本文以奧古斯丁《約翰福音講道集》第 46 篇為核心文本,提出「道成肉身」不僅是其神學體系中的一個教義條目,更構成貫穿歷史 語境、神學建構與釋經實踐的「核心詮釋範式」。此範式可具體操作 化為三個相互關聯的維度：神聖的俯就適應、物質媒介的聖化,以 及元首與肢體的聯合。在此框架下,論文首先重建第 46 篇的歷史背 景,揭示奧古斯丁如何將北非教會面臨的多重爭議映射於經文中「善 牧」「雇工」「狼」與「看門人」等文本角色 — 以「雇工」回應多納圖 派的純粹主義,以「善牧捨命」與「雇工逃跑」之對比回應伯拉糾派對 恩典的貶低,以「狼」指向威脅羊群的屬靈仇敵,以「看門人」的釋 經維護三一論的正統; 其次,分析其如何以道成肉身為中心,將揀 選論、基督論、三一論與教會論有機統攝,形成內在連貫的神學整 體; 最後,探討其釋經方法 — 包括對教父傳統的基督論重構、道成肉身的修辭學運用、牧養適應原則以及符號學理論 — 如何將 此範式轉化為具體的詮釋實踐,並以大公信仰與愛德原則為多重意 義的釋經設定了明確邊界。研究結果表明,將道成肉身視為詮釋範 式,能有效彌合當前學界在《講道集》研究中歷史考據與神學邏輯之 間的割裂,展現奧古斯丁統合護教、釋經與牧養的動態方法論,並 揭示其思想的內在統一性與神學深度。

This paper takes Augustine’s Tractate 46 on the Gospel of John as its core text and argues that “the Incarnation” is not merely a doctrinal tenet within his theological system, but constitutes a “central interpretive para-digm” that permeates his historical engagement, theological construction, and exegetical practice. This paradigm can be operationally defined through three interrelated dimensions: divine condescension and accommodation, the sanctification of material media, and the union of Head and body. Within this framework, the paper first reconstructs the historical context of Tractate 46, revealing how Augustine maps the multiple controversies of the North African Church onto the textual figures of the parable—the “hireling” as a response to Donatist purism, the contrast between the Good Shepherd's self-sacrifice and the hireling's flight as a counter to Pelagian depreciation of grace, the “wolf” as the spiritual adversary threatening the flock, and the “doorkeeper” as an occasion for safeguarding Trinitarian orthodoxy. Second-ly, it analyzes how Augustine, centering on the Incarnation, organically inte-grates the doctrines of election, Christology, Trinitarian theology, and eccle-siology into a coherent theological whole. Finally, it explores how his exe-getical method—including his Christological reconfiguration of the patristic tradition, his use of an “incarnational rhetoric,” the principle of pastoral ac-commodation, and his semiotic theory—translates this paradigm into con-crete interpretive practice, while establishing clear boundaries for polyse-mous interpretation through the rule of faith and the principle of charity. The findings demonstrate that viewing the Incarnation as an interpretive para-digm effectively bridges the gap between historical criticism and theological logic prevalent in current scholarship on the Tractates, revealing Augustine’s dynamic methodology that integrates apologetics, exegesis, and pastoral care, and illuminating the inner unity and theological depth of his thought.