Actually probably a lot of dirty little secrets but one of the ones I want to talk about today is the dirty little secret that a lot of pastors ministers etc lose their faith when they go to seminary.

事實上，可能有很多骯髒的小祕密，但我今天要談的其中一個是一個骯髒的小祕密，那就是很多牧師神父等人在進入神學院後會失去信仰。

And I want to talk a little bit about why this is and I think part of this is prompted due to a lot of comments that I've gotten on my channel geared at my education because I often start videos by saying I have a Master of Divinity which is the formal degree you get to go be a minister.

我想談一下為什麼會這樣，我想部分原因是我的頻道上有很多針對我的教育背景的評論，因為我經常在視頻開頭說我有一個神學碩士學位，這是成為牧師的正式學位。

I have a Master of Arts in Theology that I did after that and I have a PhD in Christian origins.

之後，我又獲得了神學碩士學位和基督教起源博士學位。

So by the way this is a good spot to say if you haven't already done so do subscribe.

所以，順便說一句，如果您還沒有訂閱，那就訂閱吧。

But what happens is I get so many comments from people who are like all that education and you still don't know the truth or you know you have a PhD but you don't believe the bible or you don't believe the truth you don't believe what I believe and I think it's ironic as I think about the process of educating people and what education is actually for.

但結果卻是，我收到很多人的評論，說你接受了那麼多教育，卻仍然不知道真相，或者你知道你有博士學位，但你不相信聖經，或者你不相信真相，你不相信我所相信的，我覺得這很諷刺，因為我想到了教育人們的過程，以及教育的真正目的。

I've thought a lot about this.

我為此想了很多。

I think it's one of the most interesting things in Christianity.

我認為這是基督教中最有趣的事情之一。

We don't really talk about that when people are in churches the leaders who go to get trained to lead those churches often find themselves in a position where they have to leave.

我們並沒有真正討論過，當人們在教會中時，去接受培訓以上司這些教會的帶領人往往會發現自己處於不得不離開的境地。

That's wild.

太瘋狂了

Like stop and think about that.

比如停下來想一想。

Think about the fact that somebody will go off to seminary and end up completely leaving the religion instead of coming back and leading the community they had intended to lead.

想想看，有人去上神學院，最後卻完全離開了宗教，而不是回來上司他們原本想上司的團體。

And I think from the other side like for somebody who doesn't know what's happening in that seminary you kind of make up stories and the two most common stories that I hear is that you somehow got tricked by liberal professors.

我認為，從另一個角度來看，對於不瞭解神學院情況的人來說，你會編造一些故事，而我聽到的最常見的兩個故事就是，你不知怎麼就被自由派教授騙了。

It's really common that like you went and listened to liberals and got totally tricked and that's why you now believe liberal things and why you're not a Christian anymore.

你聽信了自由派的言論，結果完全被騙了，所以你現在才會相信自由派的東西，才會不再是基督徒，這種情況真的很常見。

And I think this is just an incredibly stupid argument.

我認為這種說法愚蠢至極。

Like if you actually believe that somebody will have a career in mind, feel like they are called by God, go off to seminary and just be susceptible to brainwashing after all of that call and all of that like excitement they had for doing the calling, they picked a career, they went off and got brainwashed by professors.

就像如果你真的相信，有人心中會有一個職業，覺得自己受到了上帝的呼召，去神學院學習，在經歷了所有的呼召和所有的興奮之後，他們很容易被洗腦，他們選擇了一個職業，去接受教授們的洗腦。

Like that's stupid.

好像這很愚蠢似的。

If you want to believe that you can but that's ridiculous.

如果你想相信，你可以相信，但這太荒謬了。

That's absolutely well they were never really saved, they were never really Christian.

他們從未真正得救，也從未真正成為基督徒。

This also seems kind of stupid.

這似乎也有點愚蠢。

I mean I don't really know why people are so obsessed with saying this.

我的意思是，我真的不知道為什麼人們對這句話如此著迷。

Well okay actually I do.

好吧，其實我是這麼想的。

Because instead of saying they went off to seminary and learned something so damaging to their faith or their beliefs that they couldn't in good conscience come back and lead us, I'm still in this community if I'm this person.

因為與其說他們去了神學院，學到了對他們的信仰或信念如此有害的東西，以至於他們不能憑良心回來上司我們，不如說如果我是這個人，我就仍然在這個社區裡。

So it's easier to say well they were never really one of us to begin with.

是以，說他們從一開始就不是我們中的一員就容易多了。

And then all of this conversation goes along with this idea that biblical scholars are biased.

然後，所有這些對話都與 "聖經學者有偏見 "這一觀點相伴而行。

Because I see this a lot too and it's you know in my comments.

因為我也經常看到這種情況，你知道我的評論裡也有。

Maybe I should stop reading the comments but I love I like reading comments.

也許我應該停止閱讀評論，但我喜歡我喜歡閱讀評論。

But I see a lot of people say like well biblical scholars are biased against the truth that like you somehow have this again often liberal but like bible scholars don't actually believe the truth they're just out to get you.

但我看到很多人說，聖經學者對真理有偏見，就像你莫名其妙地又有了這個自由派，但聖經學者實際上並不相信真理，他們只是想抓住你。

When I was a teenager the movie God's Not Dead came out and it sort of I think serves as a really important commentary on what evangelicals think about education.

在我十幾歲的時候，電影《上帝未死》上映了，我認為這部電影對福音派教徒對教育的看法做出了非常重要的評論。

They think that you go in and an atheist philosophy professor is out to get you and destroy your faith probably because they are angry at God.

他們認為你進去後，無神論哲學教授就會來抓你，摧毀你的信仰，這可能是因為他們對上帝感到憤怒。

Maybe God did something they're mad at God and they just have all these unworked father figure resentment issues with God and they need to work through that and maybe they get saved at the end.

也許上帝做了什麼，他們生上帝的氣，他們只是對上帝有這些未解決的父親形象的怨恨問題，他們需要解決這些問題，也許他們最後會得救。

I think it's a really oversimplistic movie and parable but I think it is a true expression of a certain type of way that a certain type of Christian thinks about education.

我認為這是一部過於簡單化的電影和寓言，但我認為它真實地表達了某種類型的基督徒對教育的看法。

And it's worth stopping to think about this.

值得停下來思考一下。

Not just because people leave the faith or would-be Christian leaders leave the faith which is an important question.

這不僅僅是因為人們離開了信仰，也不僅僅是因為未來的基督教領袖離開了信仰，這是一個重要的問題。

Let's put a pin in that for a minute.

讓我們在這上面插上一根針。

But probably the big question that comes from all this is why does a certain type of evangelicalism see itself as fundamentally at war with education?

但這一切帶來的最大問題可能是，為什麼某類福音派認為自己與教育根本就是在打仗？

And you see this in famous people trying to get school boards to teach creationism alongside of evolution.

你可以從那些試圖讓學校董事會在教授進化論的同時教授創世論的名人身上看到這一點。

You see it in the assault of biblical criticism or good history that apologists launch.

你可以從辯解者發起的對《聖經》責備或優秀歷史的攻擊中看到這一點。

You see it as this sort of battle of world views that a lot of people think they are in between Christian apologists and atheists, secular humanists, postmodernists, relativists, fill in the blank with your favorite category of evil person that a conservative Christian often thinks they are out to war against, to fight against.

你認為這是一場世界觀之爭，很多人都認為自己處於基督教辯護士與無神論者、世俗人文主義者、後現代主義者、相對主義者之間。

But I think one of the simplest ways to understand this is that conservative evangelicalism, I use the word fundamentalism, I know these are problematic terms, but I think one of the easiest ways to understand this is that these movements are fundamentally pushbacks to modernity.

但我認為最簡單的理解方式之一是，保守的福音派，我用原教旨主義這個詞，我知道這些詞有問題，但我認為最簡單的理解方式之一是，這些運動從根本上說是對現代性的回擊。

These movements emerged in the 20th century as a pushback to modernity, as a pushback to education.

這些運動興起於 20 世紀，是對現代性的反擊，是對教育的反擊。

Fundamentalism is a pushback to this.

原教旨主義就是對此的反擊。

And I've often said that when you look at the birth of what was happening in churches, in Germany especially, in the end of the 19th century, and in the universities in Germany, you were seeing a lot of higher criticism.

我經常說，當你看到教會的誕生，尤其是 19 世紀末在德國，以及在德國的大學裡發生的事情時，你會看到很多更高層次的批判。

You were seeing people look at the Bible and say, like, we have thousands of manuscripts, they contradict each other.

你看到人們看著《聖經》說，我們有成千上萬的手稿，它們相互矛盾。

How can we use science to get back to the original manuscripts?

我們如何利用科學找回原始手稿？

This is, you know, even secular scholars now will say this is problematic in today's day and age, but this was what people were thinking about.

你知道，即使現在的世俗學者也會說這在當今時代是有問題的，但這就是人們當時的想法。

Or they might say of the historical Jesus that this is the Jesus of faith.

或者他們會說，歷史上的耶穌就是信仰中的耶穌。

We've inherited what's called the Christ of faith, which is a Christ who is mediated by the church.

我們繼承了所謂的信仰基督，即由教會中介的基督。

So how can we actually get back to who the historical Jesus would have been?

那麼，我們如何才能真正回到歷史上的耶穌呢？

What the historical Jesus would have been teaching as a first century Jew in Palestine?

作為一世紀巴勒斯坦的猶太人，歷史上的耶穌會教導什麼？

Again, very problematic now for historians, but this is the And as a result, American Christianity pushed back, and we saw like this snowball into the 20th century, this movement that was very anti-intellectual, very at its core, fighting against that.

這對歷史學家來說又是個問題，但這就是結果，美國基督教反擊了，我們看到像滾雪球一樣進入了20世紀，這場運動非常反智，其核心就是與之對抗。

Believing that the very act of asking these types of questions was in itself an assault on Christianity.

他們認為，提出這類問題本身就是對基督教的攻擊。

And at this point in time, there were sort of two different paths I think that Christianity could have taken.

在這一時刻，我認為基督教可以選擇兩條不同的道路。

The one is the conservative evangelical path, where we bury our the sand and push back against modernity and pretend that all of the things we believed in the dark ages should stay true, and that if we can just get back to the Bible as this magical book that we can just understand, and God has everything in it.

一條是保守的福音派道路，在這條道路上，我們埋頭苦幹，反擊現代性，假裝我們在黑暗時代所相信的一切都應該保持真實，如果我們能夠回到《聖經》，把它當作我們能夠理解的神奇之書，上帝在其中擁有一切。

It's the final word, and it's the pushback against science.

這是最後的決定，也是對科學的反擊。

It's the pushback against any kind of political question, any kind of legal question, that the Bible has all the answers.

這是對任何政治問題、任何法律問題的反擊，《聖經》擁有所有的答案。

Or we could have taken another approach.

我們也可以採取另一種方法。

We could was formed in a very different time than we have now.

我們的時代與現在截然不同。

We recognize that these people wrote down these things, and they're potentially imperfect, but it was how they understood the world.

我們承認，這些人寫下的這些東西可能並不完美，但這就是他們理解世界的方式。

We recognize that there's a cultural background or a literary background behind the New Testament, or the works of the Bible in general.

我們認識到，《新約聖經》或《聖經》作品背後有其文化背景或文學背景。

And that we can critically and openly engage with the faith and still kind of stay connected to it, but ask a lot of hard questions.

我們可以批判性地、公開地參與到信仰中來，仍然與信仰保持聯繫，但也會提出很多尖銳的問題。

I think those are the two types of visions that you could have had for Christianity at the turn of the 20th century.

我認為，在 20 世紀之交，基督教可以有這兩種願景。

But in Germany, you had World War II.

但在德國，你們經歷了第二次世界大戰。

You had the Holocaust.

你有大屠殺。

You had the rise of Hitler.

希特勒崛起了

You had all of these terrible things, and even biblical studies has its own terrible legacy of how it got caught up in the Nazi world.

你有所有這些可怕的東西，甚至聖經研究也有它自己可怕的遺產，那就是它是如何被納粹世界捲入的。

Because like I often say so much, I will say before, like in the late 19th century, a lot of good biblical criticism was coming out of German universities, but then a lot of these people got wrapped up in the Nazi party, or at the very least had to like deal with what was happening there, and it changed the face of history.

因為就像我經常說的那樣，我之前會說，比如在19世紀末，德國的大學裡出現了很多很好的聖經責備，但後來這些人中的很多人都被納粹黨裹挾了進去，或者至少不得不去面對那裡發生的事情，而這改變了歷史的面貌。

For a lot of different complicated historical reasons, the Christianity that many, many people inherited, especially in an American context, and I'm not even American.

由於很多不同的複雜歷史原因，很多很多人都繼承了基督教，尤其是在美國背景下，而我甚至都不是美國人。

You might think from my accent that I am.

聽我的口音，你可能會認為我是。

Sometimes I drop in the occasional A or a boot, which should tell you I'm Canadian.

有時，我也會偶爾加上 "A "或 "靴子"，這應該能說明我是加拿大人。

But even I grew up in the echoes of this type of American evangelicalism, which was very anti-intellectual.

但即便是我，也是在這種美國福音派的回聲中長大的，這種福音派非常反智。

I've often said like, I grew up reading apologists and thinking I was doing intellectual work.

我經常說，我從小就讀辯護士的書，以為自己在做智力工作。

I never took a science class after grade 10 because I believed I was being persecuted by being taught evolution.

10 年級以後，我再也沒有上過科學課，因為我認為，教我進化論是對我的迫害。

Some of the stuff is ridiculous, but it's the reality of how I viewed the world as an evangelical.

有些東西很荒謬，但這就是我作為福音派教徒看待世界的現實。

So how does this come back to seminary, and why do so many people lose their faith in seminary?

那麼，這又是如何回到神學院的，為什麼有那麼多人在神學院裡失去了信仰？

Well, if you have conservative evangelicalism as a movement that is fundamentally anti-intellectual, fundamentally built on a pushback to historical critical study of the Bible, on a pushback to liberal, and I mean small liberal here, not big L liberal, but you have this movement that was a Christian movement built on being anti-education, being anti-intellectual, and you have people going to seminary, and what are they going to do?

好吧，如果保守福音派是一個從根本上反智的運動，從根本上建立在對聖經的歷史批判研究的反擊上，建立在對自由派的反擊上，我這裡指的是小自由派，而不是大自由派，但你有這樣一個運動，它是建立在反教育、反智的基礎上的基督教運動，你讓人們去神學院，他們會怎麼做？

They're going to learn Greek and Hebrew, and they're going to look at texts and realize the same things that the German biblical scholars in the late 19th century realized.

他們將學習希臘語和希伯來語，他們將閱讀文本，並認識到與 19 世紀末德國聖經學者所認識到的相同的東西。

Holy crap, there are a lot of different manuscripts.

我的天啊，有這麼多不同的手稿。

We don't know which one's accurate.

我們不知道哪個更準確。

Holy crap, early Christians read other things of scripture beside the things that are in our New Testament.

我勒個去，早期基督徒除了讀《新約全書》中的經文外，還讀其他經文。

Holy crap, this Greek word doesn't mean what I think it means, or the writings of Paul that I thought were just really, really clear when I read them in King James Version English are actually much more complicated, or the figure of Jesus is more complicated than I thought, or the Gospels seem to have a literary relationship to each other.

我的媽呀，這個希臘語單詞的意思和我想的不一樣，或者我以為用詹姆士王版本英語閱讀時非常非常清楚的保羅的著作實際上要複雜得多，或者耶穌的形象比我想象的要複雜，或者福音書之間似乎有一種文學上的關係。

They're copying each other.

他們在互相抄襲。

Why is that, and how can they be eyewitness accounts if they're copying each other?

為什麼會這樣？如果它們互相抄襲，又怎麼能成為目擊者的描述呢？

The problem is when you're looking at religious practice, of evangelical conservative religious practice, it's very easy to stick your head in the sand and pretend that what you're doing is true.

問題是，當你審視宗教實踐，尤其是福音派保守派的宗教實踐時，你很容易把頭埋進沙子裡，假裝你所做的一切都是真的。

It's easy to pretend that the things you believe are true, like the Bible is the inherent word of God, and when you have apologists working really hard to help people stay deluded, to help keep people dedicated to maintaining this lie without actually saying, like, look, the emperor has no clothes, people in the pews don't ever realize the serious problems with their tradition or with the way they've been taught to view the world.

假裝你所相信的東西是真的很容易，比如《聖經》是上帝固有的話語，而當你有辯護士努力幫助人們保持妄想，幫助人們繼續致力於維護這個謊言，而不真正說出來，比如，看，皇帝沒有穿衣服，教堂裡的人就不會意識到他們的傳統或他們被教導的看待世界的方式存在嚴重問題。

But when you have somebody going to study Christian history or manuscript history, getting background in, like, critical thinking about texts and looking at manuscripts, looking at variations, looking at how doctrine emerged, looking at the history of the church, it doesn't take a liberal professor to trick you into questioning the things you believed, because all it takes is looking at the evidence.

但是，如果有人去學習基督教歷史或手稿史，獲得批判性思考文本、研究手稿、研究變異、研究教義是如何出現的、研究教會歷史等方面的背景知識，就不需要自由派教授來誘導你質疑你所相信的東西，因為只要看看證據就可以了。

You just look at the evidence and realize the things you believe are wrong, and you realize that the sad little ways that the apologist gave you to protect your little box of faith fall flat.

你只要看看證據，就會意識到你所相信的東西是錯的，你就會意識到辯護士給你的保護你的信仰小盒子的可悲的小方法是站不住腳的。

You realize, as I realized, that my apologist heroes never actually took the time to do any serious study.

你會意識到，就像我意識到的那樣，我的辯護士英雄們從未真正花時間做過任何認真的研究。

It doesn't take a liberal professor tricking you for you to question faith in seminary.

在神學院裡，不需要自由派教授欺騙你，你就會質疑信仰。

It just takes an honest open look at the Christian tradition to realize that it is more complicated than anything that I was ever given.

只要坦誠地審視基督教傳統，就會發現它比我所接受的任何東西都要複雜。

And the wild thing is, the thing that just drives me bonkers, is that most of these people, instead of going back to their communities and being like, we need to talk because this is more complex than we ever realized.

最瘋狂的是，讓我抓狂的是，這些人中的大多數並沒有回到自己的社區，而是說，我們需要談談，因為這比我們想象的要複雜得多。

There is space for this in some communities, but not the communities I grew up in.

有些社區有這樣的空間，但不是我成長的社區。

You're just ostracized.

你只是被排斥了。

You're like, I don't believe the right things anymore, so I have to leave.

你會想，我不再相信正確的東西了，所以我必須離開。

So the communities keep their head in the sand.

是以，各社區把頭埋在沙子裡。

They get the leaders that are willing to either toe the line or the leaders who don't have proper education or haven't asked the right questions or whatever.

他們得到的領導人要麼是願意聽話的，要麼是沒有受過適當教育或沒有提出正確問題的領導人。

They will get leaders who uphold their very oversimplistic, dumb view of the Bible, the world, et cetera, because they self-select those leaders to fit with their biases.

他們會得到那些維護他們對《聖經》、世界等的過於簡單化的愚蠢觀點的領袖，因為他們會自我選擇那些符合他們偏見的領袖。

And the people who have actually looked at the complexity of the Christian tradition and understood there are problems don't get to stay.

而那些真正瞭解了基督教傳統的複雜性並認識到其中存在問題的人卻不能留下來。

They end up usually having to leave or they end up in more mainline progressive denominations.

他們最終通常不得不離開，或者去了更主流的進步教派。

This is the dirty secret of Christianity, but here's where the chickens are coming home to roost.

這是基督教的骯髒祕密，但這裡也是 "雞 "要回家的地方。

Is that the right expression?

這樣說對嗎？

I think it's chickens that come home to roost because what you have now is a movement that we are calling deconstruction.

我認為這是雞回到了家，因為你現在所看到的是一場我們稱之為解構的運動。

And the thing is that the knowledge that used to be locked in seminaries and locked in the ivory tower is now widely available on the internet.

而問題是，過去被鎖在神學院和象牙塔裡的知識，現在可以在互聯網上廣泛獲取。

It's literally everywhere so that people can watch a video and understand the synoptic problem, for example, that they probably wouldn't have heard about otherwise.

它簡直無處不在，人們可以通過觀看視頻來了解同步問題等，否則他們可能聽都沒聽說過。

They can watch a video and understand the development of theology or they can understand something about why maybe the specifics of their denomination that their denomination thinks is the hill you have to die on like a, you know, pre-trib or post-trib or some stupid thing like that.

他們可以通過觀看視頻來了解神學的發展，或者他們可以瞭解為什麼他們的教派認為你必須死在山上，比如，你知道的，前三或後三或類似的蠢事。

They can understand that this is either not the only way of looking at it or it's outright wrong and they can start to realize there's a lot more to the world that I was ever taught.

他們可以明白，這不是看待問題的唯一方式，或者是完全錯誤的，他們可以開始意識到，這個世界上還有很多東西是我曾經被教導過的。

You have a generation of kids whose parents and Christian leaders are giving them this box and saying this is the box you have to live in and in the meantime they're going to school and being like, I have friends who are different religions.

有一代孩子，他們的父母和基督教領袖給了他們這個框框，說這就是你必鬚生活的框框，與此同時，他們去了學校，會說，我有不同宗教信仰的朋友。

How do I think about that?

我該怎麼想？

I have friends who are gay.

我有朋友是同志。

How do I think about that?

我該怎麼想？

Or I can go on YouTube and Google and realize that the things that I was taught are just really oversimplistic.

或者，我可以上 YouTube 和谷歌，然後發現我所學到的東西真的過於簡單。

And I believe that this is the wave of deconstructionism that we are seeing today because the process that used to happen in seminaries is now happening whole scale in the evangelical fundamentalist churches and churches are freaking out.

我相信，這就是我們今天看到的解構主義浪潮，因為過去在神學院發生的這一過程，現在正在福音派原教旨主義教會全面展開，教會們都嚇壞了。

They are concerned because all of their young people are being brainwashed or they're being led astray or fill in the blanks or, you know, it's an attack on the church by satan.

他們擔心所有的年輕人都被洗腦了，或者被引入歧途，或者填空，或者，你知道，這是撒旦對教會的攻擊。

But really all it is is it's this process that used to happen behind closed doors in an ivory tower for seminarians who just went away and didn't say anything about it and all of a sudden it's happening to your kids in your churches because they can look for themselves at primary evidence.

但實際上，這只是一個過去在象牙塔裡閉門造車的過程，神學院的學生們只是走開了，什麼也沒說，而突然之間，它就發生在你的孩子們身上，發生在你的教堂裡，因為他們可以自己查看原始證據。

They can look at a manuscript like Codex Sinaiticus.

他們可以查看像《西奈抄本》這樣的手稿。

I have it here where I talk about it and realize there are different books in the earliest full copy of the bible we have.

我在這裡談到了這一點，並意識到我們所擁有的最早的完整版《聖經》中有不同的書。

The New Testament doesn't even have the same books in it.

新約》中甚至沒有相同的書籍。

How do you deal with that?

你是如何處理的？

We have a world where people can actually ask intelligent questions and get really good answers that just aren't the cookie cutter answers they used to get from a pastor or from an apologist.

在我們的世界裡，人們可以真正提出有智慧的問題，並得到真正好的答案，而不是他們過去從牧師或辯護士那裡得到的曲奇餅切割式的答案。

And what's really pathetic, this is what really gets me as a former evangelical fundamentalist, is that those churches will say you have to leave or the young people will say I have to leave.

作為一個曾經的福音派原教旨主義者，真正讓我感到可悲的是，那些教會會說你必須離開，或者年輕人會說我必須離開。

I can't believe, I don't believe the right things, therefore I must be an atheist, therefore I'm, you know, an agnostic, therefore I can't be in this community anymore.

我不能相信，我不相信正確的東西，所以我必須是一個無神論者，所以我是，你知道，一個不可知論者，所以我不能在這個社區了。

And the stupid thing is is that that community was always bound to fail anyways because it's based on an oversimplistic way of looking at the world that's not true.

而愚蠢的是，這個社區無論如何都註定要失敗，因為它是基於一種過於簡單化的看待世界的方式，而這種方式並不真實。

I've pointed these out in other videos but the belief that the bible is the inerrant word of god, patently false, if you're willing to look at the history and realize that it's an impossible belief for the first 200 years of christianity, 300 years of christianity, even later it's not something that ever made any sense.