Browsing "Default"
Jun 16, 2022 - Default    No Comments

Hebrews 希伯來書的作者是誰?

“Both Clement of Alexandria (革利免, c. AD 150 – 215) and Origen (俄利根, AD 185 – 253) claimed a Pauline association for the book but recognized that Paul himself probably did not put pen to paper for this book, even though they did not know the author’s name. Clement of Alexandria suggests that Paul wrote the book originally in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek, though the Greek of Hebrews bears no resemblance to translation Greek (e.g., that of the Septuagint).” (https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/who-wrote-the-book-of-hebrews)

 

Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.14.2-3, citing Clement’s Hypotyposes

2. He (Clement) says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is the work of Paul, and that it was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language; but that Luke translated it carefully and published it for the Greeks, and hence the same style of expression is found in this epistle and in the Acts.

3. But he says that the words, Paul the Apostle, were probably not prefixed, because, in sending it to the Hebrews, who were prejudiced and suspicious of him, he wisely did not wish to repel them at the very beginning by giving his name.

Reference: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.xi.xiv.html

Jun 16, 2022 - Default    No Comments

使徒約翰的學生

使徒約翰的學生

  • Ignatius of Antioch (伊格那修, 35-107 AD)
  • Polycarp (坡旅甲, 69-155 AD)
  • Papias (帕皮亞, 60-130 AD)


“Both Ignatius (伊格那修) and Polycarp (坡旅甲) were the disciples of John (使徒約翰). In fact there is this great legend in church history that as Ignatius was John’s disciple, and Polycarp was John’s disciple, then Polycarp was also Ignatius’ disciple.
Polycarp would go on to disciple Irenaeus (愛任紐).” (https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts/5-minutes-in-church-history-with-stephen-nichols/two-disciples-of-john-polycarp)


“According to the second century Bishop Irenaeus (愛任紐) of Lyons, Papias (帕皮亞) was a hearer of John the Apostle (使徒約翰).” (https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Papias)

Jun 2, 2022 - Default    No Comments

代贖的必須性

“第一個稱為假設必須論 (hypothetical necessity),第二個稱為 結果的 絕對必須論 (consequent absolute necessity)。前者是著名人物如奧古斯丁 (Augustine) 和亞奎 (Thomas Aquinas) 的主張,後者則算是較傳統的基督教立場 (加爾文, 基督教要義, II.16.5)。

假設必須論主張不需要用代贖或補償 (satisfaction) 去赦免罪惡和拯救被揀選的人。神可以用多種他法,因為他是無所不能的。但神以恩典和至高無上的智慧所選擇的方法是神子代替犧牲獻祭,因為這方法能同時引發最多的好處,又更能彰顯神恩典的奇妙。所以,雖然神「可以」不用代贖來救人,但按着神至高無上的旨意,他實際上沒有這樣做。若不流血,就實際上沒有赦罪或救恩。不過,神的本性或赦罪的本質不是要求非流血不可的。

“第二個說法稱為 結果的 絕對必須論。「結果的」(consequent) 這用辭在此指出神救任何人的旨意或預旨都是出於自由的、主權的恩典 (換句話說:神的旨意所導致的結果)。拯救失喪的人,不是神絕對必須做的,卻是全權的意旨所喜悅做的。然而,「絕對必須性」(absolute necessity) 這個術語表示神既按着他意旨所喜悅的揀選了一些人得永生,因着他本性的完全,他就必須用他兒子的犧牲獻祭來達成救人的目的。總而言之,雖然神並無內在的必須去救人,但是自從他已計劃救恩後,他就必須用替代的獻祭和血價的買贖作救償來成就這救恩。”

John Murray – Redemption Accomplished and Applied
再思救贖奇恩https://wellsofgrace.com/gospel/books/zaisi/

 

Consequent Absolute Necessity
結果的 絕對必須論
神的旨意所導致的結果的 絕對必須論
神旨意之後果的 絕對必須論
神旨所致的 絕對必須論
神旨意的 絕對必須論
神定意的 絕對必須論

Jun 2, 2022 - Default    No Comments

Absolute Consequent Necessity

“The atonement is an absolute consequent necessity. By that, we mean that God was not obligated to redeem His people, but once He had chosen to do so (by His own will and for HIs good pleasure) the atonement became absolutely necessary. It was consequent to His decree, but necessary. That also means that there is no other way for God to be both just and the justifier of sinners.” (fredtgreco)

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/the-necessity-of-the-atonement.12390/

Pages:1234567...115»