210。拣选和预定不是基要教义，加尔文主义的危险（钟马田，小草译）

作者：钟马田（Martyn Lloyd Jones） 译者：小草

我是加尔文主义者；我相信拣选和预定的教义；但我不会把这些置于基要教义之下，而是把它们归于非基要的类别。你得救并不是因为你准确地明白这伟大的救赎是怎么临到你的。你必须要清楚的是，你迷失了，是该死的，没有盼望，也很无助，除了神在耶稣基督里的恩典，再也没有别的能救你。唯独耶稣被钉十字架，担当了你的罪债，祂受死，复活，升天，差下圣灵，使你重生得救。这些才是基要真理。

虽然我本人对这个问题持有很明确和坚定的观点，但对于一个不能接受和相信拣选和预定教义的阿民念主义者，我并不会因此与他分离，只要他告诉我，我们都是因神的恩典而得救。只要加尔文主义者赞同，也是必须赞同的，神呼召各地的人都要悔改。只要双方在这些事情有一致的观点，那么我们就决不能断绝团契。因此，我将拣选和预定的教义归于是非基要的类别。 （摘译自 2015年出版的钟马田传记：《Martyn Lloyd-Jones: His Life and Relevance for the 21st Century》，原文见附图）

没有循道主义（Methodism）的加尔文主义往往会导致唯智主义（intellectualism）和学术主义（scholasticism ），这是对加尔文主义特别的诱惑。其结果就是，人们更多地谈论 "我们所掌握的真理"，而不是 "掌管我们的真理"。 没有循道主义的加尔文主义容易出现的另一个危险是，信仰告白不再是次要的准则，而是倾向于成为主要和最高的准则，以致于取代了圣经的地位。我只是在说倾向性，并不是说这种情况发生在所有加尔文主义者身上。虽然我们会公开宣称，这些信条是 "次要的准则"；圣经是首要的，然后才是信条。但总存在着这样的危险，那就是，加尔文主义者可能会颠倒这个圣经与信条的主次关系。 这里还有一个问题，那就是，讲道是在讲解要理问答而不是讲解圣经，这样做是否正确？这是应该被考查的问题。加尔文主义的循道会不是用要理问答来讲道。他们整个的偏好是与司布真一样，也就是你甚至不该做系列的讲道，而是每个讲道都应该仰望神赐给你。我的意思是，你要仰望神赐给你传讲的信息，这就是加尔文循道会所强调的。所以，笼统地说，无论如何都存在改变信条的地位的危险，以致信条不再是次要的准则。（节译自《William Williams and Welsh Calvinistic Methodism 》）

英文原文：

I am a Calvinist; I believe in election and predestination; but I would not dream of putting it under the heading of essential. I put it under the heading of non-essential… You are not saved by your precise understanding of how this great salvation comes to you. What you must be clear about is that you are lost and damned, hopeless and helpless, and that nothing can save you but the grace of God in Jesus Christ and only Him crucified, bearing the punishment of your sins, dying, rising again, ascending, sending the Spirit, regeneration. Those are the essentials…

While I myself hold very definite and strong views on the subject, I will not separate from a man who cannot accept and believe the doctrines of election and predestination, and is Arminian, as long as he tells me that we are all saved by grace, and as long as the Calvinist agrees, as he must, that God calls all men everywhere to repentance. As long as both are prepared to agree about these things I say we must not break fellowship. So I put election into the category of non-essentials.

--- From：《Martyn Lloyd-Jones: His Life and Relevance for the 21st Century》

Calvinism without Methodism tends to lead to intellectualism and scholasticism - that is its peculiar temptation. The result is that men talk more about 'the Truth we hold', rather than about 'the Truth that holds us'.

Another danger which Calvinism without Methodism is prone to is that Confessions of Faith, instead of being subordinate standards, tend to be the primary and supreme standard, replacing the Bible in that position. I am only talking about tendencies, and not saying that this happens to all Calvinists. Officially we say that these Confessions are the 'subordinate standard'; the Bible comes first, then these. But there is always a danger that the Calvinist may reverse the order.

A question arises here - it has already been suggested in one of our discussions. It is the whole question of the rightness of preaching from and through the Catechism rather than preaching through and from the Bible itself. I am simply putting it up as a question which we need to examine. The Calvinistic Methodists did not preach through the Catechism. Their whole tendency was to say - as was the tendency of Charles Haddon Spurgeon - that you should not even preach a series of sermons, but that each sermon should be 'given' to you, that you look to God for your sermons. I mean by that, that you look to God for your text and the message you are to deliver. That was the emphasis of Calvinistic Methodism. So I put it in this general way by saying that there is at any rate a danger that we may change the position of the Confession, and it ceases to be the 'subordinate' standard.

From：《William Williams and Welsh Calvinistic Methodism 》

附图：截自《Martyn Lloyd-Jones: His Life and Relevance for the 21st Century》一书