〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》/ 柯志明教授

「我們敢斷言，如果一個聖經學者堅持只有那些通過歷史鑑別的聖經內容才是可信的，那麼幾乎整本聖經都是不可信的，因為整本聖經都在陳述上帝與人之間互動的事件以及上帝對人的言說；而既然上帝無法成為歷史鑑別研究的對象，那麼所有上帝在歷史中的行動與言說對歷史批判研究者而言就都是不可信的，至少是可疑的。因此一個以歷史批判研究為前提的基督信仰必定是不可置信的」（柯志明，〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》，頁73）。

“We dare to assert that if a biblical scholar insists that only the contents of the Bible identified through history are credible, then almost the entire Bible is unreliable, because the entire Bible states the events of interaction between God and humans and God’s words to people; since God cannot be the object of the research of historical identification, all God’s actions and words in history are untrustworthy, at least suspicious, to researchers of historical criticism. Therefore, a Christian faith based on the research of historical criticism must be unbelievable” (Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, “The Nature and Authority of the Bible,” Bibliology, page 73).

「許多經驗是科學可實證的，但許多經驗則不是；真實的或許能被科學證實，但不能被科學證實的絕不等於不真實；科學證實的應是合理的，但合理的未必就是科學的；可能的存在或許能被科學證實，但不能被科學證實的未必不可能存在。顯然，可能的大於真實的，真實的大於合理的，合理的大於經驗的，經驗的大於科學的」（柯志明，〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》，頁74）。

“Many experiences are scientifically provable, but many experiences are not; what is true may be verified by science, but what cannot be verified by science is never equal to untrue; what is proven by science should be reasonable, but what is reasonable is not necessarily scientific; the possible existence may be verified by science, but what cannot be verified by science is not necessarily impossible. Obviously, possibility is greater than truth, truth is greater than rationality, rationality is greater than experience, and experience is greater than science” (Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, “The Nature and Authority of the Bible,” Bibliology, page 74).

「以歷史科學研究聖經的根本價值在於確立聖經的歷史真實性…...」

“The fundamental value of studying the Bible with historical science is to establish the historical authenticity of the Bible”

「然而，聖經的歷史研究必須同時承認，聖經的內容原則上無法藉由歷史科學研究而加以證立，因為作為聖經主角的上帝及其歷史活動全然超出人類的科學研究之外……歷史科學本身沒有探究上帝及其作為的能力」（柯志明，〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》，頁74）。

“However, the historical study of the Bible must also acknowledge that the content of the Bible cannot be justified by the research of historical science, because God as the protagonists of the Bible and His historical activities are completely beyond the scientific research of mankind ... Historical science itself has no ability to explore God and His actions” (Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, “The Nature and Authority of the Bible,” Bibliology, page 74).

「聖經內容原則上無法被歷史科學證成時，我們所否定的不是歷史科學的價值，也不在否定歷史科學對理解聖經可有幫助，而在否定聖經不應『只』以歷史科學研究作為理解的前提與方法」（柯志明，〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》，頁79）。

“When the content of the Bible cannot be verified by historical science, what we negate is not the value of historical science, nor does it negate that historical science can be helpful in understanding the Bible, but in negating that the research of historical science should be the ‘only’ prerequisites and methods of understanding the Bible” (Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, “The Nature and Authority of the Bible,” Bibliology, page 79).

「基督徒完全不排斥歷史科學對聖經的檢驗，基督徒所拒絕的是：意圖將聖經神化或文學化或虛構化而對聖經採取一種沒有方法論的科學主義理解方式。相反地，基督徒宣稱，當人們以合理的理解方式或科學態度對待聖經時，聖經所言將與有關世界以及人類存在之知識具有高度的一致性。基督徒甚至要宣稱，唯獨根據聖經所言才能合理、正確、深刻地說明及理解世界與人類，是所有人類學問都無法企及的」（柯志明，〈聖經的本性與權威〉，《聖經論》，頁80）。

“Christians do not reject the examination of historical science into the Bible at all. What Christians reject is that they intend to mythologize or fictionalize the Bible and adopt a scientific understanding of the Bible without methodology. On the contrary, Christians claim that when people treat the Bible with a reasonable understanding or scientific attitude, what the Bible says will be highly consistent with knowledge about the world and human existence. Christians even have to claim that only according to the Bible can we reasonably, correctly and profoundly explain and understand the world and mankind, which is beyond the reach of all human studies” (Immanuel Chih-Ming Ke, “The Nature and Authority of the Bible,” Bibliology, page 80).

(英文部分為版主試譯)