返咗近30年摩門教，你問我答(2)
親愛寶貝蜜糖甜心
815 回覆
14 Like
35 Dislike
第 1 頁第 2 頁第 3 頁第 4 頁第 5 頁第 6 頁第 7 頁第 8 頁第 9 頁第 10 頁第 11 頁第 12 頁第 13 頁第 14 頁第 15 頁第 16 頁第 17 頁第 18 頁第 19 頁第 20 頁第 21 頁第 22 頁第 23 頁第 24 頁第 25 頁第 26 頁第 27 頁第 28 頁第 29 頁第 30 頁第 31 頁第 32 頁第 33 頁
太長啦，你唔好引用我啦，就咁ABC point咁傾啦，我記得我哋傾緊咩嘅，加上呢個post係我嘅，我一定會收到notifications
我想補充一下你引嘅呢節經文
“And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude(形象); only ye heard a voice.
Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,”
Deuteronomy 4:12, 15-16 KJV
呢到係摩西面對面見完神(出埃及記:33:11)之後嘅說話，中文翻譯咁申4:10 你在何烈山站在耶和華─你神面前的那日，耶和華對我說：你為我招聚百姓，我要叫他們聽見我的話，使他們存活在世的日子，可以學習敬畏我，又可以教訓兒女這樣行。
呢到嘅you同ye係眾數，指緊以色列人，而以色列人事實上的確係冇面對面見神，因為面對面見神個個係摩西。你呢節似support我多啲...
“And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude(形象); only ye heard a voice.
Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,”
Deuteronomy 4:12, 15-16 KJV
呢到係摩西面對面見完神(出埃及記:33:11)之後嘅說話，中文翻譯咁申4:10 你在何烈山站在耶和華─你神面前的那日，耶和華對我說：你為我招聚百姓，我要叫他們聽見我的話，使他們存活在世的日子，可以學習敬畏我，又可以教訓兒女這樣行。
呢到嘅you同ye係眾數，指緊以色列人，而以色列人事實上的確係冇面對面見神，因為面對面見神個個係摩西。你呢節似support我多啲...
copy錯中文聖經，補返
申4:
12. 耶和華從火焰中對你們說話，你們只聽見聲音，卻沒有看見形像。
14. 那時耶和華又吩咐我將律例典章教訓你們，使你們在所要過去得為業的地上遵行。
15. 所以，你們要分外謹慎；因為耶和華在何烈山、從火中對你們說話的那日，你們沒有看見什麼形像。
16. 惟恐你們敗壞自己，雕刻偶像，彷彿什麼男像女像，
申4:
12. 耶和華從火焰中對你們說話，你們只聽見聲音，卻沒有看見形像。
14. 那時耶和華又吩咐我將律例典章教訓你們，使你們在所要過去得為業的地上遵行。
15. 所以，你們要分外謹慎；因為耶和華在何烈山、從火中對你們說話的那日，你們沒有看見什麼形像。
16. 惟恐你們敗壞自己，雕刻偶像，彷彿什麼男像女像，
However,“The phrase "face to face" in the Hebrew (פָּנִ֣ים אֶל־פָּנִ֔ים) uses the plural form of the word פָּנֶה (paneh; "face").1 However, it would not necessarily be proper to translate it then "faces to faces," because the word is always found in the plural form in Hebrew.2 This is because Hebrew uses plurality to express compound objects ("a single object that consists of several parts").3
In the context of personal interaction, while the expression can mean literally facing one another to the face (e.g. Jer 32:4, 34:3), it also has the idea of "appearing before,"3 as when all Israel was "face to face" with God at Sinai (Dt 5:4). But the term "face" more figuratively was simply an expression of the "presence" of a person,4 including God (e.g. Ex 33:14-15).
The expression when used of interacting (seeing, speaking, etc.) with God refers to "a form of the LORD," (תְּמוּנָה; "likeness" or "representation")5 as was the case with Moses' interaction with God "face to face" (Num 12:8; cf. Ex 33:11, Dt 34:10). Such is known as a theophany.
Thus while seeing God's face (as in God's full glory) all men were incapable of doing and surviving (and so Moses did not even see Him so; Ex 33:18-23), God could manifest Himself in His creation in other ways that "localized" His presence, and one could interact with Him in a "face to face" manner, but not be expressing His full glory.”
睇埋“摩西 說：「求你顯出你的榮耀給我看。」 耶和華說：「我要顯我一切的恩慈，在你面前經過，宣告我的名。我要恩待誰就恩待誰；要憐憫誰就憐憫誰」； 又說：「你不能看見我的面，因為人見我的面不能存活。」 耶和華說：「看哪，在我這裏有地方，你要站在磐石上。 我的榮耀經過的時候，我必將你放在磐石穴中，用我的手遮掩你，等我過去， 然後我要將我的手收回，你就得見我的背，卻不得見我的面。」”
出埃及記 33:18-23
So how did JS saw the two personages literally face-to-face as shown in the first vision video?
In the context of personal interaction, while the expression can mean literally facing one another to the face (e.g. Jer 32:4, 34:3), it also has the idea of "appearing before,"3 as when all Israel was "face to face" with God at Sinai (Dt 5:4). But the term "face" more figuratively was simply an expression of the "presence" of a person,4 including God (e.g. Ex 33:14-15).
The expression when used of interacting (seeing, speaking, etc.) with God refers to "a form of the LORD," (תְּמוּנָה; "likeness" or "representation")5 as was the case with Moses' interaction with God "face to face" (Num 12:8; cf. Ex 33:11, Dt 34:10). Such is known as a theophany.
Thus while seeing God's face (as in God's full glory) all men were incapable of doing and surviving (and so Moses did not even see Him so; Ex 33:18-23), God could manifest Himself in His creation in other ways that "localized" His presence, and one could interact with Him in a "face to face" manner, but not be expressing His full glory.”
睇埋“摩西 說：「求你顯出你的榮耀給我看。」 耶和華說：「我要顯我一切的恩慈，在你面前經過，宣告我的名。我要恩待誰就恩待誰；要憐憫誰就憐憫誰」； 又說：「你不能看見我的面，因為人見我的面不能存活。」 耶和華說：「看哪，在我這裏有地方，你要站在磐石上。 我的榮耀經過的時候，我必將你放在磐石穴中，用我的手遮掩你，等我過去， 然後我要將我的手收回，你就得見我的背，卻不得見我的面。」”
出埃及記 33:18-23
So how did JS saw the two personages literally face-to-face as shown in the first vision video?
我哋先討論咗人係唔係真係唔可以面對面見神先。
我會針對你呢句「while the expression can mean literally facing one another to the face (e.g. Jer 32:4, 34:3), it also has the idea of "appearing before,"」，即係兩種解法都啱，但要分辨咩情況下用咩解法。
我想知你嘅解法之下，呢兩節聖經可以點合理化。
「出埃及記:33:11 耶和華與摩西面對面說話，好像人與朋友說話一般，摩西轉到營裡去，惟有他的幫手一個少年人嫩的兒子約書亞，不離開會幕。」
人與朋友說話一般係唔係好似你講嘅解法？你同你朋友面對面說話時，你朋友係唔係figuratively appearing before you？
「創世記:32:30 雅各便給那地方起名叫毘努伊勒。〔就是神之面的意思〕意思說：我面對面見了神，我的性命仍得保全。
使徒行傳:7:55 但司提反被聖靈充滿，定睛望天，看見神的榮耀，又看見耶穌站在神的右邊。56 就說：我看見天開了，人子站在神的右邊。」
你話all men were incapable of doing and surviving，但雅各同司提反又係見到啲咩？
呢啲明顯矛盾未解決到之前，我答唔到你呢條So how did JS saw the two personages literally face-to-face as shown in the first vision video?
因為就我看來，聖經係有實際活生生例子證明人係有見過神。
我會針對你呢句「while the expression can mean literally facing one another to the face (e.g. Jer 32:4, 34:3), it also has the idea of "appearing before,"」，即係兩種解法都啱，但要分辨咩情況下用咩解法。
我想知你嘅解法之下，呢兩節聖經可以點合理化。
「出埃及記:33:11 耶和華與摩西面對面說話，好像人與朋友說話一般，摩西轉到營裡去，惟有他的幫手一個少年人嫩的兒子約書亞，不離開會幕。」
人與朋友說話一般係唔係好似你講嘅解法？你同你朋友面對面說話時，你朋友係唔係figuratively appearing before you？
「創世記:32:30 雅各便給那地方起名叫毘努伊勒。〔就是神之面的意思〕意思說：我面對面見了神，我的性命仍得保全。
使徒行傳:7:55 但司提反被聖靈充滿，定睛望天，看見神的榮耀，又看見耶穌站在神的右邊。56 就說：我看見天開了，人子站在神的右邊。」
你話all men were incapable of doing and surviving，但雅各同司提反又係見到啲咩？
呢啲明顯矛盾未解決到之前，我答唔到你呢條So how did JS saw the two personages literally face-to-face as shown in the first vision video?
因為就我看來，聖經係有實際活生生例子證明人係有見過神。
既然我哋都明「while the expression can mean literally facing one another to the face (e.g. Jer 32:4, 34:3), it also has the idea of "appearing before,"」即係佢有兩種解法。至於佢真正意思 唔係單單cherry picking 咁去了解，唔同語言都有唔同文法，所以要see bible as a whole 先可以知佢講乜。睇埋我上面講Hebrew uses plurality to express compound objects ("a single object that consists of several parts").
至於你嗰兩段點樣合理化 朋友同朋友 呢個phrase 冇指明邊個aspect 可以係語氣 態度 不過我唔亂咁揣測 睇埋其他verses我唔會覺得佢係講緊好似JS嗰隻face to face
至於使徒行傳:7:55
係”神的榮耀” not in the fullness of his glory. It could have been be in parts , but not his literal face.
You同ye嗰度有啲模糊 唔係好明你想指出啲乜
至於你嗰兩段點樣合理化 朋友同朋友 呢個phrase 冇指明邊個aspect 可以係語氣 態度 不過我唔亂咁揣測 睇埋其他verses我唔會覺得佢係講緊好似JS嗰隻face to face
至於使徒行傳:7:55
係”神的榮耀” not in the fullness of his glory. It could have been be in parts , but not his literal face.
You同ye嗰度有啲模糊 唔係好明你想指出啲乜
see bible as a whole呢到我有所保留，因為bible根本就唔係whole，係後人集合啲分散嘅書變成一本書集，另外，我都認為緊我係seeing bible as a whole，你嘅whole同我嘅whole只係唔同睇法啫。
喺我眼中你都係先斷定人無法見到神，再"cherry pick"啲章節出嚟支持自己睇法，當遇到我引出極之明顯話係面對面時你又話係figuratively。
咁會唔會個情況其實係人真係可以literally面對面見到神，但前題係一個人要得到聖靈充滿同神嘅准許，正如雅各、摩西、司提反一樣。聖經其他地方所謂嘅人無法得見神係figuratively指緊罪人無法見到，因為耶穌都話「清心的人有福了！因為他們必得見神。」
我想表達嘅係，當聖經同你睇法有相矛盾時，你就figurative晒佢哋，但我用返同樣手法somehow你又唔接受。
當雅各同摩西例子都咁明確係face to face時，你話係figuratively，我認為係唔可行嘅，一係你可唔可以查一查你講嘅Hebrew uses plurality to express compound objects係唔係只會出現喺神同人見面？因為如果原來神見人同人見人(Jer 32:4, 34:3)兩邊都用緊同一grammer，呢個grammer form就唔可以成為一個argument。
最後使徒行傳7:55係用嚟反駁你話人無法見到神嘅榮耀，當然你係話"Thus while seeing God's face (as in God's full glory) all men were incapable of doing and surviving"，但full glory呢到可唔可以引一下聖經？就我看來，司提反親眼見到神嘅榮耀同人子但依然冇死。你可以argue司提反唔係見到full glory。但JS都冇話佢first vision見到full glory。所以似乎係好合乎新約例子。
喺我眼中你都係先斷定人無法見到神，再"cherry pick"啲章節出嚟支持自己睇法，當遇到我引出極之明顯話係面對面時你又話係figuratively。
咁會唔會個情況其實係人真係可以literally面對面見到神，但前題係一個人要得到聖靈充滿同神嘅准許，正如雅各、摩西、司提反一樣。聖經其他地方所謂嘅人無法得見神係figuratively指緊罪人無法見到，因為耶穌都話「清心的人有福了！因為他們必得見神。」
我想表達嘅係，當聖經同你睇法有相矛盾時，你就figurative晒佢哋，但我用返同樣手法somehow你又唔接受。
當雅各同摩西例子都咁明確係face to face時，你話係figuratively，我認為係唔可行嘅，一係你可唔可以查一查你講嘅Hebrew uses plurality to express compound objects係唔係只會出現喺神同人見面？因為如果原來神見人同人見人(Jer 32:4, 34:3)兩邊都用緊同一grammer，呢個grammer form就唔可以成為一個argument。
最後使徒行傳7:55係用嚟反駁你話人無法見到神嘅榮耀，當然你係話"Thus while seeing God's face (as in God's full glory) all men were incapable of doing and surviving"，但full glory呢到可唔可以引一下聖經？就我看來，司提反親眼見到神嘅榮耀同人子但依然冇死。你可以argue司提反唔係見到full glory。但JS都冇話佢first vision見到full glory。所以似乎係好合乎新約例子。
寫漏咗，you ye係指呢到
“And the Lord spake unto you(你們以色列人) out of the midst of the fire: ye(你們) heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude(形象); only ye(你們) heard a voice.
Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,”
Deuteronomy 4:12, 15-16 KJV
You get the idea. 我係想指出，因為我argue緊摩西的確有面對面見過神，但冇話以色列人有呢個經歷，所以你引呢幾節出嚟並無support到你嘅論點。因為如果摩西都冇面對面見過神，呢到唔應該用you(all) ye(all)，而係應該用we，因為摩西同以色列人都冇見過，「我哋」都冇見過
“And the Lord spake unto you(你們以色列人) out of the midst of the fire: ye(你們) heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude(形象); only ye(你們) heard a voice.
Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,”
Deuteronomy 4:12, 15-16 KJV
You get the idea. 我係想指出，因為我argue緊摩西的確有面對面見過神，但冇話以色列人有呢個經歷，所以你引呢幾節出嚟並無support到你嘅論點。因為如果摩西都冇面對面見過神，呢到唔應該用you(all) ye(all)，而係應該用we，因為摩西同以色列人都冇見過，「我哋」都冇見過
Ok 但係唔會有人見到好似JS咁”face of God”
即係咁，雅各同摩西已經係好完美嘅例子，你話要figuraltive，ok，但你有冇查過Jer 32:4, 34:3嘅face to face同雅各摩西嘅face to face喺希伯來文中係唔係完全用緊一樣文法先？因為如果係一樣的話，你就唔可以拎嚟做arguement。
信我，希伯來文我唔識嘅，我識希臘文，我有時都會用文法嚟做arguement，但前題係要文化上真係有見到嘅差別。呢到你查一查希伯來文聖經先，否則唔會有進展。
另外一個好簡單去反駁你人係見唔到神嘅論點就係耶穌基督。喺你嘅信仰中，耶穌基督應該係100%嘅神，咁都一樣有無數人親眼見過佢，呢到你又要解釋下啦。
因為就我看，耶穌係100%神，即係彼得見到耶穌=見到神，咁你嘅論點都出bug。
信我，希伯來文我唔識嘅，我識希臘文，我有時都會用文法嚟做arguement，但前題係要文化上真係有見到嘅差別。呢到你查一查希伯來文聖經先，否則唔會有進展。
另外一個好簡單去反駁你人係見唔到神嘅論點就係耶穌基督。喺你嘅信仰中，耶穌基督應該係100%嘅神，咁都一樣有無數人親眼見過佢，呢到你又要解釋下啦。
因為就我看，耶穌係100%神，即係彼得見到耶穌=見到神，咁你嘅論點都出bug。
老實講我唔識Hebrew 亦都唔係啲咩經驗豐富既神家 不過都可以查下佢係唔係identical/synonym 我淨係信truth doesn’t fear investigation.
講番一開始我話
“從來沒有人見過神，我們若彼此相愛，神就住在我們裏面，愛他的心在我們裏面得以完全了。”
約翰一書 4:12
如果你信3 seperate Gods 咁就當然有衝突 但神係三位一體 冇人可以見到神in His full glory
“耶穌對他說：「 腓力 ，我與你們同在這樣長久，你還不認識我嗎？人看見了我，就是看見了父；你怎麼說『將父顯給我們看』呢？”
約翰福音 14:9
“這不是說有人看見過父，惟獨從神來的，他看見過父。”
約翰福音 6:46
講番一開始我話
“從來沒有人見過神，我們若彼此相愛，神就住在我們裏面，愛他的心在我們裏面得以完全了。”
約翰一書 4:12
如果你信3 seperate Gods 咁就當然有衝突 但神係三位一體 冇人可以見到神in His full glory
“耶穌對他說：「 腓力 ，我與你們同在這樣長久，你還不認識我嗎？人看見了我，就是看見了父；你怎麼說『將父顯給我們看』呢？”
約翰福音 14:9
“這不是說有人看見過父，惟獨從神來的，他看見過父。”
約翰福音 6:46
其實成個討論你有太多前題，你以你信嘅教義為前題再推論出嚟，咁就當然係合你嘅理，但三位一體唔係聖經教義，新約無此記載。如果你放唔低呢個前題，我哋可以向前推一下，討論咗三位一體先。
就係因為咁，所以我先要求你去查希伯來聖經，如果你自己都唔識希伯來文，問多句都已經查唔到答唔到，咁就真係好難拎出嚟做論點。
你繼續引呢啲聖經章節其實都唔會令個討論有進展，我估你係信聖經無誤論㗎啦，咁我都只係會不斷拎返雅各、摩西、司提反出嚟。
1. 雅各面對面見過神，但冇死到。
2. 摩西面對面見過神，仲要好似一個人和朋友談話一樣。
3. 司提反見過神嘅榮耀，但冇死到。
你要成功反駁到嘅話要同時做到以下兩點。
1. 神同人面對面同埋人同人面對面喺希伯來文係用緊唔同嘅grammer，令你可以分辨。
2. 你要搵到司提反見過只係神部份榮耀而唔係全部榮耀嘅章節，但信聖經無誤同不可加減嘅你就當然唔可以自己加解釋，你一定要搵到類似「但司提反被聖靈充滿，定睛望天，看見神的(部份)榮耀，又看見耶穌站在神的右邊。」之類嘅經文出嚟先得。
就係因為咁，所以我先要求你去查希伯來聖經，如果你自己都唔識希伯來文，問多句都已經查唔到答唔到，咁就真係好難拎出嚟做論點。
你繼續引呢啲聖經章節其實都唔會令個討論有進展，我估你係信聖經無誤論㗎啦，咁我都只係會不斷拎返雅各、摩西、司提反出嚟。
1. 雅各面對面見過神，但冇死到。
2. 摩西面對面見過神，仲要好似一個人和朋友談話一樣。
3. 司提反見過神嘅榮耀，但冇死到。
你要成功反駁到嘅話要同時做到以下兩點。
1. 神同人面對面同埋人同人面對面喺希伯來文係用緊唔同嘅grammer，令你可以分辨。
2. 你要搵到司提反見過只係神部份榮耀而唔係全部榮耀嘅章節，但信聖經無誤同不可加減嘅你就當然唔可以自己加解釋，你一定要搵到類似「但司提反被聖靈充滿，定睛望天，看見神的(部份)榮耀，又看見耶穌站在神的右邊。」之類嘅經文出嚟先得。
咁我哋返返去三位一體 定係 三位三體, material or immaterial,was god a exalted man 呢個問題 反正我哋講嘅係nature of god 我會refer你去睇左呢條debate 片先
條片成兩個鐘 希望你睇到由頭最尾 尤其係最尾嗰條問題
https://youtu.be/kLwKuskCSuM
一開始Kwaku 否定immaterial 嘅存在 佢challenge anything that is immaterial and testable by material thing:
1) Light energy. Light is not a matter.That it can be converted to heat. It can be tested by all plants living on earth through photosynthesis which convert immaterial light enery into material chemical energy(food).
Personally, I believe immaterial beings of maybe higher dimensions, in which human as in a 3D world cannot reach, causes the big bang and rules the world and gives life to all living things from plants to animals. Though Im not here to proof this point.
2) Forces.
-
既然你都用 kwaku嗰條你同我講eternity Pastor Jeremy又識Greek同hebrew 我相信你都係個debate裏面搵到答案.
條片成兩個鐘 希望你睇到由頭最尾 尤其係最尾嗰條問題
https://youtu.be/kLwKuskCSuM
一開始Kwaku 否定immaterial 嘅存在 佢challenge anything that is immaterial and testable by material thing:
1) Light energy. Light is not a matter.That it can be converted to heat. It can be tested by all plants living on earth through photosynthesis which convert immaterial light enery into material chemical energy(food).
Personally, I believe immaterial beings of maybe higher dimensions, in which human as in a 3D world cannot reach, causes the big bang and rules the world and gives life to all living things from plants to animals. Though Im not here to proof this point.
2) Forces.
-
既然你都用 kwaku嗰條你同我講eternity Pastor Jeremy又識Greek同hebrew 我相信你都係個debate裏面搵到答案.
Ps 你所講steven and jacob saw God 嘅問題裏便都有講
同埋如果可以搭埋 Q&A section 最尾嗰條問題
同埋如果可以搭埋 Q&A section 最尾嗰條問題
1. Kwaku講緊嘅經文入面嘅matter同你認知同科學講開嘅matter其實好唔同，我哋LDS講緊嘅matter唔係單純要有mass或由atoms組成，喺我哋認知中經文稱為matter嘅嘢可以話係所有可以同人同世界interact嘅嘢，所以你嘅light其實都係我哋稱為matter之一，經文：D&C131: 7~8 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; 8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.
另外你舉嘅energy唔係matter呢樣做例子其實係唔多好，因為E=MC²，Energy同Matter其實可以話係同一樣嘢。最少我睇開科學channel都同意。
2. (Force個到唔見咗，我覆住希伯來文同希臘文先) 希伯來文我唔真係識，所以唔多comment，但我見有發問問題嘅人嘅希伯來文比佢更加叻。但Pastor Jeremy嘅希臘文發音真係好差…我有理由懷疑佢對希臘文嘅了解係從…神學院？之類學返嚟，佢嘅幾個希臘文字其實即使唔用希臘文都冇所謂，因為用希臘文唔會令個意義有更深入認識…
而我都好尊重你咁睇晒2個幾鐘嘅debate，我完全認同Kawku同時否定Jeremy嘅睇法。我唔認為Jeremy嘅解釋同睇法合乎聖經。
所以講返最初你講，你話摩門教唔合乎聖經，我嘅睇法係…摩門教唔合乎「主流」基督教喺第3世紀後創造出嚟嘅神學觀，但摩門教教義合乎聖經。
最後我對場debate嘅睇法，Jeremy完全冇用聖經去證明三位一體，佢只係拎住三位一體去理解聖經，因為由第三世紀開始，失去先知使徒嘅人唔明白點解聖經會講到有三位神，但舊約又稱為一神，佢哋唔明，所以就創三一神觀去理解，但佢哋喺我眼中係理解錯。
一係你提出邊一章一節係最好嘅三一神經文，我哋再去討論
另外你舉嘅energy唔係matter呢樣做例子其實係唔多好，因為E=MC²，Energy同Matter其實可以話係同一樣嘢。最少我睇開科學channel都同意。
2. (Force個到唔見咗，我覆住希伯來文同希臘文先) 希伯來文我唔真係識，所以唔多comment，但我見有發問問題嘅人嘅希伯來文比佢更加叻。但Pastor Jeremy嘅希臘文發音真係好差…我有理由懷疑佢對希臘文嘅了解係從…神學院？之類學返嚟，佢嘅幾個希臘文字其實即使唔用希臘文都冇所謂，因為用希臘文唔會令個意義有更深入認識…
而我都好尊重你咁睇晒2個幾鐘嘅debate，我完全認同Kawku同時否定Jeremy嘅睇法。我唔認為Jeremy嘅解釋同睇法合乎聖經。
所以講返最初你講，你話摩門教唔合乎聖經，我嘅睇法係…摩門教唔合乎「主流」基督教喺第3世紀後創造出嚟嘅神學觀，但摩門教教義合乎聖經。
最後我對場debate嘅睇法，Jeremy完全冇用聖經去證明三位一體，佢只係拎住三位一體去理解聖經，因為由第三世紀開始，失去先知使徒嘅人唔明白點解聖經會講到有三位神，但舊約又稱為一神，佢哋唔明，所以就創三一神觀去理解，但佢哋喺我眼中係理解錯。
一係你提出邊一章一節係最好嘅三一神經文，我哋再去討論
Btw 亞洲男想溝高質鬼妹其中一個辦法係咪入摩門教？
唔係，因為忠信嘅教徒唔會俾唔忠信嘅你追到。
而唔忠信嘅教徒你唔需要返教會都追到。
我見太多男仔為追女仔而入教，全部都收晒皮
分清楚個先後次序，你真心信先返教會，返咗教會先再識個有共同價值觀嘅女仔。而係為咗追個價值觀唔同嘅女仔，而返教會扮信教。
信我，LDS好難扮信，付出同犧牲太多
而唔忠信嘅教徒你唔需要返教會都追到。
我見太多男仔為追女仔而入教，全部都收晒皮
分清楚個先後次序，你真心信先返教會，返咗教會先再識個有共同價值觀嘅女仔。而係為咗追個價值觀唔同嘅女仔，而返教會扮信教。
信我，LDS好難扮信，付出同犧牲太多
香港教會已經好成熟，所有嘢都係廣東話㗎啦。唔識英文冇問題
呢個真
LDS相信家庭係神嘅計劃裏面嘅核心
而伴侶都係一個忠信嘅教徒會令家庭更完滿
大家一齊進步學習
我都會想有同我一樣信仰嘅男朋友或者老公
我覺得價值觀唔同真係冇可能一世㗎
利申：LDS
LDS相信家庭係神嘅計劃裏面嘅核心
而伴侶都係一個忠信嘅教徒會令家庭更完滿
大家一齊進步學習
我都會想有同我一樣信仰嘅男朋友或者老公
我覺得價值觀唔同真係冇可能一世㗎
利申：LDS
Btw 我由第一頁開始睇
爸打真係好有心解答
好詳盡 慢慢解釋教義
我自己都知多咗嘢
神話過
末世嘅時候福音會傳遍大地
喺連登傳福音真心難
佩服爸打
爸打真係好有心解答
好詳盡 慢慢解釋教義
我自己都知多咗嘢
神話過
末世嘅時候福音會傳遍大地
喺連登傳福音真心難
佩服爸打
我原意都唔係傳福音，係與其由教外人亂答，我哋自己講返啫。信唔信唔係我控制，但最少資訊唔好錯都當真先最重要
唔知有冇人問過
1. 你飲唔飲茶 咖啡 Decaf飲唔飲得
2. 你有冇結婚？女朋友？
3. 如有 佢點睇你嘅宗教？
4. 教會多黃定藍定港豬 定睇一個個教會
1. 你飲唔飲茶 咖啡 Decaf飲唔飲得
2. 你有冇結婚？女朋友？
3. 如有 佢點睇你嘅宗教？
4. 教會多黃定藍定港豬 定睇一個個教會
1. 茶、咖啡、Decaf我都唔飲。但好多人以為我哋唔飲可樂，但其實可以嘅。
2. 已婚有小朋友
3. 伴侶同為後期聖徒，我喺聖殿結婚
4. 年輕成員（12~40）我估8～9成黃，40+嘅我諗大概3～5成黃，年齡層愈大、住得愈近新界，藍比例愈高。我都睇唔透點解佢哋睇咁多經文都可以藍
19年日日同佢哋Facebook開戰
鬧到佢哋話我係恐怖分子，問題少年
2. 已婚有小朋友
3. 伴侶同為後期聖徒，我喺聖殿結婚
4. 年輕成員（12~40）我估8～9成黃，40+嘅我諗大概3～5成黃，年齡層愈大、住得愈近新界，藍比例愈高。我都睇唔透點解佢哋睇咁多經文都可以藍
19年日日同佢哋Facebook開戰 鬧到佢哋話我係恐怖分子，問題少年