湃 恩
引 言
里昂的愛任紐（Irenaeus
of Lyons, 130～202），生於公元2世紀小亞細亞的早期基督教的主教，[1] 被視為頭一位教會系統神學家，其著作奠定了早期基督教神學發展。[2] 根據傳統，他是使徒約翰門徒坡雷卡（Polycarpus，69～156）的學生，師承使徒約翰的統緒，[3] 也繼承使徒保羅的教導。[4] 在第2世紀各種侵擾教會的異端當中，以衝著福音的中心—基督的位格與其工作的諾斯底派（Gnostics）的危害最大，其中以華倫天努學派（Valentinians）為首。[5] 愛任紐面對著這嚴峻困境，他重新闡述保羅的獨特用辭『oikonomia』（經世計劃）[6]，用之來統合舊約的啟示和新約的使徒教導，[7] 並以耶穌基督的位格和工作，為其所架構之神學的中心點，來對抗諾斯底派。
本文旨在從愛任紐的基督論來探討神這『經世計劃』的意義。首先，探討基督的位格在愛氏對oikonomia理解中的位置：愛氏認為基督道成肉身，成了具有真實神人二性的神人，是三一神完成祂oikonomia之目標的基礎和關鍵，而這目標乃是人性的聖化。接著探究基督的工作在oikonomia裡的功用：愛氏看基督開創了新人性，並率先經過『下降與上升』歷程，又與信徒聯合，使他們不斷地有分於三一神而使人性逐漸上升，最終分享神聖榮耀，達到神原初創造的目的，完成了神的oikonomia之目標和計劃。最後，總結愛氏神學中oikonomia的神學意義，及對後世神學發展及今日教會見證的影響。
第一部分：探討oikonomia下之基督的位格
愛任紐最重要的著作為駁斥當時日漸茁壯的諾斯底主義而著的《反異端》（Against Heresies，AH）。這主義起源複雜，混雜了東方神祕宗教及西方希臘哲學思想。[8] 但簡言之，它是一種極端二元對立思想：視物質世界為邪惡，靈界為美善。人的靈魂原為神性一部，因墮落跌入身體的『牢獄』中。人的救恩只能由『從至高者而來的智者』帶來的『隱密的智慧』（gnosis）而得。[9] 愛氏察覺到，若按此觀念，一個擁有真實肉身之基督必定不能作為人類的救贖者，也無法是世界的創造者。這樣敵視物質與漠視歷史，必定嚴重地違悖使徒的見證並動搖福音的救恩。故此，愛氏窮半生力抗諾斯底主義。[10]
愛氏首先要證明使徒們所教導並傳承下來的救恩福音，是坐落在『一位且是同一位主（the one and the
same Lord）』身上，[11] 救贖者基督就是那位創造萬有的神。而基督的道成肉身更是整個救贖的關鍵。神的兒子（道）必須成為有血有肉的人，真實經歷人性生活，才能拯救與恢復墮落的人性。如果祂非同時是真神和真人，救恩便沒有可能。他在駁斥中以弗一10的anakephalaiosis（同歸於一，recapitulation）（意『重新作頭』）闡釋使徒的教導：他認為基督的救贖，乃是給人性提供新的起頭。[12] 整個『同歸於一』的過程，是按著神所定下的oikonomia，以耶穌基督的道成肉身為高峰。Oikonomia這辭在《反異端》第三部算起，[13] 共出現107次之多，[14] 反映它是愛氏架構其神學的主軸，要將萬有都統攝在基督裡面：
耶穌基督來到，按照神的整個經世計劃（oikonomia），使萬有在祂裡面匯聚（anakephalaiosis）。然而，祂在各方面都是人，神的塑造之物：故此，祂親自把人帶入自己裡面，不可見的成為可見的，無法被理解的成為可被理解的，不可受苦的成為可受苦的，道被造成為人，將萬有總和於自身之內：好叫在天以外的、屬靈的、和看的見的事物中居有至高無上的地位，並使得自己成為最超越的，並在指定的時候，將萬有都歸於自己。[15]
對愛氏來說，人類的罪與墮落始於第一個人亞當的不順服。基督來成了『第二亞當』，在祂人性中順服神，不但扭轉了人因第一亞當墮落所進入的敗壞，恢復人原初『神的形像』，更使人藉分享祂的新人性，成為新族類，把人性提昇到墮落前也未曾經歷到的境界：[16]
當祂成為肉身時，祂將整個人類總括在祂自己身上，以將救恩賜給我們。這樣，我們在亞當裡所喪失之神的形像，可以在基督耶穌裡恢復過來。…神在基督裡面重新作人古老構造的頭（recapitulated），使祂可以除去罪和死的權勢，使人重生，故祂的工作是真實的。[17]
愛氏清楚指出道成肉身和救贖的一個目標：就是使人性更新變化，成為分享神性的人（彼後一4），進入不朽壞之中。愛氏這個救贖觀念，後來的教父稱為『聖化』（deification）或『神化』（theosis）。[18] 如此，愛氏認為在神的oikonomia中展現了一個『交換公式』（Exchange Formula）[19]：
基督道成肉身，將人性與神性聯合，開創了受造的與非受造的聯合，這使神在祂oikonomia中的目標成為可能。道成肉身的事件，背後是按照神所定下的oikonomia進行，要藉著『聖化』最終達到『同歸於一』。[22]
第二部分：探討oikonomia下之基督的工作
愛任紐看道成肉身只是『同歸於一』，即人到達神那裡去的旅程，成為不朽壞之先決條件，這目標還需要神與信徒聯合使他們有分才能完成。[23] 愛氏特別使用koinónia（在基督裡有分，participation in Christ）[24] 這辭來描述。這辭在《反異端》中使用超過80次，意思非『個體聚合』或『本體上合併』，而是描述神在基督裡使信徒分享祂生命的方式。[25] Paul Lebeau認為，愛氏整個神學可以koinónia來總括表示。[26]
愛氏分析當時諾斯底派的教訓，表面上他們是持二元對立及徹底分隔的宇宙觀，認為整個受造界都是在邁向崩潰和分散，是出於一個神性源頭的一系列流出（emanation），而人內裡有一部分叫『靈』（pneuma）或『火花』（spark），正是這神性的流出，但被困於受造界內。人的得救就在藉『智慧』與那至高神明的靈體感通，而逐漸脫離敗壞肉身和物質界，邁向那神性（the One）。[27] 故此，諾派的救恩觀其實是一元的（monistics）。[28] 愛氏認為按著諾派觀念，人的『靈』若是神性的延伸（extension of the divinity），神與人的區別就會被抺去，神人聯合裡的koinónia也隨之失去。[29] 因此，他的反駁方式是：（一）重建『神創造—人受造』分界線（Creator-creature
line），及（二）重述神與人聯合裡的koinónia。首先，他指人作為受造物，人存在意義在於作接受者（receiver），不斷地有分於三一神，使他人性逐漸向創造者上升（ascend）[30] 而邁向完全（perfection）。最終與創造者相像，[31] 分享祂的神聖榮耀。[32] 如此，人才達到神造人的目的。[33] 而這神聖榮耀乃是存在於koinónia內。[34]
並且，愛任紐指受造的人性『上升』是照著三一神oikonomia所定下之『下降』（descent）與『上升』的模式：三一神先起始進到人性裡，最後帶著人回到祂自己裡面。[35] 子基督和聖靈正是協助父完成祂這旨意的『雙手』（two hands）（AH, 4.Pref）：[36]
靠著父的設計和旨意，子的執行和行動，靈的澆灌和加添，受造的人一步步地向上，達到完全，那就是接近那非受造者。[37]
這就是那些得救之人的進程，他們是按照這種步驟前進的：他們是由聖靈而上升到子那裡，再由子上升到父那裡。[38]
（一）從亞當至基督—神所創造的亞當雖是美好的，卻並未完全。[40] 人的命定是要先學習作受造者（『下降』），在愛裡相信並順服造他的主，[41] 藉著不斷地接受祂的生命與對祂恩典的回應，就漸漸成長上升，達致完全，有分創造者的榮耀，而成為神（gods）。[42] 這『上升』全在於koinónia，並非如諾派的救贖觀般抺殺了『創造—受造』間的區別及兩者間的koinónia。[43]
（二）從基督至聖靈降下—按照預定的計劃，時候滿足時，基督先『下降』取了人性，成了第二亞當。祂開創新人性，[44] 重新恢復亞當失去之神的形像，重現人性『上升』的可能。[45] 然後，祂重演第一亞當的歷史，藉著順服至死敗壞了罪和死後，[46] 自己先經歷復活與『上升』，帶著復活的身體升到父那裡，領先『進入榮耀裡』（來二10），成了『初熟果子』（林前十五23）和『長子』（firstborn Son）。基督的人性使神人間的koinónia成為可能，預備將信徒作成『眾子』跟隨祂進入榮耀（羅八29～30）。反觀，諾派的救贖觀因徹底撇除基督的成肉身與祂身體復活的真實，koinónia就沒有可能。[47]
（三）從聖靈降下至基督再臨—神自列祖各時代以來，藉著祂的靈，已開始一面訓練和預備人，使人類習慣與祂有koinónia，[48] 另一面預備好基督的人性，讓祂與人聯合。[49] 基督『上升』後降下聖靈，澆灌在一切屬肉體之人身上。這靈是人類藉以上升到父的『梯子』[50]。聖靈分賜神的生命，領人主觀經驗與三一神的koinónia，最終將人的靈、魂、體三部分，都提高到神的生命裡，完全彰顯神的形像和榮耀。[51] 這點反駁了諾派的『靈界—物質』二元對立觀，這觀廢棄人性的完整，以及神完全（holistic）的救恩。[52]
這憑據（聖靈）既留在我們裡面，就使我們成為屬靈的人，於是這必死的，就被不死吞滅了。然而這事成就，並不是由於將肉體取消，而是由於與聖靈相通。[53]
完全的人包含肉體，魂，和靈三部分。三者中拯救人而形成人者，乃是靈。那聯結起來，具有形體者，乃是肉體。介乎靈與肉體之間者為魂。…凡敬畏神，又相信祂的兒子降世，因信而有神的靈在心裡的人，乃得稱為清潔，屬靈，向神活著的人，因為他們有神的靈，這靈清潔之人，並將人提高到神的生命。[54]
總括而言，愛氏認為『神的經世計劃』就是將萬有『同歸於一』於元首基督裡，這是神創造的目的與救贖的目標，而基督也是神達成此目標的憑藉：神在子裡創造人（God makes in the Son），人也在子裡正被造成為神的兒子（Men are
being made in the Son）。[55]。在『神的經世計劃』裡：基督的成肉身是信徒聖化的基礎和中心；模成基督的形像是信徒聖化的目標；基督的『下降與上升』歷程是信徒聖化的模式；有分於基督是信徒聖化的方式（way）；最後，基督的靈是信徒聖化的憑藉（means）。可見，愛氏理解整個oikonomia是與基督的位格與工作（救贖）緊密連繫著。總結，筆者嘗試將以上討論簡化作以下圖表表達：
第三部分：總結愛氏神學中oikonomia的意義
Oikonomia這辭原由oikos與nomos組成，本意為家庭中的管理法則或職責的監管。[56] 使徒保羅將之指涉神救恩的計畫、行政管理、秩序。這辭最合適用以作連繫並架構聖經中各論的主軸。作為熟悉保羅教導的愛任紐，[57] 亦同樣以oikonomia作為他的神學主軸。他在反駁諾斯底派中展現『神完整救恩之經世計劃（whole economy of salvation）』圖畫。[58] 這經世計劃完全在於基督的位格與工作：以在基督裡創造為起點、基督的成肉身為中心，以及在基督裡有分（koinónia）為內容。筆者認為在愛氏對oikonomia的理解裡，在基督裡有分乃是創造與道成肉身的延續，是oikonomia的完成。受造之人竟能有分於創造之神，這完全基於基督神人二性的位格。人藉著與基督的位格聯合，有分於三一神的生命而『聖化』，同時又保持『創造—受造』的區別。因此，基督徒信仰和生活的內容最大部分就是在基督裡有分。[59]
總結，愛氏憑著他獨特的身分，宣告他有從使徒統緒傳承下來對『經世計劃』的真實認識，徹底地駁斥諾派的『另一經世計劃（another
Dispensation）』[60]。他鑿破諾派受異教和哲學思想影響的錯謬：二元對立思想，把神與創造者、創造者與救贖者、救贖者與基督、基督與耶穌分割。[61] 愛氏的努力和貢獻保守了教會歷代以後能忠於使徒教導，並對以後教父，如俄利根、亞他那修、奧古斯丁等，甚至改教家，如加爾文[62] 的神學發展，影響深遠鉅大。他們往後對神救贖計劃的教導都建基於愛任紐的觀點，包涵基督的道成肉身與人在與基督聯合裡的聖化這兩點。[63]
20世紀中國地方教會領袖李常受，繼承自他同工倪柝聲的觀點，亦嘗試以『神的經綸（oikonomia）』展開他的神學起點，以『聖化』[64] 為其神學終點。在oikonomia的教導上，李氏與愛任紐與改革家加爾文的教導相當近似。但李氏認為在oikonomia下的聖化是在三部分（tripartite）人論模型之中進行，他視人的靈為聖化過程中信徒經驗koinónia的關鍵點。[65] 筆者認為在人性解構（human constitution）上，李氏較加爾文更接近愛任紐，因二人同屬『三部分人觀』。[66] 此外，李氏認為oikonomia有兩面意義：一面是『安排計劃』（dispensation）；另一面是『分賜』（dispensing），他並且嘗試將『分賜』一面的意義聯於信徒經驗聖化。[67] 筆者認為李氏對oikonomia『分賜』一面的理解，意義上就是愛任紐的koinónia。
最後，筆者認為愛任紐這種從oikonomia去理解基督論和救贖論，有助提升今日信徒靈命的注重與教會的見證。Tanner指出基督是信徒活出三一生命（Trinitarian life）的關鍵。她指基督地上的生活展現了三一的內在關係和生命，並且祂這『下降與上升』歷程乃是信徒的模型。[68] 現今信徒藉著受浸與領聖餐，持續不斷地聯合於基督，這模型也會重複在信徒的生活中，包括在他們向神的敬拜（『上升』）及向世界的事奉（『下降』）中，展現出三一的生命。[69]
遺憾的是，16世紀宗教改革以後的大多數神學家，都否認或忽略這個在教會傳統以來在oikonomia之下的救恩觀，偏重於以個人與神復和為中心的救恩觀。[70] 這造成日後更正教偏重個人得救，而輕得救後的成聖。近年香港華人教會和信徒更在『屬靈消費主義』影響下，將他們與三一神的生命關係，失於他們生命中的首位。[71] 其實，教會不僅該注重信主人數的增加，也同時該幫助信徒建立與三一神親密、愛的團契關係。如此，才叫信徒與教會真正活在神救贖計劃之中。筆者認為愛任紐的神學不僅最能體現使徒的教導，也適用於今天教會普遍狀況。愛氏神學有助信徒復以基督為生命的中心，提升靈性品質與教會的見證。筆者認為愛任紐對oikonomia的理解，值得華人更正教會未來進一步的研究，以保守更正教會留在使徒傳給我們的信仰之中（約壹一1～3）。
[1]《基督教歷代名著集成：尼西亞前期教父選集》（香港：基督教文藝出版社，1998），頁11。
John Behr, Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity (Oxford University Press, 2013), p71.
John Behr, Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity (Oxford University Press, 2013), p71.
[2] H. B. Swete, foreword in F. R. m. Hitchcock, Irenaeus of Lyons:
A Study of his Teaching, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914). “No
early Christian writer has deserved better of the whole Church than Irenaeus.”
[4] 愛任紐建構其系統神學主題的兩個關鍵詞：oikonomia和anakephalaiosis均出自使徒保羅著作的獨特用辭。以希臘文為寫作母語之愛氏必然深明白保羅教導的獨特觀點因而採用之，而新約記載保羅也曾停留在小亞細亞地區多年建立和牧養教會，更印證這觀點。（參選集1，11，16頁）
[5] Eric Osbron, Irenaeus of Lyons (UK: Cambridge, 2002), p55-58.
[7] Jules Gross, The Divinization of the Christian: According to the
Greek Fathers, Paul A. Onica trans.(US: A&C Press, 2002), p120.
[8] 約納斯（Hans Jonas），《諾斯替宗教：異鄉神的信息與基督教的開端》（The Gnostic
Religion: The Message of Alien God and the Beginning of Christianity）（歷代基督教思想學術文庫：研究系列），張新樟譯（香港：道風，2003），頁42～45。
[9] 黃錫木、孫寶玲、張略合撰，《新約歷史與宗教文化導論》（聖經導論叢書，香港：基道，2002），頁218～219。
AH 4.Pref.:” For as the serpent beguiled Eve, by promising her what he had not himself, so also do these men, by pretending [to possess] superior knowledge”. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103400.htm
AH 4.Pref.:” For as the serpent beguiled Eve, by promising her what he had not himself, so also do these men, by pretending [to possess] superior knowledge”. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103400.htm
[11] AH, 4.9.2 “For one and the same Lord,…confers gifts
upon men, that is, His own presence, and the resurrection from the dead” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103409.htm
[14] 11次被用來描繪諾斯底派提出的假冒觀念。參謝仁壽、周復初，〈本土化神學經綸、神化、人的靈〉，收郭承天、周復初、蔡彥仁編，《基督生命長成─現代中國本土基督教神學之發展論文集》（臺灣：橄欖，2013）。
[15] 此處為根據Philip Schaff之英文本ANP01. The Apostolic
Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, AH 3.16.6重譯，見http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103316.htm。
[17] AH 3.18.1 “when He became incarnate, and was made man,
He commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, in a
brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam—namely,
to be according to the image and likeness of God—that we might
recover in Christ Jesus.”.
3.18.7 “God recapitulated in Himself the ancient formation of man (first Adam), that He might kill sin, deprive death of its power, and vivify man; and therefore His works are true.”
3.18.7 “God recapitulated in Himself the ancient formation of man (first Adam), that He might kill sin, deprive death of its power, and vivify man; and therefore His works are true.”
[18] Jules Gross, p61, 109: “Beginning with Saint Irenaeus, many
fathers concluded from the account of the forming of Adam that a certain deification
of the latter exists.”
[19] R. A. Norris, Jr., God and world in early Christian theology (Study
in Patristic Thought), (US: A&C Black Publishers, 1967), p94. Canlis, p206.
[20] AH 3.19.1. “the Word of God was made man, and He who was the
Son of God became the Son of man, that man, having been taking into the
Word, and receiving the adoption, might become the son of God.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103319.htm
[21] AH 5.Preface, “the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who
did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might
bring us to be even what He is Himself”. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103500.htm
[23] 凱利，頁116～118。
諾門‧拉索（Norman Russell），《希臘教父傳統中的神化教義》（The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition），謝仁壽、周復初譯（臺灣：聖經資源中心，2014），頁146。
諾門‧拉索（Norman Russell），《希臘教父傳統中的神化教義》（The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition），謝仁壽、周復初譯（臺灣：聖經資源中心，2014），頁146。
[24] 英文多譯作『Participation」、『Sharing」、『Communion」、『Fellowship」、，如Ante-Nicene Fathers edition of Against Heresies (1885)；中文則多譯為『有分」、『分享」、『契合」、『團契」、『交通」等。
[25] Julie Canlis, Calvin Ladder: A Spiritual Theology of Ascent
and Ascension (UK: Cambridge, 2010), p17-18, 222.
[26] Paul Lebeau, “Koinonia: la signification du selon saint Irénée, “
in Epektasis [Beauchesne, 1972], p122, 124；Lebeau認為諾斯底的宇宙觀是建於其不能契合（Incommunicability）和解體（dissociation）的原則；而愛任紐的宇宙觀則是一個統一、萬物可在保持本體的獨特性下，彼此開放契合（communicable）的宇宙。
[28] Canlis, p178-179. AH 4.Pref.4, 3.16.8
[29] Canlis, p183-186.
[31] Canlis, p180. AH 3.24.1, 4.9.3, 4.11.1-2, 4.38.1-3, 4.39.2,
5.36.1-3.
AH 4.38.3 : “Now it was necessary that man
should in the first instance be created; and having been created, should
receive growth; and having received growth, should be strengthened;
and having been strengthened, should abound; and having abounded, should
recover [from the disease of sin]; and having recovered, should be
glorified; and being glorified, should see his Lord. For God is He
who is yet to be seen, and the beholding of God is productive of immortality,
but immortality renders one near unto God.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103438.htm
[32] AH, 4.39.2: “How, then, shall he be a God, who has
not as yet been made a man? Or how can he be perfect who was but
lately created? How, again, can he be immortal, who in his mortal
nature did not obey his Maker? For it must be that you, at the outset,
should hold the rank of a man, and then afterwards partake of the glory of
God.”
[33] Canlis p182-183. AH, 5.35.2: “And as he rises actually, so
also shall he be actually disciplined beforehand for incorruption, and shall go
forwards and flourish in the times of the kingdom, in order that he may be
capable of receiving the glory of the Father.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103535.htm
[34] Canlis p182-183. AH, 4.14.1: “In the beginning, therefore,
did God form Adam, not as if He stood in need of man, but that He might have
[some one] upon whom to confer His benefits…. (He) has both formed us,
and prepared us for this, that, when we are with Him, we may partake of His
glory. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103414.htm
[35] AH, 5.36.4: “His offspring, the First-begotten Word, should descend
to the creature (facturam), that is, to what had been moulded (plasma), and
that it should be contained by Him; and, on the other hand, the creature should
contain the Word, and ascend to Him, passing beyond the angels, and
be made after the image and likeness of God.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103536.htm
[36] Canlis, p175-178.
[37] AH 4.38.3: “The Father planning everything well and
giving His commands, the Son carrying these into execution and
performing the work of creating, and the Spirit nourishing and
increasing [what is made], but man making progress day by day,
and ascending towards the perfect, that
is, approximating to the uncreated One.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103438.htm
[38] AH 5.36.2: “this is the gradation and arrangement of those
who are saved, and that they advance through steps of this nature; also
that they ascend through the Spirit to the Son, and through the Son
to the Father, and that in due time the Son will yield up His work to the
Father” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103536.htm
[39] Denis Minns, Irenaeus- An Introduction (New York: T&T
Clark, 2010), p70.
[40] AH 4.38.1: “If, however, any one say, What then? Could not
God have exhibited man as perfect from beginning? let him know that, inasmuch
as God is indeed always the same and unbegotten as respects Himself, all
things are possible to Him. But created things must be inferior to Him who
created them, from the very fact of their later origin; for it was not
possible for things recently created to have been uncreated.”
[41] AH 3.16.3: “the Son of God being made the Son of man, that
through Him we may receive the adoption,— humanity sustaining, and receiving,
and embracing the Son of God.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103316.htm
[43] Canlis, p180, 184.
[44] AH 3.17.4: “the Son of God, the Only-begotten, who is also
the Word of the Father, coming in the fullness of time, having become
incarnate in man for the sake of man, and fulfilling all the conditions of
human nature, our Lord Jesus Christ being one and the same, as He
Himself the Lord does testify…”http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103317.htm
[45] AH 3.18.1: “when He became incarnate, and was made man, He
commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, …, with
salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam— namely, to be according to the
image and likeness of God— that we might recover in Christ Jesus.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103318.htm
[46] AH 3.18.7: “God recapitulated in Himself the ancient
formation of man, that He might kill sin, deprive death of its
power, and vivify man; and therefore His works are true.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103318.htm
AH 3.21.10: “the Word, recapitulating Adam in Himself…the very same formation should be summed up [in Christ as had existed in Adam], the analogy having been preserved.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103321.htm
AH 3.21.10: “the Word, recapitulating Adam in Himself…the very same formation should be summed up [in Christ as had existed in Adam], the analogy having been preserved.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103321.htm
[47] Canlis, p192-194. AH 1.21.5, 2.30.7, 3.16.6. 4.12.4.
[48] AH 4.14.2: “God formed man at the first, because of His
munificence; but chose the patriarchs for the sake of their salvation;
and prepared a people beforehand, teaching the headstrong to follow God;
and raised up prophets upon earth, accustoming man to bear His Spirit
[within him], and to hold communion with God” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103414.htm
[49] Canlis, p198-199
[50] AH 3.24.1: “For this gift of God has been entrusted to the
Church, as breath was to the first created man, for this purpose, that all the
members receiving it may be vivified; and the [means of] communion with Christ
has been distributed throughout it, that is, the Holy Spirit, the
earnest of incorruption, the means of confirming our faith, and the ladder
of ascent to God.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103324.htm
[51] Canlis, p210-212.
[52] Canlis, p180.
[54] AH, 5.9.1-2. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103509.htm
[55] Julie Canlis, “Being made
human: the significance of creation for Irenaeus’ doctrine of participation” in
Scottish Journal of Theology (Vol 58, Issue04, Nov 2005), p451.
[56] Gerhar Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological
Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), Vol.V, Eerdmans, 1979, p150-153.
[57] John Behr, Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity(Oxford:
2013), p145: “All these points (AH
1.10.3)… are rather, as the concluding quotation from Paul indicates,
openings into the mysteries of the wisdom and riches of God deployed in his
dealings with the human race, the economy.”
[58] Osborn認為愛任紐的神學可總結為處理四個問題：（一）形像與樣式、（二）罪與墮落、（三）氣與靈、（四）肉體與靈，而這四個問題的解答都在於人有分於神（participation in God），這是諾斯底派異端教導所會抹殺的。（Osborn,
p230, 216）
[59] Canlis, p5.
[60] AH, 3.24.2:
“they(Gnotics) have discovered another god beyond God, or another Pleroma, or another
dispensation.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103324.htm
[61] AH. 3.Pref. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103300.htm.
3.16.8: “All, therefore, are outside of the [Christian] dispensation, who,
under pretext of knowledge, understand that Jesus was one, and Christ
another, and the Only-begotten another, from whom again is the Word,
and that the Saviour is another.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103316.htm
[62] Julie Canlis, Calvin’s Ladder: “My intent is that
Irenaeus’s vision (of ascending by participation) would draw attention to the
originality and continuity of Calvin’s own concept of participation.”
(p22).
“Peter declares that believers are called in this to become partakers of the divine nature. How is this? It is because ‘he will be… glorified in all his saints, and will be marveled at in all who have believed.’ If the Lord will share his glory, power, and righteousness with the elect – nay, will give himself to be enjoyed by them and , what is more excellent, will somehow make them to become one with himself, let us remember that every sort of happiness is included under this benefit. (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.25.10)
“Peter declares that believers are called in this to become partakers of the divine nature. How is this? It is because ‘he will be… glorified in all his saints, and will be marveled at in all who have believed.’ If the Lord will share his glory, power, and righteousness with the elect – nay, will give himself to be enjoyed by them and , what is more excellent, will somehow make them to become one with himself, let us remember that every sort of happiness is included under this benefit. (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.25.10)
[64] 李氏的發表為：『神成為人，為要使人在生命和性情上，但不在神格上，成為神。』（《歷代志生命讀經》，第7篇）http://www.lsmchinese.org/big5/07online_reading/lifestudy/ot/read.asp?no=11-007
[65] 李氏引用羅馬書八章，指出三一神的生命在信徒裡面的聖化過程，是從信徒的靈開始，然後到魂，最到體。（《羅馬書生命讀經》，第62篇）http://www.lsmchinese.org/big5/07online_reading/lifestudy/read.asp?no=06-62。李氏這點與倪柝聲相同：『當信徒與復活的主相聯合之後…信徒的靈聯合在主的靈裏…這樣的聯合，就叫信徒多得著主的生命和性情，而建造主在他裏面的新造。』《倪柝聲文集第二輯七冊，屬靈人（中冊）》（台灣福音書房，1992年）http://www.lsmchinese.org/big5/07online_reading/nee/read.asp?no=1-13-02
[66] John Behr, Asceticism and Anthropology in Irenaeus and Clement (UK:Oxford,
2000), 99-102.
[67] 李常受，《約伯記生命讀經》，第38篇：『神聖的經綸就是神永遠的計畫，要將基督分賜到祂所揀選的人裏面。』http://www.lsmchinese.org/big5/07online_reading/lifestudy/ot/read.asp?no=15-038
[68] Kathryn Tanner, Christ the Key (UK: Cambridge, 2010), p140-161.
[69] Tanner, p196-206.
[71] 參〈慎防消費主義在教會蔓延〉，時代論壇第924期，（2005-05-15）http://christiantimes.org.hk/Common/Reader/News/ShowNews.jsp?Nid=29020&Pid=2&Version=924&Cid=2&Charset=big5_hkscs
朱易，〈當教會遇上「消費主義文化」〉http://www.efccc.org/ArticleDetail.aspx?DocID=3326
朱易，〈當教會遇上「消費主義文化」〉http://www.efccc.org/ArticleDetail.aspx?DocID=3326
