Bible Taught or Spirit Taught?
by A.W. Tozer
或許有人會感到震驚，因為連我都認為接受聖經的教導和接受聖靈的教導兩者之間有差異。不過，確是如此。
接受過信仰基礎知識的教導，卻仍對信仰的全貌一無所知？這絕對有可能。同樣，也可能精通聖經教義，卻仍然沒有獲得屬靈的啟蒙？結果就是心靈上仍然蒙著一層紗，使人無法領悟真理的屬靈本質。
我們大多數人都熟悉這樣的教會：從孩子們很小的時候就開始教他們聖經，讓他們長時間學習教義問答，在牧師的課堂上進一步訓練他們，但仍然無法在他們身上培養出活潑的基督教信仰或充滿活力的敬虔品格。他們的成員沒有絲毫脫離死亡、進入永生的跡象。聖經中明確指出的得救的標誌，在他們身上都找不到。他們的宗教生活規範得體，也算合乎道德，但卻完全機械僵化，毫無光彩可言。他們佩戴信仰，就像過去哀悼者佩戴黑色臂章，以表達對逝者的愛與敬意一樣。
這些人不能簡單地被視為偽君子。他們中的許多人對此表現得異常認真，甚至有些可悲。他們只是盲目而已。由於缺乏靈性，他們被迫依附於信仰的外在形式，而他們內心深處卻渴望屬靈的真諦，只是渾然不知自己究竟出了什麼問題。
聖多瑪斯Thomas à Kempis在一篇獻給主的溫柔小禱文中，很好地闡述了信條宗教與聖靈宗教之間的這種區別：「以色列人從前對摩西說：『你與我們說話，我們必聽；但不要讓神與我們說話，免得我們死亡。』主啊，我懇求你，不要這樣；我乃是與先知撒母耳一同謙卑懇切地祈求：『主啊，請說，僕人聽見。』不要讓摩西或任何先知對我說話，而要你說話，主上帝啊，眾先知的啟迪者和啟迪者；因為唯有你才能完全教導我，而他們若沒有你也毫無益處。他們或許能言善辯，卻不能賜下聖靈。他們言辭優美，但若你沉默，他們便無法點燃人心。他們傳授字面意義，而你開啟其內涵；他們揭示奧秘，而你解開謎團……他們只注重外表，而你教導並啟迪人心……他們用言語吶喊，而你使聆聽者領悟真諦。」
沒有比這更好的總結了。其他人也曾以各種方式表達過類似的觀點；然而，最廣為人知的說法可能是：「要理解聖經，必須以當初啟示聖經的聖靈來閱讀。」大家都承認這一點，但即使是這個說法，若沒有聖靈的感動，聽者也難以領會。
自由派人士常指責我們是“聖經崇拜者”，這種說法或許並非如批評者所言屬實；但坦誠和自我反省會迫使我們承認，他們的指責往往不無道理。在那些信仰正統、無可置疑的宗教人士中，有時也會出現一種對經文字面意義的盲目依賴，而對經文的精神卻缺乏絲毫理解的情況。我們若想真正認識真理，就必須時時謹記真理的本質是屬靈的。耶穌基督本身就是真理，祂不能只限於言語，即便我們堅信，祂親自啟示了這些言語。屬靈的事物無法被墨水封閉，也無法被文字和紙張束縛。書籍所能做的，不過是向我們呈現真理的字面意思。如果我們能獲得超越文字的真理，那必定是聖靈的賜予。
靈性飢渴之人當務之急有二：第一，認識聖經，因為若不認識聖經，主就不會賜予救贖真理；第二，蒙聖靈光照，因為若不蒙聖靈光照，就不能明白聖經。
It may shock some readers to suggest that there is a difference between being Bible taught and being Spirit taught. Nevertheless it is so.
It is altogether possible to be instructed in the rudiments of the faith and still have no real understanding of the whole thing. And it is possible to go on to become expert in Bible doctrine and not have spiritual illumination, with the result that a veil remains over the mind, preventing it from apprehending the truth in its spiritual essence.
Most of us are acquainted with churches that teach the Bible to their children from their tenderest years, give them long instruction in the catechism, drill them further in pastor's classes, and still never produce in them a living Christianity nor a virile godliness. Their members show no evidence of having passed from death unto life. None of the earmarks of salvation so plainly indicated in the Scriptures are found among them. Their religious lives are correct and reasonably moral, but wholly mechanical and altogether lacking in radiance. They wear their faith as persons in mourning once wore black arm bands to show their love and respect for the departed.
Such persons cannot be dismissed as hypocrites. Many of them are pathetically serious about it all. They are simply blind. From lack of the vital Spirit they are forced to get along with the outward shell of faith, while all the time their deep hearts are starving for spiritual reality and they do not know what is wrong with them.
This difference between the religion of creed and the religion of the Spirit is well set forth by the saintly Thomas in a tender little prayer to his Lord: "The children of Israel in time past said unto Moses, 'Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.' Not so, Lord, not so, I beseech Thee; but rather with the prophet Samuel, I humbly and earnestly entreat, 'Speak, Lord; for your servant hears.' Let not Moses speak unto me, nor any of the prophets, but rather do You speak, 0 Lord God, the inspirer, enlightener of all the prophets; for You alone without them canst perfectly instruct me, but they without You can profit nothing. They indeed may utter words, but they cannot give the Spirit. Most beautifully do they speak, but if You be silent, they inflame not the heart. They teach the letter, but You openest the sense; they bring forth mysteries, but Thou unlockest the meaning of sealed things. . . They work only outwardly, but Thou instructest and enlightenest the heart. . . They cry aloud with words, but Thou impartest understanding to the hearing."
It would be hard to wrap it up better than that. The same thing has been said variously by others; however, the most familiar saying probably is, "The Scriptures, to be understood, must be read with the same Spirit that originally inspired them." No one denies this, but even such a statement will go over the heads of those who hear it unless the Holy Spirit inflames the heart.
The charge often made against us by Liberals, that we are "bibliolaters," is probably not true in the same sense as meant by our detractors; but candor and self-analysis will force us to admit that there is often too much truth in their charge. Among religious persons of unquestioned orthodoxy there is sometimes found a dull dependence upon the letter of the text without the faintest understanding of its spirit. That truth is in its essence spiritual must constantly be kept before our minds if we would know the truth indeed. Jesus Christ is Himself the Truth, and He cannot be confined to mere words even though, as we ardently believe, He has Himself inspired the words. That which is spiritual cannot be shut in by ink or fenced in by type and paper. The best a book can do is to give us the letter of truth. If we ever receive more than this, it must be by the Holy Spirit who gives it.
The great need of the hour among persons spiritually hungry is twofold: First, to know the Scriptures, apart from which no saving truth will be vouchsafed by our Lord; the second, to be enlightened by the Spirit, apart from whom the Scriptures will not be understood.
