Re: [心得] 要進『毀壞』的門?還是『滅亡』的門?

作者: Xenogeous (非洲大陸)   2017-11-13 22:51:57
: → pinjose: 壞掉的收音機嗎?反覆跳針 11/12 22:40
: → pinjose: 早就有全面完整的回覆,至今不敢去論述? 11/12 22:40
我早就翻譯好了,就放在下面方便你查詢。
麻煩找真正懂英文的召會弟兄來教教df31,
不然,私底下問外文造詣高深的aun5780,他會很樂意告訴你
df31引用這些文章究竟是在打誰的臉。
謝謝大家:)
The idea of apoleia is not that of annihilation but that which is ruined and
is no longer usable for its intended purpose. Apoleia does not describe the
complete loss of being, but the complete loss of well-being. It means utter
and hopeless loss of all that gives worth to existence. Note that contrary to
popular opinion apoleia does not refer to extinction or annihilation or an
end of existence, but to total ruin so far as the purpose of existence is
concerned.
這段就是在講「失去存在價值」,但不是「失去存在」。
As Jesus makes clear elsewhere, hell is not a place or state of nothingness
or unconscious existence, as is the Hindu Nirvana. It is the place of
everlasting torment, the place of eternal death, where there will be “
weeping and gnashing of teeth” forever (see Mt 13:42, 50).
這段在講,地獄不是「失去存在」的地方,而是永刑之處。
「weeping and gnashing of teeth」就是召會弟兄最愛的哀哭切齒。
作者用來形容地獄,不知為何召會用來形容補習班。
All people are created by God for His glory, but when they refuse to come to
Him "through the narrow gate" for salvation, they lose their opportunity for
eternal redemption and ultimately the opportunity of becoming what God
intended for them to be in Christ. At that time, they are fit only for
condemnation and destruction.
"through the narrow gate" for salvation 這裡講的是救恩的窄門
不知為何召會稱它為得勝的窄門。
Destruction for the sinner does not result in annihilation or extinction. In
other words as noted above, "destruction" is not the loss of being, but of
well-being! The gospel promises everlasting life for him who believes. The
failure to possess this life will involve the utter ruin of those that perish.
這段講福音應許人生命(life),沒有得到這個生命(life)的人會導致
utter ruin,也就是destruction,所以沒有得到這個生命的人,
是會去地獄,還是會去補習班
作者: damonwhk (Damon)   2017-11-13 22:59:00
df31有向你挑戰第一段的翻譯,我在等你們翻譯的歧異點你那個叫解釋,不叫翻譯
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:02:00
呵呵,XE,知道什麼叫做『翻譯』嗎?XE,我等著看你往『大坑』裡面跳呢!加油!
作者: aun5780 (夢境)   2017-11-13 23:08:00
請問 您是否知道df老大英文讀解能力是本版第2的(第一是米國聖光)
作者: tfnop (網管測試中)   2017-11-13 23:10:00
那anu 試著翻譯看看不就得了
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:11:00
估計要『混』過去了。當然,我覺得,如果TF能夠翻譯,也很好大家會比較『激賞』TJC的學術水平!不過,估計沒能力就是了。大家可以當我剛剛放了一個屁!:)
作者: aun5780 (夢境)   2017-11-13 23:12:00
這篇就是Xe大說的意思請問這篇的權威根據是?
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:13:00
@au XE那個不叫翻譯好不好!他只找『對他有利』的講講,d『對他不利』的,就想混過去。哪有那麼好的事情!?開玩笑
作者: aun5780 (夢境)   2017-11-13 23:14:00
我覺得意思是他說的那樣
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:14:00
我還沒見過英文不好的能夠宣稱自己懂聖經的。所以卡死他!
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:15:00
o!那麼,麻煩您也『督促』他翻譯,如何!嘻嘻~~~~~@au 自己去前面翻舊帖啦!拜託,別破壞我挖的大坑,好嗎?!
作者: aun5780 (夢境)   2017-11-13 23:16:00
呵呵 XE大很明顯無法自由使用英文但這裡他應該也沒太大問題如果你有暗藏陷阱那我等你的陷阱不過我反對這篇refuse "through the narrow gate"只有是否拒絕救恩沒有是否拒過窄門的命題
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-13 23:45:00
老大!你不認可OK啦!我只要證明兩件事:1)兩個字不一樣不是我們的發明;2)XE瞎扯。就夠了。別鬧了好嗎!
作者: neohippie (米國聖光肥魯八嘎囧)   2017-11-14 01:33:00
本肥的專長是廢文不是外文...
作者: theologe (表達你我的信仰~)   2017-11-14 07:57:00
這篇的權威是一回事,但是是老魚用來幫自家人/反串的引文...重點是老魚拿這個引文說apollumi跟apoleia意思天差地別也有可能老魚還埋了什麼隱藏陷阱?我是很懷疑啦XD話說回來,就權威來說,老魚是強調他的這些引文都是很權威的資料。apoleia就是講不進窄門(太7:13),所以補考通過,aun就瞭解為何不進窄門=不得救。當然,你反對這個論點,那這樣你就要找其他原文資料來證明靈魂的apoleia跟靈魂的apollumi,是兩回事。漏字:"解釋"原文"的"資料
作者: df31 (DF-31)   2017-11-14 09:53:00
唐三藏又開始出來念經了!

Links booklink

Contact Us: admin [ a t ] ucptt.com