聖經的無誤（Biblical Inerrancy）與無謬（Biblical Infallibility）

聖經的無誤（Biblical Inerrancy）與無謬（Biblical Infallibility）

● 字源

「inerrancy」源自拉丁文 in-（無）與 errare（漂泊、犯錯），指沒有錯誤。「infallibility」源自拉丁文 in-（無）與 fallere（欺騙、使失敗），指不會失敗、不會誤導。中文常把前者譯為「無誤」，後者譯為「無謬」。兩個詞在神學界的用法並不固定，有些學者把 infallibility 視為較窄的詞（只涉及信仰與生活），有些學者則反過來視為更強的詞。

● 例句

So subtle is the distinction between biblical inerrancy, which holds that the Scriptures, as originally written, contain no error in anything they affirm, whether theological, historical, or scientific, and biblical infallibility, which a number of theologians, including some associated with Fuller Seminary, restrict to the Bible's inability to mislead readers in matters of faith and practice, that the Chicago Statement of 1978, drafted by evangelical scholars who feared that the narrower term would let errors in history slip into the text, affirmed both words together, since, as scholars on every side admit, either term misleads when it stands alone.

（約 103 字）

● 排列為比較容易閱讀的方式

So subtle is the distinction

between biblical inerrancy,

which holds that the Scriptures,

as originally written,

contain no error in anything they affirm,

whether theological, historical, or scientific,

and biblical infallibility,

which a number of theologians,

including some associated with Fuller Seminary,

restrict to the Bible's inability to mislead readers in matters of faith and practice,

that the Chicago Statement of 1978,

drafted by evangelical scholars

who feared that the narrower term would let errors in history slip into the text,

affirmed both words together,

since,

as scholars on every side admit,

either term misleads when it stands alone.

● 分解為原初的短小句

The distinction between biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility is so subtle that the Chicago Statement affirmed both words together.（So subtle is ... that 為倒裝；so ... that 引導結果子句，主句的主詞 distinction 與 be 動詞被倒到句首。）

Inerrancy holds that the Scriptures contain no error in anything they affirm.（which 引導之關係子句；that 為 holds 之受詞子句。）

The Scriptures were originally written.（as originally written 為省略主詞與 were 的 as 子句。）

The error may be theological, historical, or scientific.（whether 引導之讓步性插入語，省略 it may be。）

A number of theologians restrict infallibility to the Bible's inability to mislead readers in matters of faith and practice.（第二個 which 引導之關係子句，which 為 restrict 之受詞。）

Some of the theologians are associated with Fuller Seminary.（including 引導之分詞片語插入。）

Evangelical scholars drafted the Chicago Statement in 1978.（drafted by 為過去分詞片語，修飾 the Chicago Statement。）

The scholars feared that the narrower term would let errors in history slip into the text.（who 引導之關係子句；that 引導 feared 之受詞子句；let ... slip 為使役結構。）

Either term misleads when it stands alone.（since 引導之原因子句的內容；when 引導時間子句。）

Scholars on every side admit this.（as 引導之插入子句，as 代替後面整個內容。）

● 文法解析

So + 形容詞 + be + 主詞 ... that 倒裝（So subtle is the distinction ... that ...）：

so 加形容詞置於句首時，後面的主詞與動詞須倒裝為 be + 主詞。這個句型的主詞 the distinction 被後面兩大段 which 子句拉得極長，讀者須一路讀到很遠處的 that，才知道這是「如此……以致……」的結果結構。

並列 between A and B，且各帶 which 子句（between biblical inerrancy, which ..., and biblical infallibility, which ...）：

between 後面的兩個名詞各自帶一個非限定性關係子句，使 and 離第一個名詞很遠，須確認 and 連接的是兩個 between 的受詞，而不是兩個子句內的成分。

as originally written 省略（the Scriptures, as originally written, contain ...）：

as originally written 是省略「they were」的 as 子句，插在主詞 the Scriptures 與動詞 contain 之間，使主詞與動詞分隔。

whether 讓步插入（whether theological, historical, or scientific）：

whether 後面省略 the error may be，三個形容詞並列，接在 anything they affirm 之後，形成插入語。

including 分詞片語插入（which a number of theologians, including some ..., restrict to ...）：

第二個 which 為 restrict 的受詞，主詞 a number of theologians 與動詞 restrict 之間被 including 片語截斷。須注意 a number of 後接複數動詞 restrict。

drafted by 過去分詞與 who 子句疊加（the Chicago Statement of 1978, drafted by evangelical scholars who feared that ...）：

主詞 the Chicago Statement 與動詞 affirmed 之間，依序塞入 of 1978、過去分詞片語、who 子句、that 名詞子句，共四層，須一層層回溯。

since 子句與 as 準關係代名詞（since, as scholars on every side admit, either term misleads ...）：

since 後面緊接 as 插入子句，as 代替後面整個內容，所以 admit 不需要受詞。since 子句說明為何兩個詞要並用。

● 參考譯文

兩者的區別是如此細微（無誤主張聖經原稿所肯定的一切，無論神學、歷史或科學方面，皆不含錯誤；無謬則被一些神學家，包括與富勒神學院有關的部分人士，限定為聖經不會在信仰與生活事務上誤導讀者），以致 1978 年的《芝加哥聲明》（由擔心較窄的用詞會讓歷史上的錯誤混入經文的福音派學者起草）把兩個詞並用，因為如各方學者所承認，任何一個詞單獨使用都會誤導。

● 補充說明

句型亮點與文法變化：

So + 形容詞 + be + 主詞 ... that 倒裝： 前幾篇已用過 No sooner、Seldom、Little、Only after、Not only、Not until、Hardly、Were it not for 等倒裝，本篇改用表結果的 so ... that 倒裝，主詞被推遲到兩大段 which 子句之後。

不使用分號： 全句僅以 which、that、who、whether、since、as、when 等連接詞與關係詞推進，單一主幹貫穿到底。

雙概念對照： inerrancy 與 infallibility 各帶一個 which 子句，使兩個概念的定義並列對照，再以 that 結果子句收束。

多重插入： the Scriptures 與 contain 之間、a number of theologians 與 restrict 之間、the Chicago Statement 與 affirmed 之間、since 與 either term 之間，皆有插入成分。

更多相關例子（可替換或延伸使用）：

《芝加哥聖經無誤聲明》（Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, 1978）由國際聖經無誤委員會（International Council on Biblical Inerrancy）發表。

Autograph（原稿）：無誤的主張通常限於聖經的原始手稿，而非後世抄本或譯本。

Limited inerrancy（有限無誤）與 full inerrancy（完全無誤）：前者把無誤限於信仰與救恩，後者包括歷史與科學。

核心學術字彙與文法重點總結：

關鍵字詞： Inerrancy（無誤）、Infallibility（無謬）、Scripture（聖經、經文）、Evangelical（福音派的）、Autograph（原稿）、Affirm（肯定）、Mislead（誤導）、Theologian（神學家）。

文法重點： So ... that 倒裝、between A and B 各帶 which 子句、as 省略子句、whether 讓步插入、including 分詞片語、過去分詞與 who 子句疊加、since 子句與 as 準關係代名詞。

一點小提醒： 這兩個詞在神學界的定義並不統一。有些人把 infallibility 視為較窄（限於信仰與實踐），有些人把它視為更強（根本不可能出錯），例句採前一種用法，並以「some associated with Fuller Seminary」簡述。《芝加哥聲明》第十一條確實同時使用 infallible 與 inerrant 兩詞。起草動機一句為求句型完整做了概括，實際討論更為細緻。例句實際約 103 個英文單字。參考譯文為求順暢，已調整部分分句順序。