| [1] < [3] [4] 5 > [7] |
同四福音一樣，耶穌沒有看過．不可以列為應該沒有問題． | |
Dye: No you have not answered anything. For the whole discussion, you were ONLY focusing on HAVING signs and precautions. But the main problem of the discussion there should be people’s disobedience to the signs and the precaution steps… which you have not said a word about. Why? | |
回復 E72 睇錯你的問題.....答錯答案.....  不過, 我的觀點跟你有些不同. 1) 耶穌宣揚的是猷太教議.....耶穌認同的, 就是猷太教, 跟天主教,基督教並不等同 2) 現今天主教,基督教宣揚的, 是一套耶穌死後復活的哲學, 猷太教, 回教有嗎? 跟進化論相似....基督教跟天主教.猷太教.回教雖然都有耶穌(有共同的祖先), 但是, 猷太教不是基督教的祖先. 所以, 耶穌有無睇過, 並不是問題. | |
回復 E72 睇錯你的問題.....答錯答案..... 不過, 我的觀點跟你有些不同. 1) 耶穌宣揚的是猷太教議.....耶穌認同的, 就是猷太教, 跟天主教,基督教並不等同 2) 現今天主教,基督教宣揚的, 是一套耶穌死後復活的哲學, 猷太教, 回教有嗎? 跟進化論相似....基督教跟天主教.猷太教.回教雖然都有耶穌(有共同的祖先), 但是, 猷太教不是基督教的祖先. 所以, 耶穌有無睇過, 並不是問題. | |
不過而家我只係有現有的新約, 未發現有咩大問題, 用住先~ | |
1) 耶穌宣揚的是猷太教議.....耶穌認同的, 就是猷太教, 跟天主教,基督教並不等同 2) 現今天主教,基督教宣揚的, 是一套耶穌死後復活的哲學, 猷太教, 回教有嗎? 又唔係咁講. 耶穌成日都鬧D法利賽人架喎. 就是猷太教囉. 而且死後復活係耶穌講架嗎. 猷太教, 回教就係唔信, 所以耶穌咪話佢地唔得囉. | |
言下之意，耶穌同基教無關。只是後人推他做教主。孔教推孔子做教主一樣？ | |
不過而家我吾發覺係到亂吹有咩問題，所以吹住先。 | |
我都冇唔俾你吹丫, 都算有問必答丫~ 只不過係發現到你吹得可能有D問題既時候我講出黎大家研究下姐～ | |
.. 猶太人中, 只有撒杜塞人一個分支是不信人死會復活的。 猶太托拉五經也多處涉及人死後的描述。 | |
回復 91# beebeechan 乜猶太人唔係唔信新約架咩？佢地唔係仲等緊果個彌賽亞架咩？唔通我記錯左？ | |
回復 beebeechan 信猶太教的猶太人不信耶穌是救世主 當然不會讀新約. | |
回復 beebeechan 新約....猶太人邊有新約? 猶太跟基督教分歧, 在於耶穌的角色. 基督教用七十士譯本話耶穌就係彌賽亞 猷太教話《七十士譯本》譯錯.....基督教教話是聖靈指引下, 對原文的更正....然後有新約... ----------------------------------------- 何謂《七十士譯本》？舊約聖經主要是以希伯來文寫成，在主前第三世記（五經於 280 BC 畢），由 72 位亞歷山大的猶太學者譯成希臘文，後人誤把 72 位稱為 70 位，即稱為七十士譯本（Septuagint，拉丁文 Septuaginta = 七十），而羅馬數目字 LXX 就成為其簡稱。 你知道為什麼有的時候，當新約顯然是引述舊約，所引述的卻與舊約聖經有出入嗎？這是因為新約作者常常直接引述七十士譯本（約有三百次之多），而不是引述希伯來文聖經。 ----------------------------------------- | |
I have since the beginning. It is irrelvent in certain cases because the sign/warning/notice will not get anyone out of their 'liability'. It is only that you have failed to see it. | |
回復 E72 耶穌同基教無關 <== 我並不是這個意思. 雖然人跟猴不同, 但是, 總不成說他沒有關系. 大家的關系, 在於原點的設定. 耶穌的信仰, 有很大部份在基督教內, 但不是全部. 基督教設的三位一體, 耶穌生前有說過嗎? 係保羅受聖靈感動後說, 還是有其他12門徒提出相似的觀點? 只是後人推他做教主。孔教推孔子做教主一樣？ <== 這個正是我的意思, 情況跟"動L"相似, 你知"動L"是甚麼... | |
"It is irrelvent in certain cases because the sign/warning/notice will not get anyone out of their 'liability'." True. But what is the "case" we are dealing with? Not placing bombs in the market or the poisoned milk... Do you remember the whole point of the discussion? The existence of the Tree of Wisdom. In which, people's disobedience is totally relevent. Don't you think so? | |
Which is why I said, "The idea is that people should pay "reasonable" effort in keeping others safe from harm. By reasonableness, you consider 1) Whether the harm is foreseeable. People are expected to act in a reasonable manner.(In the case of God, however, it is totally forseen) 2) The degree of the foreseeable harm. If it result in death or injury, the responsibility is high. (In the case of God, it is a couple billion death at least) 3) The price of the preventive measure (In the case of God, the price is little) 4) The ability of the defendent to pay the price (In the case of God, the ability is infinite) Other factors to keep in mind: 5) The forseeable capacity of the plaintiff. The less the capacity, the higher the responsibility (In the case of God, the capcity of human is suppose to be none before eating from the Tree)" ALL of which is in relation to the case of God. THEREFORE, the warning is irrelvent. THEREFORE, "As a matter of fact, God has demonstrated what he should have done to the tree of knowlegde. If he has protected fruit from the tree of knowlegde in the same way as he has protected the tree of life after the fall, billion will be saved." It is not only about the tree being there, it is the whole circumstances because everything is "manufactured" by God. (Including the serpent) Something you should understand as an adult, "The greater the power, the greater the responsibility" Hence, infinite power breeds infinite responsibility. | |
基督教設的三位一體, 耶穌生前有說過嗎? 這位反基哥哥仔幾時變得要把耶穌的話看成金科玉律, 作判斷的依歸呢? | |
D“一國自相分爭可能會愈分爭愈站立得住” 一國自相分爭可能會愈分爭愈站立得住” 咁就睇下啦. 要睇下就唔係自相分爭實變荒場啦, 只係耶穌同陳真一樣 -- 讀書不多, 所以要佢補幾堂歷史 呢句我有多少同意. 不過其實 "真正的基督徒" 還有少數是存在的. 聽說比例大約是一千比一. 人人都争住認自己係一, 自相分争搞旺個場 "徒2:44 信的人都在一處、凡物公用．" 呢句只係形容當時情況, 唔係定例. 因為前後文有講過, 如過有人唔捐野出來, 果D野仍然係佢地自己既. 冇問題. 只要唔好冇捐, 又話捐左, 咁就得啦. 同 BeeBeeChan 講既大同小異. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 前後文講過唔捐冇問題就唔係「凡物」all things, 而係some of the things 部分物公用部分物私用 | |
「我升到我的父和你們的父那裏去，升到我的天主和你們的天主那裏去。」 起碼除了耶穌外, 還有一位「天主」, 「父」 在若望福音14章中也清楚講了: 我也要求父，他必會賜給你們另一位護慰者，使他永遠與你們同在； 他是世界所不能領受的真理之神，因為世界看不見他，也不認識他；你們卻認識他，因為他與你們同在，並在你們內。 」 The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name--he will teach you everything and remind you of all that (I) told you. 英文版楚說了這個叫聖神 Holy Spirit |
| [1] < [3] [4] 5 > [7] |
