如前所见,真主向穆斯林下达了命令,要他们与有经典启示的民众作战,即犹太教徒和基督教徒,“直到他们屈辱地亲自缴纳人头税”。(第29节)这一命令下达时,本章序言中所讨论的某些情况影响了当时麦地那的穆斯林群体。这些情况需要重申和强调这一命令,也需要阐明其缘由。部分穆斯林对其目的感到不安,需要加以安抚。服从这一命令,就意味着要与叙利亚南部的拜占庭人对抗。伊斯兰教到来之前,阿拉伯人敬畏拜占庭人,尤其因为拜占庭人长期控制着阿拉伯半岛北部。一些阿拉伯部落与他们勾结,拜占庭还扶植了一个傀儡国家,由加萨尼部落掌权。
As we have seen, God issued His order to the Muslims to fight the people of earlier revelations, i.e. the Jews and the Christians, “till they pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled.” (Verse 29) When this order was given certain circumstances, discussed in the Prologue to this sūrah, affected the Muslim community in Madinah at that time. These circumstances required that this order should be reiterated and emphasized. Its reasons needed to be clarified. The uneasiness felt by some Muslims about its purpose required reassurance. To obey this order meant opposing the Byzantines in southern Syria. Before the advent of Islam, the Arabs held the Byzantines in awe, particularly because they held control over the north of Arabia for a long time. Some Arab tribes collaborated with them, and they had a puppet state where the Ghassān tribe assumed power.
这并不是穆斯林与拜占庭人的第一次交锋。伊斯兰教使真主赋予阿拉伯人一种尊严感，使他们得以抵挡波斯人和拜占庭人。在此之前，他们所展现的一切勇武都体现在部族内部的冲突，以及部族之间相互发动的劫掠袭击之中。然而，对拜占庭人的畏惧依然存在，尤其是在那些尚未真正领悟伊斯兰态度的人当中。此外，穆斯林与拜占庭人的上一次重大交锋并未对穆斯林有利。在那场战役中，拜占庭人及其阿拉伯爪牙集结了大量兵力，据一些记载，人数不少于二十万。
This was not the first encounter the Muslims had with the Byzantines. With Islam, God gave the Arabs a sense of dignity which enabled them to stand up to both the Persians and the Byzantines. Formerly, all the bravery they demonstrated was in internal conflict and the looting raids they launched against one another, tribe against tribe. Yet there was still a lingering fear of the Byzantines, particularly among those who had not yet acquired the true Islamic attitude. Moreover, the last major encounter with the Byzantines had not gone in favour of the Muslims. In that battle, the Byzantines and their Arab stooges marshalled large forces which some reports put at no less than 200,000 men.
所有这些情况，无论是涉及当时穆斯林社团的结构，还是对拜占庭人的旧有恐惧，抑或是被称为“困难远征”（al-‘usrah）的这次远征本身，以及拜占庭人和与其结盟的基督教阿拉伯人遵循早期经典这一看法，都需要进一步的阐明和更明确的表述，以说明对他们的战斗是不可避免的。所有的疑虑都必须消除，不安的情绪也需要通过解释这一不可避免之事的理由来加以安抚。
All these circumstances, whether relating to the structure of the Muslim community at the time, or to the old fear of the Byzantines, or to the expedition itself which was termed ‘the expedition of hardship,’ and also the feeling that the Byzantines and the Christian Arabs allied with them followed earlier Scriptures required further clarification and more categorical statements to show that the fight against them was inevitable. All doubts had to be removed and unease needed to be countered with reassurance by explaining the reasons for that inescapable eventuality.
在这节经文中，《古兰经》阐明了那些持有早期启示者为何会遵循与阿拉伯多神教徒、古罗马多神教徒以及其他民族和社群的信仰相呼应的偏离信仰。他们没有坚守其经典中所阐明的正确信仰。因此，他们不能被视为任何神圣启示的追随者，因为他们所持的信仰与神所启示的一切经典相悖。值得注意的是经文提到了犹太人，以及他们宣称以斯拉是神之子的说法；而这些经文的目的是让穆斯林为与拜占庭人及其阿拉伯基督教盟友的对抗做好准备。这很可能出于两个原因：
In this verse, the Qur’ān makes it clear why those people of earlier revelations were following deviant beliefs which echoed those of the Arab idolaters, Roman idolaters of old as also other nations and communities. They had not maintained the right faith which was outlined in their Scriptures. Hence they could not be considered as followers of any divine message, since they held beliefs contrary to all messages revealed by God. What is worth noting is the mention of the Jews and their assertion that Ezra was the son of God when these verses are meant to prepare the Muslims for a confrontation with the Byzantines and their Arab Christian allies. Most probably there are two reasons for this:
第一点在于，这些经文是以一般性的表述给出的，而要求与有经典的民族作战、直到他们自愿缴纳人头税并处于屈服地位的命令，同样具有普遍意义。有鉴于此，有必要阐明这一普遍命令的思想基础，它既适用于基督徒，也适用于犹太人。
The first relates to the fact that these verses are given as a general statement, and the order to fight the people of earlier revelations until they pay the submission tax with a willing hand and are subdued is also of general import. In view of this it is necessary to outline the ideological basis of this general order that applies to both Christians and Jews.
第二个原因是，犹太人必须被纳入这一安排之中，因为他们有能力设置障碍，阻挠穆斯林向叙利亚南部的扩张。在与穆斯林经过一场艰苦的战斗之后，他们从麦地那迁往靠近叙利亚的地区，此前的战斗导致了盖赖扎部落和纳迪尔部落的撤离。
The second reason is that the Jews had to be included in this order because they were in a position to put up obstacles to impede the Muslim expansion into southern Syria. They had moved from Madinah to areas close to Syria after a hard fight against the Muslims which had led to the evacuation of the tribes of Qaynuqā` and al- Nadīr.
基督徒声称耶稣基督是神之子，这一点广为人知。自保罗歪曲基督教信仰以来，他们便一直持此信念。另一方面，犹太人声称以斯拉是神之子这一说法，今天已不为人所知。今天我们在犹太宗教典籍中所见关于以斯拉的记载，将他描绘为一位精通《托拉》的熟练抄经士，并且他致力于探求主的律法知识。然而，《古兰经》将这一断言归于他们，即以斯拉是神之子，这一事实是无可辩驳的证据，表明至少其中一些人，特别是麦地那的犹太人，曾经持此看法，而且这在他们之中是普遍被接受的。《古兰经》以公开而清楚的方式面对犹太人和基督徒。如果《古兰经》所归于他们的说法有任何不实之处，他们必定会从中找到有力的论据，来支持他们否认先知信息之真实性。
The Christian claim that Jesus Christ is the son of God is well known. This has been their belief ever since Paul distorted the Christian faith. On the other hand, the claim by the Jews that Ezra was the son of God is not known today. What we find today in Jewish religious writings about Ezra is a description which shows him as a skilful scribe of the Torah and that he dedicated himself to the pursuit of knowledge of the Lord’s law. Nevertheless, the fact that the Qur’ān attributes to them this assertion that Ezra was the son of God is irrefutable evidence that at least some of them, particularly the Jews of Madinah, used to believe so and that this was commonly accepted among them. The Qur’ān faced the Jews and the Christians in an open and clear way. Had there been anything untrue in what it attributed to them, they would have found in it a valid argument to support their denial of the truth of the Prophet’s message.
已故的谢赫·拉希德·里达（Rashīd Riđā’）对以斯拉在犹太人眼中的地位和身份作了有益的概括，并加以自己的评论。在此引用其中几段，有助于我们了解犹太人的信仰。24
The late Shaikh Rashīd Riđā’ gives a useful summary about Ezra’s position and status as viewed by the Jews and adds his own comments. It is useful to quote a few of these paragraphs here so that we have an insight into what the Jews believe.24
《犹太百科全书》（1903年版）提到，以斯拉标志着犹太教民族历史中的春天。“地上现出花朵”指的是以斯拉和尼希米。以斯拉本可有资格成为律法的载体，只是律法已经借摩西赐下。律法曾被遗忘，但以斯拉使它得以恢复。若不是因为以色列的罪，以斯拉时代的以色列人本可以目睹如约书亚时代那样的奇迹……以斯拉重新确立了摩西五经的经文，在其中引入了亚述体或方形字母，显然是为了对抗撒玛利亚人而采取的辩论性措施。他在一些词语的上方加点，以表明他对这些经文正确与否的怀疑……犹太历法的起源也可追溯至他。
The Jewish Encyclopaedia (1903 edition) mentions that Ezra marks the springtime in the national history of Judaism. “The flowers appear on the earth” refers to Ezra and Nehemiah. Ezra was worthy of being the vehicle of the Law, had it not been already given through Moses. It was forgotten but Ezra restored it. But for its sins, Israel in the time of Ezra would have witnessed miracles as in the time of Joshua... Ezra re-established the text of the Pentateuch, introducing therein the Assyrian or square characters, apparently as a polemical measure against the Samaritans. He showed his doubts concerning the correctness of some words of the text by placing points over them... the beginnings of the Jewish calendar are traced back to him.
在《圣经词典》中,乔治·博克斯博士指出,以斯拉是一位犹太祭司,也是著名的抄经士,他曾在巴比伦居住了一段时间,时值长手亚达薛西斯在位。在其在位第七年,亚达薛西斯允许以斯拉带领大批犹太民众前往耶路撒冷,时间约为公元前457年。(《以斯拉记》第7页)
In the Dictionary of the Bible, Dr George Box says that Ezra was a Jewish priest, a famous scribe who lived for a time in Babylon in the reign of Artaxerxes, of the long hands. In the seventh year of his reign he permitted Ezra to take a large number of the Jewish people to Jerusalem around 457 BC. (Ezra p. 7)
这段旅程用了他们四个月的时间……
The journey took them four months...
在犹太传统中，以斯拉的地位可与摩西和以利亚相提并论。
`In Jewish tradition, Ezra’s position is comparable to that of Moses and Iliya.
据说他建立了大议会，汇集了圣书的各卷，以迦勒底字母取代了古希伯来字母，并撰写了旧约中的《历代志》《以斯拉记》和《尼希米记》。
It is said that he founded the large assembly, collected the books of the Holy Book, introduced the Chaldean alphabet in place of the old Hebrew alphabet, and wrote the books of Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah of the Old Testament.
《以斯拉记》（第4章第8节、第6章第19节以及第7章第1至27节）是用迦勒底语写成的，因为民众从流亡中归来后，比起希伯来语，他们更能理解迦勒底语。”历史学家，包括犹太人和基督徒在内，普遍知道，摩西所写并保存在约柜之中或其旁的律法书，在所罗门时代之前就已遗失了。所罗门在位时打开约柜，里面除了载有十诫的两块石版之外，别无他物。25
The book of Ezra (pp. 4: 8, 6: 19 and 7: 1-27) is written in the Chaldean language because when the people returned from exile, they could understand Chaldean better than Hebrew.’ It is widely known to historians, including Jews and Christians, that the Torah which Moses wrote and kept in or near the casket was lost before the time of Solomon. When the casket was opened during his reign, there was nothing in it other than the two tablets containing the ten commandments,25
正如《列王纪上》中所见。以斯拉在奴役结束之后，用迦勒底文字书写了《托拉》及其他内容，迦勒底语与当时残存的古希伯来语相混，而犹太人大多已遗忘了古希伯来语。先前启示的信奉者坚持认为，以斯拉是在受到神的启示之后，按照原本的样子书写的。但这一说法并不为其他群体所接受。人们提出了许多反对意见，这些意见可以在专门的著作中找到相应的论述，甚至在他们自己撰写的著作中也有，例如原为法文写成的天主教著作《宝藏之书》（Dhakhīrat al-Albāb）。该书作者用第11章和第12章来反驳五经为摩西所作的观点。关于此，他说：
as seen in the first book of Kings. It was Ezra who, after the end of slavery, wrote the Torah and other things in Chaldean letters, and the Chaldean language mixed with whatever was left of the old Hebrew, which the Jews had largely forgotten. The people of earlier revelations maintain that Ezra wrote it as it originally was, having been inspired by God. But this is not accepted by other communities. Many objections are raised which we find at the appropriate place in specialized books, even those authored by them, such as Dhakhīrat al-Albāb for Catholics, written originally in French. The author devotes Chapters 11 and 12 to objections to the view that the five books were those of Moses. Concerning this, he says:
据《以斯拉记》(4:14–21)记载,在尼布甲尼撒的时代,所有的圣书都被火焚毁,当时他说:“律法已经焚毁,没有人知道你所行的事,也不知道你将要做的事。”此外还记载,以斯拉在圣灵的启示下重新写下了那五部被火焚毁的书,并有五位同时代的文士协助他。
`It is mentioned in the book of Ezra (4: 14.21) that all holy books were burnt with fire at the time of Nebuchadnezzar, when he said: “The Law is burnt, and no one knoweth the works that thou hast done,26 or what thou art about to do.”27 It is added that with inspiration by the Holy Spirit, Ezra re-wrote the five books burnt with fire, and he was assisted by five contemporary scribes.
因此，我们看到圣德尔图良（St Thertholianus）、圣爱任纽（St Irinaous）、圣耶罗尼米（St Ironemus）、金口圣若望（St John the Golden）、圣巴西略（St Basilius）等人称以斯拉为“复兴犹太圣书的人”。28
Therefore, we see St Thertholianus, St Irinaous, St Ironemus, St John the Golden, St Basilius and others call Ezra `the one who revived Jewish holy books’28
谢赫·拉希德·里达进一步说道：
Shaikh Rashīd Riđā’ further:
我们希望说明，所有先前启示的信众，在其信仰的根基和圣书方面，都亏欠以斯拉。我们也希望表明，这一根基十分脆弱，所依托的支撑也很薄弱。这一点已被欧洲自由思想学者清楚地揭示出来。29 在《大英百科全书》中以斯拉的条目下，提到了他重新书写律法一事，这一点得到了以斯拉记和尼希米记的证实。随后该条目又说，后来的记载声称，他不仅为他们重写了被焚毁的律法，还重写了所有已经遗失的希伯来书卷，并且又重写了70部未经认可的书。该条目的作者评论说，关于以斯拉的这一传说是某些历史学家出于自身意愿所写，并未依据任何其他文献。因此，现代学者认为它不过是虚构之说。
This is sufficient for our purposes. We wish to make it clear that all the people of earlier revelations are indebted to Ezra with regard to the foundation of their faith and their holy books. We wish also to show that this foundation is feeble, relying on weak support. This has been clearly shown by European freethinking scholars.29 Under his entry in the Encyclopaedia Britannica his writing of the law — confirmed in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah — is mentioned. Then the entry says that later reports claim that he did not merely re-write for them the law that had been burnt, but also all the Hebrew books which had been lost. He further re-wrote 70 unauthorized books. The writer of the entry comments that this legend about Ezra has been written by some historians of their own accord, relying on no other reference. Hence, modern writers consider it as mere fabrication.
总而言之，犹太人过去尊崇、至今仍尊崇以斯拉，甚至有些人称他为神之子。我们不知道使用这一称呼，是否只是一种尊敬，正如以色列、大卫以及其他人所受到的尊崇那样，还是与他们的哲学家斐洛后来所主张的说法相类似。
To sum up, the Jews venerated and still venerate Ezra, to the extent that some of them call him the son of God. We do not know if using this description was a kind of honouring Ezra, in the same way as Israel, David and others were honoured, or it was akin to what their philosopher Philo later claimed.
这一说法与印度哲学相近，而印度哲学正是基督教信仰的源头。30 古兰经注释家们一致认为，把"以斯拉是神之子"这一说法归于犹太人，指的是部分犹太人的说法，而非所有犹太人。
This latter claim is close to Indian philosophy, which is the origin of Christian beliefs.30 Qur’ānic commentators are in agreement that the claim attributed to the Jews about Ezra being the son of God was made by some Jews, not all of them.
说这话的犹太人是当时居住在麦地那的一些人。这与古兰经中的经文相呼应:"犹太人说:'真主的手被捆住了!'被捆住的是他们自己的手。他们因所说的话而受诅咒。不然,真主的双手是伸开的,他随意施舍。"(5:64)古兰经在下一节提到的其他人,情况也是如此。
The Jews who said this were some of those who lived in Madinah. It is the same as the Qur’ānic reference: “The Jews say: ‘God’s hand is shackled!’ It is their own hands that are shackled. Rejected [by God] are they for what they say. Indeed, both His hands are outstretched. He bestows [His bounty] as He wills.” (5:64) The same applies to others whom the Qur’ān mentions in the following verse:
“God has certainly heard the words of those who said: ‘God is poor, and we are rich.’ — (3:181) These people uttered this mouthful in reply to God’s invitation:”
Translated into Chinese (Simplified):
“真主确已听见了那些说‘真主贫穷，我们富有’之人的话。——（3:181）这些人在回应真主的号召时，说出了这样一番狂妄之言：”
“God has certainly heard the words of those who said: ‘God is poor, and we are rich.— (3:181) These people uttered this mouthful in reply to God’s invitation:
“谁愿意借给真主一笔美好的贷款，祂就会加倍偿还他？”（57:11）{也许早先有人也说过同样的话，只是没有传到我们这里。}
Note: the Qur'an verse is wrapped in braces per the source's convention where applicable; the Chinese rendering above reflects the original text.
“Who is it that will offer up to God a goodly loan, which He will amply repay?” (57:11) It may be that some earlier ones said the same thing, but it was not reported to us.
Ibn Isĥāq 和其他人记载：“Sallām ibn Mishkam、Nu`mān ibn Awfā、Abū Anas、Shās ibn Qays 和 Mālik ibn al-Sayf 对先知说：‘你既然背弃了我们的 qiblah［即礼拜时面向的方向］，又不承认以斯拉是神的儿子，我们怎么能跟从你呢？’”众所周知，一些声称耶稣是神之子的基督徒，原本是犹太人。斐洛是来自亚历山大的犹太哲学家，与耶稣同时代，他说神有一个儿子，即祂的道，神借此创造万物。因此，在伊斯兰教降临之前，一些犹太人声称以斯拉是神的儿子，是完全有可能的。31
Ibn Isĥāq and others report: “Sallām ibn Mishkam, Nu`mān ibn Awfā, Abū Anas, Shās ibn Qays and Mālik ibn al-Sayf said to the Prophet: `How can we follow you when you have abandoned our qiblah [i.e. the direction faced in prayer] and you do not accept that Ezra was the son of God.” It is well known that some Christians who claimed that Jesus was the son of God were originally Jews. Philo, a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria who was a contemporary of Jesus, says that God has a son who is His word with which He creates all things. Hence, it is perfectly possible that some Jews claimed prior to the advent of Islam that Ezra was the son of God.31
通过引用这一犹太人的论断，古兰经在此语境中表明，某些早前启示的信众持有扭曲的信仰，这与他们作为信仰真主、遵循真理宗教的信徒是不相容的。这些便是构成穆斯林被命令与之作战之裁决基础的主要特征。此种战斗的目的不是强迫他们成为穆斯林，而是制服他们，使其不再与伊斯兰教对立，并使其接受伊斯兰教的权威。如此，个人便可摆脱一切限制其自由的影响，自由地选择信仰真主并遵从祂的启示。
By quoting this Jewish assertion in this context the Qur’ān makes clear that some of the people of earlier revelations held such distorted beliefs as could not fit with their being believers in God or their following the religion of truth. These are the main characteristics which form the basis for the ruling given to the Muslims to fight them. The purpose of such a fight is not to compel them to be Muslims, but to subdue them so that they do not stand in opposition to Islam and so that they accept its authority. Thus individuals would be free of all influences restricting their freedom to make a choice to believe in God and follow His message.
如前所述，基督徒关于耶稣是神之子的说法是广为人知的。事实上，自从保罗歪曲了耶稣基督的信息以来，所有基督教教会都一直在作出这一断言；而耶稣的信息，和一切天启的信息一样，乃是以神的独一为基础的。教会的宗教会议更进一步地歪曲了它，实际上扼杀了神独一的观念。
As we have said, the Christian assertion about Jesus being the son of God is very widely known. Indeed all Christian churches have been making this assertion ever since Paul distorted the message of Jesus Christ which, like all divine messages, was based on God’s oneness. The Church Synods carried the distortion further and practically killed the concept of God’s oneness.
对于基督徒信仰的概要，我们同样引用谢赫·穆罕默德·拉希德·里达（Shaikh Muĥammad Rashīd Riđā）的《古兰经注释》《光塔》（Al-Manār）。在“三位一体”标题下，我们读到：
For a summary of Christians’ beliefs we will similarly quote from Shaikh Muĥammad Rashīd Riđā’s commentary on the Qur’ān, Al-Manār. Under the heading ‘Trinity’, we read:
三位一体是基督徒用来指上帝三种位格显现的术语。这三位是圣父、圣子和圣灵。这是天主教和东正教以及几乎所有新教徒教义的一部分。信奉这一观念的人声称，它与圣经完全相符。神学学者根据古代宗教会议的教导和早期教父的著作，撰写了大量文字来阐释和解说这一观念。他们的著述大多讨论第二位格是如何诞生的、第三位格是如何出现的，以及三位格之间的关系、各自的独特属性、名称和称号。
“三位一体”一词在圣经中并未使用。旧约中没有任何一节经文明确提及三位一体。然而，早期基督教作家引用了许多提到上帝集体临在的经文。这里的要点在于：如果这些经文允许多种解释，就不能被引用为支持三位一体观念的明确证据。他们把这些经文当作对新约中所包含的明确启示的参照。支持这一观念的，主要引用新约的两组经文。第一组经文同时提到圣父、圣子和圣灵；第二组则分别提及他们，并强调他们的某些属性以及彼此之间的关系。
The Trinity is a term used by Christians to refer to three manifestations of God. These are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This is part of the teachings of the Catholic and Eastern Churches, as well as almost all Protestants. Those who adhere to this concept allege that it is absolutely in line with the Holy Bible. Scholars of Divinity have written extensively in interpreting and explaining this concept, based on the teachings of the old Synods and the writings of the former fathers of the Church. Much of their writings discuss the way the second manifestation was born and how the third manifestation came about, and the relationships of the three manifestations, their distinctive qualities, names and titles. The term, `Trinity’, is not used in the Bible. No verse of the Old Testament specifically mentions the Trinity. Yet old Christian writers cite many verses that refer to a collective presence of God. The point here is that if these verses admit more than one interpretation, they cannot be cited as clear evidence in support of the concept of the Trinity. They are used as reference to clear revelations they believe to be included in the New Testament. Two large sets of verses from the New Testament are quoted in support of this concept. The first set consists of verses that mention the Father, Son and Holy Spirit together, and the second mentions them separately, emphasizing some of their attributes and the relationship between them.
关于三位一体中三个位格的争论始于使徒时代。它很可能源自希腊哲学家的思想。
Dispute about the three persons of the Trinity started at the time of the Apostles. Most probably it emanated from the ideas of Hellenic philosophers.
安提阿的第二世纪主教提阿非罗（Theophilus）使用了希腊词 trinus，随后特尔图良（Tertiliyanus）首先使用了其同义词 trinitas，意为“三”。在尼西亚大公会议之前，关于这一概念的争论十分激烈，尤其是在东方。教会将许多观点斥为异端。其中包括：阿比奥尼派（Abionians）的观点，他们认为基督不过是一个人；撒伯流派（Sabilians）的观点，他们认为圣父、圣子和圣灵是上帝向人显示自己的三种不同形式；阿里乌派（Airisis）的观点，他们认为圣子不像圣父那样永恒存在，而是圣父在创造宇宙之前先创造了圣子，因此圣子地位较低，服从圣父的旨意；以及马其顿派（Macedonians）的观点，他们否认圣灵是上帝的一个位格。
Theophilus, the second century Bishop of Antioch, used the Greek word trinus, while subsequently Tertiliyanus was the first to use its synonym trinitas, which means three. Much dispute about this concept took place prior to the Council of Nicea, particularly in the East. The Church branded many views as heretic. Among these were the views of the Abionians who believed that Christ was no more than a human being, the Sabilians who believed that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit were three different manifestations by which God shows Himself to people, the Airisis who believed that the Son was not ever present like the Father; rather, the Father created the Son before creating the universe. Hence, the Son has a lower status and is subject to the Father’s will, and the Macedonians deny that the Holy Spirit is a person of God.
教会的这一概念在公元325年的尼西亚大公会议上获得通过，公元381年的君士坦丁堡会议也予以确认。两次会议都裁定，圣子与圣灵在三位一体中与圣父同等。圣子是在时间开始之前由圣父所生，而圣灵则是从圣父发出。公元589年的托莱多会议同样裁定，圣灵是从圣父发出的。拉丁教会一致接受了这一增补并坚持不改。至于希腊教会，起初虽然几乎没有抵制，但后来提出反对改变教law的论点，并将此视为异端。
The Church concept was approved by the Council of Nicea in 325 CE, and the Constantinople Synod in 381. Both ruled that the Son and the Holy Spirit are equal to the Father in the Trinity, and while the Son was born through the father before the start of time, the Holy Spirit emanated from Him. The Toledo Synod of 589 CE also ruled that the Holy Spirit emanated from the Father. The Latin Church unanimously accepted this addition and held on to it. As for the Greek Church, it showed little resistance at the beginning, but later gave its argument against changing the law, considering that as heresy.
“And also from the Son”这一短语，至今仍是希腊教会与天主教会合一的障碍。马丁·路德的追随者及改革宗教会的著述，采纳了与天主教会相同的三位一体观念。然而，自十三世纪起，大量神学专家反对这一观念；另有一些新的团体，如苏西尼派、德意志派、一位论派和普救派，也都认为该观念既与《圣经》相悖，也违背理性。苏威德·提拉格提出，三位一体即基督所被赋予的三重印记，他所说的是三中有一，而非一中有三。他的理解是：基督里的神性是圣父；与基督里的人性相结合的神性是圣子；从祂发出的神性是圣灵。理性主义者对新教和改革宗教会的影响，削弱了许多德国神学家的三位一体观念。
The phrase ‘And also from the Son’ continues to be a barrier preventing the unity between the Greek and Catholic Churches. The writings of the followers of Martin Luther and the Reformist churches adopt the same concept of the Trinity as the Catholic Church. However, beginning with the thirteenth century, a large number of divinity specialists have opposed this, as also some new groups such as the Susinians, Germans, Unitarians and the Universalists, who all consider that concept contrary to the Holy Bible and to reason. Suweid Tiragh makes the Trinity the Christ given a tri-mark. He speaks of one in three, not three in one. What he understands is that the divine in Christ is the Father, while the divine which is in union with the human in Christ is the Son, and the divine that emanated from Him is the Holy Spirit. The influence of the rationalists on the Protestant and Reformist churches weakened the Trinity concepts among many German divines.
康德认为，圣父、圣子和圣灵象征上帝的三种本质属性，即权能、智慧与爱，或三种主要活动，即创造、护佑与掌管。希金斯（Higgins）和谢林（Shling）都试图为三位一体的观念建立一个抽象的基础，此后的一些德国神学家沿着抽象的路线为这一观念辩护。另有一些依据圣经立论的神学家，并不严格遵循尼西亚公会议和君士坦丁堡公会议所确立的教会立场。近年来，许多人试图为撒伯里乌主义者（Sabellians）的观点辩护，尤其是如此。32
Kant considers that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit signify three essential attributes of God, which are power, wisdom and love, or three main activities, which are creation, protection and control. Both Higgins and Shling tried to establish an abstract basis to the concept of the Trinity, and they were followed by later German divines who tried to defend the concept on abstract lines. Some divines who rely on the Scriptures do not strictly follow the Church line as stated by the Nicea and Constantinople Councils. In later years many tried to defend the views of the Sabilians in particular.32
诚然，如今已没有任何基督教教会信奉基于真主独一性的真理之教；他们也不承认，没有任何事物或任何人在任何方面与祂相似，也不承认祂未曾生育任何人。赞美祂的荣耀，祂是至高无上的。
Indeed, no longer do any Christian churches believe in the religion of truth based on God’s oneness; nor do they accept that nothing and no one is similar to Him in any way, or that He does not beget anyone; limitless indeed is He in His glory.
常有人提到，基督徒中的某些群体，尤其是伊斯兰文献中称为Arīsīs（阿里西派）的群体，信奉真主的独一。这种说法是不准确的。
It is often mentioned that some groups of Christians, particularly those referred to in Islamic literature as the Arīsīs, believed in God’s oneness. To say this is inaccurate.
这个团体在“神圣信仰”意义上的一神论并不纯正，其观念颇为混乱。他们一方面声称，与上帝不同，耶稣基督不是永恒的，这一点是对的；另一方面又声称他是圣子，并且是在宇宙存在之前由圣父所创造的。这一切与上帝独一性的正确概念毫无关系。
This group is not unitarian in the sense we find in the divine faith. Their concepts are rather confused. While they state that, unlike God, Jesus Christ is not eternal — which is true — they also claim that he is the Son, and that he has been created by the Father before the universe. All this has nothing to do with the proper concept of God’s oneness.
确实，上主已作出明确的判决：那些说基督是上帝之子、或说基督就是上帝、或说上帝是三位一体之一的人，都是不信道者。同一种信仰不可能同时导向信道与不信道。没有人能够既是信士，又是不信者。
Indeed a clear verdict has been given by God that those who say that Christ is the son of God, or say that Christ is God, or say that God is one of a Trinity are unbelievers. The same faith cannot lead to belief and unbelief at the same time. No one can simultaneously be a believer and an unbeliever.