← All books · Latin Fathers › Anti-Arian Works

Fulgentius of Ruspe

Anti-Arian Works 1 part 7/7

Latin original · 36 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss · long chapter, split into parts; this part covers 1:228–1:263 (263 verses in all)

ch. 2 →

← prev part

1:228

Aiunt enim : « Quod in Deo est, interius esse credendum, quod autem apud Deum est, exterius æstimandum. Quocirca si illud quod apud Deum est et exterius est, non est credendum unius cum Deo naturæ, consequens est ut illud quod in Dep est, et interius est, unius credatur cum Deo substantiæ. » Ad hanc igitur conclusionem ra tiocinatio ista perducitur, ut sicut Verbum, pro eo quod apud Deum est, ab ejus natura separatur: ita creatura, pro 45 eA quod estin Deo, unius credatur naturæ cum Deo. Unde convincuntur illa sentire, quibus nos et Filio audeant præferre, et Patri co nentur æquare. Sic totum confundunt, qui a veritate dissentiunt. Ecce quibus sententiis error infidelis as seritur.

For they say: 'That which is in God is to be believed to be interior; but that which is with God is to be esteemed exterior. Wherefore, if that which is with God and is exterior is not to be believed to be of one nature with God, it follows that that which is in God and is interior is to be believed to be of one substance with God.' To this conclusion, therefore, is this reasoning led: that just as the Word, on account of the fact that it is with God, is separated from His nature; so the creature, on account of the fact that it is in God, is believed to be of one nature with God. Whence they are convicted of holding those things by which they dare to prefer us even to the Son, and endeavor to equal us to the Father. Thus they confound everything who dissent from the truth. Behold by what sentences the unfaithful error is asserted.

因為他們說：『凡在神裡面的，當被相信為內在；而凡與神同在的，當被視為外在。所以，若那與神同在、且是外在的，不當被相信與神同屬一性，那麼隨之而來的，是那在神裡面、且是內在的，當被相信與神同屬一個本質。』因此，這推理被引向如此的結論：正如道因與神同在而被與祂的性相分離；照樣受造物因在神裡面而被相信與神同屬一性。由此他們被查明持有這樣的見解，藉以竟敢把我們置於子之上、並企圖把我們與父同列。凡與真理相違的人，就這樣把一切都攪亂了。看哪，這不信的謬誤是憑著怎樣的論斷被主張的。

1:229

Ecce quibus adinventionibus fidei veritas im pugnatur. CAPUT IV. Dixerunt apud se cogitantes non recte. Apud se dicere, est idem quad intra se dicere. Similiter idem eat dicere intra se, et cogitare apud se: Idem denique est apud se cogitare et cogitare in corde suo. Sed quibuslibet arietibus Ecclesiam sanctam hae retici quatere nitantur, certi sumus de Domino Deo nostro, quoniam civitatem supra montem constitu tam subvertere non valebunt. Imo seipsos prorsus subvertunt et exterminant, qui Deum verum Dei uni cum Filium contumeliosis assertionibus exacerbant. Nec ab injuria temperant etiam Patris, dum ingrati ficentiam reddunt gratiae Salvatoris.

Behold by what inventions the truth of faith is assailed. CHAPTER 4. 'They said within themselves, thinking not rightly.' To say 'within oneself' is the same as to say 'inside oneself.' Likewise it is the same to say 'inside oneself' and to think 'within oneself'; finally, it is the same to think 'within oneself' and to think 'in one's heart.' But by whatever battering-rams the heretics strive to shake the holy Church, we are certain concerning the Lord our God, that they will not be able to overthrow the city set upon a mountain. Nay rather, they utterly overthrow and destroy themselves, who exasperate the true God, the only Son of God, with insulting assertions. Nor do they refrain from injury even to the Father, while they render ingratitude to the grace of the Saviour.

看哪，信德的真理是被怎樣的臆造所攻擊。第四章。「他們心裡議論、思念不正」。說「在自己心裡」與說「在自己之內」是一樣的。同樣，說「在自己之內」與「在自己心裡思念」也是一樣的；最後，「在自己心裡思念」與「在自己心中思念」也是一樣的。但無論異端者用甚麼攻城槌力圖動搖聖教會，我們都因主我們的神而確信：他們絕不能傾覆那建在山上的城。不但如此，那些用侮辱的主張激怒真神、神的獨生子的人，反倒徹底傾覆並毀滅自己。他們既以忘恩回報救主的恩典，也不免對父加以傷害。

1:230

Quapropter con gruum videtur ut ex aliis Scripturarum locis verbi hujus intelligentia requiratur, ut appareat, utrum quidquid apud aliquem esse dicitur, debeamus, secun dum illorum sententiam, semper exterius aestimare. In libro Sapientiae legimus dictum de quibusdam: Dixerunt apud se cogitantes non recte (Sap. n, i); hujus loci ab Arianis exigimus rationem, utrum qui apud se cogitat, intra se an extra se cogitet? cum hominis cogitatio non solum extra corpus hominis non sit, sed nec corporis actio sit.

Wherefore it seems fitting that the understanding of this word be sought from other passages of the Scriptures, so that it may appear whether whatever is said to be with someone we ought, according to their opinion, always to esteem exterior. In the book of Wisdom we read it said of certain men: 'They said within themselves, thinking not rightly' (Wisd. 2:1); of this passage we demand from the Arians a reason: whether he who thinks within himself thinks inside himself or outside himself—since the thought of man is not only not outside the body of man, but is not even an action of the body.

因此，宜當從經上其他經文尋求這詞的含義，好使人明白：凡說「與某人同在」的，我們是否照他們的見解、就當常視為外在的。在《智慧書》中，我們讀到論及某些人所說的話：「他們心裡議論、思念不正」（智二1）；論到這段經文，我們向亞流派索取一個理由：那在自己心裡思念的人，是在自己之內思念，還是在自己之外思念呢？——既然人的思念不僅不在人的身體之外，甚至也不是身體的行動。

1:231

Enim vero quia id ipsum quod cogitatio dicitur non solum non extra r.ominem, sed nec in ipso corpore hominis inveni tur, quis non videat cogitationem solius esse animae, cui per rationalem virtutem divinitus datum est co gitare? In homine quippe cogitando dominatur ani mus, operando autem servitium exhibet corpus. Ibi est eniiu homini data cogitatio, ubi est inserta boni malique discretio. Interior igitur homo cogitationis officium gerit, qui etiam intelligendi virtutem ad imaginem Dei creatus accepit. Cum ergo apud se homo cogitat, non extra se, sed intra se cogitat, qui non extra se cogitaret, etiamsi ad exteriorem homi nem cogitatio pertineret.

For truly, since that very thing which is called thought is found not only not outside a man, but not even in the man's body itself, who does not see that thought belongs to the soul alone, to which the power to think has been divinely given through the faculty of reason? Indeed, in a man the mind rules when it thinks, but when it acts the body renders its service. There is thought given to a man where the discernment of good and evil has been implanted. It is therefore the interior man who performs the office of thought, who also, created in the image of God, received the power of understanding. When, then, a man thinks within himself, he thinks not outside himself but within himself; whereas he would not be thinking outside himself even if thought pertained to the exterior man.

因為實際上，那被稱為「思想」的事物本身，不僅在人之外找不到，甚至在人的身體之內也找不到，那麼誰看不出思想是唯獨屬於靈魂的呢？靈魂藉著理性的能力，蒙神所賜而得以思想。的確，人在思想時是心靈在作主，而在行動時則是身體在效力。思想被賜給人，正是在善惡辨別被植入之處。因此，是那內在的人執行思想的職分，他既照著神的形像受造，也領受了悟性的能力。所以，人在自己裡面思想時，並非在自己之外，乃是在自己之內思想；即使思想是屬於外在之人的，他也不會在自己之外思想。

1:232

Quanto magis ergo intra se cogitat, quandoquidem non exterior homo, sed interior cogitat. Qui tamen secundum Scriptune te- stimonium apud se cogitare dicitur, quod utique non in exterioris, sed interioris hominis officio reperitur. Ait enim Scriptura, sicut supra jam positum est: Dixerunt apud se cogitantes non recte. Quid est autem apud se dicere, nisi in corde suo dicere ? Propter quod alibi dicitur: Quæ dicitis in cordibus vestris, et in cubilibus vestris compungimini (Psal. IV, 5). Hoc est ergo apud se dicere, quod est intra se di cere.

How much more, then, does he think within himself, seeing that it is not the exterior man but the interior man that thinks. And yet, according to the testimony of Scripture, he is said to think 'with himself,' which surely is found to be the office not of the exterior but of the interior man. For Scripture says, as has already been set down above: 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly.' But what is it to say 'with oneself,' if not to say in one's heart? For which reason it is said elsewhere: 'The things you say in your hearts, be sorry for them upon your beds' (Ps. IV, 5). This, then, is to say 'with oneself,' which is to say within oneself.

那麼，既然思想的並非外在之人，而是內在之人，他豈不更是在自己之內思想嗎？然而按照聖經的見證，他被說成是「與自己」思想，而這無疑正是內在之人、而非外在之人的職分。因為聖經如上文已引述的說：「他們與自己說話，思想不正」（參智慧篇二1）。「與自己說話」是什麼意思呢？豈不就是在自己心裡說話嗎？因此別處也說：「你們在心裡所說的，要在床上痛悔」（詩四5）。所以「與自己說話」就是在自己之內說話。

1:233

Unde et Pharisaeus ille qui Dominum poposce rat ad vescendum , cum ingressa mulier peccatrix lacrymis rigaret, et capillis pedes tergeret Salvatoris, qui intra se cogitabat, intra se utique dicebat quod cogitando dicebat. Ait enim evangelista : Videns autem Pharisæus, qui vocaverat eum, ait intra se di cens (Luc. VII, 39). Quid est enim, ait intra se, nisi cogitavit intra se ? Verumtamen Scriptura docente cognoscimus quia qui cogitat intra se, cogitat apud se. Ideo utique dicitur : Dixerunt apud se cogitantea non recte.

Hence that Pharisee also, who had invited the Lord to dine, when a sinful woman came in and bathed the Savior's feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair, he who was thinking within himself was surely also saying within himself what he was saying by thinking. For the evangelist says: 'But the Pharisee who had invited him, seeing this, said within himself, saying...' (Luke VII, 39). For what is 'he said within himself' but 'he thought within himself'? Yet by the teaching of Scripture we know that he who thinks within himself thinks with himself. Therefore it is indeed said: 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly.'

因此那位邀請主用飯的法利賽人也是如此：當一個有罪的婦人進來，用眼淚沾濕救主的腳，又用頭髮擦乾，他既在自己裡面思想，就無疑也在自己裡面說出他藉思想所說的話。因為福音書作者說：「請耶穌的那法利賽人看見這事，就自己心裡說」（路七39）。「他自己心裡說」是什麼意思呢？豈不就是「他在自己裡面思想」嗎？然而藉著聖經的教導，我們得知：凡在自己裡面思想的，就是與自己思想。所以確實說：「他們與自己說話，思想不正。」

1:234

Attamen ne hoc quod dictum est apud se, non præcedenti sermoni, sed subsequenti velint Ariani conjungere, ut non dicatur, dixerunt apud se, sed dicatur, dixerunt, et postmodum inferatur, apud se cogitantes; audiant etiam hinc divinarum 46 testimonia Scripturarum, et cognoscant officium cogitationis humanae, non ad exteriorem, sed ad in tenorem hominem pertinere. Evangelista dicit; quia cum Domino paralyticus offerretur, Videns Dominus fidem illorum, qui eum per tegulas submiserant, dixit: Confide, fili, remittuntur peccata tua; et ecce qui dam de scribis dixerunt intra se : Hic blasphemat. Et cum vidisset Jesus cogitationes eorum dixit: Utquid cogitatis mala in cordibus vestris (Matth.

But lest the Arians should wish to join this phrase 'with themselves' not to the preceding clause but to the following one, so that it be read not 'they said with themselves,' but 'they said,' and afterward be added 'thinking with themselves'—let them also hear from this the testimonies of the divine Scriptures, and let them recognize that the office of human thought pertains not to the exterior but to the interior man. The evangelist says that when a paralytic was brought before the Lord, 'the Lord, seeing the faith of those who had let him down through the tiles, said: Take heart, son, your sins are forgiven you; and behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves: This man blasphemes. And when Jesus saw their thoughts, he said: Why do you think evil in your hearts?' (Matt.

但恐怕亞流派要把「與自己」這句話連於後文而非前文，好使人不讀作「他們與自己說話」，而讀作「他們說話」，然後再接上「與自己思想」——那麼就讓他們也從這裡聽聽神聖聖經的見證，並認清人的思想職分乃是屬於內在之人、而非外在之人的。福音書作者說：當一個癱子被帶到主面前，「主看見那些從瓦片間把他縋下之人的信心，就說：孩子，放心吧，你的罪赦了；看哪，有幾個文士在自己心裡說：這人說僭妄的話。耶穌看見他們的意念，就說：你們心裡為什麼思想惡事呢？」（太

1:235

IX, i, 5; Marc. II, 4, 5; Luc. v, 18, 19)? Quos dixit evange lista intra se dixisse, ipsos Dominus dicit in cordi bus mala cogitasse. Quid est autem mala in cordibus cogitare, nisi cogitare apud se non recte? Quomodo libet ergo hujus loci sensum Ariani distinguant, ibi necesse est, confusionem suæ pravitatis inveniant. Et utinam sic de errore confundantur, ut ad verita tem convertantur. Si enim dixerint, sic istum Scri pturæ versiculum dividendum, quod scriptum est, Dixerunt apud se, cogitantes non recte, ut ipsum apud se, præcedenti sennoni jungentes, sic distinguant:

IX, 5; Mark II, 4, 5; Luke V, 18, 19)? Those whom the evangelist said had spoken within themselves, these the Lord says had thought evil in their hearts. But what is it to think evil in one's heart, if not to think 'with oneself' not rightly? However, then, the Arians may distinguish the sense of this passage, they must necessarily find there the confusion of their own perversity. And would that they might be so confounded by their error that they might be converted to the truth. For if they say that this verse of Scripture is to be divided thus—that which is written, 'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly'—so that they join the very phrase 'with themselves' to the preceding clause, distinguishing it thus:

九5；可二4、5；路五18、19）？福音書作者說他們是在自己裡面說話的，這些人，主卻說他們是在心裡思想惡事。然而，在心裡思想惡事是什麼意思呢？豈不就是「與自己」思想不正嗎？因此，無論亞流派如何劃分這段話的意思，他們必然要在其中發現自己邪僻的混亂。但願他們能因自己的謬誤而如此蒙羞，以致歸向真理。因為，倘若他們說這節聖經應當這樣劃分——就是所寫的「他們與自己說話，思想不正」——把「與自己」這句連於前文，如此區分：

1:236

Dixerunt apud se, ut postea inferant, coyitantes non rete, Davidico statim convincuntur eloquio, non aliud esse, apud se aicere, nisi in corde dicere. Ait enim : Quæ dicitis in cordibus vestris (Psal. Iv, 5). Quod si aliter distinguere voluerint, ut ipsum apud se, non præcedenti sermoni, sed subsequenii conjun gant, ut praemittentes dixerunt, interjecto silentio, postmodum inlerant illud quod dictum est, Apud se cogitantes non recte (Sap. II, 1), etiam hinc increpa tionem Salvatoris audiant, et cordis esse cogitationet agnoscant; ait enim : Quid cogitatis mala in cordibus vestris (Luc. v, 22) ? Alio quoque loco idem Dominus docet: Quia de corde exeunt cogitationes malæ (Matth. xv, 19).

'They said with themselves,' so that afterward they add 'thinking not rightly'—they are at once refuted by the words of David, that 'to say with oneself' is nothing else than 'to say in one's heart.' For he says: 'The things you say in your hearts' (Ps. IV, 5). But if they wish to distinguish it otherwise, so as to join the phrase 'with themselves' not to the preceding clause but to the following one, so that, having put first 'they said,' with a silence interposed, they afterward bring in what was said, 'With themselves thinking not rightly' (Wisd. II, 1)—let them from this too hear the rebuke of the Savior, and acknowledge that thought belongs to the heart; for he says: 'Why do you think evil in your hearts?' (Luke V, 22). In another place also the same Lord teaches: 'For out of the heart come evil thoughts' (Matt. XV, 19).

「他們與自己說話」，然後再加上「思想不正」——他們立刻就被大衛的話所駁倒，因為「與自己說話」無非就是「在心裡說話」。因為他說：「你們在心裡所說的」（詩四5）。但若他們願意作別樣的區分，把「與自己」這句不連於前文，而連於後文，就是先放「他們說話」，中間插入一段靜默，然後才接上所說的「與自己思想不正」（智二1）——那麼就讓他們也從這裡聽聽救主的責備，並承認思想是屬於心的；因為他說：「你們心裡為什麼思想惡事呢？」（路五22）。同樣的主在別處也教導說：「因為從心裡發出惡念」（太十五19）。

1:237

Et denuo dicit: Quia bonus homo de bono thesauro cordis sui profert bona: et matus homo de malo thesauro cordis sui profert mala (Matth. XII, 35). Jamne cognoscunt in quanto errore versentur qui Verbum apud Deum, non interius, sed exterins asse rere moliuntur ? CAPUT V. Apud Deum nota est et apud homines tnemo na ejus. Introibo ad eum, et ad eum veniemus et mansionem apud eum faciemus. Sic Verbum et apud Deum et in Deo est. Sic idem est in Deo, et apud Deum non est iniquitas. Unus et idem spiritus in Moyse, David et Paulo. Rursus in eodem libro scriptum de sapientia legi mus : Immortalis enim est memoria illius, quoniam et apud Deum nota est, et apud homines (Sap. iv, 1).

And again he says: 'For a good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil things' (Matt. XII, 35). Do they not now recognize in how great an error they are entangled, who strive to assert that the Word is 'with God' outwardly and not inwardly? CHAPTER V. His memory is known both with God and with men. I will come in to him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him. Thus the Word is both with God and in God. Thus the same is in God, and with God there is no iniquity. One and the same Spirit was in Moses, David, and Paul. Again, in the same book we read this written concerning wisdom: 'For the memory of her is immortal, because she is known both with God and with men' (Wisd. IV, 1).

他又說：「善人從他心裡所存的善就發出善來，惡人從他心裡所存的惡就發出惡來」（太十二35）。那些竭力主張「道」是在外面、而非在內裡「與神同在」的人，如今豈不認清自己陷在何等大的謬誤中嗎？第五章。他的記念在神那裡與在人那裡都是被知道的。我要進到他那裡去，我們要到他那裡去，並要與他同住。如此，道既與神同在，又在神裡面。如此，同一位既在神裡面，而神那裡也沒有不義。同一位聖靈在摩西、大衛和保羅裡面。我們又在同一卷書中讀到論智慧所寫的：「因她的記念是不朽的，因為她在神那裡與在人那裡都是被知道的」（智四1）。

1:238

Quomodo autem apud homines nota est, si non intra homines, sed extra homines est? Cum nisi in animam hominis intraverit, nota homini esse non possit. De ipsa quippe sic dicitur, et permanens in se omnia in novat, et per nationes in animas sanctas se transfert (Sap. VII, i7). Et ut non aliud agnoscatur, in ani mas se transferre, quam in animas intrare : rursus de illa textus Scripturae sanctae sic memorat: Hæe populum justum et semen sine querela liberavit a natio nibus quæ illum comprimebant. Intravit in animam servi Domini, et stetit contra reges horrendos in por tentis et signis (Sap. x, 15). Hunc introitum suum, quo in animas intrat, etiam in Apocalypsi Joannis insinuat, dicens :

But how is she known with men, if she is not within men but outside men? Since unless she has entered into the soul of a man, she cannot be known to a man. For of her it is thus said: 'And remaining in herself she renews all things, and throughout the nations she conveys herself into holy souls' (Wisd. VII, 27). And that it may not be understood to be anything other to convey herself into souls than to enter into souls, again the text of holy Scripture recalls this concerning her: 'She delivered a righteous people and a blameless seed from the nations that oppressed it. She entered into the soul of the servant of the Lord, and stood against dreadful kings in portents and signs' (Wisd. X, 15). This entrance of hers, whereby she enters into souls, she also intimates in the Apocalypse of John, saying:

但她若不在人裡面，而在人之外，她怎能在人那裡被知道呢？因為她若沒有進入人的靈魂，就不能被人所知。因為論到她如此說：「她住在自己裡面，卻更新萬物，並且世世代代進入聖潔的靈魂」（智七27）。並且為使人明白「進入眾靈魂」與「進到眾靈魂裡面」並無二致，聖經的經文又論到她如此記載：「她救了義民和無可指摘的後裔，脫離那壓迫他們的列國。她進入主僕人的靈魂，藉著奇事異兆抵擋可畏的君王」（智十15）。她這進入眾靈魂的入口，也在約翰的啟示錄中示明，說：

1:239

Ecce sto ad januam et pulso : si quis audierit vocem meam et aperuerit januam, introibo ad eum, et cænabo cum illo, et ipse mecum (Apoc. 111, 20). Hoc introitu Pater et Filius ad dilectorem suum ve niunt, et mansionem apud eum faciunt: sicut ipse Filius loquilur : Si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit, et Pater meus ditiget eum, et ad eum veniemus, et man- sionem apud eum faciemus (Joan. XIV, 23). Quod si ve nientes Pater etFilius ad eum, apud quem mansionem faciunt, non interius, sed exterius sunt, dicaLur nobis, ubi ad eum veniant et mansionem apud eum faciant? 47 Interim quod interius in suis fidelibus inhabitet Christus, Paulo prædicante cognovimus, qui ait:

'Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and I will sup with him, and he with me' (Rev. III, 20). By this entrance the Father and the Son come to the one who loves them, and make their abode with him: as the Son himself says: 'If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him' (John XIV, 23). But if the Father and the Son, coming to him with whom they make their abode, are not within but outside, let it be told us where they come to him and make their abode with him? Meanwhile that Christ dwells inwardly in his faithful ones, we have learned by Paul's preaching, who says:

「看哪，我站在門外叩門：若有人聽見我的聲音就開門，我要進到他那裡去，我要與他一同坐席，他也與我一同坐席」（啟三20）。父與子藉著這入口，來到愛他們的人那裡，並要與他同住：正如子自己所說：「人若愛我，就必遵守我的道，我父也必愛他，並且我們要到他那裡去，與他同住」（約十四23）。但若父與子來到他們與之同住的人那裡，卻不在內裡，乃在外面，那就請告訴我們：他們來到他那裡、並與他同住，究竟是在何處呢？同時，基督內在地住在他信徒裡面，這是我們藉保羅的傳講所學到的，他說：

1:240

In interiore homine habitare Christum per fidem in cor dibus vestris (Ephes. 111,17). An forsitan dicturi sunt, aliter in interiore homine nostro habitare Christum per fidem, et aliter eum cum Patre venientem apud dilectorem suum facere mansionem, ut Christus in terim solus in interiore homine nostro inhabitare possit, Pater autem exterius remanens, apud quem mansionem facit, non solum ipse interius manere nequeat, sed etiam Filium communione adventus sui ne in interiore homine habitare possit impediat. Spi ritum quoque sanctum sic Filius Dei promisit fideli bus suis, ut apud eos maneat, et in ipsis sit. Dicit enim :

'That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts, in the inner man' (Eph. III, 17). Or perhaps they will say that Christ dwells by faith in our inner man in one way, and comes with the Father to make his abode with the one who loves him in another way—so that Christ meanwhile could dwell alone in our inner man, while the Father, remaining outside the one with whom he makes his abode, not only could not himself remain within, but could even prevent the Son by the fellowship of his coming from being able to dwell in the inner man. The Son of God likewise promised the Holy Spirit to his faithful ones, that he might remain with them and be in them. For he says:

「使基督因你們的信，住在你們心裡的內在之人」（弗三17）。或者他們也許要說：基督因信住在我們內在之人裡面是一種方式，而他與父一同來到、與愛他之人同住又是另一種方式——如此基督便可以獨自住在我們內在之人裡面，而父卻留在他與之同住之人的外面，這樣父不但自己不能住在內裡，甚至還藉著他來臨的同在，攔阻子住在內在之人裡面。神的子也照樣把聖靈應許給他的信徒，使他與他們同在，並在他們裡面。因為他說：

1:241

Si diligitis me, mandata mea servate, et ego ro gabo Patrem, et alium Paracletum dabit vobis, ut ma neat vobiscum in aeternum, Spiritum veritatis, quem mundus non potest accipere, quia non vidit eum, nec scit eum; vos autem cognoscetis eum, quia apud vos manebit, et in vobis erit (Joan. xiv, 15). Ecce apud quos manet, in eis est Spiritus sanctus. Dicatur ergo quæ hic potest esse diversitas in eo quod apud eos manet, et in eis est? Etenim in uno loco utraque præ positio ponitur, et Spiritui sancto utriusque rei pos sibilitas assignatur, ut apud quos manet, in eis sit. Itane vero Spiritus sanctus sic apud fideles manet ut in ipsis fidelibus esse possit:

'If you love me, keep my commandments, and I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may remain with you forever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him; but you will know him, because he will remain with you, and will be in you' (John XIV, 15-17). Behold, with those with whom he remains, in them is the Holy Spirit. Let it be told, then, what difference there can be here between his remaining with them and his being in them? For in one place both prepositions are used, and to the Holy Spirit is assigned the possibility of both things, that with those with whom he remains, in them he may be. Is it then that the Holy Spirit so remains with the faithful that he can be in the faithful themselves,

「你們若愛我，就必遵守我的命令，我要求父，父就另外賜給你們一位保惠師，叫他永遠與你們同在，就是真理的靈，乃世人不能接受的，因為不見他，也不認識他；你們卻認識他，因他將要與你們同在，也要在你們裡面」（約十四15-17）。看哪，聖靈與誰同在，就在誰裡面。那麼就請說明：他「與他們同在」和「在他們裡面」之間，能有什麼分別呢？因為在同一處經文中同時用了這兩個介系詞，並把這兩件事的可能性都歸給聖靈，就是說：他與誰同在，就在誰裡面。難道聖靈這樣與信徒同在，就能在信徒本身裡面，

1:242

Verbum autem Deus sic apud Deum est, ut in Deo esse non possit? Quid dicam his qui de Scripturis sic disputare desiderant, ut intelligentiae spiritalis viam nullatenus quærant, et avertentes oculos a vero lumine, jugiter in tenebris delectentur errare? Hoc idem quippe esse apud Deum, quod est esse in Deo, sancta Scriptura aliis quoque locis ostendit. Dicit enim Moyses : Deus fide tis, in quo non est iniquitus, justus et sanctus Dominus (Deut. XXXII, 4). David etiam canit : Quoniam justus Dominus Deus noster, et non est iniquita, in eo (Psal. xci, 16). Paulus autem apostolus apud Deum non esse iniquitatem dicit. Sic enim ait : Nunquid iniqui tas apud Deum? absit (Rom. IX, 14).

yet the Word who is God is so 'with God' that it cannot be in God? What shall I say to those who desire so to argue from the Scriptures that they in no way seek the way of spiritual understanding, and, turning their eyes away from the true light, delight to wander perpetually in darkness? That to be 'with God' is this very thing which is to be 'in God,' holy Scripture shows in other places also. For Moses says: 'A faithful God, in whom there is no iniquity, just and holy is the Lord' (Deut. XXXII, 4). David also sings: 'For the Lord our God is just, and there is no iniquity in him' (Ps. XCI, 16). And the apostle Paul says that there is no iniquity with God. For thus he says: 'Is there iniquity with God? By no means' (Rom. IX, 14).

而身為神的「道」卻這樣「與神同在」，以致不能在神裡面嗎？對於那些一心要從聖經如此爭辯、卻絲毫不尋求屬靈悟性之路、並且轉眼不看真光、反倒喜愛長久在黑暗中飄流的人，我還能說什麼呢？「與神同在」就是「在神裡面」，聖經在別處也如此顯明。因為摩西說：「他是信實的神，在他毫無不義，又公義又聖潔」（申三十二4）。大衛也歌唱說：「因為耶和華我們的神是公義的，在他毫無不義」（詩九十二16）。而使徒保羅也說神那裡沒有不義。他這樣說：「難道神那裡有不義嗎？斷乎沒有」（羅九14）。

1:243

Eligant in hoc loco quod voluerint Ariani, et, ut suam sapientiam evidenter ostendant, de legalibus et propheticis atque apostolicis dictis judicium ferant. Moyses dicit: Deus fidelis, in quo non est iniquitas. David quoque dicit: Justus Dominus Deus noster, et non est iniquitas in eo. Paulus vero dicit : Nunquid iniquitas. apud Deum? absit. Aut igitur fateantur apostolicum sensum legali propheticoque sensui convenire, aut dicant apostolum Paulum a legali et prophetica intelligentia discre pare. Paulus equidem apostolus eumdem se spiritum fidei habere dicit, quem David beatus habuit, quem etiam Moyses sanctus accepit, sicut ipse testatur, di cens:

Let the Arians choose in this place what they will, and, that they may plainly display their wisdom, let them pass judgment on the sayings of the Law, the Prophets, and the Apostles. Moses says: 'A faithful God, in whom there is no iniquity.' David also says: 'The Lord our God is just, and there is no iniquity in him.' Paul indeed says: 'Is there iniquity with God? By no means.' Either, then, let them confess that the apostolic sense agrees with the legal and prophetic sense, or let them say that the apostle Paul disagrees with the legal and prophetic understanding. Paul the apostle indeed says that he has the same spirit of faith which blessed David had, and which holy Moses also received, as he himself testifies, saying:

在這處經文上，就讓亞流派隨意選擇吧，並且為叫他們明明彰顯自己的智慧，就讓他們對律法、先知和使徒的話下判斷吧。摩西說：「他是信實的神，在他毫無不義。」大衛也說：「耶和華我們的神是公義的，在他毫無不義。」保羅則說：「難道神那裡有不義嗎？斷乎沒有。」那麼，他們或是承認使徒的意思與律法、先知的意思相合，或是說使徒保羅與律法、先知的悟性相違背。使徒保羅確實說，他有與蒙福的大衛相同、也是聖潔的摩西所領受的那同一個信的靈，正如他自己所見證的，說：

1:244

Habentes autem eumdem spiritum fidei, sicut scriptum est : Credidi, propter quod locutus sum: et nos credimus, propter quod loquimur (II Cor. iv, 15). Quomodo autem unum spiritum fidei habuerunt, si de fideli Deo diversa senserunt? Magna est autem sentiendi diversitas, si diversum est quod dicit Pau- Ius, Non esse iniquitatem apud Deum, ab eo quod Moyses et David dicunt, Non esse iniquitatem in Deo. Et si dicente Paulo, eumdem se habere spiritum Mei, quem et prophetae habuerunt, in eorum fide di versus est sensus, mendax (quod absit) Apostolus pronuntietur, qui in se Christum loqui testatur? An experimentum, inquiens, quæritis ejus qui in me loqui tur Christi (II Cor. XIII, 3) ?

'But having the same spirit of faith, as it is written: I believed, therefore I have spoken; we too believe, therefore we speak' (2 Cor. IV, 13). But how did they have one spirit of faith, if concerning the faithful God they held differing views? Great, however, is the diversity of understanding, if what Paul says—that there is no iniquity 'with God'—differs from what Moses and David say—that there is no iniquity 'in God.' And if, though Paul says he has the same spirit of faith which the prophets also had, there is a differing sense in their faith, then the Apostle is declared a liar (which God forbid), he who testifies that Christ speaks in him? For he says: 'Do you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me?' (2 Cor. XIII, 3).

「但我們既有這同一個信的靈，正如經上所記：我信，所以我說了；我們也信，所以也說」（林後四13）。但他們若對信實的神持不同的見解，怎能有同一個信的靈呢？然而，若保羅所說的「神那裡沒有不義」，與摩西和大衛所說的「神裡面沒有不義」有所不同，那意見的分歧就是極大的。並且，若保羅說他有與眾先知也擁有的那同一個信的靈，而他們的信裡卻有不同的意思，那麼那見證基督在他裡面說話的使徒，就要被斷定為說謊的（斷乎不然）；因為他說：「你們是想要得到基督在我裡面說話的憑據嗎？」（林後十三3）。

1:245

Sed quoniam vere Chri stus in Paulo locutus est, Paulus utique mendax non est. Et quia cum eumdem spiritum fidei se habere dicit, non mentitur; uterque 48 sensus consonans invenitur: ut quod Moyses et David dixerunt iniqui- latem in Deo non esse, hoc sit, quod etiam Paums dicit: Iniquitatem apud Deum non esse. Quod si eis forsitan videtur ut ex adverso aliud dicant, hoc eis reliquum est, ut aut prophetis aut Apostolo contra dicant. CAPUT VI. Apud quem non est transmutatio. Multa exempla, ubi apud pro in ponitur. Et licet tot tantisque testimoniis confutata hære ticorum sententia cognoscatur nulla veritate subnixa, respondeant tamen quid de illo apostoli Jacobi loco sentiunt, ubi dicit:

But since Christ truly spoke in Paul, Paul surely is no liar. And since, when he says he has the same spirit of faith, he does not lie, each sense is found to be in agreement: so that what Moses and David said—that there is no iniquity in God—is this, which Paul also says: that there is no iniquity with God. But if perhaps it seems to them that they say something contrary, this remains for them: to contradict either the prophets or the Apostle. CHAPTER VI. With whom there is no change. Many examples where 'with' is put for 'in.' And although the opinion of the heretics is known to be refuted by so many and so great testimonies, and to rest on no truth, let them nevertheless answer what they think of that passage of the apostle James, where he says:

但既然基督確實在保羅裡面說話，保羅就斷不是說謊的。並且既然他說自己有同一個信的靈時並沒有說謊，兩種意思就都相互吻合：以致摩西和大衛所說「神裡面沒有不義」，就正是保羅所說的「神那裡沒有不義」。但若他們或許認為自己所說的是相反的，那麼餘下的就是：要麼與眾先知相矛盾，要麼與使徒相矛盾。第六章。在他那裡沒有轉變。許多「與……同在」用來表達「在……裡面」的例子。雖然異端的見解已被這麼多、這麼大的見證所駁倒，並顯明毫無真理可倚，然而還是讓他們回答：他們對使徒雅各那段話有何看法，他在那裡說：

1:246

Omne datum optimum et omne donum perfectum desursum est descendens a Patre luminum, apud quem non est transumutatio, nec vicissi tudinis obumbratio (Jacob. 1, 17). Apud quem autem transmutatio non est, profecto mutabilitas non est: et apud quem mutabilitas non est, immutabilitas est. Haec igitur immutabilitas, quæ apud Deum est, dicant, utrum exterius an interius est; si enim inte rius est, ecce hoc est in Deo esse, quod apud Deum esse. Desinant igitur perversa sentire, et festinent catholicæ rectitudini consentire. Si autem hæc im. mutabilitas, quæ apud Deum est, non interius esse, sed exterius creditur, profecto in Deo esse non cre ditur.

'Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of turning' (James I, 17). But with whom there is no change, there is assuredly no mutability; and with whom there is no mutability, there is immutability. Let them say, then, whether this immutability, which is 'with God,' is outside or inside; for if it is inside, behold, this is what it is to be 'in God,' namely to be 'with God.' Let them therefore cease to think perversely, and hasten to consent to catholic rectitude. But if this immutability, which is with God, is believed to be not inside but outside, then assuredly it is not believed to be in God.

「各樣美善的恩賜和各樣全備的賞賜都是從上頭來的，從眾光之父那裡降下來的，在他並沒有轉變，也沒有轉動的影兒」（雅一17）。但在他那裡沒有轉變的，就必然沒有可變性；而在他那裡沒有可變性的，就有不變性。那麼就讓他們說：這「與神同在」的不變性，是在外面還是在裡面呢？因為若是在裡面，看哪，這就是「在神裡面」，也就是「與神同在」。所以就讓他們停止邪僻的思想，趕緊贊同大公信仰的正直吧。但若這「與神同在」的不變性被信為不在裡面、乃在外面，那麼它就必然不被信為在神裡面。

1:247

Et si in Deo immutabilitas esse non creditur, consequenter Deus ipse mutabilis prædicatur. Et ne hoc in Filio assignare audeant (al. velint), audiant in eodem loco Patrem luminum nominatum. Proinde cum audimus quia apud Deum non est transmutatio, hoc sentiamus secundum catholicæ fidei veritatem, quia nulla est in Deo mutatio. Et cum dicitur, Ver bum erat apud Deum, non aliud senliamus quam Verbum erat in Deo; et cum Sapientia in Prover biis dicit : Eram apud illum componens (Prov. VIII, 30), non aliud sentiamus quam eram in illo compo- Dens. Et. cum Deo dicitur: Apud te est fons vitæ (Psal. III, 5), non aliud intelligamus quam in te est fons vitæ. Et cum Joannes dicit:

And if immutability is not believed to be in God, then consequently God himself is proclaimed mutable. And lest they dare (or wish) to assign this to the Son, let them hear that in the same passage the Father of lights is named. Accordingly, when we hear that 'with God there is no change,' let us understand this according to the truth of the catholic faith, namely that there is no change in God. And when it is said, 'The Word was with God,' let us understand nothing other than 'The Word was in God'; and when Wisdom says in the Proverbs, 'I was with him arranging' (Prov. VIII, 30), let us understand nothing other than 'I was in him arranging.' And when it is said to God, 'With you is the fountain of life' (Ps. XXXV, 10 [al. III, 5]), let us understand nothing other than 'In you is the fountain of life.' And when John says:

並且，若不信不變性在神裡面，那麼結果就是宣告神自己是可變的。恐怕他們膽敢（或想要）把這歸給子，就讓他們聽聽：在同一段話中，眾光之父是被指名的。因此，當我們聽見「在神那裡沒有轉變」時，就讓我們照著大公信仰的真理來理解，就是神裡面沒有變動。當經上說「道與神同在」時，就讓我們理解為別無他意，唯有「道在神裡面」；當智慧在箴言中說「我在他那裡作工師」（箴八30）時，也讓我們理解為別無他意，唯有「我在他裡面作工師」。當人向神說「在你那裡有生命的源頭」（詩三十六9）時，也讓我們明白為別無他意，唯有「在你裡面有生命的源頭」。當約翰說：

1:248

Annuntiamus vobis vitam æternam, quæ erat apud Patrem, et palam facta est nobis (1 Joan. i, 2): non aliud intelligamus quam vitam æternam quae erat in Patre : vere enim apud Deum est Deus Verbum, quia in Deo est Deus Ver bum. Et vere apud Deum sapientem est sapientia, quia in sapiente Deo est sapientia. Et vere apud Deum vivum est vita, quia in Deo vivo est Deus vita. Et vere apud Deum verum est Deus veritas, quia in Deo vero est Deus veritas. Et vere apud Deum fortem est Deus virtus, quia in Deo forti est Deus virtus. Sed quid mirum, si hoc est Filio esse apud Patrem, quod est illi esse in Patre, quia scilicet naturaliter natus de Patre permanet semper in Patre:

'We announce to you eternal life, which was with the Father, and was made manifest to us' (1 John I, 2)—let us understand nothing other than eternal life which was in the Father: for truly the Word God is with God, because the Word God is in God. And truly with the wise God is wisdom, because in the wise God is wisdom. And truly with the living God is life, because in the living God is God the life. And truly with the true God is God the truth, because in the true God is God the truth. And truly with the strong God is God the power, because in the strong God is God the power. But what wonder is it, if for the Son to be with the Father is this very thing which is for him to be in the Father, since indeed, naturally born of the Father, he remains always in the Father—

「我們將永生傳給你們，這永生原與父同在，且顯明給我們」（約壹一2）——就讓我們理解為別無他意，唯有這永生原在父裡面：因為那身為神的「道」確實與神同在，因為那身為神的「道」在神裡面。並且智慧確實與智慧的神同在，因為智慧在有智慧的神裡面。並且生命確實與活的神同在，因為那身為生命的神在活的神裡面。並且那身為真理的神確實與真實的神同在，因為那身為真理的神在真實的神裡面。並且那身為能力的神確實與大能的神同在，因為那身為能力的神在大能的神裡面。然而，若子「與父同在」就正是他「在父裡面」，這有什麼希奇呢？因為他既是本性地由父所生，就常在父裡面——

1:249

cum etiam de hominibus legamus (quantum ad substantiam attinet, qua naturaliter homines sunt) non aliud esse, cum dicitur aliquid apud illos esse, quam in illis esse? Unde testimonia manifestissima proferemus. In libro Isaiæ continetur Ezechiæ regis oralio, quam post ad jectos sibi ad vitam annos quindecim, ad Deum effu dit, ubi inter cætera sic dicit: Spiritus meus apud me factus est, sicut lanifica proximans demere telam (Isai. XXXVIII, 12). Quid autem hic aliud intelligitur : Spiritus meus apud me, nisi, Spiritus meus in me ? An. et hic dicetur spiritum hominis apud hominem esse, in bo- mine autem non esse?Cum evidenter Apostolus di cat:

since even concerning men we read (as far as pertains to the substance by which they are naturally men) that it is nothing other, when something is said to be with them, than to be in them? Whence we shall bring forth most manifest testimonies. In the book of Isaiah is contained the prayer of King Hezekiah, which he poured out to God after fifteen years had been added to his life, where among other things he says thus: 'My spirit is made with me, like a weaver drawing near to cut off the web' (Isa. XXXVIII, 12). But what else is here understood by 'My spirit is with me,' if not 'My spirit is in me'? Or shall it here too be said that the spirit of a man is with a man, but is not in the man? Whereas the Apostle plainly says:

因為連論到人（就其憑以本性成為人的本質而言），我們所讀到的也是：當說某物「與他們同在」時，無非就是「在他們裡面」？由此我們要提出極其明顯的見證。以賽亞書中載有希西家王的禱告，就是在他的壽數增添了十五年之後向神所傾吐的，他在其中說到諸事，其中如此說：「我的靈成在我裡面，如同織布的臨近剪斷經線」（賽三十八12）。這裡的「我的靈與我同在」除了「我的靈在我裡面」之外，還能理解為別的什麼呢？難道這裡也要說人的靈與人同在，卻不在人裡面嗎？何況使徒明明說：

1:250

Quia enim scit hominum quæ sunt hominis, nisi spiritus hominis qui in ipso est (1 Cor. II, 11)? Sed et illud quod supra posuimus scriptum: Dixerunt apud se, cogitantes non recte (Sap. II, 1), 49 quid est aliud quam, dixerunt intra se? Rursus in libro Sapien tiae dicitur : Hoec cogitans apud me, et commemorans in corde meo, quoniam immortalitas est in cogitatione sapientice (Sap. VIII, 17). Quod apud se cogitat, hoc in corde suo commemorat, quod utrumque dum dicit, illatu utique cogitationem et illam commemoratio nem, non exterius, sed interius sibi inesse monstra vit. Dicitur etiam in Proverbiis :

'For who among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man which is in him?' (1 Cor. II, 11). But also that which we set down above as written—'They said with themselves, thinking not rightly' (Wisd. II, 1)—what else is it than 'they said within themselves'? Again, in the book of Wisdom it is said: 'Thinking these things with myself, and pondering in my heart, that immortality is in kinship with wisdom' (Wisd. VIII, 17). What one thinks 'with oneself,' this one ponders in one's heart; and in saying both, one surely showed that that thought and that pondering are present in oneself not outwardly, but inwardly. It is also said in the Proverbs:

「除了在人裡面的人的靈，誰知道人的事呢？」（林前二11）。並且我們上文所引作為經上所寫的那句——「他們與自己說話，思想不正」（智二1）——豈不就是「他們在自己裡面說話」嗎？智慧篇中又說：「我心裡思想這些事，並在心中默念，就是與智慧為親原是不朽的」（智八17）。人「與自己」所思想的，就是他在心裡所默念的；他既同時說出這兩者，就無疑顯明那思想和那默念不是在外面、乃是在裡面存於自己之內。箴言中也說：

1:251

Fili, non te compre hendat cogitatio mala, quæ derelinquit doctrinam ado lescentiæ, et testamenti divini oblita est; posuit enim apud mortem domum suam, et apud inferos cum terri genis axes suos (Prov. n, i 6). Si ergo cogitatio mala, quae apud mortem posuit domum suam, extra mor lem est, non in morte, profecto vivit. Et si apud in feros posita non est in inferno, superest ut illa quae nec in morte est, nec in inferno, vitam habere di catur in coelo. Ideo enim Deo dicitur: Quia eripuisti animam meam de morte (Psal. CXIV, 8), quia animæ per fidem vitam donavit dicens : Justus autem meus ex fide vivit (Rom. I, 17). Et rursus idcirco ipsi dici tur :

'My son, let not evil thought lay hold of you, which forsakes the teaching of youth, and has forgotten the divine covenant; for it has placed its house with death, and its axles with the underworld among the earth-born' (Prov. II, 16). If, then, the evil thought which has placed its house 'with death' is outside death, not in death, then surely it lives. And if, placed 'with the underworld,' it is not in hell, it remains that that which is neither in death nor in hell should be said to have life in heaven. For this reason it is said to God: 'Because you have snatched my soul from death' (Ps. CXIV, 8), because he granted life to the soul through faith, saying: 'But my just one lives by faith' (Rom. I, 17). And again for this reason it is said to him:

「我兒，不要讓那離棄少年之教訓、忘記神聖之約的惡念抓住你；因為它把自己的家安置於死亡，把自己的軸桿安置於陰間，與地上所生的同在」（箴二16-18）。那麼，若那把自己的家安置「與死亡同在」的惡念是在死亡之外、不在死亡之中，那它必然是活著的。並且，若它安置「與陰間同在」卻不在陰間之中，那就剩下這一點：那既不在死亡、也不在陰間之中的，就當說它在天上有生命。因此人向神說：「因你救我的性命脫離死亡」（詩一一六8），因為他藉信賜生命給人的靈魂，說：「我的義人必因信得生」（羅一17）。並且又因此向他說：

1:252

Eripuisti animam meam ex inferno inferiori (Psal. LXXXV, 13), quia idcirco animae ab inferno gratia Dei eripiuntur, ut in coelis conversentur. Unde dicit Apostolus: Nostra autem conversatio in cœlis est Philip. III, 20). Porro anima, quæ per cogitationem malam apud mortem fuit, quomodo de morte libe rata est, si in morte non fuit ? et quomodo ex inferno erepta est, si apud inferos constituta, in inferno non fuit? Cum utique si in morte non esset, mor-tua non fuisset. Per malam autem voluntatem, hoc est, per peccatum, quis nesciat animam mori? cum Deus di cat: Anima quæ peccaverit, ipsa morietur (Ezech. XVIII, 20).

'You have snatched my soul from the lower hell' (Ps. LXXXV, 13), because souls are snatched from hell by the grace of God for this purpose, that they may dwell in the heavens. Whence the Apostle says: 'But our citizenship is in heaven' (Phil. III, 20). Further, how has the soul, which through evil thought was 'with death,' been freed from death, if it was not in death? And how has it been snatched from hell, if, though set 'with the underworld,' it was not in hell? Since surely, if it were not in death, it would not have been dead. And through evil will, that is, through sin, who does not know that the soul dies? Since God says: 'The soul that sins, it shall die' (Ezek. XVIII, 20).

「你救我的性命脫離極深的陰間」（詩八十六13），因為神的恩典為此把眾靈魂從陰間救拔出來，使他們得以住在諸天。所以使徒說：「我們卻是天上的國民」（腓三20）。再者，那藉惡念曾「與死亡同在」的靈魂，若不在死亡之中，怎能從死亡中得釋放呢？並且它若雖被安置「與陰間同在」卻不在陰間之中，又怎能從陰間被救拔出來呢？因為若它不在死亡之中，就斷然不曾死過。誰不知道靈魂是藉惡意、就是藉罪而死的呢？因為神說：「犯罪的靈魂，必要死亡」（結十八20）。

1:253

Certum est igifur, animam male cogitan tem, cum apud mortem est, in morte esse, et cum apud inferos est, in inferno esse. Quid quod etiam Salvator dicit: Qua impossibilia sunt apud homines, possibilia sunt apud Deum (Matth. XIX, 26; Luc. XVIII, 27) ? Ergone sic dicemus, omnia Deo possibilia esse, ut hoc ipsum quidem possibile esse, sic dica mos apud Deum esse, ut dicamus in Deo non esse? Quid autem posse apud se Deus habet, si ipsum posse in se non habet? CAPUT VII. Non credis quia ego in Patre, et Pater in me est. Verbum est apud Deum, sicut in mente ver bum.

It is certain, therefore, that the soul which thinks evil, when it is 'with death,' is in death, and when it is 'with the underworld,' is in hell. What of the fact that the Savior also says: 'The things which are impossible with men are possible with God' (Matt. XIX, 26; Luke XVIII, 27)? Shall we then say that all things are possible with God in such a way that this very possibility, which we say is 'with God,' we should say is not 'in God'? But what power does God have 'with himself,' if he does not have that very power in himself? CHAPTER VII. Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The Word is with God, as the word is in the mind.

因此，可以確定：那思想惡事的靈魂，當它「與死亡同在」時，就是在死亡之中，當它「與陰間同在」時，就是在陰間之中。何況救主也說：「在人所不能的，在神卻能」（太十九26；路十八27）？那麼我們豈可這樣說：萬事在神都能，卻要把這我們所說「在神」的可能性說成不「在神裡面」嗎？但若神在自己裡面沒有那能力，他「在自己那裡」又能有什麼能力呢？第七章。你不信我在父裡面，父在我裡面嗎？道與神同在，正如言語在心思裡面。

1:254

His atque hujusmodi testimoniis claret, cum dici tur, Verbum erat apud Deum, non aliud intelligi de bere quam Verbum erat in Deo, Nam et ipse Filius, qui est Verbum Deus, non solum Patrem in se, sed etiam se in Patre esse testatur, dicens: Non credis quia ego in Patre, et Pater in me est (Joan. XIV, 10). Hoc autem Filii esse apud Patrem, et esse in Patre, non videatur tale quale si quis homo sit apud aliquem hominem, sive jure hospitali (al. hospitalitalis), sive caritatis affectu. Nam et apostolus Paulus dicit, se apud Apostolum Petrum quindecim diebus mansisse (Gal.

By these and testimonies of this kind it is clear that, when it is said, 'The Word was with God,' nothing else ought to be understood than 'The Word was in God.' For the Son himself, who is the Word God, testifies that not only is the Father in him, but that he too is in the Father, saying: 'Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me?' (John XIV, 10). But this being of the Son 'with the Father,' and his being 'in the Father,' should not be regarded as such as when one man is with another man, whether by right of hospitality or by the affection of charity. For the apostle Paul also says that he remained with the apostle Peter fifteen days (Gal.

藉著這些以及此類的見證，就顯明：當經上說「道與神同在」時，不當理解為別的，唯有「道在神裡面」。因為身為神之「道」的子自己見證：不僅父在他裡面，他也在父裡面，說：「你不信我在父裡面，父在我裡面嗎？」（約十四10）。但子這「與父同在」以及「在父裡面」，不當被看作如同一個人與另一個人同在，無論是憑款待之情，或是憑愛心之誼。因為使徒保羅也說，他與使徒彼得同住了十五天（加

1:255

I, 18), jure scilicet hospitalitatis, et puritale dilectionis, quorum licet per unitatem Mei et carita tis fuerit anima una , et cor unum , non tamen sic mansit Paulus apud Petrum , sicut Verbum manet apud Deum, quia nec sic potest esse homo apud ho minem, sicut Verbum Deus est apud Deum Patrem : homo cnim apud hominem sic est, ut non solum apud eum non esse possit, sed etiam, cum apud eum est, in ipso substantialiter esse non possit. Vere enim qui sic apud alium est, extra illum est, quia cum est apud illum, sinceritate dilectionis, loco discernitur, quantolibet affectu invicem sibi uterque jungatur. Sed sic est Verbum 50 apud Deum , sicut est in mente verbum, sicut in corda consilium :

I, 18), namely by the right of hospitality and by the purity of love; and although through the unity of faith and charity their soul was one and their heart one, yet Paul did not so remain with Peter as the Word remains with God, because a man cannot be with a man as the Word God is with God the Father: for a man is so with a man that not only can he be not with him, but also, when he is with him, he cannot substantially be in him. For truly he who is so with another is outside him, because when he is with him, in sincerity of love, he is separated by place, however greatly each is joined to the other in affection. But the Word is so with God as the word is in the mind, as counsel is in the heart:

一18），就是憑款待之權和純潔的愛；並且雖然藉著信與愛的合一，他們的靈魂是一個、心也是一個，然而保羅與彼得同住，並不像「道」與神同在那樣，因為人不能像那身為神的「道」與父神同在那樣與人同在：因為人與人同在的方式是這樣的——他不僅可以不與那人同在，而且即使與那人同在，也不能實質地在那人裡面。因為凡這樣與別人同在的，實在是在那人之外，因為他與那人同在時，即或彼此在情感上何等相連，仍憑真誠的愛而在空間上被分隔。但「道」與神同在，卻像言語在心思裡面，像籌算在心中：

1:256

cum enim mens apud se verbum habet, utique cogitando habet, quia nibil aliud est apudse dicere quam apud se co gilare. Cum ergo mens cogitat, et cogitando verbum intra se generat, de sua substantia generat verbum, et sic illud verbum generat de se, ut genitum habeat apud se. Nec minus aliquid habet ,'cubum quod ex mente nascitur, quam est mens de qua nascitur, quia quanla est mens quæ generat verbum , tantum est etiam ipsum verbum. Sicut enim de tota mente na. scitur verbum , sic intra totam permanet natum.

for when the mind has a word with itself, it surely has it by thinking, because to say 'with oneself' is nothing other than to think 'with oneself.' When, then, the mind thinks, and by thinking generates a word within itself, it generates the word out of its own substance, and so generates that word out of itself that it may have what is begotten with itself. Nor does the word which is born from the mind have anything less than is the mind from which it is born, because as great as is the mind that generates the word, so great is also the word itself. For as the word is born from the whole mind, so it remains, once born, within the whole.

因為當心思在自己裡面有一個言語時，它無疑是藉思想而有的，因為「與自己說話」無非就是「與自己思想」。那麼，當心思思想、並藉思想在自己裡面生出言語時，它是從自己的本質生出言語，並且如此從自己生出那言語，使它所生的與自己同在。從心思所生的言語，並不比它所出自的心思有絲毫欠缺，因為那生出言語的心思有多大，那言語本身也有多大。因為正如言語是從整個心思所生的，照樣它一經被生，就存在於整個心思之內。

1:257

Et quia cogilante mente , non est ejus aliquid , ubi in ea verbum non sit, ideo verbum tantum est, quanta est mens ipsa de qua est, et cum apud illam est, in illa est et quod ipsa mens est, hoc est verbum quod de illa et in illa est; et quanta illa est, tantum etiam verbum est, quia de tota et in tota est. Tantumque est ipsum verbum, quanta simul est et mens ipsa cum verbo, neque enim sic de illa verbum nascitur, ut ab ea localiter secernatur.

And because, when the mind thinks, there is no part of it where the word is not, therefore the word is as great as is the mind itself from which it is; and when it is with it, it is in it, and what the mind itself is, this is the word which is from it and in it; and as great as it is, so great also is the word, because it is from the whole and in the whole. And the word itself is as great as is at once the mind itself together with the word, for the word is not so born from it as to be locally separated from it.

並且因為當心思思想時，它裡面沒有任何一處是言語所不在的，所以言語有多大，就有它所出自的那心思本身多大；並且當言語與心思同在時，就在心思裡面，且心思本身是什麼，那從心思所出、又在心思裡面的言語也是什麼；心思有多大，言語也有多大，因為它是從整個心思所出、又在整個心思裡面。並且那言語本身有多大，就有那與言語同在的心思本身那麼大，因為言語從心思所生，並非如同在空間上與心思分離。

1:258

Nativitas quippe illa, quæ ostendit quid sit et de qua sit, ipsa ostendit quod extra eam de qua natum est esse non possit, nec in aliquo minus sit, sed sic de ipsa sit, ut apud ipsam et in ipsa sit, tantumque sit de illa, quantum in illa, et tantum in illa, quantum cum illa. CAPUT tIU. Non sumus nos in Deo sicut fn Deo esi Verbum Deus. Aliter nos Deus genuit, aliter V,, bum. Blasphemiæ hæreticorum in Filium Dei. Et quidem et nos quodammodo dicit Scriptura, et in Deo esse et apud Deum esse , sed non quomodo apud Deum est et in Deo est Verbum Deus, qui est unigenitus Filius : dicitur enim de nobis, quia in Deo vivimus et movemur, et sumus. Et dicitur ipsi Deo I si non pec V.

For that birth, which shows what it is and from what it is, itself shows that it cannot be outside that from which it was born, nor be in any respect less, but so be from it that it is with it and in it, and be as much from it as it is in it, and as much in it as it is with it. CHAPTER VIII. We are not in God as the Word God is in God. God begot us in one way, the Word in another. The blasphemies of the heretics against the Son of God. And indeed Scripture says in a certain manner that we too both are in God and are with God, but not in the way in which the Word God, who is the only-begotten Son, is with God and in God: for it is said of us that in God we live and move and are. And it is said to God himself: 'If we have not sinned,

因為那顯明它是什麼、又從何而出的生出，正顯明它不能在它所出自者之外，也絲毫不會有所欠缺，乃是這樣從它而出，以致與它同在、又在它裡面，並且它從它而出有多少，就在它裡面有多少，在它裡面有多少，就與它同在有多少。第八章。我們在神裡面，並不像那身為神的「道」在神裡面。神生我們是一種方式，生「道」是另一種方式。異端褻瀆神子的話。的確，聖經也以某種方式說，我們既在神裡面，也與神同在，但並不像那身為神的「道」、就是獨生子與神同在、又在神裡面的方式：因為論到我們說，我們是在神裡面生活、動作、存留。並且向神自己說：「我們若沒有犯罪，

1:259

caverimus , scimus quia apud te sumus deputati. Ve rumtamen cum hoc de nobis dicitur , non naturalis unitas nostra cum Deo ostenditur, sed aut potentia creatoris intelligitur, aut pietas redemptoris. Sic enim qui credimus, in Deo et apud Deum sumus, sicut de Deo geniti, filii Dei sumus. Scriptum est enim : Carissimi, nunc filii Dei sumus (1 Joan. III. 2). Et iterum : Voluntarie genuit nos Verbo veritatis (Jac. I, 18). Nos ergo Deus Verbo veritatis genuit, illud autem Verbum veritatem genuit. Nobis potestatem dedit filiosDei fieri; ille autem non ex potestate Filius Dei factus, sed de Deo naturaliter est Dei Filius na tus. No? Deus voluntarie genuit, quia voluntas gene- rationem præcessit;

we know that we are counted as with you.' Yet when this is said of us, our natural unity with God is not shown, but either the power of the Creator is understood, or the mercy of the Redeemer. For we who believe are so in God and with God as, being born of God, we are sons of God. For it is written: 'Beloved, now are we the sons of God' (1 John III, 2). And again: 'Of his own will he begot us by the word of truth' (James I, 18). We, then, God begot by the word of truth, but that Word he begot as the truth. To us he gave the power to become sons of God; but he was made Son of God not out of power, but is born naturally of God as the Son of God. Us God begot of his own will, because will preceded the generation;

就知道自己算是與你同在的。」然而，當這樣論到我們時，並非顯明我們與神有本性上的合一，乃是或指創造者的能力，或指救贖者的慈憐。因為我們這信的人之所以在神裡面、與神同在，乃是因為我們既由神而生，就成為神的兒女。因為經上記著：「親愛的弟兄啊，我們現在是神的兒女」（約壹三2）。又說：「他按自己的旨意，用真道生了我們」（雅一18）。這樣，神是用真道生了我們，而那「道」他卻生為真理。他賜給我們權柄，作神的兒女；而他自己作神的子並非出於權柄，乃是本性地由神而生，為神的兒子。神是按自己的旨意生我們的，因為旨意先於生育；

1:260

in Unigeniti autem generatione, nulla generantis præcesait voluntas, ubi sine initio -naturali (al. naturalis) permanet æterna nativitas. Sicut ergo geniti sumus, sed non sicut unigenitus Deus ; et filii Dei sumus, sed non sicut unicus et ve rus Filius ; et dii sumus, sed non sicut Verbum, qui verus est Deus : ita in Deo sumus, et apud Deum sumus , sed non sicut apud Deum est et in Deo est Verbum Deus, qui de Deo naturaliter natus est:

but in the generation of the Only-begotten, no will of the one generating preceded, where without beginning the eternal nativity remains natural. As, then, we have been begotten, but not as the only-begotten God; and we are sons of God, but not as the one and true Son; and we are gods, but not as the Word, who is the true God: so we are in God, and we are with God, but not as the Word God, who is naturally born of God, is with God and in God:

但在獨生子的生育中，那生者的旨意並未在先，因那無始的永恆之生，乃是本性所固有的。因此，正如我們被生，卻不像那獨生的神；我們是神的兒女，卻不像那獨一而真實的子；我們是神，卻不像那身為真神的「道」：照樣，我們在神裡面、與神同在，卻不像那本性地由神而生、身為神的「道」，那樣與神同在、又在神裡面：

1:261

quamvis enim ille Filius dicatur et nos filii dicamur, et ille Deus et nos dii, et ille genitus et nos geniti, multum tamen distat in re quod unum sonare vide tur in nomine, quoniam ille, quod Deus, quod Filius, quod Unigenitus est, naturaliter est, quia de natura Patris natus est; nos autem , quod dii, quod filii, quod geniti sumus , non natura , sed gratia sumus, quia cum in natura non haberemus ut hoc esse pos semus, gratis nobis datum est ut hoc facti essemus. Hanc discretionem si hæretici, misericorditer Deo donante, 51 percipiant, lumen verum videbunt et ab unigeniti Filii contumeliis temperabunt:

for although he is called Son and we are called sons, and he is God and we are gods, and he is begotten and we are begotten, yet there is a great difference in reality in that which seems to sound as one in name; because he, in that he is God, that he is Son, that he is Only-begotten, is so naturally, because he is born of the nature of the Father; but we, in that we are gods, that we are sons, that we are begotten, are so not by nature but by grace, because whereas we did not have it in our nature that we could be this, it was freely given to us that we should be made this. If the heretics, God mercifully granting it, should perceive this distinction, they will see the true light and will refrain from the insults against the only-begotten Son:

因為雖然他被稱為子，我們也被稱為兒女，他是神，我們也是神，他是被生的，我們也是被生的，然而在名稱上看似同一，在實質上卻有極大的差別；因為他之為神、為子、為獨生子，乃是本性如此，因他是由父的本性所生；而我們之為神、為兒女、為被生的，卻不是憑本性，乃是憑恩典，因為當我們在本性上本無法成為這樣時，這乃是白白賜給我們，使我們得以被造成這樣。倘若異端，蒙神慈憐賜下，能領會這分別，他們就必看見真光，並必戒除對獨生子的侮慢：

1:262

cui non solum iu eo quod apud Deum est detrahunt, sed etiam el animam humanam in illo negare contendunt. Quos ipse Filius Dei uno psalmi versiculo designavit, dicens: Hoc opus eorum qui detrahunt mihi apud Deum, et qui loquuntur mala adversus animam meam (Psal. CVIII 20). Quis enim deterius Christo apud Deum detrahit quam qui audiens Verbum Deum apud Deum esse, dicit idem Verbum in Deo non esse ? Aut quis amplius mala adversus Christi animam loquitur, quam qui in Christo humanam animam diffitetur?

for they not only detract from him in that which is 'with God,' but also strive to deny in him a human soul. The Son of God himself designated these men in a single verse of a psalm, saying: 'This is the work of those who detract from me with God, and who speak evil against my soul' (Ps. CVIII, 20). For who detracts more grievously from Christ 'with God' than he who, hearing that the Word God is with God, says that the same Word is not in God? Or who speaks more evil against Christ's soul than he who denies a human soul in Christ?

因為他們不僅在那「與神同在」的事上詆毀他，甚至竭力否認他裡面有人的靈魂。神的子親自用詩篇的一節話指明這些人，說：「這是那些在神那裡詆毀我、並攻擊我性命、說惡言之人的作為」（詩一〇九20）。誰比那聽見身為神的「道」與神同在、卻說這同一位「道」不在神裡面的人，更嚴重地在神那裡詆毀基督呢？又有誰比那否認基督裡有人之靈魂的人，更攻擊基督的性命、說更多惡言呢？

1:263

cum illud Verbum , quod Deus est, sic apud Deum sit, de quo est, ut per unitatem naturae in Deo sit, et per eamdem unitatem naturæ unus cum illo Deus sit, et illa anima simul cum carne suscepta fuerit ab unigenilo Deo, ut simul in Christo et anima nos tra salvaretur et caro. A quo procul dubio ille sem piternam consequetur salutem, qui in eo divinæ hu manaeque naturæ plenam cognoverit veritatem.

since that Word, which is God, is so with God, of whom he is, that through the unity of nature he is in God, and through the same unity of nature he is one God with him; and that soul, together with the flesh, was assumed by the only-begotten God, so that at once in Christ both our soul and flesh might be saved. From whom, without doubt, that man will obtain everlasting salvation who has recognized in him the full truth of the divine and human nature.

因為那身為神的「道」，這樣與他所出自的神同在，以致藉著本性的合一而在神裡面，並藉著同一本性的合一而與他同為一神；並且那靈魂連同肉體，一同被獨生的神所取，使我們的靈魂和肉體在基督裡一同得救。凡在他裡面認清神性與人性之完全真理的人，必毫無疑問地從他得著永遠的救恩。

← prev part

ch. 2 →

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16