I Corinthians 1:20: Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the lawyer of this world? Hasn’t God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
智慧人在哪裡？經學家在哪裡？今世的辯士在哪裡？ 神不是使屬世的智慧變成了愚笨嗎？
I Corinthians 2:9: 正如經上所記：“ 神為愛他的人所預備的，是眼睛未曾見過，耳朵未曾聽過，人心也未曾想到的。”
I Corinthians 2:10: 但 神卻藉著聖靈把這些向我們顯明了，因為聖靈測透萬事，連 神深奧的事也測透了。
I Corinthians 2:11: 除了在人裡面的靈，誰能知道人的事呢？同樣，除了 神的靈，也沒有人知道 神的事。
I Corinthians 2:12: 我們所領受的，不是這世界的靈，而是從 神來的靈，使我們能知道 神開恩賜給我們的事。
I Corinthians 2:13: 我們也講這些事，不是用人的智慧所教的言語，而是用聖靈所教的言語，向屬靈的人解釋屬靈的事（“向屬靈的人解釋屬靈的事”或譯：“用屬靈的話解釋屬靈的事”）。
I Corinthians 2:14: 然而屬血氣的人不接受 神的靈的事，因為他以為是愚笨的；而且他也不能夠明白，因為這些事，要有屬靈的眼光才能領悟。
I Corinthians 2:15: 屬靈的人能看透萬事，卻沒有人能看透他，
I Corinthians 2:16: 如經上所記：“誰曾知道主的心意，能夠指教他呢？”但我們已經得著基督的心意了。
But as it is written,
“Things which an eye didn’t see, and an ear didn’t hear,
which didn’t enter into the heart of man,
these God has prepared for those who love him.”
I Corinthians 2:10: But to us, God revealed them through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God.
I Corinthians 2:11: For who among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man, which is in him? Even so, no one knows the things of God, except God’s Spirit.
I Corinthians 2:12: But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might know the things that were freely given to us by God.
I Corinthians 2:13: Which things also we speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual things.
I Corinthians 2:14: Now the natural man doesn’t receive the things of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can’t know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
I Corinthians 2:15: But he who is spiritual discerns all things, and he himself is judged by no one.
I Corinthians 2:16: “For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him?” But we have Christ’s mind.
This is off topic but it's just so good.
Anyway, a lot of times, I find myself putting up a brave face doing all I can but at the same time I am getting burn by some silly people behind me who are suppose to help me. Through the years, I realized that it's God who we put ALL our trust in, NOT people. That relationship with God is paramount, NOT relationship with people. Why? Because people changes, people can be corrupted, people have diseases and people include all of us. People can lead us astray. We need fellowship but sometimes, all you got is GOD. Your friends might leave you, your family might not support you and all you have is GOD.
Sometimes I wonder why I fight at all. Why put up a fight when people don't even know how to enjoy it. Why work for it when people always find excellent excuses to destroy it? Why bring people to church when the so-called "Christians" are killing one another inside? Am I bringing people to the slaughter house?
I try not to think about that. Just trust God. Just be useful, be of help. I do what I can and let God do the rest.
How can we show God's love when we can't even love each other? Loving is not easy. But we need to make an effort and learn. I actually wonder why God loves us, we are really bad. Just watch the news, local or international and you know what humans are like. We are a mess. Like 鮑維均 said, we are scams or scambags. He actually quoted it from another person, yea, but anyway, we are all scambags so should we be more inclusive and embracing and more forgiving? We shouldn't pick and choose who to care, who to love. In the world that we live in, we are not equal but we are equal under God. What gives us the right for scambags to bad mouth another scambags? Does God give you this right? How we get so arrogant? Maybe it makes us feel better, maybe it is to protect ourselves, maybe it is for advancement, maybe because we are insecure, maybe we are just evil, maybe we are just the devil's advocates, well, we are scambags afterwall.
God forgave us. God is like the rich man who wrote all the huge debt his servant owed him. But many of us are acting like that cruel servant who then went to another person who owed him just a little sum of money.
Posts
我以為自己不是把痛快 (就是愛與痛) 表達得很痛快嗎? 點解變成 "憂"呢? 真是要再苦練苦練下, 要再掌握得好一點.
難怪某某人講: "寫好了的文章, 作者就是死了, 讀者才是活的". 這就是寫作的既神秘又好玩之處.
anyway, be assured, God provides. 事奉 never ends. God doesn't forsake His faithful servant.
Finally, I dont want to talk about the retirement anymore, since my article is talking about my passion with my family, my mother church and my buddy. Please, try to read between the lines.
And you are right about no 保障. It's sad, those old people who pick cans and 紙皮. ... Read MoreIt's not right in a society as rich and small as HK. I noticed in Chinese society, there is this narrow view of education where education is about passing the exams, and getting high score, certificates and not really about learning. That's why there's so many cases of cheating from Chinese students in universities.
Thanks for the explanation. I think you touched on many interesting topics and issues in your writing but it is very difficult to discuss on fb, words just get lost in translation. Talk to you when i see you~ Emmanuel
"misinterpret" ?, how can we interpret it in better way?
On the above, I just want to ask "why not ?", why it is not balance? If it is really not balance in your mind, it is waste. Of course, you can say you did not use the word "waste", but this is not misinterpret I think. About the irrational througt of "not balance", I think I did elaborate my points on above. That's why I disagree with you firstly.
Secondly, It is all depends how do you define retirement. In fact, no one try to or want to define it in my article and the responses, so I do think no one can comment others' point of veiw of retiremet here. That's why I disagree with what you said "something is wrong when all that people think is about 退休." what do you mean "all that people" ? who are they? How can you prove it shold be right or wrong? Actually, this is call "Argument from silence", hope you know that team. You know, you are not asking a question, but a statment. How can we interpret it in a better way? ... Read More
You said "words just get lost in translation". I believe writing is a art of communication, so I love to write very carefully. If writing is not a good way to communicate, how do we know talk face to face is more better way? What is the problem? I am asking a question with no answer.
it is based on my notion that people in HK think about "退休" a lot, probably because they work very hard and lack 保障 as you mentioned. Base on my observation, I do find HK people, generally speaking, to be working very hard and lack security, especially when comparing with their overseas counterparts. And they do talk about 退休 more than Americans or Australians.
I don't think it's healthy/balanced when people thinking and worrying about 退休 so much. I do find people in Hong Kong working too hard and getting too stressed over it, which is basically an unbalanced lifestyle. So I was saying the general lifestyle for the general population of HK is unbalanced. ... Read More
I was writing in metaphor, so please don't take my words literally. I am also using casual American English so I realize that you are misreading what I wrote.
i think talking face to face is better communication because we don't only use words to communication, we also use tone, volume, hand gesture, body language, facial expression to communicate. Words is just a small part of it, and words can easily be misinterpreted depend on where you are from. And it doesn't help with our different language and cultural background.
Do you see this confusion, this is so typical facebook confusion. I am sure we experienced this before. Words get misinterpreted and it's very common.
so better talk to you when i see you. it would be so much easier. this is cool. it's a good discussion but i think the points are missing the points haha.
Of course, you are useing a metaphor, thats why the reader should use the imagination to interpret the writer's meaning. I sure that, once the writer use metaphor, he / she has a purpose to resrve the rooms for the imagination. Do you agree with that? If you agree, the "not balance" is a sence of "negative" right? So, as a reader, I can use the negative word "waste" to fill in. Of course, different reader can use different word to fill in a metarphor, this is call "Reader responses" ( I think you should know this term). The question is, what is the subject? In the context of your first respons, I got the subject is "the people whose life is work hard in school to get good grades to go to a good university to get a good job to 提早退休 " . However, I dont think it is essentially wrong, thats why I did elaborate my disagreement on above.
The key argument , which is I call it an "Argument from silence", is how do the people plan to contribute to the society? it is not depends on working or retirment. However, we cant make a easy conclusion here.
... Read More
I want to share some more about communication. I think communication is a progress, is a movement of developing. Once two or more guys just talk to defend the self but not base on the movement, it is not a communication. Therefore, the means of communication is not the most important element, write or talk face to face are not prefect, since the limitations of human. If you talk to someone face to face who always said that in chinese " 我有講, 但不是這意思" or "我無講, 但我有這一個意思" always like that, Kill me man, face to face is so cruel. I just tell you my experience but not our conversation on above, ok?
If you still have the interest to understand the dynamics of our conversation, and if you dont mind to waste you time, just read the above again and find out want is our connection and disconnection. As a writer, I am very interesting to the reader responses, I will think how come the reader got this got that which's I am not expected, what did I write? sometimes got lost, sometimes so funny.
my point was that 退休 should not be the purpose and meaning of studying, working hard and life.
yes, this is really amusing...
This is from yahoo's dictionary:
使荒蕪;使荒廢
The drought wasted the land 旱災使田地荒蕪。... Read More
waste is a verb here.
may be I should use "wasted".
my word in chinese is "退休使苦學得來的白費了", this is what i got from your first respons.
dont worry, I just try to understand what you write but not who you are. Surely, you can have your own point of view which's not as same as me. I enjoy writing and also accept the limiation of it. Everything has limiation la.
Thats why I dont think we talk face to face is better.
Do you really see what I mean?... Read More
Have you talk to others like that usually?
I tell you, I am not angry, but disappointed, since I did you my heart and time to show my concern to your responses.
ok, I think we need a easy way to let go.
1. You said that I misunderstood your point of view, I accepted it now, since I respect you but not logically.
2. Also, I hope you can accept my conclusion too, which is you have not try hard to understand my points of view to your explanations and not communicate base on the movement of the argument.
... Read More
According to the disconnected reasoning, this two points are the fact. We have two different idea without ethical right or wrong.
That's it on this topic.
For the retirement protection about pastors, it echoed a bit with Rev. Chu's sharing ytd.
About the Rev. Chu's sharing which is you have mentioned. I believe it shoud be a coincidence. I dont and cant believe a pastor is using the public preaching time on Sunday Service to echo a personal discussion. Therefore, it shuold be coincidence.