the conflicting claims and confused teachings of polytheism, were seeking for some unity in the world nature and of thought, St Paul brought a doctrine, at once simple and profound, of one personal God living and true, the Creator of all.
To men who sought for some intelligent account of the world, its nature and its end, St Paul revealed a moral purpose in the light of which all the perplexities, uncertainties, and apparent contradictions, resolved themselves into a divine harmony.
To men of high moral instincts, appalled and dismayed at the impurity of society around them, St Paul offered the assurance of a moral judgment.
To men oppressed by the sense of sin he brought the assurance of pardon and release.
To the downtrodden, the sad, the hopeless, he opened the door into a kingdom of light and liberty.
To those who were terrified by the fear of malignant spirits he revealed a Spirit benignant, watchful and ever present, all-powerful and able at a word to banish the power of darkness.
To men dissatisfied with the worship of idols he taught the pure service of one true God.
To people whose imaginations were overwhelmed by the terrors and darkness of the grace he gave the assurance of a future beyond the grace in the bliss and peace of the Risen Lord.
To the weak who needed support, to sinners bound with the chain of vice, to people unable to cope with the depressed morality of their heathen surroundings, he brought the promise of an indwelling Spirit of power.
To the lonely he offered the friendly warmth and society of a company all eagerly looking forward to a bright day when Grace would come and this world with all its perplexities and troubles pass away. It is no wonder that this Gospel of St Paul appealed to men, fired their imaginations, filled them with hope, and strengthened them with power to face persecution.
The moment a man had faith, life for him consisted in union with Christ. Consequently, it meant the acceptance of a new source of life. It meant dependence upon Christ for the supply and maintenance of life. It meant the abandonment of the old conception of life, nay, or the very life itself as he before knew it. It meant the casting away of all the former things.
The possibility of rejection was ever present. St Paul did not establish himself in a place and go on preaching for years to men who refused to act on his teaching. When once he had brought them to a point where decision was clear, he demanded that they should make their choice. If they rejected him, he rejected them. The ‘shaking of the lap’, the ‘shaking of the dust from the feet’, the refusal to teach those who refused to act on the teaching, was a vital part of the Pauline presentation of the Gospel. He did not simply ‘go away’, he opened rejected those who showed themselves unworthy of his teaching. It was part of the Gospel that men might ‘judge themselves unworthy of eternal life’. It is a question which needs serious consideration whether the Gospel can be truly presented if this element is left out. Can there be a true teaching which does not involve the refusal to go on teaching? The teaching of the Gospel is not a mere intellectual instruction: it is a moral process, and involves a moral response. If then we go on teaching where that moral response is refused, we cease to preach the Gospel; we make the teaching a mere education of the intellect. This is why so much of our teaching of the Gospel in schools and zenanas is ineffective. We teach, but we do not teach morally. We do not demand moral response. We are afraid to take the responsibility which morally rests upon us of shaking the lap. We should refuse to give intellectual teaching to a pupil if he refused to give us his attention: we might equally refuse to give religious teaching to a pupil who refused to give us religious attention.
Repentance and faith are the keynotes of his preaching. In repentance they confess their past wrongdoing; in faith they find forgiveness as members of Christ’s Body. In repentance they recognize the weakness; in faith they find strength by the administration of the Spirit of Christ. In repentance they confess the way in which they have walked is a way of death; in faith they find in the Kingdom of Christ the way of life. In repentance they break with a sinful world; in faith they enter the Church.

• Excerpt from Roland Allen, Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours? Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2001. 62-77.