Interview with Professor Jack R. Lundbom (Part II)

PART II

Are prophecies characterized by the individual features or personalities of specific prophets? For example, how do we explain the images, diction, and strategies used by one prophet being different from those used by another?

先知发布的预言是否会因为个人特点或性格而有所区别？比如说我们如何来解释一个先知与另一个先知使用的意象、措辞和策略有所不同的情况呢？

Yes, of course. Prophets are individuals. Just compare Amos and Hosea. Amos is hard-hitting and very judgmental; there is not a lot of compassion in this prophet, while Hosea gives a very compassionate message. Even his view of God is different from that of Amos. For example, he preaches that God is very reluctant to give up his people; God says: “How can I give you up O Ephraim?” (Hos 11:8). So even the God portrayed by Hosea is different from the God portrayef by Amos. God has many aspects, of course, yet God is portrayed differently by different prophets. Jeremiah shows characteristics of both Amos and Hosea. He is hard-hitting, and yet very compassionate. Look also at Ezekiel, who does such bizarre things to dramatize his prophecies. Some scholars have thought that Ezekiel had mental illness. He lies on his back for 100 days at a time, and does things Jeremiah or other prophets would never think to do, but Ezekiel does them. So yes, prophets are still human and have their own characteristics. And they present a different window into the nature of God. One must recognize that.

是的，当然了。先知都是独立的个体。例如阿摩司和何西阿。阿摩司言辞犀利、厉行审判。 在阿摩司身上看不到太多的同情，相较而言何西阿的预言则极富同情。甚至他对上帝的看法都与阿摩司不同。比如，他宣扬上帝不愿放弃自己的子民。“以色列啊，我怎能弃绝你？”（何11:8），所以何西阿预言中上帝的形象与阿摩司预言中上帝的形象是不同的。上帝是有多面的，因而，不同先知预言中上帝的形象也是不同的。 耶利米先知身上既有阿摩司的犀利也兼具何西阿的同情。又如以西结，他是个常结异象的神。有些学者判断以西结患有精神疾病。他曾经卧床一百天，做了一些耶利米或是其他先知不会做的事情。 所以肯定的是，先知仍然是人，他们有自己的特点。我们必须认识到的是先知为我们提供了了解上帝本质的窗口。

Or we may say that these prophets work as mirrors that reflect the different aspects of God. But if prophets are interpreting the message of God in their individual ways, how can we make sure that the messages they are delivering are authentically the message of God?

或者我可以这样理解么：不同的先知好似镜子一样映射出上帝的不同方面。但是如果先知们是在按照自己的理解来传递信息，我们如何能确认他们传递的信息是真实无误的上帝的意旨呢？

You have to take it as it comes. Also, you cannot expect that God’s message is going to be the same from every one speaking for him. It is the same today. If you carefully analyze the preaching of good preachers—forget the bad preachers— you will see that they are different and you have to accept these differences. That is the complexity of revelation. Revelation does not issue in a unified view of God. You just have to just accept that.

先知如何预言我们就要如何接受。而且我们不能期待上帝的意旨从每个预言人口中传递的都如出一辙。即便如今，也依然如此。如果我们仔细分析教牧的传道内容（忘记那些不好的吧），我们会发现一些不同，也必须要接受这些不同。这正是上帝启示的复杂性，因为它们展现的并非上帝唯一的观点。在这种时候，我们只能接受上帝观点的多面性。

A related thing. Prophets are giving prophecy from their more or less personal perspective, but the message is delivered to an audience, often a public audience. Prophecy can address a king or another specific listener, but generally speaking, prophetic messages are public in nature. How can we find a balance between the private and the public?

我接下来的这个问题也与您上面的回答相关。这些先知在给出预言的时候或多或少会带有一些私人观点，但是信息是要传递给某位听众或者公众。预言有时是向过往或者某个特殊的听众发布的，但总体来说，先知预言本质上是面向公众的。那我们怎么来寻求面向个人的与公众的平衡点？

I don’t know. It is hard. One thing to keep in mind is that times change. So, for example, Isaiah in his time is the great prophet of peace, but Jeremiah, except for a few prophecies about the distant future, doesn't preach peace at all. The reason is that the prophets prophesying peace in his time are false prophets. Times have changed, and God’s message has changed. Here It is not so much that prophets are individuals who bring different messages, although that may have something to do with it. It is because the times have changed. What was true 100 years ago may not be true today, and that is what happened in the time of Jeremiah. The false prophets were preaching the message of Isaiah, but God wasn't giving that message. God had another message, so Jeremiah's preaching became different from the preaching of Isaiah. The genuine prophet responds correctly to the times in which he is living, and has to do it if he is going to get the message right. More than that I cannot say. This is a perceptive question and difficult to give a definitive answer. But when you look at the total picture, you simply have to recognize existing differences, try to understand them, and accept them.

这是个很难回答的问题。另一个要牢记在心的事实是时代在变迁。例如，在那个时代，以赛亚是一名宣扬和平的伟大先知，而耶利米除了少数几次对遥远的未来进行预言以外，他完全不教化关于和平的事情。这是因为在耶利米的时代，发布关于和平预言的先知是假先知。时代改变了，上帝的神谕也改变了。这并不是先知们因为个人原因而在传达信息上出现了小小差别，尽管也有些关系，但最主要的原因是时代改变了。百年前被看作是真理的话在今天可能不再是真理，耶利米时代正是这样的情况。假先知在发布以赛亚发布的预言，但并非上帝的神谕。上帝传递给耶利米不同的神谕，因而耶利米发布的预言与以赛亚不同。真正的先知会对他所生活的时代进行准确的预言，为了能够保证预言的准确性他们也必须这样做。这个问题，我大概说这么多。这是个非常有洞见的问题，很难给出一个确定的答案。我想当我们总揽全局之时，会发现不同并接受它们。

In your book Biblical Rhetoric and Rhetorical Criticism you are advocating a rhetorical approach to the biblical text. Would you please show us the advantage of this approach and how it will enable people to better understand messages contained in ure?

在您的《圣经修辞和修辞学批评》一书中，您提倡了一种用修辞学来解读圣经文本的方式。您是否可以阐述一下这种方式的优势，以及它如何辅助人们更好的理解圣经的信息？

Biblical rhetoric and rhetorical criticism are main interests of mine, and in the book you cited, my Jeremiahcommentary, other writings, and in my teaching at the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Hong Kong, as well as elsewhere, I have emphasized a rhetorical approach to interpreting the biblical text. I can perhaps give you a few examples of how biblical scribes wrote up their accounts and also compiled the compositions we now have in our Bible. Some of their scribal work is similar to what modern writers and editors do today, but some is different.

圣经修辞和修辞学批评是我研究的兴趣所在，在你提及的那本书中、我关于以赛亚的文章、其他的一些文章、以及我在香港信义宗神学院的教学中等等，我都强调过使用修辞学的角度来解读圣经文本。我用几个例子你就可以看到圣经的誊写者如何行文以及我们现在所读到的圣经是如何成书的。其中的一部分书写和我们如今的作家、编辑的工作是类似的，但也有一些不同。

First, rhetoric in writing up narrative. You know the great passage in 2 Samuel 7 of the Old Testament, where King David tells the prophet Nathan that he wants to build a house for Yahweh. He has a nice house himself, and the ark of God is just dwelling in a tent. Nathan says, “Go, do all that is in your heart, for Yahweh is with you.” But then, during the night, Nathan gets this message from Yahweh: “Go and tell David: Why should you build me a house? I will instead build you a house.” The scribe here preserves a play on the word “house,” which in Hebrew can mean both a building and a line of descendants. In rhetorical terms this is called “paronomasia.” David had in mind a house of stone and cedar, a temple, but Yahweh has in mind a house of descendants, a line of sons succeeding him. This was God’s eternal covenant to David, to give him an everlasting royal line. So when you read this passage you need to recognize the wordplay to gain an enriched interpretation.

首先，我们来看一下修辞在叙述中的应用。撒母耳记下第七章中大卫王告知先知拿单他起意为耶和华建立神殿。他自己的宫殿富丽堂皇，然而耶和华的约柜却放在幔子中。拿单说：“你可以按照你的心意而行，因为耶和华与你同在。”当夜，耶和华的话临到拿单：“你回去告诉我仆人大卫，说耶和华如此说：‘你岂可建造殿宇给我居住呢？我必将为你建立家室。”经卷的誊写者特意保留了对“房”一词的双关，因为在希伯来语中这个词可以指一栋建筑或者一脉衍生的后代。 大卫王口中的“房”是用石头和香柏木建造的殿宇；耶和华则允诺大卫一脉保持血脉的不断繁衍。这是上帝与大卫定立的永恒之约，也就是赐予他永恒不断的皇室血脉。因此，能够读懂这段文字的双关含义，便能更好的理解经文的内涵。

In the first chapter of Jeremiah, a look at keywords in the commission passage (Jer 1:15-19) indicates that a foe from the north is going to come against the walls of Jerusalem and the cities of Judah and destroy them, but Yahweh promises to make Jeremiah a fortified city and bronze walls, which is to say, Yahweh will protect him against all comers. He is going to have a hard time because people will not want to listen to preaching about the nation being brought to ruin. Nevertheless, Yahweh says to Jeremiah: “I am promising you a protection I will not give to Jerusalem and the cities of Judah.” So again, one needs to pay close attention to vocabulary and structure in the text. Here you have repeated keywords, and as often happens in rhetorical discourse, they are inverted when appearing the second time. This may seem like a small thing, but it is Hebrew rhetoric. Hebrew rhetoric is based on repetition, also inversions, and previous scholars reading this passage have commonly missed both.

耶利米书第一章（耶1:15-19）中授命叙事的部分记录了一个北方来的敌人将要攻击耶路撒冷周围的城墙并摧毁犹大的各城镇，但是耶和华许诺说会使耶利米成为坚城、铜墙，也就是说耶和华会保佑他不受到一切来者的伤害。他将度过一段艰难的时光，因为人们不愿听到城将要被摧毁的预言 。然而，耶和华对耶利米说：“我许诺你，保佑你，使你不会遭受同耶路撒冷和犹大城镇一样的毁灭。”同样的，文本中的词汇和结构需要认真研读。这里，我们看到一些关键词的重复，就像是在修辞话语中经常出现的那样，这些词在出现第二次的时候被倒置。这看起来微不足道，但是这确实是一种修辞。希伯来的修辞以重复为基础，倒置也是其中一种，之前不免出现在阅读到这一部分的时候忽略了其修辞的学者。

Rhetorical criticism also helps to delimit literary units, showing where the unit begins and ends. In Jeremiah and in other prophetic books you often need help in delimitation. The Psalms have numbers, so you know where they begin and end. In Genesis you also know where stories begin and end. It’s obvious. But in the prophetic books you often don't know where one unit ends and another begins, especially in the poetry. In Jeremiah one unit goes right into the next. But by using rhetorical criticism it is possible to do a better job of delimiting literary units, which can make a big difference in interpretation. Knowing the end of a unit may also give you some idea of the intended impact of the passage on its audience. Scholars in the past have not paid sufficient attention to the delimitation of units; they just begin and end where they want to, with the result that the passage is not interpreted properly and the impact upon its original audience is not correctly discerned.

修辞学批评有助于划分文本单元，可以标记出文本的篇章分割从哪里开始、在哪里结束。在耶利米书以及一些其它的经卷中，需要借助（修辞）来界定每一个篇章。赞美诗有编号，容易辨识出它从哪里开始、在哪里结束。在读创世纪的时候，也很明显能读懂故事的始终。但是在先知书中，尤其涉及诗歌的部分，篇章通常不易读出哪里开始哪里终结。耶利米书中，篇章紧紧相连 。然而，如果我们利用修辞学批评，或许可以更好地划分每一个文本单元，而这对解读文本会产生很大影响。知晓每个文本单元的划分，或许可以帮助预期这段文字想要传递给读者的影响。过去一些学者没有对此给予足够的重视，他们只是按照自己的理解来划分文本单元，这样有一些章节就没有得到恰当的解读，而对于最初的读者的影响也没被正确地辨识。

I’ll give you another example in Jeremiah 5:1-9, a passage I cite often in my classes. Here we have a chiastic structure of keywords and speaker, another intentional rhetorical structure. In a chiasmus key words, speakers, and sometimes audiences are arranged in an abba, abcba, or more expanded pattern. The discourse works up to a center point and then repeats in reverse order to the end. Earlier scholars have failed to recognize these patterns, but they are there, and need to be brought to light. Rhetorical criticism can do this, and once again, it will affect interpretation. Rhetorical criticism works particularly well in Jeremiah because Jeremiah is a dramatist who alternates voices in his poems and oracles. Scholars commonly miss this drama, assuming simply that since the prophet is a mouthpiece for God his words are God’s words. Well, that is true enough, but in Jeremiah you have to see how skillful this prophet is in crafting his poems and oracles. Changes in speaker and audience may be intentional.

咱们来看另一个例子，即耶利米书的5:1-9，我经常在课上讲到这一段。这个章节中用到了关键词和讲话者的交错结构（chiastic structure)，这是另一个有目的而为之的修辞结构。在一个交错结构中，关键词、讲话者，有时也包括读者，会被以ABBA或者ABCBA的方式或者更长的方式进行安排。语篇不断发展到中间点，并以反向排序重复直到回归到最初的句子 。之前的学者没能识别出这些规律，但是它们是存在的，也应该被注意到。修辞学批评可以做到这点，而修辞学批评的引入也会影响文本的解读。修辞学批评可以很好的应用于耶利米书的解读，因为耶利米是一个充满戏剧色彩的人，他在诗歌和神谕中会变换不同的口吻。 大部分学者会忽视这种戏剧感，简单地认为先知是上帝的发言人，发布的预言就是上帝的神谕。有时的确如此，但是在耶利米书中你会看到这位先知是如何巧妙地创作他的诗歌和神谕。讲话者和读者的变化或许都是有意而为之。

In Jer 5:1-9 is a poem of five stanzas in which Yahweh speaks first to a search party, telling them to go in search of a righteous man. If they find one, he will pardon Jerusalem (vv 1-2). Next Jeremiah speaks to Yahweh, telling Yahweh how intractable the people are (v 3). In the middle of the poem Jeremiah is talking to himself, making us privy to what was going on in his mind when he was out walking the city (vv 4-5ab). In the next stanza Jeremiah is speaking again to Yahweh, telling Yahweh that both small and great have broken the covenant yoke, and an enemy is sure to destroy his people (vv 5c-6). Finally, in the last stanza, Yahweh is again the speaker, asking Jerusalem how he can pardon her with such evil abounding? (vv 7-8). The structure is a chiasmus of repeated keywords and alternation of speaker / audience.

耶利米书5:1-9中有一首包含五个诗节的诗歌。最初，耶和华对一群人说，让他们去寻找公正之人。如果他们能找到，他就会赦免耶路撒冷（第一、二节）。之后耶利米对耶和华发言，他说到人们悖逆、不肯回头（第三节）。在中间部分，耶利米自言自语，让我们知道他在走出城时的内心所想(第四、五节)。随后的诗节中，耶利米再次对耶和华发炎，告知耶和华不论是贫穷的还是尊大的人都齐心将契约之轭折断，因此他们必受攻击（第五、六节）。在最后的诗节里耶和华再次发言，质问耶路撒冷她如此罪孽深重，如何才能赦免她？（第七、八节）。这里便是以重复的关键词和讲话者或者读者的变换而构成的交错结构。

The other important thing coming from a rhetorical analysis of this poem is that you see where it ends, and you find out that the conclusion in vv 7-8 is open-ended. Verse 9 is a later add-on. This is not the sort of preaching you get from Amos, who is more direct. He speaks Yahweh’s judgment, and you have to either take it or leave it. But here Yahweh asks Jerusalem how he can pardon the city when men are committing adultery and patronizing prostitutes. The people of Jerusalem will have to answer this question themselves. The prophet does not answer it for them. The poem is an echo of the story in Genesis 18, where, again, righteous persons could not be found in the wicked city of Sodom.

利用修辞学批评手段分析此诗，不难发现，在诗歌的收尾部分也即第七、八节保留了开放式的结尾。第九节是后来添加的。这样的神谕和阿摩斯所传播的神谕不同，后者更为直接。他发布耶和华的审判，读者或者接受或者拒绝。但是这里，耶和华质问耶路撒冷他怎能赦免这座城，这里的男人行奸淫之事，把娼妓养在家里。耶路撒冷的民众需要自行回答问题，先知没有为他们作出回答。这里的诗歌与创世纪第十八章呼应，也即在罪恶之城所多玛不会找到公义之人。

You have another good example of an open-ended message in Jesus’ New Testament parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32). The fellow squanders his inheritance, but then comes to his senses and returns home, now repentant of his waywardness, and of course the father is glad to see him, running and hugging him and telling his son how much he has missed him. The servants are told to kill the fatted calf so they can have a big feast. Then the older brother comes in from the field, and says, “What’s going on here? I've been serving you here at home and never disobeyed you, and now this fellow who has been wasting all your money comes back, and you welcome him and have a feast for him. You never gave me a feast to celebrate with my friends. I've been your faithful son all these years.” The father tries to reason with him. He says: “You are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.” He loves him just as much as the younger one. The older son is then invited to come into the party, but it doesn't sound like he wants to. Does he finally join the merrymakers? We don't know. The parable is left open-ended, and the people listening are left to decide whether he does come in. The Pharisees listening to the parable also have to decide whether they will enter the joyful Kingdom into which repentant sinners are being welcomed. This is powerful rhetoric.

新约中有关浪子回头的寓言中是另一个关于开放信息的很好的例子（路加福音15:11-32）。小儿子挥霍了父亲的遗产，回归理智后返回家庭，为他的任性而后悔， 父亲见到小儿子喜出望外，跑过去抱住他，向儿子诉说他的思念。这个父亲告诉仆人去宰一头肥牛，他们要一起吃一顿盛宴。随后他的大儿子从田地里回来，对他父亲说：“发生了什么，我服侍您这多年，从来没有违背过您的命令，但他吞尽您的产业才返回家中，您欢迎他并为他宰了肥牛犊。您从未赐予我一顿盛宴使得我和朋友同乐。我才是这些年对您忠心耿耿的儿子。”他的父亲宽慰他说，“你是一直和我在一起的，我的一切都是你的”。父亲对大儿子的喜爱程度和对小儿子的喜爱程度相同。他邀请大儿子也来参加宴会，但是大儿子并不想赴宴 。之后他究竟参加聚会了吗？我们不得而知。这是一个开放式的结尾，读者需要自己通过解读判断大儿子最终是否赴宴。听到这个寓言的法利赛人要决定自己是否要进入这个欢乐的王国，这个王国中悔改的罪人都会受到欢迎。这里也是一个非常有效的修辞的使用。

I’ll give you another example where rhetorical criticism aids in the interpretation of Jeremiah 7:1-15. Here older scholars talked about a “temple sermon” in the verses, but it is not a single sermon. The verses are three separate oracles delimited by messenger formulas, section markings (setumah and petucha), and three uses of the inclusio (repeated words at beginning and end). Three different criteria show the verses to contain three separate oracles. Why is this important? One reason, certainly, is that the preaching in the first oracle is conditional. This oracle says that if people amend their ways and do what the covenant requires, then Yahweh will let them remain in the land. The second oracle, however, indicts the people for willful covenant disobedience. They are stealing, murdering, committing adultery, swearing falsely, burning incense to Baal, and chasing after other gods they have not known. The third oracle states that Yahweh is going to destroy the Jerusalem temple just like he destroyed Israel’s first sanctuary at Shiloh, which is judgment pure and simple. Older scholars had a problem explaining how a single sermon could go from conditional preaching to unmitigated judgment, but if you show the verses to contain three separate oracles, each retains its own integrity even if all happened to have been spoken in sequence on a single occasion. Here rhetorical criticism gives integrity to the text and improves the interpretation.

接下来我们来看耶利米书7:1-15。之前的学者曾经就篇章中的“神殿发布的神谕”进行探讨，这并不是一次单独的神谕发布。篇章中包含三条独立的神谕，分别用预言结构、段落标记、以及三次首位呼应的方法来界定神谕的界限。三个不同的界定标准标志出三个单独的神谕。为什么这很重要呢？其一、第一条神谕的发布是有条件的，神谕中预言如果人们改正行为，按照契约行事，耶和华就会使他们在这地方继续居住。第二条神谕指责人们任性的违背契约，偷盗、杀戮、奸淫、做假证、敬拜巴力，追随其他的崇拜。第三条神谕预言耶和华将毁灭耶路撒冷的神殿，就如同他在示罗曾毁灭以色列的第一个圣所，这条神谕就是直接而简明的审判。过去的学者存在的问题在于他们难以解释一条单独的神谕如何从有条件的预言发布逐渐演变成为严厉的审判。但如果能够读出这个篇章中有三条单独的神谕，即便是在同一个场合进行发布，每一条都具备独立的完整性。这里修辞学批评赋予了文本一种完整性，并帮助文本进行释读。

My final example is from the concluding confession in Jer 20:14-18. The confession ends with a question. Life has been extremely difficult for the prophet, and Jeremiah has cursed the day he was born and the man who brought his father the gladsome news. He asks at the very end “Why from the womb came I forth,” but gets no answer. The great German scholar Gerhard von Rad says the God that Jeremiah addresses no longer answers him. Yes, but when the First Edition of the book of Jeremiah was compiled, which in my view consisted of chapters 1-20, an answer did come to the prophet’s wrenching question. At the very beginning of the book Yahweh told Jeremiah: “Before I formed you in the belly I knew you, and before you came forth the womb I declared you holy; a prophet to the nations I made you” (Jer 1:5). Here then is the answer to Jeremiah’s question. It does not come after the confession, where one would expect it. It comes at the beginning of the book. When the First Edition of the book of Jeremiah was read in its entirety, which is how it would have been read in antiquity, those hearing it would make the connection. At some point someone had to tell Jeremiah: “Look! God spoke to you when you were just a boy and gave you an answer about why you were born. It is as good today as it was then.” This is ancient Hebrew rhetoric, and rhetorical criticism of the biblical text enables one to uncover meaning that was originally intended. Scholars not paying sufficient attention to ancient Hebrew rhetoric will miss the point.

最后一个例子是耶利米书20:14-18的忏悔。这段忏悔以问题作为结尾。对于先知耶利米来说，生活异常苦难，于是耶利米诅咒他出生的日子以及为他父亲报喜讯的人。他在最后问道：“我为何出胎”，但是没有得到答复。著名的德国学者格哈德·冯·拉德说这里上帝不再回答耶利米的问题了。是的，但是在耶利米书的第一版编辑完成时（在我看来是包括第一至第二十章）其中对于困扰先知耶利米的问题提供了答案 。开篇，耶和华即告知耶利米：“我未将你造在腹中，我已晓得你；你未出母胎，我已分别你为圣；我已派你作列国的先知”（耶1:5）。这已然是对耶利米的回答。答案不如人们预期一般在忏悔结束后出现，而是在一开始便给出了。当人们像古代的人一样把整个耶利米书的第一版读下来，就会产生这样的联想。在某个时刻，应该有人告知耶利米：“上帝早就给了你答案，当你还是个男孩的时候，上帝已经说明了你出生的缘故，这个缘故也从未改变 。”这是一个古老的希伯来修辞方式，而对圣经文本的修辞学批评可以帮助我们去更靠近文本本身的阐述意图。而忽视古希伯来修辞的学者们在解读文本时就可能出现偏差。

Do you support people who are not believers to have a literary interpretation of the prophetic books instead of a theological one? How do we strike a balance between these two approaches?

您是否支持非信徒对先知书进行文学解读而非神学解读？我们应该如何在两种解读方式中寻求到平衡点呢？

Anyone—believer or nonbeliever—can benefit from a literary study of the prophetic books. There is no need to strike any balance. Even though the prophet’s message was delivered to people who came under the covenant God made with Israel, the prophets also addressed people who did not come under this covenant. All the writing prophets, with the single exception of Hosea, gave oracles against foreign nations, which consisted of people who didn't have any covenant with Yahweh. The prophets spoke judgment against them for inhumane behavior, reckless living, pride, and other acts of wickedness. As far as the literary interpretation of the prophetic writings are concerned, I think anybody can benefit from a study of them. The Bible is great literature. It is more than that for the believer, yet it can be of value to anyone. Preaching of the Hebrew prophets can be useful anywhere today in the world, to censure people who act wrongly according to any generally accepted standard of behavior. The God of the Bible does not speak only to religious people. This God speaks to any and every people. Why? Because he is the God of the whole world. That, I think, is the bottom line.

所有人，不论是信徒还是非信徒，都可以从希伯来先知的文学研究中受益。所以没有必要去寻求平衡点。尽管许多预言是向与上帝立约的以色列子民发布的，但先知们也会对其他人发布预言。所有的写作先知，除何西阿以外，都曾对其他国家发布神谕，进行谴责，这里也包括没有和耶和华立约的人们。先知们也会对残忍、鲁莽、骄傲或者其他恶行进行审判。对先知的书写进行文学解读，我想所有人都可以从中受益。圣经是一部伟大的文学作品，对信徒来说它当然不仅仅是文学作品，但它对所有人来说都是有价值的。希伯来先知的训诫在当下都至关重要，根据普世价值来谴责不当的行为。圣经不只是给有宗教信仰的人，而是面向所有的人的一部典籍。为什么呢？因为从基督教信仰的角度来看，他是全世界的上帝，我想这是一条底线。

采访/ Tony Huang/ Nancy He

校译/ Nancy He

编辑/ 李库晴

鸣谢/ 元极教育文化孵化基金 /天津桃李源文化基金会

元圈圈

元圈圈(Metacircle)是一個讀書、品書、評書、薦書、旨在重新發現書之美好、閱讀之幸福、分享之趣味的平台。這是喜書者的樂園，是閱讀與精神的保留地。

微信号: metacircle

Hash:29dad5e239b100817ac11f1526cff7fbe3090cb0