tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post7488411036198249059..comments2024-03-19T13:49:22.046-07:00Comments on Everybody Has A Theology: 替代刑罰救贖論的較真a_seedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15913775973150913065noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post-50438897639210248042022-07-12T05:55:37.897-07:002022-07-12T05:55:37.897-07:00你的解經大有問題!耶穌釘十字架,對耶穌本身來說,當然是「不按公義」的。但是對人來說,或是更精確一點的...你的解經大有問題!耶穌釘十字架,對耶穌本身來說,當然是「不按公義」的。但是對人來說,或是更精確一點的講,對人的救贖來說,卻是「公義懲罰」。公不公義是要看從誰的立場來看,是從耶穌的立場來看,還是從人的立場來看。你連這種立場變換的角度都分辨不出來,只抓住文義的表面意思來批判,這種解經水準真的堪慮。Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post-28824345620616212842012-12-20T11:49:00.158-08:002012-12-20T11:49:00.158-08:00Packer博士指出,替代刑罰理論是在一個特別的時期建構起來的,就是新教的解經一度被自然神學染色的時...Packer博士指出,替代刑罰理論是在一個特別的時期建構起來的,就是新教的解經一度被自然神學染色的時期。那時教會完全沒有認識到自然神學的問題,只顧從當時的法律和政治思想界汲取亮光。自然神學是指從周遭世界(包括從現有的司法觀念)中得到關於上帝的知識,而不是從聖經的啓示中得到。a_seedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15913775973150913065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post-42867464887951993262012-12-19T18:14:07.231-08:002012-12-19T18:14:07.231-08:00Yes the passage of Ezekiel 18:1-20 as a whole star...Yes the passage of Ezekiel 18:1-20 as a whole start with a smaller scope. I think Jewish were thinking of Moses' law, that God punish iniquity of people to a few generations, that the fact they were in exile was to bear the consequences of their fathers' sins. Ezekiel swore for God that He will be handling each person by his own situation, that no one will ever be bearing the iniquity of another. But as it turns out that God's swearing does not include Jesus, that he bears the iniquity of the world? That's why I feel it is in a direct conflict with western system theology.<br />a_seedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15913775973150913065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post-57836477063585225612012-12-18T21:51:22.742-08:002012-12-18T21:51:22.742-08:00以西結書十八20:惟有犯罪的,他必死亡。兒子必不擔當父親的罪孽,父親也不擔當兒子的罪孽。義人的善果必...以西結書十八20:惟有犯罪的,他必死亡。兒子必不擔當父親的罪孽,父親也不擔當兒子的罪孽。義人的善果必歸自己,惡人的惡報也必歸自己。<br /><br />這個纔是上帝的原則,另一與代罰理論直接衝突的經文。a_seedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15913775973150913065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3239670697731442075.post-30368118988743166312012-12-18T21:19:23.846-08:002012-12-18T21:19:23.846-08:00使徒行傳八章33節:他(耶穌)卑微的時候,人不按公義審判他(他的公正被奪去)...“不按公義”是聖經...使徒行傳八章33節:他(耶穌)卑微的時候,人不按公義審判他(他的公正被奪去)...“不按公義”是聖經對耶穌受審的描述。可是代罰理論把耶穌釘十字架解釋成上帝對世人有罪的公義懲罰。聖經中沒有一處經文說耶穌的受死是公正的,乃是“你們(猶太人)藉著無法之人的手,把他釘在十字架上殺了”(徒二23)。箴言十七26:刑罰義人為不善(It is not good to punish an innocent man 現中譯本:懲罰無辜是不宜的),顯然反對代罰的原則。a_seedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15913775973150913065noreply@blogger.com