目錄
1-理論與講道
|
2-德行與講道
|
3-神學與講道
|
4-經文分析與講道
|
4-經文分析與講道
textual analysis and preaching
homiletical Ananlysis
釋經講道的分析
| kaiser_chapter_7 講道分析.pdf |
| 亞當斯_ch5-6 目的性講道.pdf |
講道中最常發生，會造成災難性後果的，沒有比未能確定講道經文段落的telos目的 (主題-中心思想)還嚴重的事。當其目的尚未被確定時，這段經文，以及神的話語本身，就被曲解、被誤用和被不當地處理了。其直接結果，是失去了經文的力道和權威。我們要對傳道人這樣說：「掌握經文的目的！在你所做的一切專研中，必須要掌握住該經文段落的目的（主題-中心思想）。」除非你確定已經理解到為什麼聖靈把那段經文放在聖經中時，你絕不能用那一段經文去講道。-亞當斯 J. E. Adams
請參考：柴培爾《以基督為中心的講道》Christ Centered Preaching 130-131頁
以弗所書釋經講道實際操練：
|
|
|
|
DETERMINING THE PREACHING PORTION
第5章【決定講道的經文段落】 But how do you know what Scripture to choose for a sermon? And, even if you can decide upon a general area, how do you determine how much of that area to use as a preaching portion? Again, the answer lies in purpose. 但是，你如何知道要選擇哪些經文來講道呢？ 而且，即使你可以決定一個大概的經文段落，你如何確定該經文段落中，有多少地方可以用來作講道的經文呢？ 同樣，答案在於「目的」。 “Do I begin with the preaching portion or the congregation?" The answer to that very important question is that you must begin with both, but with an emphasis on the congregation. If you are selecting individual Scripture portions that are not in succession-a very legitimate way to preach when done properly-then you must always have the congregation in mind. You do not merely preach about whatever may happen to intrigue you. That is not a legitimate purpose in preaching. ' Remember, your purpose is to honor God by building up His church. It is their needs, failures, opportunities, etc., that should impel you to choose as you do each week. Your purpose in preaching is to edify the flock. 「我是從講道經文段落開始，還是從會眾的需要開始？」此非常重要的問題之答案是，你必須從兩者開始，但要著重於會眾的需要。如果你要選擇的是個別的經文，而不是連續的經文——如果做很好的話，這是一個非常合法的講道方式，那麼你必須始終牢記著會眾的需要。你不是要傳授僅僅是引起你自己興趣的東西，這不是傳道的合法目的。[1]「請記住，你的目的是要透過建立他的教會來榮耀上帝。應該是他們的需要，失敗，機會等等，促使你每週一次選擇[講道的經文]。 你宣講的目的是要使主的羊群得到餵養。 On the other hand, if you are preaching consecutively through a Bible book, or through a long section (e.g., the Sermon on the Mount), then you do not make weekly selections (though you will remains); the very you will consider each week of what have to determine how much course that you have set for yourself determines that. Yet even here you should keep in mind that when you originally selected this long section or book, your selection should have been made on the basis of the congregation's needs. 另一方面，如果你通過一本聖經書卷作連續的講道，或者通過一個長的經文段落（例如登山寶訓），那麼你就不需要每週選擇講道的經文了（儘管你還會如此作）； 你每週都會有要考慮的經文，這決定了你為自己設定的路線。 然而，即使在這裡，你也應該記住，當你最初選擇這段經文或整卷書時，你的選擇應該是根據會眾的需要做出的。 There is a seemingly "pious" approach that says, "I'll take a book and, in that way, let God tell me what to preach." Fine. There is certainly nothing wrong with preaching through Bible books; indeed, there are quite a few advantages in doing so. Probably this way of preaching ought to comprise the bulk of one's preaching. But it is no more "pious" or "spiritual" to use that method than to select, on your own, a new preaching portion for each sermon. After all, who selects the Bible book? Some of the worst mistakes of all are made in this way (e.g., Revelation for Sunday morning, Daniel for Sunday night, and Ezekiel for Wednesday hardly provide a congregation with a balanced diet!). When you are stuck with a whole book, unwisely selected, you are really stuck! Once chosen, if the choice is bad, it commits a preacher to a long a course of error and failure.[2] 2 有一種看似「虔誠」的方法是說：「我會拿一卷書來講道，這樣，讓上帝告訴我要講什麼。」 好的！ 通過一卷書來傳講信息當然沒有錯。 確實，這樣做有很多好處。 一個人講道的大部分內容，應該包含這樣的講道方式。 但是，使用這種方法並不比為每次講道都靠自己，選擇一個新的講道經文段落更「虔誠」或「屬靈」。 畢竟，是誰選擇了這卷書？ 一些最嚴重的錯誤就是這樣犯下的（例如，週日早上的啟示錄、週日晚上的但以理書和周三的以西結書幾乎不能為會眾提供均衡的飲食！）。 當你被整本書卡住了，不明智地選擇了，你真的卡住了！ 一旦作了選擇，如果選擇不好，就會使傳道人陷入長期的錯誤和失敗中。 2 However, having wisely chosen a series of studies in a book, then it is easier to bring up difficult or delicate matters as the book does so, it is easier to avoid riding one's own personal hobbies, and it saves you the hard work of finding passages on a weekly basis, That in itself can become a frustrating chore.[3]" Well, then, if I must always begin with a consideration of what will edify the congregation, choosing (at least) the Bible book from which I intend to preach in the light of their needs and circumstances, that requires me to analyze my congregation with accuracy. How do I learn to do that?" That is an important question that must be deferred until a later chapter. For now, we must discuss the matter of the preaching portion in depth. 但是，明智地選擇一本書中的一系列研究，那麼就會比較容易地，像該聖經書卷那樣提出許多困難的或細微的事，也會更容易地避免受到自己個人的愛好所驅使，並且省去了每週要尋找講道經文的辛苦工作。 每週一段不同的書卷，這本身就是一件令人沮喪的苦差事。3 「那麼，如果我必須始終考慮什麼會造就會眾，那麼（至少）從我打算根據他們的需要和情況來宣講，這需要我準確地分析我的會眾。 我要如何學習做到呢？」這是一個重要的問題，必須延遲到後面的章節再討論。現在，我們必須深入討論講道經文段落的問題。 Let us assume, for simplicity's sake, that you have selected a longer portion from which to preach a Bible book or a unit of a book large enough that you won't be able to preach on the whole in one sermon. In such a case, the question naturally arises, "How do I divide it into preaching-sized portions?" Is division an arbitrary matter? Is it determined by the clock on Sunday morning? No. Absolutely not. "Well, then, how do I single out a 'preaching portion,' as you seem to prefer to call it?" Again, you must make your divisions of the book or unit strictly ON the basis of purpose. 為簡單起見，讓我們假設你選擇了較長的經文段落，來宣講一卷書或一卷書中的一個單元，因它的篇幅大，以至於你無法在一次佈道中講完全部內容。 在這種情況下，自然會產生一個問題：「我如何將它分成適合講道的段落部分呢？」 分段是武斷隨便的嗎？ 它是由星期天早上的時鐘決定的嗎？ 不，絕對不是。 「那麼，我該如何挑出一個『講道段落』（preaching portion）？」 同樣地，你必須嚴格地根據「目的」(telos) 對書卷或單元進行段落分割。 Telic Cues The entire Bible, and any book or portion thereof, may be viewed from the perspective of its telos (the New Testament word for "purpose, end, goal, objective"). As a whole, the Bible has a purpose: speaking ultimately, we know that its telos is to glorify God.5 Less ultimately, Jesus said that the Bible's purpose is to help men to love God and their neighbors properly. These purposes, fulfilled, lead to the ultimate one. More proximately speaking, we may mention the purposes (tele) detailed in I Timothy 3:15-17; these purposes, fulfilled, cause men to love God and neighbors. These overarching tele must be kept in mind at all times when considering the telos of any Bible book or lesser portion from it. Every message preached ought to have its relationship to the greater telos or tele in which the preaching portion is found. This process of discovering, recognizing, and using tele within tele continues downward until you select the preaching portion itself: 目的之線索（Telic Cues） (譯者註：目的=主題=中心思想 main point) 整本聖經，以及任何一卷書或其中的一部分，都可以從它的telos（telos 特拉斯-這個字是新約中的希臘用語，意思是：「目的purpose、目的end、目標goal、標的objective」）的角度來看。 總的來說，聖經有一個目的：歸根究底，我們知道其目的就是榮耀神。[4] 最後，耶穌說聖經的目的是幫助人們正確地愛神和他們的鄰舍。 這些目的一旦實現，就會導致終極目的。 更直接地說，我們可以想到提摩太前書 3:15-17 中詳述的目的（tele）； 這些目的一旦實現，就會使人愛神和愛鄰舍。 在考慮任何聖經書卷或其中較小部分的目的時，必須始終牢記這些首要目的。所傳講的每一個信息，都應該與傳講的那部分經文所具有的更大的目的或目的有關係。 這種發現、看出，和使用目的中的目的之過程，會繼續往下走，直到你所選擇的要傳講的信息的那段經文。
Each Bible book has its telos and its tele. For instance, the Gospel
of John was written with an overall evangelistic telos: Now Jesus did many other signs in the disciples' presence that aren't written in this book, but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, God's Son, and that by believing you may have eternal life in His name (John 20:30, 31). On the other hand, its sequel, I John, was written for an edificational purpose (to bring assurance to converts): 聖經中每一卷書都有它的「多重目的」和「目的」。 例如，約翰福音是帶著一個整體的福音目的所寫成的： 現在耶穌在門徒面前做了許多其他的神蹟，這些神蹟沒有寫在這本書裡，但寫這些神蹟是為了讓你相信耶穌是基督，神的兒子，並且相信你可以奉他的名得永生 （約翰福音 20:30, 31）。 另一方面，它的續集《約翰一書》是為了造就（edification）目的而寫的（為已歸信的人帶來保證）： I have written these things to you who believe in the Name of God's Son that you may know that you have eternal life (I John 5:13). Jude tells us the telos of his book in verse 3. It is interesting to note how Jude discusses purpose. Originally, he tells us, he had an entirely different telos in mind when he thought of writing. But news of false teachers and the effect they were having on the church motivated him to change his telos. 猶大書在第 3 節告訴我們他的書的目的。有趣的是，猶大是如何論述他寫書的目的。 他告訴我們，最初，當他想到寫作時，他的目的是完全不同的。 但是假教師的消息和他們對教會的影響促使他改變了他的目的。 The telos or tele of a Bible book is not always spelled out so clearly. 聖經書卷的多重目的或目的並不總是會被清楚地說明出來。 6. Of course, at any stage, a sermon could have been preached. Stages one to five could each a have been considered a preaching portion since each constitutes unit. 6. 當然，在任何階段，都可以講道。從第一到第五階段，每個 階段都可以被考慮作為一個講道的經文段落，因為每個階段是構成的單元。 By the writer. Often you must discover these for yourself. For instance, John doesn't say in so many words that the telos of his second letter is to warn against extending hospitality to false teachers, or that the telos of the third letter is to encourage Gaius that he has been right in extending hospitality to true teachers, despite Diotrephes' words and actions, but a study of these two writings makes this clear. 按照作者。 通常，您必須自己發現這些。 例如，約翰並沒有說他第二封信的目的是警告不要接待假教師，或者第三封信的目的是鼓勵該猶，儘管丟特腓不當的言行舉止，他還是接待了那些真教師們是正確的。真正的教師，但對這兩部著作加以研究，會清楚地看到這一點。 On the other hand, a careful study of Philippians indicates that there were at least four major tele behind the writing of that letter: 1. To thank the church for its gift. 2. To ease their concern over Epaphroditus' health. 3. To explain Paul's imprisonment;" 4. To deal with the split in the church. When preaching from Philippians, then, you must keep not only the general purposes of the Bible before you, and the more proximate ones, but the particular one of the four purposes in which your preaching portion is found. That means, for example, that the great christological passage in Philippians 2 ought never be preached in the abstract, totally unrelated to the practical issue of unity of which it forms a part. And even that matter of unity must be oriented to the larger tele to which the whole Bible addresses itself (that is to say, unity is not to be urged because it is pleasant, or better for all concerned, but because of its effect on God's church, which in turn has an effect on the honor of His Name). 另一方面，對腓立比書的仔細研究表明，寫這封信的背後至少有四個主要的目的telos： 1. 感謝教會的奉獻。 2. 減輕他們對以巴弗地健康的擔憂。 3. 解釋保羅被監禁的原因； 4. 處理教會的分裂。 因此，當你從腓立比書講道時，你不僅必須將聖經的一般目的和更接近的目的放在你面前，而且還要將你的講道部分所在的四個目的中的特定目的之一保留在你面前。這意味著，例如，腓立比書第2章中偉大的基督論經文不應該抽像地傳講，與它所構成的合一的實際問題完全無關。甚至連合一的問題也必須指向整本聖經所針對的更大的目標（也就是說，要求催促合一，不是因為它是令人愉快的，或者對所有相關的人都更好，而是因為它影響到神的教會，這反過來，又會影響到神的名的榮耀）。 Determining the Spirit's telos of a passage is one of the most important obligations in preaching, perhaps the greatest of all, about which I shall have more to say in the next chapter. But, for now, let me say that a failure to do so constitutes an affront to the Holy Spirit. 確定一段經文的聖靈的目的(the Spirit’s telos)，是講道中最重要的責任之一，也許是最重要的責任，我將在下一章更多地談到這一點。 但是，就目前而言，讓我說，若不這樣做，就會成為對聖靈的一種冒犯。 Now, let us see how purpose (telos) is the determining factor in the selection of the preaching portion. All arbitrary factors in selecting the amount of Scripture from which to preach a given sermon must be abandoned. Blackwood, for instance, used to say, "Preach on a paragraph." While you may often find yourself doing so, that is not what you will always be doing, nor is it a good rule even most of the time. It is too arbitrary. In the historical books, you may find that you must preach on a chapter--or even two! When preaching in Proverbs, you will often preach on a verse. 現在，讓我們看看目的（telos）如何成為選擇講道部分的決定因素。 必須摒棄在選擇講道的聖經範圍時所有武斷的因素。 例如，Blackwood曾經說過，「用一段經文來講道」。 雖然您可能經常發現自己都是這樣做的，但這不會是你將一直做的事，即使在大多數情況下，這也不是一個好的規則。 太武斷了。 在歷史書中，你可能會發現你必須用一章，甚至兩章的經文來講道！ 在講箴言書時，你經常會用一節經文來講道。 What, then, is the determining factor? Purpose. You may preach on any purpose unit-regardless of its length. Purpose is what defines a preaching unit. If the Holy Spirit has determined to do something specific by means of a unit of material devoted to that particular purpose, then it is clear that it may (must) be preached in order to achieve that very purpose. 那麼，決定因素是什麼？ 是「目的」（purpose）。 你可以以任何經文單位來講道，無論其經文長度如何。 目的是定義講道單位的東西。 如果聖靈已經決定，要藉著某部分的經文，來做特定的事，該部分的經文就是具有它特殊的目的的。那麼，很明顯，這段經文就必須被傳講處理，為了要達到這個特別的目的。 7. For more on this point, see my book, How to Handle Trouble. 7. 有關這一點的更多資料，請參閱我的書《如何處理問題》。 Because a purpose, or telic unit, determines the preaching unit, it is possible to preach on the telos of an entire book or on any sub-tele; sub, sub-tele; sub, sub, sub-tele, etc. So long as a portion of the Scriptures is defined as a unit devoted to producing a particular effect (i.e., achieving a specific purpose), it is proper to preach on it. 因為是目的(purpose)或目的單元(telic unit)決定講道的單元（preaching unit），所以有可能按照整本書的「目的」，或任何「子-目的」； 「子，子-目的」 「子, 子, 子-目的」 等，來講道。只要聖經的某一部分，被界定為一個產生特定的果效的單元（即：實現特定目的），就可以用它來講道。 Often homileticians have stressed unity as important to a sermon, but, again, they have done so arbitrarily, by fiat. The reason why a sermon ought to treat one major subject, thus creating and preserving unity, is not for literary reasons balance, symmetry, and the like- but in order to focus on and remain true to the purpose or intention of the Holy Spirit. When you get a hold on some purpose that He had in view, and make that the purpose of your sermon, it is the Holy Spirit's intention that brings unity to the sermon, not some extraneous, arbitrary factor or rhetorical canon. 講道者經常強調統一性(unity)對講道很重要，但通過這個命令，他們的做法，還是武斷的。 講道之所以應該處理一個主要主題，因此而創造出和保持了統一性，這不是出於文體上的平衡、對稱等原因，而是為了專注於，並保持對聖靈的目的或意圖的忠誠。 當你抓住了祂所考慮的某個目的，並將其作為你講道的目的時，是聖靈的意圖使講道變得統一，而不是一些無關緊要的、武斷的因素或修辭規範。 "But, you may ask, "when you speak of a telic, or purpose, unit, just what are you talking about?" The answer to that crucial question will take us into the next chapter. 但是，你可能會問，「當你講到一個 telic 或目的purpose、單元時，你到底在說什麼？」這個關鍵問題的答案將帶我們進入下一章。 Class Assignment: Divide the Book of Jude into preaching portions according to tele. Be prepared to show how each portion you have isolated is a telic unit. Relate each sub-telos to the overall telos of the book. 課堂作業： 根據目的tele將猶大書分成不同的講道段落部分。 準備好展示你分割出來的每個部分是如何成為一個目的單元 telic unit。 將每個子目的 sub-tuelos與本書的整體目標聯繫起來。 DETERMINING THE TELOS 第6章 【決定目的】 There are few deficiencies in preaching quite so disastrous in their effect as the all-too-frequently occurring failure to determine the telos (or purpose) of a preaching portion. The passage, and therefore the Word of God itself, is misrepresented, misused, and mishandled when its purpose has not been determined, with the direct result that its power and its authority are lost. For the preacher we may say, "'Get the telos; in all your getting, get the purpose." You must never preach on a passage until you are certain you understand why the Holy Spirit included that passage in the Bible. When you have grasped His purpose, what He intended to do to the recipient of His message, then -and then only_-do you have the purpose for your sermon, and then--and then only--do you know what God wants you to do to your listeners through it. Everything in the sermon the organization of the material into an outline, the style (language usage), the delivery (use of voice and body)-should contribute to, and therefore be conditioned by, the purpose; everything must further the Holy Spirit's intention in the passage. 講道中最常發生，會造成災難性後果的，沒有比未能確定講道經文段落的telos還嚴重的了。當其目的尚未確定時，這段經文，以及神的話語本身，就被曲解、被誤用和被不當地處理了，其直接結果，是失去了經文的力道和權威。我們要對傳道人這樣說：「掌握經文的目的；在你所做的一切研讀中，要掌握住經文段落的目的。」除非你確定，你已經理解到為什麼聖靈把那段經文放在聖經時，你絕不能去講那一段經文。當你掌握了祂[聖靈]的目的，就是祂打算要對那些領受祂的信息人作什麼事——然後，只有在那之後，你才掌握了講那篇道的目的——然後，只有在那之後，你才知道神想要你透過你的講道對你的聽眾做什麼。講道中的所有的東西：將材料組織成的大綱、講道的風格（用詞）、講道的表達（聲音和身體的使用） - 都應該有助於經文的目的，因此受制於經文的目的；一切都必須促進聖靈在經文中的意圖。 When I speak of the purpose or the telos of a preaching portion, I refer to the purpose that the Holy Spirit had when He "moved" the writer to pen the words of that passage. That purpose was broader than the immediate purpose in the writer's mind when writing to a particular person or church. Paul himself makes this point when he uses Old Testament passages in New Testament contexts: 當我談到講道經文段落的多重目的或目的時，我指的是聖靈「感動」聖經作者寫下這段話的目的。 在寫信給特定的人或教會時，這個目的比作者腦海中的直接目的更廣泛。 保羅自己在新約上下文中使用舊約經文時也指出了這一點： Now these events happened as examples for us so that we might not desire evil things as they did (I Cor. 10:6). 林前10:6「6 這些事都是我們的鑑戒，叫我們不要貪戀惡事，像他們那樣貪戀的」 Now these events happened to them as examples and were recorded as counsel for us who live at this late date in history (I Cor.10:11). 林前10:11「11 他們遭遇這些事都要作為鑑戒，並且寫在經上，正是警戒我們這末世的人。」 Note also his words in I Corinthians 9:9, 10: 注意到林前9:9-10這樣說： It is written in Moses' law, "Don't muzzle an ox when it is threshing. It isn't about oxen that God is concerned, is it? Isn't He really speaking about us? It was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes he should do so in hope of having a share of the crop. 林前9:9-10「9 就如摩西的律法記著說：『牛在場上踹穀的時候，不可籠住牠的嘴。』難道神所掛念的是牛嗎？10 不全是為我們說的嗎？分明是為我們說的。」 Paul himself determined that the telos of the Holy Spirit was broader than the situation to which the passage in Deuteronomy 25:4 originally was addressed. He saw that the Holy Spirit's intention in it was to teach a principle that was of greater value than when it was originally applied to oxen. The principle, stated in verse 10b is that the one who works at a task ought to share in its benefits. He clearly applies it to his day, when, in his own words, he writes in verse 14: 保羅他自己決定，聖靈的目的比申命記 25:4 最初提到的情況更廣泛。 他看出聖靈在其中的用意是要教導一個比最初應用於牛時更有價值的原則。 第 10b 節陳述的原則是，從事某項工作的人應該分享其利益。 他清楚地把它應用到他的時代，用他自己的話來說，他在第 14 節寫道： In the same way the Lord gave orders that those who announce the good news should live by announcing the good news (I Cor. 9:14). 林前9:14「14 主也是這樣命定，叫傳福音的靠著福音養生。」 So, it must be understood that when I say that the intention of the Holy Spirit must be discovered, I do not mean merely His intention in its limited application to an event at the time when the passage was written, but any and all valid applications that He intended to make from any principles that may be generalized from the basic thrust of the passage. The Holy Spirit does not intend for us to use a passage allegorically--finding hidden meanings in every word and generating all sorts of unintended principles from any given passage, but neither does He want us to landlock a principle so that it may be used only when a situation of exactly the same sort occurs in our day. No, it is only when a situation arises to which the telic principle (i.e., the one, and only the one, that the Holy Spirit had in mind in relationship to His purpose) applies that it is to be used. I shall have more to say on this matter. 所以，必須明白，當我說必須發現聖靈的意圖時，我並不是僅僅指祂的意圖，侷限地應用於寫作當時的這段時間所發生的事件，而是任何和所有有效的應用，都是聖靈打算從經文的基本主旨中，概括出來的任何原則中所得出這一點。 聖靈並不打算讓我們以寓意的方式使用一段經文——在每一個詞中尋找隱藏的含義，並從任何一段經文中產生各種並非意圖的原則。但聖靈也不希望我們鎖定一個原則，以便它可以僅在我們的時代發生完全相同的情況時才使用。 不，只有當一個目的性的原則（telic principle）（即聖靈在祂的目的中所想到的唯一且唯一的）適用的情況出現時，它才會被使用。 在這個問題上我還有更多話要說。 The thing to be avoided at all costs is to impose your own purposes on the passage. You must be extremely careful not to allow this to happen. Plainly, the history of preaching and sermon analysis shows that this is what has been done again and again. More often than not, if a sermon has a discernible purpose at all, that purpose turns out to be the preacher's purpose rather than the purpose of the Holy Spirit. What you must work for is to make His purpose your own. 要不惜一切代價避免的事，是將你自己的目的強加於經文段落。你必須非常小心，不要讓這種情況發生。很明顯，講道的歷史和對信息分析告訴我們，這是重複發生的做法。很多時候，如果一篇講道有一個明顯的目的，結果你會發現那個目的是講道者的目的，而不是聖靈的目的。 你必須為之努力的，是讓聖靈的目的成為你自己的目的。 To be just to any human writer, his purpose in a given writing must be considered, and purposes that he did not have in mind should not be attributed to him. This book, for instance, should not be used to set forth my views on pastoral counseling; it was not written for that purpose, and it would be misused, and I would be misrepresented by anyone who was foolish enough to do such a thing. I have written extensively on counseling; my views on the subject should be gleaned from those books, not from this one. do not expect someone to treat my writings that way; you would not think of doing that-it would be foolish and would yield strange and perverse results. And yet, that is precisely what preachers do with the writings of the Holy Spirit-not merely human writings all the time! If you carefully abide by the canon of using a purely human writing for the purposes for which it was intended, how much more careful should you be when using the writings of God? Because you are working in such sacred territory, be careful what you do! 為了對任何人類作者公正，必須考慮他在特定寫作中的目的，並且不應將他沒有想到的目的歸咎於他。例如，這本書不應該用來表達我對教牧輔導的看法；它不是為此目的而寫的。任何愚蠢到做這種事的人，都會濫用了這本書。我寫了大量關於輔導的文章；我對輔導的主題的看法應該到那些書中去收集，而不是從這本書中收集。不要指望有人這樣對待我的書；你不會想到這樣做——這是愚蠢的，而且會產生奇怪和反常的結果。然而，這正是傳道者對聖靈的著作所做的事情——[聖經]在所有的時候都不僅僅是人類的著作！如果你小心地遵守準則，使用純人類的著作，來達到該著作預期目的；那麼在使用上帝的文字時，你不應該更加小心嗎？因為你在如此神聖的領域工作，所以要小心你的所作所為！ The Holy Spirit, using human authors with the peculiarities of their style and vocabularies (providentially developed, to be sure), pre- served them from error in order to set forth the truth that He would use to achieve various purposes He had in mind. That is why it is our duty to become expert exegetes who lear how to determine His purpose in every passage before preaching it. Historical-grammatical exegesis is essential, but not enough. 聖靈使用具有獨特風格和用語的人類作者（可以肯定的是，這是神的護理下所發展出來的providentially developed），保護他們免於錯誤，以闡明祂將用來實現祂心中的各種目的的真理。 這就是為什麼我們有責任成為專家解經者，在講道之前學會如何確定聖靈在每段經文中的目的。 「歷史-文法解經」（Historical-grammatical exegesis）是必不可少的，但還不夠。 Biblical-theological and systematic-theological studies of the passage likewise are important but, again, are insufficient. Rhetorical and literary analyses (areas themselves rarely acknowledged and so usually ignored) are also significant but still do not go fare nough. The result of all the work done in these six ways will be uselessness, leading at length to frustration and to all sorts of possible harm if you do not go on to discern, from all those efforts, the telos of the passage. Indeed, all six of these important and essential efforts in studying the passage should be made telically. That is to say, there should be purpose in doing what is done. That purpose should be not merely to *'understand the passage,' if by that you mean to understand what the words mean, but should include the purpose of discovering purpose. 對這段經文在「聖經神學」（Biblical-theological）和「系統神學」（systematic-theological）上的研究同樣重要，但同樣是不夠的。 「修辭和文學分析」（Rhetorical and literary analyses）（這些領域本身很少被認可，因此通常被忽略）也是很重要的，但仍然沒有走得更遠。如果你不繼續從所有這些努力中辨別出經文的目的，那麼以這六種方式完成的所有工作的結果將是毫無用處的，最終導致挫折，和各種可能的傷害。 確實，所有這六個重要且必不可少的對經文研究的努力，都應該研究這段經文的目的。 也就是說，做這些事應該是有目的的。 如果你的意思是要理解這些詞的意思，那麼這個目的不應該僅僅是「理解經文」，還應該包括發現經文的目的。 It is only when a preacher knows he is saying what the Holy Spirit said, for the purpose of the Holy Spirit in saying it, that he speaks with power and with authority. This, in part, is what made the difference between Christ and the Pharisees: 只有當傳道人知道他所說的是聖靈所說的，是為了聖靈所說的目的，他才帶著能力和權柄說話。 這在一定程度上是造成基督和法利賽人不同的原因： And the result was that when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at His teaching since He taught them as an authority and not as their scribes (Matt. 7:28, 29). 太7:28-29「28 耶穌講完了這些話，眾人都希奇他的教訓。29 因為他教訓他們，正像有權柄的人，不像他們的文士。」 All through the preceding Sermon on the Mount, Jesus corrected the faulty use the scribes (religious teachers) had made of Old Testament Scriptures. That is what He was doing when He said, *You have heard… but I say. He was not setting His teaching over against Old Testament teaching; no, exactly not that. He was setting the true telos of the Old Testament passages that had been misused by the scribes over against their false interpretations and the wrong purposes for which they used them. 在整個的《登山寶訓》中，耶穌糾正了文士（猶太教教師）對舊約聖經的錯誤使用。 當他說，「你聽見有話說……只是我告訴你們」。 祂並沒有反對舊約教導； 不，完全不是這樣。他是說明舊約中一些經文的真正目的，這些經文被文士濫用了。祂是反對他們錯誤的解釋，以及他們應用上錯誤的目的。 A good example of this is found in Matthew 5:31,32. The Holy Spirit's purpose in Deuteronomy 24 was not to teach that bill of divorcement must be given, as the false teachers said. Rather, it was to control and discourage divorce and make clear that divorce on the wrong basis would set up conditions for committing adultery.[5] 馬太福音 5:31,32 就是一個很好的例子。 聖靈在申命記 24 章中的目的不是像假教師所說的那樣教導必須提出離婚協議書。 相反，它是為了控制和阻止離婚，並明確指出基於錯誤的離婚會為通姦創造條件。 The issue was the intention or purpose of the passage. Christ, unlike the scribes, revealed the telic import of Deuteronomy 24; in contrast, they had used the passage for their own ends. 問題是這段經文的意圖或目的。 與文士不同，基督揭示了申命記 24 章的重要意義； 相反，他們是為了自己的目的而利用這段經文。 This matter of purpose is such an important consideration in preaching that if your wife were to awaken you on Sunday morning at 4 o'clock and ask, "What is the purpose of this morning's message?" you ought to be able to rattle it off in one crisp sentence, roll over and go to sleep again, all without missing a single stroke in your snoring! Indeed, I think it would be advisable for you to write out at the top of every sermon outline (I'll discuss the other purposes of the outline later) a one-sentence purpose statement. Until you can capsulize the purpose of the sermon in one crisp sentence, you probably do not yet has it clearly enough fixed in your own mind even if you think you do? 這個目的問題在講道中是一個非常重要的考慮因素，如果你的妻子在星期天早上 4 點叫醒你並問：「今天早上信息的目的是（中心思想）什麼？」 你應該能夠用一個清晰的句子把她的吵聲關掉，個身再去睡覺，這一切都不會錯過你的鼾聲！ 事實上，我認為你最好在每個講道大綱的頂部（我稍後會討論大綱的其他目的）寫下一個句子的目的陳述。 在你能用一句話概括你講道的目的之前，你可能還沒有在你的思路中，足夠清楚地抓住它，即使您認為自己已經做到了！ Fundamentally, there are three general purposes in view: to inform, to convince (to believe or disbelieve), or to motivate the members of the congregation in ways that will bring glory to God's Name by building up His church. Here is a typical purpose statement that might appear on the outline: "My purpose is to convince the congregation that Christ is at work in trouble for good.' Of course, the three general purposes may converge in a message, but when they do, one of the three will be uppermost. The specific purpose is what, specifically, the congregation should learn, believe/disbelieve, or do. 從根本上講，有三個一般性的目的：告知to inform、說服to convince（相信或不相信），或激勵教會的成員（to motivate the members of the congregation），以各種榮耀神的名的方式來建立祂的教會。 以下是大綱中可能出現的典型目的陳述：「我的目的是讓會眾相信基督為了良善的目的在患難中工作。」 當然，這三個一般性目的可能會在一個信息中匯合，但是當它們匯合時，三個中的一個將是最重要的。具體目的是會眾應該學習、相信/不相信或做什麼。 How are you to discover the Holy Spirit's telos in a passage of Scripture? Having done your work, you must ask, "Now, what does all this amount to?" More often than not, when you develop a telic concern, you will find yourself discovering the telos while you are involved in doing the exegesis. All along, at each step during every aspect of the process of preparation, you ought to have some such thought as this in mind: "Now, I wonder just what the Holy Spirit is up to in this passage?" If you do, the telos will come clear, usually during, but if not, almost always at the end of, the process of preparation. 你如何在一段經文中發現聖靈的目的(telos)？ 完成你的工作後，你必須問：「現在，這一切意味著什麼？」 很多時候，當你發展出一個目的性的關注點時，你會發現自己在參與解經的同時發現了這個目的。 一直以來，在準備過程的每一個環節，每一步，你都應該有這樣的想法：「現在，我不知道聖靈在這段話裡到底要做什麼？」如果你這樣做了，通常情況下，在準備過程中，目的會變得清晰，但如果不是，幾乎總是在準備過程的最後(經文的目的才會變得清楚)。 Then too, quite frequently you will discover in the passage what I like to call telic cues. These are cues to the purpose of a book or a passage that appears in the passage itself. Once you become aware of these cues to the purpose of a passage, you will begin to see them everywhere. Look at the telic cue in I Thessalonians 4:13: "Now, we don't want you to be ignorant, brothers, concerning... Clearly, that cue indicates a desire on the part of Paul/the Holy Spirit to inform. But, to provide information is not the sole purpose of the passage. We know that from the additional telic cue appended at the end: 然後，你也會經常在文章中發現我喜歡稱之為「目的的線索」（telic cues） 的東西。 這些是出現在經文段落本身中，關於一本書或一段經文的目的之線索。 一旦你意識到這些關於段落目的的線索，你就會開始在各處看到它們。 看看帖撒羅尼迦前書 4:13 中的 「目的線索」：「論到睡了的人，我們不願意弟兄們是無知的（另譯）……」很明顯，這個線索表明保羅/聖靈渴望告知。 但是，提供資訊並不是這段經文的唯一目的。我們從末了附加的「目的線索」中知道： encourage one another with these words." That shows a motivational concern. 帖前4:18，「18 所以，你們當用這些話彼此勸慰。」這表明了一種激勵性的考量。 Let's consider Luke 15, a passage that has commonly been misused because those misusing it have failed to recognize and take their cue from the telically oriented words at the outset (vv. 1-3): 讓我們來看看路加福音 15 章，這是一段經常被誤用的經文，因為那些誤用它的人一開始就沒有認識到，並沒有從朝向目的的字詞中去得到線索（1-3 節）： Now the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to Him. But the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, "This person welcomes sinners and eats with them." So, He told them this parable. 路15:1-3，「眾稅吏和罪人都挨近耶穌，要聽他講道。2 法利賽人和文士私下議論說：“這個人接待罪人，又同他們吃飯。”3 耶穌就用比喻說：」 You can see that the parables that follow are designed to expose the sin of those who grumbled over Christ's loving concern to save the outcasts of society. His purpose in Luke 15, though closely related to His evangelistic effort, was not to do evangelism, as so many have thought. It had to do rather with hindering the witness to the lost and the assimilation of new converts into the church. It is wrong to preach each of these parables separately because, as the context shows, they all hang together and because, together, they make an impact that can be made in no other way. Note, a similar pattern runs through each of the three parables: 1. Something is lost (a sheep, a coin, a son). 2. A search is made. 3. The item is found. 4. Everyone rejoices. 你可以看到，接下來的比喻，旨在揭露那些抱怨基督慈愛地拯救社會中被遺棄者的人所犯的罪。 祂在路加福音 15 章中的目的，雖然與祂傳福音的努力密切相關，但並不是像許多人所想的那樣傳福音。 相反的，祂的目的與阻礙對失喪者的見證，和納入新歸信者進入教會有關。 單獨個別地傳講這些比喻是錯誤的，因為如上下文所示，它們都聯繫在一起，因為它們共同產生了衝擊性的影響，是無法以其他方式產生的。 請注意，類似的模式貫穿於三個比喻中： 1. 丟失了一些東西（一隻羊、一枚硬幣、一個兒子）。 2. 進行搜索。 3. 找到該項目。 4. 每個人都很高興。 Surely the listeners could do nothing other than agree that that is how it is and, indeed, how it ought to be. But just as the Pharisees and the scribes were nodding assent for the third time, Jesus threw them a curve. He extended the third parable to reveal the sinful, selfish attitudes and actions of the elder brother, who, against all reason and love, was totally out of accord with the appropriate response. This brother, of course, represented the grumblers mentioned in verses1-3, who had been complaining about the kind of people Jesus was associating with. They complained, *This person welcomes sinners and eats with them" (v. 2). 當然，聽眾除了同意它是這樣的，事實上，它應該是這樣的，別無他法。 但就在法利賽人和文士第三次點頭表示同意的時候，耶穌帶他們繞了一個彎。 祂擴展了第三個比喻，揭示了大兒子的罪惡、自私的態度和行為，他違背了所有的理性和愛，他的回應是完全不符合適當的態度。 當然，這位弟兄代表了第 1-3 節中提到的抱怨者，他們一直在抱怨耶穌與什麼樣的人交往。 他們抱怨：「這個人接待罪人，又同他們一起吃飯」（第 2 節）。 The power and intent of the passage is lost when the parables are pried apart and, apart from their intended purpose, are used for evangelistic purposes. Surely, the gospel is in them as Christ "seeks and saves that which is lost," but that isn't the prime thrust. Convict- ing those snobbish and self-righteous parishioners who have problems in welcoming previously notorious and unkempt converts into the church would provide a much more appropriate use of the passage that lines up with its telic principle. 當這些比喻被撬開分離時，就失去了經文的力道和意圖，就把它們從預期目的分開了，這些比喻是用來達到傳福音的目的。 當然，當基督「尋找並拯救失喪的人」時，福音就在它們裡面，但這並不是主要的推動力。 而是要定罪那些勢利和自以為是的教區居民，他們有困難歡迎之前那些臭名昭著和蓬頭垢面的歸信者進入教會，這將會更恰當地使用經文段落，符合其目的性的原則（telic principle）。 It is possible, of course, to preach on sub-tele so long as (1) there are sub-tele in the passage (there do not seem to be any in Luke 15), (2) you do so in a way that recognizes the larger telic thrust of which it is a sub-category, and (3) you do not distort the telos or tele of which the sub-telos is a purpose unit. In using it you must show how it relates to and contributes to the telos or tele of which it is a part. It is possible to spend the major portion of a sermon informing the congregation about the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead who go out to escort Him as He returns, but it would be altogether wrong to lose sight of the purpose of such explanations to comfort and encourage grief-stricken and confused believers. 當然，按照「子-目的」（sub-tele）講道是可能的，只要 (1) 經文段落中有「子-目的」 (路加福音 15 中似乎沒有)，(2) 你這樣做的方式，是要認出它是更大目的中的「子-範疇」（sub-category），並且（3）您不要去扭曲「多子-目的」或「目的」，他們其中的「子-目的」是具有目的性的單元。我們可能會把講道的主要部分，放在告訴會眾關於基督再來，和死人復活，並迎接祂的再來，但是如果沒有看到這種的解釋的目的，是要安慰和鼓勵悲傷和困惑的信徒，那就全盤大錯了。 For more on telos in preaching, see my two articles on the subject in a book of essays on preaching, Truth Apparent, as well as the discussion on the subject in What to Do on Thursday, a book on the practical use of the Scriptures, and Lectures on Counseling, pages 198-203. All these books are published by the Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865. 有關講道中的目的的更多資訊，請參閱我的兩篇關於該主題的文章，在一本關於講道的論文集，《真理的明顯性-Truth Apparent》，以及關於該主題的討論《在星期四要做什麼-What to Do on Thursday》，一本關於實際使用聖經的書， 和《輔導講座-Lectures on Counseling》，第 198-203 頁。 所有這些書籍均由Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company 出版，Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865. Class Assignments: 1. Read and report on the materials on telos in one of the three books mentioned above. 2. Find the telos of five passages of Scripture and write them out in a telic statement. 課堂作業： 1.閱讀並報告上述三本書中的一本關於目的論的材料。 2. 找出五段經文的目的，並將它們寫在一個目的性陳述中。 唐興牧師 摘譯自：亞當斯《目的性的講道》Preaching with Purpose, by Jay E. Adams [1] 但是，當然，研讀一段經文本身可能會提醒你教會會眾的需要； 事實上，沒有其他方法可以確定什麼是教會會眾所需要的是什麼，除非你透過聖經發現它們。 一個開始學習的好地方是啟示錄2,3。 [2] 然而，如果一位傳道人在做出這樣的選擇時犯了錯誤，後來又承認了這一事實，他不應該因為驕傲或固執而堅持自己的錯誤，而應該向感恩的會眾承認錯誤，並立即做出必要的改變。 [3] 然而，通過遵循我將在下文中提倡的六個月學習和準備計劃，即使是這個問題也可以大大減少。 [4] 4. As a matter of fact, beyond reasonable limits, the clock should be ignored. There is no reason why every sermon should be half an hour or three quarters of an hour long. The preacher should take as long as it requires to preach any given message, whether one week he preaches for 20 minutes or the next for an hour. The passage should determine the sermon length. [5] For more on the specific issues involved, see my book, Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible. |
Chapter 7 Homiletical Analysis
第7章 講道分析 Walter Kaiser Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching 邁向解經神學：講道與教學的聖經解經 Exegesis is never an end in itself. Its purposes are never fully realized until it begins to take into account the problems of transferring what has been learned from the text over to the waiting Church. To put it more bluntly, exegesis must come to terms with the audience as well as with what the author meant by the words he used. 解經本身從來都不是目的。 它的目的永遠不會完全實現，直到它開始考慮將從文本中學到的東西轉移到等待的教會的問題。 說得更直白一點，解經必須與觀眾和作者所用詞的意思达成一致。 Traditionally this is the very place where theological education has failed in its program. None of the theological departments has been specifically charged with assisting the student in the most delicate maneuver of transferring the results of the syntactical-theological analysis of the text into a viable didactic or sermonic format. In fact, everyone has assumed that this is so very obvious to anyone who has spent hours analyzing the Biblical text, that it would be a work of supererogation to even delve into the matter at all! 傳統上，這正是神學教育在其計劃中失敗的地方。 從來都沒有一個神學系，會專門負責協助學生進行最精細的操作，將經文文本的句法神學分析結果，轉化為可行的教導或講道的形式。 事實上，每個人都認為，對於任何花上長時間去分析聖經文本的人來說，這是非常明顯事，而要去深入研究這些，又是一種超出範圍外的額外工作！ It is our new contention here that we must now charge this duty to the department of exegesis. The reason we have chosen this department is that the exegetical process and the hermeneutical circle have not been closed or completed until the exegete comes to terms with his own and his intended audience’s response to the text. 我們在這裡的新論點是，我們現在必須把這項職責交給解經部門。 我們選擇這個部門的原因，是直到解經者與他自己和他的目標受眾對文本的反應達成協議，「解經過程」(exegetical process) 和「解經學循環」(hermeneutical circle) 才結束或完成。 Recently this point has been felt to be so intrinsic to the whole interpretive process that modern hermeneutical theory has cared less (and sometimes, not at all) about what a text meant when it was written than what it mean s to us today. This turn of events was traced in chapter 1. While we were critical, we also said that we have heard—loud and clear—what lies behind this turn of events. What good, indeed, is it to know something happened or was said unless it has some relationship to me the reader or listener? The point is well taken. 最近，人們認為這一點對於整個解釋過程而言是如此地固有內在，以至於現代釋經學理論很少（有時甚至根本完全不）關心經文文本在寫作當時的意義，而不是它對我們今天的意義。 這一事件的轉折在第 1 章中進行了追溯。雖然我們持批評態度，但我們也說我們已經——響亮而清晰地聽到了——關於這件事的背後發生的原因。 事實上，除非它與我這個讀者或聽眾有某種關係，否則知道某事發生或被說出來有什麼好處呢？ 這是很好的重點。 From our viewpoint, it is to be regretted that modern men and women have also decided that they can do just as well without a decision on whether the author actually wrote what is found in the text or whether the events described really happened. It is almost as if modern men and women have grown tired of waiting for the exegetes and have summarily changed the ground rules so that finally something relevant and of personal value can come from the texts. 從我們的觀點來看，令人遺憾的是，當代的人也已經決定他們可以做得同樣好，而無需要決定作者是否真的寫了文本中的內容，或者所描述的事件是否真的發生了。就好像當代人的已經厭倦了等待解釋，並草率地改變了基本規則，以便最終可以從文本中獲得一些相關的和具有個人價值的東西。 If we are not mistaken, for every move in the exegetical process, as we have attempted to trace it up to this final step, there is a matching function in what we are calling here homiletical analysis. This is not to say that we are now attempting to rival or to supplant the discipline of homiletics; that would be a total misunderstanding of our proposal here. To be absolutely clear about what we are doing in this chapter, we might have entitled it “Preparations for Homiletical Usage.” The basic thrust of the chapter will be what we call “principlization,” the final task in the exegetical process before a text can be turned over to the special concerns of the department of pastoral theology and homiletics. 如果我們沒有弄錯的話，對於解經過程中的每一步，正如我們試圖追踪它直到最後一步，在我們這裡所說的「講道學分析」（homiletical analysis）中有一個相匹配的功能。 這並不是說我們現在正試圖對抗或取代「講道學」； 這完全誤解了我們這裡的提議。為了完全清楚我們在本章中所做的事情，我們可以將其命名為「為講道學所用做準備」。 這一章的基本主旨將是我們所說的「原則化」（principlization），就是在將經文文本移交給「教牧神學」（pastoral theology）和講道學(homiletics) 所特別關注的事之前的「解經過程」（exegetical process）中的最後一項任務。 In those happy instances where the Biblical materials are cast into a straight didactic form, such as the exegete finds in much of the Book of Romans, there is hardly any need for what we are here calling “principlization.” There the problem is relatively simple, in that the only demand on the exegete is that he put the teachings and doctrines of Romans into the form of propositions (i.e., main points in a preaching outline) that will call the hearers to some type of response. When truth is not internalized within the hearers, but is left as just so many notions floating around outside their experience, the exegete is in effect a mere dilettante—a trifler in the art of interpretation. 在那些聖經材料被塑造成直接的教義形式的令人愉快的情況下，如同解經者發現，羅馬書大部分的內容，幾乎不需要我們這裡所說的「原則化」。 那裡的問題相對是簡單的，因為對解經者的唯一要求，就是他需要把羅馬書中的教導和教義以命題的形式（the form of proposition）（即講道大綱中的要點/中心思想main point）陳述出來，以致於引起聽眾的某種回應。當真理在聽眾的內心沒有被內化 (internalize)，而只是在他們的經驗之外漂浮著許多概念時，解經者實際上只是一個業餘愛好者——解釋藝術中的一個小人物。 But most texts are not cast into a straight didactic form. The problems in each of these instances are far more complex. As we have already seen, it ought to be possible for the interpreter to summarize in a brief sentence the meaning of each paragraph in the portion of Scripture on which he has chosen to preach. (This preaching portion will usually be limited to two or three paragraphs, a total of eight to fifteen verses.) The interpreter must make sure that his focus is identical with the author’s truth-intention. And accordingly, it will be proper to designate the brief sentence summarizing the paragraph as the author’s theme sentence/proposition. 但大多數經文文本並沒有被轉換成直接的教義的形式。 這些實例中的每一個問題都複雜得多。 正如我們已經看到的，解經者應該可以用一個簡短的句子，來概括他選擇宣講的聖經部分中每個段落的含義。 （這個講道部分通常限制在兩到三個經文段落，總共八到十五節經文。）解釋者必須確保他的重點與作者的真實意圖一致。 因此，將總結該段落的簡短句子指定為作者的「主題句/命題」（the author’s theme sentence/proposition）是合宜的。 The theme sentence/proposition should give the essence of what the paragraph is about. The only situation in which this process could become troublesome and complicated is in those rare instances (1) where the theme is implied or (2) where independent sentences are connected to the expressed topic sentence of the paragraph (in effect a compound theme). In case (1) it will be necessary to propose a theme; in case (2) it will be necessary to enlarge the theme proposition to include those attached independent clauses which rank on an equal basis with the so-called topic sentence. 「主題句/命題」應該給出段落的本質。 這個過程可能變得麻煩和復雜的唯一情況是在極少數情況下：當（1）主題是隱含的，或（2）獨立句子與段落中表達的主題句相連（實際上是一個複合主題）。 在情況（1）中，需要提出一個主題； 在情況（2）中，有必要擴大主題命題，以包括那些與所謂的「主題句」處於同等地位的獨立從句。 As we have already seen, it ought to be possible for the interpreter to summarize in a brief sentence the meaning of each paragraph in the portion of Scripture on which he has chosen to preach. (This preaching portion will usually be limited to two or three paragraphs, a total of eight to fifteen verses.) The interpreter must make sure that his focus is identical with the author’s truth-intention. And accordingly, it will be proper to designate the brief sentence summarizing the paragraph as the author’s theme sentence/proposition. 正如我們已經看到的，解經者應該可以用一個簡短的句子，來概括他選擇宣講的聖經部分中每個段落的含義。 （這個講道部分通常限制在兩到三段，總共八到十五節經文。）解釋者必須確保他的焦點與作者的真實意圖是一致的。 因此，將總結該段落的簡短句子指定為作者的「主題句/命題」是適當的。 But most situations an interpreter will meet have a single and expressed theme. The themes of the two or three paragraphs that have been selected for exposition should be grouped together. 但解經者遇到的大多數情況都有一個單一而明確的主題。選定的兩三個段落的主題應該組合在一起 。 Now we are ready to begin the process of principlizing these themes. To put it most succinctly, in formulating the main points of his message the exegete must restate these paragraph themes without diluting or expanding their content. Furthermore, these restatements must simultaneously embrace the author’s purpose in writing the whole section and the timeless and abiding truth he intended to convey in each paragraph. 現在我們準備開始對這些主題進行「原則化」的過程。 簡言之，在闡述他的信息的要點時，釋經者必須「重述這些段落主題」，而不稀釋或擴展它們的內容。 此外，這些重述必須同時包含作者編寫整個經文段落的目的，以及他打算在每個段落中，要傳達的永恆和持久的真理。 It is of utmost importance that the restated theme not be a purely descriptive narration of the past events. This will immediately prejudice moderns against giving it their attention. Thus, it is imperative that each main point (one per paragraph please, unless the scope of our exegesis and message is only one paragraph) avoid the use of the past tense of the verb (a reporting style) and the use of all proper names (with the understandable exception of God’s names). 最重要的是，重述的主題不是對過去事件的純粹描述性敘述（a purely descriptive narration）。 這將會立即妨礙現代人的關注。 因此，每個要點（請給予每個段落一個主題，除非我們的解釋和信息的範圍只有一個段落）避免使用動詞的過去時（一種報告式的風格）和使用所有專有名稱 （除了上帝的名字是可以理解的）。 The exegete’s eye will be drawn from the author’s overall purpose to his manner of carrying it out in the paragraphs being examined. This in turn will raise the question, what did the first speaker (i.e., the author) of these words expect from his audience when they first heard these words? With this in mind, let us define “principlization.” To “principlize” is to state the author’s propositions, arguments, narrations, and illustrations in timeless abiding truths with special focus on the application of those truths to the current needs of the Church. Contemporary applications will often be suggested by analogous applications made by the original writer of the Biblical text. The remainder of this chapter will focus on the various steps to be followed in principlizing a passage. 解經者的目光將從作者的總體目的 (overall purpose)，轉向被審查的經文段落中，被作者帶出來的方式。 這反過來又有一個問題：當他們第一次聽到這些話時，這些話的第一個說話者（即作者）對他的聽眾有什麼期望？ 考慮到這一點，讓我們定義「原則化」。 「原則化」是「用永恆不變的真理」（timeless abiding truths）來陳述作者的主張、論點、敘述和例證，並特別關注將這些真理應用於教會當前的需要。 聖經文本的原始作者所做的應用，通常會經由類比，成為當代的應用。 本章的其餘部分將重點介紹在對經文段落進行原則化時要遵循的各個步驟。 The Subject of the Text 經文的主題 The first step in the process of principlization is to determine the subject of the Biblical passage (and hence of the message to be preached). It should reflect the major concern of the ancient writer. It is best if that concern can be described in a way that shows how that same concern is shared by most, if not all, of humanity. 「原則化」過程的第一步是確定聖經段落的主題（從而確定要傳講的信息）。 它應該反映古代作家的主要關注。 最好能以一種方式來描述這種考量，以顯示大多數（如果不是全部）人類如何分享同樣的考量。 In order to accurately describe what the subject of a passage is, the exegete must now back up and ask once again what the Biblical book as a whole is all about. That Biblical book must be classified as to kind and subject matter. 為了準確地描述一段經文的主題是什麼，解經者現在必須回過頭來再次詢問整本書卷的內容是什麼。 該卷書必須按種類和主題分類。 Then the major sections or parts of the Scriptural book should be studied once again to note what, if any, progress or development there is in the argument, narrative, or injunctions as the reader moves along. The whole scope of the work should be understood in relation to the contribution that the individual parts make. By analyzing the relationships that exist at this level, the interpreter may find solutions to some of his problems. 然後應該再次研究該卷書的主要段落或部分，隨著讀者的前進，注意其中的論點、敘述或命令有什麼進展或發展。 應該根據各個部分所做的貢獻，來理解整個工作範圍。 通過分析存在於這個層次的關係，解釋者可能會找到他的一些問題的解決方法。 But our concern as interpreters and proclaimers of the Word must be much more restricted if we are to do an intensive and detailed analysis of the text. As we have already suggested, pastors and teachers have almost uniformly experienced that one cannot do a good job of exegeting a passage of more than two or three paragraphs. Usually it is best to treat about six to eight verses when one is working with didactic material. If one is working in historical narrative, of course it will be easier and more practical to focus on a larger body of material (perhaps up to twenty or even thirty verses). Determination of the subject of this group of two or three paragraphs is the most critical move for the proclaimer, for it will in turn determine the subject of the pastor’s message. 但是，如果我們要對經文進行深入而詳細的分析，我們作為聖經的解釋者和宣講者的關注必須受到更多限制。 正如我們已經提到的，牧師和教師幾乎一致地經歷過，一個人不能很好地解釋超過兩三段的經文。 通常，當一個人使用教學材料時，最好處理大約六到八節經文。 如果一個人正在研究歷史敘事，當然更容易和更實際地關注更多的材料（可能多達二十甚至三十節經文）。 確定這組兩三段經文的主題是宣講者最關鍵的一步，因為它將反過來決定牧師信息的主題。 The exegete must resist the temptation to impose a mold over the text by forcing that text to answer one of his favorite questions or to deal with one of the contemporary issues that our culture wants to have solved. Instead, the careful interpreter will gather the following data to determine the subject that best fits the uniqueness of the passage under investigation: (1) the theme sentence or topic proposition of each of the paragraphs; (2) repeated terms which are defined, or are stressed, or give the text an unusual flavor; and (3) the special part that these paragraphs play in the overall theme or argument of the whole book and the section in which they are found. 解經者必須抵擋一種試探，要把他最喜歡的某問題，或處理我們的文化想要解決的當代問題，像模子一樣，強行加諸於經文之上（譯註：彼後3:16:強解經書...）。 相反地，細心的解經者將收集以下的資料，以確定最適合所研究段落的獨特性的主題：（1）每個段落的「主題句」（theme sentence）或「主題命題」； （2）重複的術語，定義或強調，或使文本有不尋常的味道； (3) 這些段落在全書的總體主題或論點中以及它們所在的章節中所起的特殊作用。 Some examples of this process might help. When the exegete undertakes an examination of a text like Isaiah 40:12–31, he or she is immediately struck by the division of the text into three major strophes (poetic paragraphs). Two of these strophes begin with virtually identical questions: “To whom then will you compare God, or what likeness will you make with him?” (Isa. 40:18, 25). It is this repeated question (and hence the theme or topic proposition) that supplies the exegete with the subject of the passage and therefore the topic of the message to contemporary men and women: “The Incomparability of God.” 此過程的一些示例可能會有所幫助。 當解經者對像以賽亞書 40:12-31 這樣的文本進行檢查時，他或她立即被經文文分成三個主要的段落strophes（詩體文的段落）所打動。 其中兩節以幾乎相同的問題開頭：“那麼你會將上帝與誰比較，或者你會與他有什麼相似之處？” （賽 40:18, 25）。 正是這個重複的問題（以及因此的主題或主題命題）為解釋者提供了經文的主題，從而為當代男女提供了信息的主題：“上帝的無與倫比”。 Other passages are a little more subtle in the way they yield up their topic and central subject matter. Take, for example, the historical narrative of Numbers 20:1–13, which deals with an incident that occurred during the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. The issue for the Israelites was a lack of water. But the words that make a major difference and suddenly tip the whole narrative on its head, as it were, are the unexpected blasts from Moses’ lips: “Listen now, you rebels; must we [!] bring water for you out of this rock?” (Num. 20:10). These words are not repeated, nor are they key theological terms, but they are undoubtedly the pivotal words in this text. They immediately bring to mind the contrast between the words and actions of men and the words and actions of God—for water did pour forth from that rock in spite of what God’s leaders had done. Therefore, we believe the subject of this passage is and the topic of the message should be: “Letting God Be God.” Moses and Aaron robbed God of His glory by “speaking rashly,” as a later Psalm would editorialize on this event (Ps. 106:32–33). 其他的段落在揭示其主題和中心內容方面顯得稍微含蓄一些。例如，民數記 20:1-13 的歷史敘事，處理了以色列人在曠野流浪四十年期間發生的一件事件。對以色列人來說，問題是缺水。 但改變整個敘事並突然顛覆故事的話語是摩西意想不到的嘲諷：“聽著，叛逆的人啊；難道我們[!]要從這磐石給你們出水嗎？”（民數記20:10）。這些話語並沒有重複，也不是關鍵的神學用語，但毫無疑問，它們是這段經文中的關鍵話語。它們立即讓人聯想到人類的話語和行動與上帝的話語和行動之間的對比——因為儘管上帝的領袖們做了什麼，水確實從那磐石中湧出。因此，我們相信這段經文的主題是，講道的主題應該是：“讓上帝是上帝”。摩西和亞倫通過“魯莽發言”剝奪了上帝的榮耀，後來的詩篇對這件事進行了評論（詩篇106:32-33）。 Once in a while the very words of the subject will be expressed in the body of the text itself. One example is Malachi 2:17–3:10. There, almost at the heart of the text and functioning much as a pivot or a fulcrum, is Malachi 3:6—“I the Lord do not change.” When this central assertion is juxtaposed with the charges that introduce the passage (“Where is the God of justice [anyhow]?”), the sermon subject naturally suggests itself: “A Call to Trust in Our Unchanging Lord.” 有時經文中的主題會直接在文本本身中表達出來。一個例子是瑪拉基書 2:17-3:10。在這裡，幾乎在經文的中心位置，並且起到樞紐或支點作用的是瑪拉基書 3:6——“我耶和華是不改變的。”當這個中心宣告與引導這段經文的指控（“公義的神在哪裡？”）並列時，講道的主題自然就出現了：“信靠我們不變的主的呼召。” The subject of a passage might also be suggested in the opening words or heading of a section. In Malachi 1:6–14, God asks of the Jews through His prophet, “If I am [your] father, where is my honor? And if I am [your] Lord, where is my fear?” (Mal. 1:6). And there is the point of the whole passage: “A Call to Authentic Sonship.” It is all too easy to claim that we are sons and servants of the living God without demonstrating the same! No other subject dominates these nine verses. 一段經文的主題也可能在開頭的詞句或章節的標題中表明。在瑪拉基書 1:6-14 中，上帝通過他的先知向猶太人詢問：“如果我是你們的父親，我的尊榮在哪裡？如果我是你們的主，我的敬畏在哪裡？”（瑪拉基書 1:6）。這就是整段經文的重點：“真實子女的呼召。”聲稱我們是永生神的兒女和僕人是非常容易的，但卻沒有表現出相同的行為！在這九節經文中，沒有其他主題佔主導地位。 When we have extracted the subject from the text instead of imposing a subject on it, we may speak with more confidence that the word we share for moderns has an authority which is not our own, but is borrowed from the text. We would urge exegetes to study (1) the theme sentences, (2) distinctive or unusual features of the passage, (3) pivotal statements that may act as a fulcrum for the passage, and (4) the opening words or headings that set the stage for all that the passage wishes to develop. 當我們從經文本身提取主題，而不是強加一個主題時，我們可以更有信心地說出我們與現代人分享的話語具有一種不屬於我們自己的權威，而是借自經文。我們建議解經者研究（1）主題句，（2）段落中的獨特或不尋常特徵，（3）可能作為段落支點的關鍵陳述，以及（4）設定段落發展場景的開場詞或標題。 The Emphasis of the Text 經文的強調 The next step is to find the emphasis of the text under consideration. Within this selected passage there will be important words and key terms. These words and terms may be identified by frequent occurrence in the group of paragraphs being investigated. Or they may occupy a strategic position; for example, they may appear in the theme propositions. Or they may be explicitly defined. One other clue to recognizing these words is that they will usually give us trouble in our exegesis since they add special nuances to the passage. 下一步是找到所考慮文本的重點。在這段選定的經文中，會有重要的詞語和關鍵術語。這些詞語和術語可以通過在被調查的段落組中頻繁出現來識別。或者，它們可能佔據戰略位置；例如，它們可能出現在主題命題中。或者它們可能被明確定義。識別這些詞語的另一個線索是它們通常會在我們的解經中給我們帶來麻煩，因為它們為經文添加了特殊的細微差別。 The original author’s leading concepts are sometimes marked by special vocabulary. In those cases where the text and its author have thus pointed to the concepts which they want to stress, it behooves the interpreter to follow this same pattern if he wishes to be a trustworthy exegete. Often, identification of this stress or emphasis will help the exegete to give a unity to his preparation of the passage for teaching or preaching. 原作者的主要概念有時會用特殊詞彙來標示。在這些情況下，文本和作者都指向了他們想要強調的概念，如果譯者希望成為一個值得信賴的解經者，那麼他就應該遵循同樣的模式。通常，識別這些重點或強調點將有助於解經者在準備教學或講道時，賦予經文統一性。 Whenever a series of sentences or clauses is linked together by the same introductory word (“because,” “since,” “therefore,” or the like), it may be possible to organize the message around these key words. [1] In this case each major point in the sermon will be a development of the subject from the same perspective and angle. For example, if the word therefore is sprinkled throughout the paragraphs under investigation, then we may safely make our major points in the sermon a discussion of the consequences of the announced subject. Alternatively, if the word because recurs frequently, we may develop our message around a series of reasons. 每當一系列的句子或子句由相同的引導詞（“因為”、“自從”、“因此”等）連接在一起時，便可以圍繞這些關鍵詞來組織信息。在這種情況下，講道中的每個主要點將從相同的角度和視角發展主題。例如，如果“因此”這個詞經常出現在被調查的段落中，那麼我們可以安全地將講道的主要點定為討論所宣布主題的後果。或者，如果“因為”這個詞頻繁出現，我們可以圍繞一系列原因來發展信息。 One example that comes to mind is Isaiah 9:1–7. Here the repeated “for” (“because”) at the head of verses 4, 5, and 6 introduces the reasons why there is “joy to the world.” Another example is Isaiah 58. As it talks about true spirituality in dedicated social action, it balances “if” conditions ( אִם ) with “then” consequences ( אָז ). 一個例子是以賽亞書9:1-7。在這裡，第4、5和6節開頭重複的「因為」引出了「普世歡騰」的原因。另一個例子是以賽亞書58章。它在談論奉獻社會行動中的真正靈性時，平衡了「如果」條件（אִם）與「那麼」結果（אָז）。 Sometimes the repeated phenomenon is only a point of grammar or syntax. Thus in I Thessalonians 4:1–8 the stress is on the three infinitival forms in verses 3b, 4a, and 6a. They function almost like purpose clauses to develop the subject of “Knowing the Will of God” (I Thess. 4:3a). Or in I Peter 1:1–12, the Greek form εἰς (“unto, to”) is used in verses 3b, 4a, and 5b to indicate all the things into which believers have been “born anew.” 有時，重複的現象只是一個語法或句法上的重點。因此，在帖撒羅尼迦前書4:1-8中，重點在於第3b節、4a節和6a節中的三個不定式形式。它們幾乎像目的子句一樣發展「知道神的旨意」（帖撒羅尼迦前書4:3a）這個主題。或者在彼得前書1:1-12中，希臘形式εἰς（“直到”）在第3b節、4a節和5b節中被用來指示信徒「重新出生」的所有事物。 Time and again the exegete may be saved from would-be disaster and the perils of subjectivism by relying on the text’s own pattern of emphasis as it is often indicated by some stylistic, grammatical, or rhetorical device that supplies the authoritative basis for principlizing that text. Where such emphases in words, terms, stylistics, rhetorical devices, or even repeated grammatical forms are lacking, the interpreter must rely on other factors to guide him in the principlizing or application stage. 解經者可以一次又一次地通過依賴文本本身的強調模式來避免潛在的災難和主觀主義的危險，這些模式通常是通過一些風格、語法或修辭手法來指明，這些手法為原則化該文本提供了權威的基礎。如果這些詞語、術語、風格、修辭手法甚至是重複的語法形式缺乏強調，譯者必須依賴其他因素來指導他在原則化或應用階段的工作。 The Main Points of the Message 信息的主要要點 Now we can begin to determine the main points of our lesson or message. In this step, it will be most advantageous if the interpreter has already laid out a syntactical display or block diagram such as was discussed in chapter 4. 現在我們可以開始確定我們的課程或信息的主要要點。在這一步，如果譯者已經按照第4章中討論的那樣，佈置好句法顯示或區塊圖，那將是最有利的。 The advantages of analyzing each paragraph or strophe in a mechanical display that concentrates on tracing the syntactical connections between sentences, clauses, and phrases are enormous. The most important is that the theme proposition or topic sentence (even if it is only implicit) plainly declares what that particular paragraph or strophe is all about. When the two or three propositions or topic sentences (if our selected text includes that many paragraphs) are studied together, the exegete must ask, “What do these propositions have in common? How can these propositions or topic sentences be stated so as to retain the perspective and stance adopted as a result of the first two steps in the process of principlization—determination and investigation of the subject and key words?” 分析每個段落或詩節的句法連接時，將其機械顯示出來的好處是巨大的。最重要的是，主題命題或主題句（即使只是隱含的）可以清楚地表明該段落或詩節的內容。當兩或三個命題或主題句（如果我們選定的文本包括那麼多段落）一起研究時，解經者必須問：「這些命題有什麼共同點？這些命題或主題句如何表述才能保持在原則化過程的前兩個步驟——確定和調查主題和關鍵詞——中採取的視角和立場？」 We are saying only that the exegete, teacher, and preacher must locate the important sentences in each targeted text. Usually there will be only one such sentence for each paragraph. It will be the theme proposition or what we have also designated as the topic sentence of the paragraph. 我們只是在說，解經者、教師和傳道人必須在每個目標文本中找到重要的句子。通常，每個段落只有一句這樣的句子。這將是主題命題或我們也稱之為段落的主題句。 It will be from these sentences that the interpreter will build the main points of the message or lesson. This will be best accomplished by weighing each topic sentence against the author’s major concern in the whole text under scrutiny (see again chapter 3, pp. 69–85; and pp. 152–55). Armed with this perspective, the interpreter should begin to see a way in which these topic sentences can be formulated into major points which will not only preserve the precise meaning of the original text, but will also provide an invitation, challenge, and instruction to moderns. 這些句子將成為譯者構建信息或課程主要要點的基礎。這最好是通過衡量每個主題句與整個文本中作者的主要關注點來完成（再次參見第3章，第69-85頁；第152-155頁）。有了這種視角，譯者應該開始看到這些主題句如何被制定成主要要點，這不僅能保持原始文本的確切含義，還能為現代人提供邀請、挑戰和指導。 The main pitfall to avoid in formulating these main points of the message is that of using dated statements. The tendency is to merely transfer from the text all proper names, places, incidents, and descriptions. This of course immediately makes more difficult a modern audience’s efforts to hear God’s “new” word to their generation from an admittedly old text. Therefore, the teacher or preacher will be well advised to delete all proper names from his main points (except for God’s names). Likewise, anything that would tend to focus the listeners’ attention more on the “thenness” of the text than on the “now” of God’s new challenge must be studiously avoided. At the same time each proposition must be so worded as to preserve the abiding, permanent, and fixed teaching of the text. 在制定這些信息要點時，主要的陷阱是使用過時的陳述。傾向於僅僅從文本中轉移所有專有名詞、地點、事件和描述。這當然立即使現代觀眾更難以從明顯的舊文本中聽到神對他們這一代的“新”話語。因此，建議教師或傳道人從其要點中刪除所有專有名詞（除了神的名字）。同樣，任何可能將聽眾的注意力更多地集中在文本的“當時性”而不是上帝的新挑戰的“現時性”的內容，都必須仔細避免。與此同時，每個命題的措詞必須保留文本持久、永久和固定的教義。 For example, if one were to preach on Numbers 22, his main points might easily be a historicized narration of just passing interest without any contemporary challenge: 例如，如果有人要講述《民數記》第22章，他的要點很容易變成一個僅僅是過去事件的歷史敘述，沒有任何當代挑戰： 1)Balaam Sought—Numbers 22:1–20 2)Balaam Fought—Numbers 22:21–27 3)Balaam Taught—Numbers 22:28–38 1) 巴蘭被尋求—《民數記》22:1-20 2) 巴蘭的奮鬥—《民數記》22:21-27 3) 巴蘭的教導—《民數記》22:28-38 This would be a fairly good message if we were preaching to Balaam, but can we expect God’s people today to respond to such a message? Instead we would suggest that there is a subject in the passage which is relevant to Balaam and to us in our day—the problem of “Knowing and Doing the Will of God.” There are three ways (our key word here) in which we can know and do the will of God: 這會是一個相當好的信息，如果我們是對巴蘭講道，但我們能期待今天的上帝子民對這樣的信息作出回應嗎？相反，我們建議經文中有一個主題對巴蘭和我們今天都有相關性——「知道並遵行上帝旨意」的問題。我們可以通過三種方式（這是我們的關鍵詞）來知道並遵行上帝的旨意： 1)By Keeping the Faith (“once for all delivered to the saints”)—Numbers 22:1–7 [the expositor should call attention to the informing theology of Gen. 12:3 and the relationship of Moab and Midian to Abraham] 2)By Obeying God’s Word—Numbers 22:8–22 3)By Observing the Obstacles—Numbers 22:23–35 The same material has been expounded, but this time the message is relevant to all. 1) 堅守信仰（“一次交付給聖徒的信仰”）——《民數記》22:1-7【解經者應該注意《創世記》12:3的神學及摩押和米甸與亞伯拉罕的關係】 2) 遵行上帝的話語——《民數記》22:8-22 3) 觀察障礙——《民數記》22:23-35 同樣的材料已經被闡述，但這次信息對所有人都是相關的。 It is also important to make sure that the main points are in a parallel structure—if one is a phrase, then all should be phrases instead of a single word or a sentence. If one is in the imperative form or an interrogative, then it is best that the others also follow suit. Likewise, nouns should correspond with nouns, verbs with verbs, and prepositions with prepositions. Thus, if the first point begins with a preposition, so should each of the other main points. It might also be noted that until the interpreter has acquired a wide range of experience, it might be best to let the main points follow the same order as the sequence in the paragraphs themselves. 同樣重要的是要確保諸主要重點呈現平行結構——如果其中一個是短語，那麼所有重點都應該是短語，而不是單詞或句子。如果其中一個是祈使句或疑問句，那麼最好其他重點也跟隨這種形式。類似地，名詞應該對應名詞，動詞應該對應動詞，介詞應該對應介詞。因此，如果第一個重點是以介詞開頭，那麼其他主要重點也應該以介詞開頭。還需要注意的是，在解經者具備廣泛經驗之前，最好讓主要重點按照段落中的順序來排列。 It is not always an easy matter to formulate these main points. Beside the few hints we have already given, there is the need for meditation and prayer. Beyond all the science of exegesis and hermeneutics there is another side which we may call the art of preparing a text for proclamation. Those who have few gifts in this creative and reflective area should follow the guidelines we have suggested above as a minimum. This procedure will not lead the interpreter away from what we call the art of preparing a text; rather it will put the proclaimer in the best possible position to do further reflection and meditation on the specifics of the text. 要制定這些主要重點並不總是容易的事情。除了我們已經給出的幾個提示外，還需要冥想和祈禱。除了詮釋學和釋經學的所有科學之外，還有另一個方面，我們可以稱之為為宣講準備文本的藝術。那些在這個創意和反思領域中天賦較少的人應該至少遵循我們上面建議的指導方針。這個程序不會使解經者偏離我們所說的準備文本的藝術；相反，它會使宣講者處於最佳位置，進一步反思和冥想文本的具體內容。 The Subpoints of the Message 訊息的次要重點 Next to be considered are the subdivisions of the main points. Here we are involved with the logic and development of a lesson or message. And here is where the syntactical analysis of each paragraph should begin to pay handsome dividends. 接下來要考慮的是主要重點的細分。在這裡，我們涉及一個課程或信息的邏輯和發展。而這正是每段句法分析開始付出豐厚回報的地方。 The method for extracting the subpoints or subdivisions of the main points ought to be the same in principle as the method used for formulating the main divisions. In fact, the indentations and levels of subordination indicated in the syntactical analysis for each paragraph ought to help us decide which phrases, clauses, or even sentences are to be chosen for highlighting in the subpoints. Only by paying careful attention to the grammar and syntax of the paragraph will our eyes and hearts be directed to follow the thread of the original writer’s intentions. And this is what we wish to reproduce in the lives of men and women. 萃取「次要重點」或「主要重點的細分」的方法，原則上應該與制定主要細分main subdivision的方法相同。事實上，每段句法分析中指示的縮排indentations和從屬級別應幫助我們決定哪些短語、子句甚至句子應在次要重點中突出顯示。只有仔細關注段落的語法和句法，我們的眼睛和心靈才能被引導去遵循原作者的意圖。而這正是我們希望在人們生活中再現的東西。 One caution must now be sounded. It is best to limit the number of subdivisions lest the outline tend to make the text seem more complex than it really is. The object ought to be to simplify the structure so as to provide to every listener an insight into the skeleton and linking sinews of the text. 現在必須提出一個警告。最好限制細分的數量，以免大綱使文本看起來比實際更複雜。目標應該是簡化結構，以便每個聽眾都能了解文本的骨架和連接的筋脈。 Like the main points, the subpoints must also be in parallel structure. Furthermore, for the sake of simplicity and for the convenience of those who are following the message (ideally, their Bibles should be open to the passage), it again is best to preserve the order of the text. Of course, when there are very good reasons, it is permissible to depart from this order; but this should be the exception. And it must be especially clear at all times just where the expositor is in the paragraph. He should frequently announce the verse(s) in the paragraph he is now examining and the subpoint to which it relates. 像主要重點一樣，諸次要重點也必須是平行結構。此外，為了簡化起見和方便那些跟隨信息的人（理想情況下，他們的聖經應該翻開到相關段落），最好還是保留文本的順序。當然，當有充分理由時，是可以偏離這一順序的；但這應該是例外。而且，始終必須特別清楚地表明解經者在段落中的位置。他應該經常宣佈他現在正在檢視的段落中的經文以及與之相關的次要重點。 The whole objective of what we are here calling “textual expository preaching” is to let the Scriptures have the major, if not the only, role in determining the shape, logic, and development of our message. We want to drive home into the hearts of God’s people the Scripture itself as well as the challenge, comfort, and instruction of the message. It is to be hoped that God’s men and women will be challenged to reread that very same Biblical text on their own soon after they have heard the message. Even if they cannot recall the outline (they probably will not—sorry!), that Word of Scripture will still speak to them because they have thought through its structure and shape in such a way as to have decisively met God in that text. 我們在這裡所稱的「文本釋經講道」 “textual expository preaching” 的整個目標是讓聖經在決定信息的形狀、邏輯和發展方面起主要作用，如果不是唯一的作用。我們希望將聖經本身以及信息的挑戰、安慰和教導深入到神的子民心中。希望神的男人和女人在聽到信息後不久，就會被激勵再次自行閱讀同一篇聖經文本。即使他們無法記住大綱（他們很可能不會——抱歉！），那聖經之言仍會對他們說話，因為他們已經以某種方式仔細思考了其結構和形狀，從而決定性地在那文本中遇見了神。 We will want to develop our subpoints as the writer did. Thus we will have a list of reasons where he used a series of “because” clauses, or a list of conditions where he had a series of “if” clauses. Regardless of what particular textual device suggests to us the rubric for getting the subpoints in a parallel structure, syntax must lie at the basis of that decision. 我們希望像作者一樣發展次要重點。因此，當他使用一系列“因為”子句時，我們會列出理由清單，或當他有一系列“如果”子句時，我們會列出條件清單。不管是什麼特定的文本工具向我們暗示了如何獲得平行結構中的次要重點，語法必須是這一決定的基礎。 Teachers and students of exegesis must pay much more attention to syntax. Only by doing so will they be able to come to terms with what the author meant and only then will they be in a position to come to terms with the audience gathered to hear God’s Word. To help in this respect, we strongly urge interpreters to give serious consideration to the method of syntactical display (block diagrams) advocated in this book. 講解學的教師和學生必須更加重視語法。只有這樣，他們才能理解作者的意思，並進而能夠理解聚集在一起聽上帝話語的觀眾的需求。為了幫助實現這一目標，我們強烈建議解經者認真考慮本書所提倡的語法顯示方法（區塊圖）。 The Theology of the Text 經文中的神學 And now, where are we to find the essential substance of a passage? Or, to put it in another way, what is the permanent, abiding, and doctrinal part of the passage? Must we import doctrine and theology (from elsewhere in the Bible) to fill out the word we hope to teach and preach from the selected passage—especially if it is a narrative text, or an Old Testament passage? 現在，我們應該在哪裡找到一段經文的基本內容？或者，換句話說，這段經文中永久的、持久的和教義性的部分是什麼？我們必須從聖經的其他地方引入教義和神學，來補充我們希望從所選經文中教導和傳講的內容嗎？——特別是如果它是一段敘述性文本，或是舊約的一段經文？ Many have noted that the strength of preachers who follow rather closely the pattern of preaching found in the Reformers is that they preach theologically. There is no doubt that when our teaching and preaching focus on the person and work of God, there are decided strengths and praiseworthy emphases. 宗教改革者所遵循的講道模式是神學講道。毫無疑問，當我們的教導和講道專注於神的位格和工作時，會有顯著的優點和值得稱讚的重點。 But even these strengths can be subverted when in our methodology we do not heed the Biblical author’s own theological motivations and presumptions—at least to the extent that he has explicitly referred to an antecedent theology which he believes he is building onto in this passage. It has been our contention in this work (see chapter 6) that the exegete is responsible for what we have called the “informing theology” or the “analogy of antecedent Scripture.” There are two tools we can employ to identify this theology: (1) the author’s own explicit references, allusions, and use of terms which in the progress of doctrine had taken on a technical status by his time; and (2) a good textbook of Biblical theology that traces the diachronic progress of the doctrine which is further developed in our preaching passage. 但即使這些優點也可能被顛覆，當我們的方法論不注意聖經作者自己的神學動機和假設時——至少在他明確提到他在這段經文中構建的前述神學的程度上。在本書中（參見第 6 章），我們一直主張解經者對我們所稱的「啟發神學」informing theology 或“「先前經文的類比」analogy of antecedent Scripture 負責。我們可以用兩個工具來識別這種神學：（1）作者自己的明確參考、典故和用語，這些用語在他的時代已經在教義進展中達到了技術狀態；（2）一本好的聖經神學教科書，追溯我們講道經文中進一步發展的教義的歷時進展。 This “emerging theology” must take precedence over the legitimate concerns of a systematic theology. Systematic statements are useful only when we have completed exegesis of a passage. Then, in our summaries of each main point, in the sermon outline, or in the whole passage, we may jump over the centuries and bring to bear all that God subsequently revealed on the theological issue being examined. In no case should a later doctrine be used as an exegetical tool to unlock an earlier passage. That would be an extremely serious methodological mistake, for, in effect, all revelation would then be leveled out. Virtually every passage dealing with a particular topic would end up saying almost the same thing as the latest revelation of God on that topic. 這種「新興神學」必須優先於系統神學之合法的關注點。系統性的陳述只有在我們完成對一段經文的詮釋後才有用。然後，在我們的每個主要觀點的總結中，在講道大綱中，或在整段經文中，我們可以跨越幾個世紀，利用上帝隨後在所探討的神學問題上所揭示的一切。在任何情況下，都不應使用後來的教義作為詮釋工具來解開早期的經文。這將是一個極其嚴重的方法錯誤，因為實際上，所有的啟示都將被抹平。幾乎每段涉及特定主題的經文都會最終說出與上帝在該主題上的最新啟示幾乎相同的內容。 The proper alternative to this abuse of systematic theology, however, is not to refuse to include any theology; rather, it is to let Biblical theology be the twin tool of syntactical analysis. As “emerging theology” wended its way through the history of redemption, there gradually developed a background against which the deeper or more spiritual emphases of God’s most recent revelation were to be understood. Far from imposing any tradition of a later theology (no matter how Biblical and how excellent it is) on an earlier text, this method respects the integrity of the original revelation of God to the writer. Yet it also legitimately enriches that same text by its emphasis on the accumulating, ramifying, and informing theology. 然而，系統神學的這種濫用正確的替代方案不是拒絕包括任何神學；而是讓聖經神學成為語法分析的雙重工具。隨著“新興神學”在救贖歷史中的行進，逐漸發展出一個背景，使得對上帝最近啟示的更深或更靈性的強調得以理解。這種方法尊重了上帝對作者的原始啟示的完整性，遠非將任何後來的神學傳統（無論多麼符合聖經和多麼優秀）強加於早期的文本。然而，它也合法地充實了同一文本，強調了累積、不斷分支和啟發的神學。 If this was the theology which was central to the interest of the audiences in the writer’s day, then could it not also still function for us in the same way? If this informing theology was what made the text timeless and full of abiding values for the people in that day (and we believe that it was), then could not this same diachronic accumulation of theology provide the same heart of the message for all peoples in all times? Yes, for even in the text’s historical particularity, it also carried in its very bosom an enduring plan of the everlasting God. 如果這是作者那個時代聽眾感興趣的核心神學，那麼它是否也能以同樣的方式對我們產生作用？如果這種啟發神學使得經文對當時的人來說是永恆且具有持久價值的（我們相信它是），那麼這種神學的歷時性積累是否也能為各個時代的所有人提供信息的核心？是的，因為即使在經文的歷史特殊性中，它也包含了永恆上帝的持久計劃。 We believe that this informing theology provides the interpreter with the key to all the emphases, applications, appeals, and offers of hope or warnings of judgment which must be made if the text is to mean anything to our day and age. It is for this reason that we have named our method of exegesis after the two most important functions in the exegetical process--the syntactical-theological method of exegesis. Without both of these emphases, the message will fall stillborn on baffled ears and hearts. 我們相信，這種啟發神學 informing theology為解經者提供了關鍵，使其能夠強調、應用、呼籲、提供希望或警告審判，從而使經文對我們的時代和年代具有意義。正因為如此，我們將我們的解經方法命名為詮釋過程中最重要的兩個功能—--語法神學解經法。如果沒有這兩個重點，信息將在困惑的耳朵和心中死胎。 The Conclusion of the Message 信息的結論 The last step in principlizing a passage is to give the message a strong conclusion. The messages of about two hundred years ago that remain in print excel in their ability to draw stirring conclusions. More recently, we have tended to specialize in emphasizing the introduction. In fact, we have usually overindulged ourselves in the art of introducing texts and messages. We have begun with references to the weekly newsmagazines, recent editorials, various opinion polls, and with quotes from prominent authors from the past. Meanwhile, much of our allotted time has been eaten up (sometimes up to one-fifth of it), and we still have not brought God’s people near to the text. It is almost as if we were afraid to cut that text loose on God’s people. 將一段經文原則化的最後一步就是給予信息一個有力的結論。大約兩百年前的那些至今仍在印刷的講道信息在振奮人心的結論方面表現出色。最近，我們往往專注於強調介紹。事實上，我們通常在介紹文本和信息的藝術上過於放縱自己。我們開始引用每週的新聞雜誌、最近的社論、各種民意調查，以及過去著名作者的語錄。同時，我們的大部分分配時間已被消耗掉（有時高達五分之一），但我們仍然沒有使上帝的子民接近文本。這幾乎像是我們害怕將那段文本釋放給上帝的子民。 We need to reevaluate our priorities in this matter of introductions. I would urge God’s ministers and teachers of the Word in every type of ministry inside and outside of the Church to severely limit their work on the introduction and to devote that time and those energies of preparation to an expanded and clearly-thought-out conclusion. 我們需要重新評估在介紹這方面的優先事項。我敦促所有在教會內外各種事工中事奉的上帝的牧師和聖言教師，嚴格限制他們在介紹方面的工作，並將那段時間和精力投入到擴展且明確思考過的結論中。 Here again we believe the Biblical text itself will suggest what our conclusion might be. At least we ought to begin by asking where the author thought that God was leading the original audience who first heard this message. Usually that is all that we need to observe and the pattern for our own conclusion will be set. 在這裡，我們再次相信聖經文本本身會暗示我們的結論應該是什麼。至少，我們應該開始問問作者認為上帝在引導最初聽到這個信息的聽眾去哪裡。通常這就是我們需要觀察的一切，並為我們自己的結論設置模式。 The reader must recognize that there is much more that needs to be done before he can master all the principles and achieve all the goals of good homiletical procedure. We believe that the departments of homiletics in the theological seminary should now take over and carry the student the rest of the way. This book has made an earnest attempt to be the friend of the pastor, teacher, and student along the uncharted and lonely path from exegesis over to the preparation of a sermon. We trust that it has provided an adequate definition and description of the detailed procedure that must be followed in this matter of principlizing a Biblical text for public proclamation of the Word. 讀者必須認識到，在掌握所有原則並實現良好講道程序的所有目標之前，還有很多事情需要做。我們相信，神學院的講道學部門現在應該接手並帶領學生完成剩下的過程。本書已經作出了認真的努力，成為牧師、教師和學生在從解經到講道準備的未知且孤獨道路上的朋友。我們相信，它已經提供了足夠的定義和描述，說明在將聖經文本原則化以供公眾宣講聖言時必須遵循的詳細程序。 02-06-2025 唐興 牧師 用copilot 摘譯 |