|
|
[ 1 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/25 上午 11:47:00 )
真耶穌教會不是基督教 True Jesus Church is not a protestant church because it violates three main principles of Christian church. Millions of Christians were killed by the Catholic Church to get religious freedom. Three Protestant principles: 1. 唯獨聖經 Only Bible is the highest authority; the authority of church should not surpass the truth in Bible. Bible was completed, no direct revelation through man is allowed to be added to Bible and be considered as truth. Truth can only be derived by correct Bible interpretation. 啟 示 錄 22 18.我向一切聽見這書上預言的作見證、若有人在這預言上加添甚麼、 神必將寫在這書上的災禍加在他身上． 錯誤:真耶穌教會認為真耶穌教會建立的模式與聖經上記載使徒時代教會的建立相似，都是由聖靈直接啟示聖經真理，藉由神蹟奇事與意象顯明 2. 唯獨相信 信心是白白賜的恩典﹐人沒有功勞. Justification by faith along; not with work to gain salvation or preserve salvation. 錯誤:真耶穌教會認為「得救」可為三階段：悔改相信耶穌是領受救恩的「準備階段」，領受水靈二洗是救恩的「完成階段」，遵守真神誡命是救恩的「保持階段」。人帶著肉體，都是軟弱的，必須靠著聖靈帶領，遵守神誡命，方能持續地保守自己在神的愛中，安然行走天路。 3.唯獨恩典 Salvation and all God’s blessing are from God’s grace only, not by man’s work or by any sacrament (聖禮) 聖禮有救人的效力﹐不是因為聖禮本身有能力﹐也不是因為行禮的人有能力﹐乃唯獨藉著基督所賜的恩典﹐和聖靈在那些以信領受的人心中所作的工作。 錯誤:真耶穌教會認為信洗腳禮是與主有分 錯誤:真耶穌教會認為人要相信救主耶穌，並接受奉主耶穌聖名，赦罪的浸禮，方有資格得到耶穌的救恩。
[ 2 ] )) ( 2003/4/25 下午 01:37:00 )
>>>錯誤:真耶穌教會認為人要相信救主耶穌，並接受奉主耶穌聖名，赦罪的浸禮，方有資格得到耶穌的救恩。 請問這有什麼錯?
[ 3 ] 微風輕吹 ( 2003/4/25 下午 03:40:00 )
說真的我看不懂所指出的錯誤有什麼不對的耶
[ 4 ] 博而不精的人 ( 2003/4/25 下午 04:08:00 )
八成又是一個來吵洗禮問題的 大家不要理他，免得又是一場筆戰了 好不容易Wai走了，大家也不希望又 為了這個吵起來吧 李約翰先生，真耶穌教會是不是神的教會 我想不是你我有資格論斷的 耶穌說的好，什麼樹結什麼果子 以這句話來看這裡的朋友 很抱歉我不相信今天真耶穌教會真是走偏了路 請不要認為你在做什麼幫助人幫助神的事 （聖經上也沒這樣教你這樣做吧） 時候未到，什麼都不要論斷，共勉之~~
[ 5 ] 冰心 ( 2003/4/25 下午 05:44:00 )
博兄安！ 一、>>>八成又是一個來吵洗禮問題的 大家不要理他，免得又是一場筆戰了<<< 對不起！我不懂您的意思？ 二、水、靈二洗禮即然是罪全赦免，領受聖靈由聖靈引導領受神的道路，照經上看應該是喜樂的，但是為何我一路走來---總是讓人看笑話呢？
[ 6 ] Wai ( 2003/4/25 下午 05:54:00 )
To:博而不精的人 約 翰 二 書 1:10 若 有 人 到 你 們 那 裡 、 不 是 傳 這 教 訓 、 不 要 接 他 到 家 裡 、 也 不 要 問 他 的 安 ． 1:11 因 為 問 他 安 的 、 就 在 他 的 惡 行 上 有 分 。 加 拉 太 書 1:7 那 並 不 是 福 音 、 不 過 有 些 人 攪 擾 你 們 、 要 把 基 督 的 福 音 更 改 了 。 1:8 但 無 論 是 我 們 、 是 天 上 來 的 使 者 、 若 傳 福 音 給 你 們 、 與 我 們 所 傳 給 你 們 的 不 同 、 他 就 應 當 被 咒 詛 。 1:9 我 們 已 經 說 了 、 現 在 又 說 、 若 有 人 傳 福 音 給 你 們 、 與 你 們 所 領 受 的 不 同 、 他 就 應 當 被 咒 詛 。 我就一定守真道, 不與異端為伍. 異端也給你說成正道, 你要跟他們一起被咒 詛, 在他的惡行上有分, 就隨便你.
[ 7 ] Wai ( 2003/4/25 下午 06:11:00 )
To 博而不精的人 我知你不是真耶穌教會的人,你說他們不是異端,那麽你已經受了洗腳禮,和你也不信三一神,而且你不是真耶穌教會的人也是在圈外的人,也是不得救.如果他們是正道,在他們來看你也是異端教會的人. 請看先賢的說話: 慕迪:神才是我的幫助所以我永遠不會與那些否定神的神性和耶穌基督救贖恩典的人相交.
[ 8 ] CVT ( 2003/4/25 下午 06:46:00 )
博兄啊...說曹操曹操倒，沒想到Wai又回來了。 不信者，你選擇了不信，我們也不能強求，只是希望你可貼較建立性的話題，免得浪費大家手筆又沒結論。 很對不起的，「基督教」在中文翻譯實在糟糕，因為一般講「基督教」是指Protestant，但是更正確的，「基督」「教」應該是Christianity。 而Christianity如何定？ 「基督」「教」是指基督的教會。 我們也信基督，也信唯獨一本六十六本書合成的聖經，教義也完全與聖經符合，所以我們是Christianity，不是Protestant。 你要是說我們不是Protestant的話，那你說的實在正確不過，因為我們本來就是獨立的，不屬於任何教派。 謝謝你把這點標示出來，免得有人以為我們是教派。 所以呢，你用英文說我們不是Protestant實在正確。 但是你好像想表達我們不從聖經，實在說不過來，希望你來本會參觀參觀再下結論。 其實啊，你貼的我們完全能夠反駁，但是我啊，吵煩了，也不想打這麼多筆仗了，如果哪天心血來潮，再打筆仗。 只是啊，你知其一不知其二，所以誤解許多事情。 真的希望你去真耶穌教會接觸接觸再下結論。 這樣大概可以下比較正確一點的結論。
[ 9 ] 糖幾顆‧得 ( 2003/4/25 下午 10:45:00 )
嗯.... 真耶穌教會.. 的確不是基督教.. 他就是.. 真耶穌教會.. 這樣子回答會不會很怪.. 因為.. 歷史的拯舊 必須出於歷史之外..
[ 10 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/26 下午 12:30:00 )
To Mr. 糖幾顆‧得, You are right! You should 得幾顆糖 as award! Since True Jesus Church (TJC) is not a protestant church, why you folks have been using Protestants' hymns for more than 50 years? These hymns were all written by Christians without speaking in tongues, no foot-washing sacrament, and believed in Trinity of God. They were "unsaved" by TJC's definition of salvation. However, you folks always touched by their understanding of God's love, and keep using them for spiritual growth. It's really a joke!
[ 11 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/26 下午 12:42:00 )
To Mr. 不精的人 李約翰先生，真耶穌教會是不是神的教會 我想不是你我有資格論斷的 耶穌說的好，什麼樹結什麼果子 以這句話來看這裡的朋友 很抱歉我不相信今天真耶穌教會真是走偏了路 --> 你的教會有什麼資格論斷的我的教會不是神的教會 by the doctrines of 真耶穌教會? 時候未到，不要論斷我的教會，共勉之
[ 12 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/26 下午 12:52:00 )
Hi 冰心, 二、水、靈二洗禮即然是罪全赦免，領受聖靈由聖靈引導領受神的道路，照經上看應該是喜樂的，但是為何我一路走來---總是讓人看笑話呢？ ---> I am a Christian, I love God and his children, but I want to tell you that this church's doctrines have some mistakes. Don't think all your suffering from people's attacks are all for God's sake. You really need to study why so many devoted Christains against TJC.
[ 13 ] CVT ( 2003/4/26 下午 01:42:00 )
I have been a Catholic for more than 6 or 7 years. I have been in contact with Protestant churches for more than 2 years. These were all before I came to TJC. I know what you're on about, and I know why they're aganist TJC. However, if you look at it from the SCRIPTURAL point of view, and if you actually see the BIG picture (which nearly all other churches that oppose TJC don't), you'll find TJC doctrine flawless. Why do you think using Protestant music is nurturing TJC believers under Protestant church? That is so wrong. Music itself is not a big deal - just like an idol - is an idol anything but wood or stone? if that is the reason why you're mixing Protestant with TJC, then I think you really have missed the point. We make our music as well. Some music we use aren't even from Protestant churches but merely music from musicians. Besides, you should be happy that TJC is using your music (though with different lyric); does that not bring a view that your music was artistically well written and therefore accepted? You should see the positive side of it. Again, I emphasise, music is not a big deal AT ALL, and your point is simply off-track. AND - ONE VERY IMPORTANT THING, which nearly ALL other churches, including yourself, misunderstand. TJC NEVER said other churches will not be saved - we make no comment about it - and the only answer we have towards this is: "salvation depends on God". We only say TJC IS a church that will be saved - but never saying other churches will not be saved. This you got SOOO absolutely wrong that you're simply showing your misunderstanding of TJC. Please make sure you get the RIGHT information about TJC before you come and make negative comments in such a manner. Again, I urge you to go and observe what TJC is like for a short while, and see what comments you can make that would be more correct.
[ 14 ] CVT ( 2003/4/26 下午 01:59:00 )
Wow I can see that you have really spent time on attacking our church even with your website (just visited your website). Very interesting, but everything was in vain, sadly. Anyway this verse I give you, and show you that we're revived apostolic church even with what we suffer from: Acts 24:14-15 "14 But this I admit to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the law or written in the prophets, 15 having a hope in God which these themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust." (RSV) Anyway, as I have already said, all your argue points can be argued back, but I can't be bothered. I posted my previous message because you seemed to see music as a deal unnecessarily big, which I really didn't know why. Anyway, if you have time to come and "attack" us, I urge you to spend your time attack cults such as Jehovah's Witness or whatever else you take interest in. Wai has gone through a great deal of job and time what you are now doing at this website, and he failed big time. It's easy to see that you won't make a difference either. So please criticise elsewhere with your understand of the Bible. You won't get anywhere here.
[ 15 ] CVT ( 2003/4/26 下午 02:02:00 )
-_-; sorry, didn't spot the mistakes I made since I did not proof-read my previous message. >>Anyway, if you have time to come >>and "attack" us, I urge you to spend your >>time attackING cults such as Jehovah's >>Witness or whatever else you take interest >>So please criticise elsewhere with your >>understandING of the Bible. Ai~~ I really need to practise typing again. Haven't been typing much lately.
[ 16 ] 博而不精的人 ( 2003/4/26 下午 10:16:00 )
--> 你的教會有什麼資格論斷的我的教會不是神的教會 by the doctrines of 真耶穌教會? 時候未到，不要論斷我的教會，共勉之 很遺憾我看不懂閣下的文法..... 反正該說的都說了，恕我以後不回應這個主題
[ 17 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/27 上午 04:02:00 )
John Lee回應 CVT： I have studied the doctrines of True Jesus Church since 1976. My wife and her families are all belong to True Jesus Church (three generations). Many trgedies happened to brohters and sisters who could not speak in "tongues" after years of seeking, and years of praying. Please go to ask those brothers and sisters who can not speak in tongues in your church (about 30%), what kind of feeling they have? When someone praises the Lord for receiving "Holy Spirit" (speak in tongues), these brothers and sisters are crying inside. Besides, who validate the "tongues" in your church is really from God? Go to read John 3:16, and the whole book of John, then go to read Romans, you will understand what's the real meaning of salvation. John Lee
[ 18 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/27 上午 05:06:00 )
To 博兄, Sorry for my grammer, because I don't have Chinese software in my PC, so I can only copy and paste Chinese letters from your E-mails. My point is when you make True Jesus Church's doctrines become absolute truth, then you exclude me from the kingdom of God, because I did not follow TJC's absolute truth. For 1600 years, Catholic church believes no salvation outside the Catholic church, because Catholic Church has spent 1600 years to make sure it's doctrines is really 100% correct, and is absolutely right, so hence no one can be saved if they do not following all the correct doctrines they eastablish. You apparently understand their mistakes, but why you can not tell True Jesus Church is doing the same thing? You can ask CVT, when he was at Catholic church, he was under a theology system seems 100 % correct, but when he joined the Protestant church, he also found some Christians with true faith there, and now he came to TJC, he also found lots of brothers and sisters in another theology system. So another point is, since using speaking in tongues to validate the existence is not a command or clear doctrine in the Bible, and it's an invention from American Aposolitic church around 1900, it's very unwise to make it an absolute doctrine for TJC, and becomes a bondage for those who can not speak in tongues. It's a bondage, not freedom. Only true can set us free. 1917 when Mr. Paul wei found TJC, not many information or library available, so it's hard to see the truth. But now with the help of Internet, you will find more than thounds of penecostal churches have similar doctrines and tongues with TJC, so what's the point to emphasize that TJC is the only true church establised by God to control members belief?
[ 19 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/27 上午 05:45:00 )
To: CVT I think you are not quite understand what TJC believes. Read at the following annoncement. TJC think they are the only church Jesus established from about A.D 100 to 1917 A.D, and it's only church Jesus built from now on. TJC has denied that God had sufficient power to preserve his church from 100 A.D. till 1917. Do you think this denial would make God angry? 聖靈是真神的靈、基督的靈、耶穌的靈（使徒行傳十六章第6～10節）。神應許賜聖靈內住祂選民身上，於使徒時代已經應驗了，但後來因教會受異端之害而離棄真道，聖靈也就被收回而停降。直到末世，真神在結束這天地之前，再次施行救贖工作，因此降下晚雨的聖靈，建設了真教會。聖靈才有赦罪之權柄；所以施洗時，須有聖靈之運行，其浸禮才有赦罪之功效。
[ 20 ] CVT ( 2003/4/27 上午 08:35:00 )
John Lee: Oh I see... so you're one of the sad sheep... I don't need to ask any brother or sister who has not received the Holy Spirit yet. I myself have not yet received the Holy Spirit. What do you mean "crying" inside? Can you please explain it more? Those who have received the Holy Spirit are joyful inside when they're filled with the Holy Spirit. I don't really get what you're trying to say. Ai... do you know why tragedies happen? Has no one told you? Have you not found out yourself?... Hrmph... I think you've been blinded from your intention against TJC and therefore really lost the truth. TJC denied not the work of God throughout inter-apostolic church era. The making of the Bible - the choosing of the Holy Scripture (canon) and separation of fake scriptures (apocrypha etc) - we believe that there was work of God within the work of men and it was in the inter-apostolic church era. But judging from history, is it not true that Catholic really have lost the truth since the 4th century? I have just watched Discovery channel lastnight and it was about Catholic. The Catholic church has so many "mysteries" and "secrets" that were sensitive to be revealed (letters written by previous Popes etc) and they think the letters were sacred. The Pope manifested many paintings of previous Popes and workers of Catholic church and declares that he is sure those men in the painting are surely in Heaven, therefore people could pray to them - man! And they say they believe in Jesus Christ?? So it's so obvious the truth was truly lost. Then Martin Luther came. But you must know - the Holy Scripture is inspired by God. Although it's just words in there, you won't see the mystery of truth in it unless God guides you through or even reveals it to you. Men can not understand the Word of God without God. Men, without God, can merely understand the appearance of words - the shallow degree - the text. Men can try and make up stories to suit the Scripture, but the stories are usually only in harmony with few verses and contradict with other verses elsewhere (that's exactly I told you why you must see the BIG picture to see that TJC doctrines are flawless - that's a huge problem with Protestant, Pentacostal, Catholic etc churches). So how can you say that the truth was not lost? Another fact that supports that the truth was lost is the fact that there are so many denominations in the world today. "Different cultures set different rules to suit them" etc. These aren't excuses to change doctrines. The Word of God is eternal and unchanging - yet men is changing it according to their environment and their needs and their understanding of the Bible. Does the truth actually permit such change? No! For God said, "For I the LORD do not change;" (Malachi 3:6; RSV). I wonder why exactly you cannot accept that the truth was lost judging even from the historical point of view. Besides, the time that God revived the work of salvation depends on God. If you disagree with that, appeal to God. If you do not see why it has to take so long, ask God. We don't have the answer to that. It's the will of God. p.s. please remember to make clear why you said "crying inside". I really don't understand the message you were trying to get through. Thanks.
[ 21 ] CVT ( 2003/4/27 上午 09:01:00 )
Sorry to disappoint you... but I was fortunately made conscious by God throughout my time with other churches. I didn't find Catholic doctrine 100% correct. In fact, while I was still a Catholic, I denied their "truth" inside my heart because I could see their mistakes (e.g. terribly big mistakes in praying to angels and saints etc). I was fortunately not blinded. I therefore went for Protestant churches. But Protestant churches, in which I went to a few different denominations, seeking for the truth, Sadly, I was unsatisfied. When I went to TJC from a friend's invitation, I listened and was stunned. I had never heard a truth so solid. I was satisfied with the truth in TJC, so I have now become a member of TJC. Even now, from time to time, I still take notice of other churches and read what they say from the internet, just to see what's going on in the world, not to leave TJC. It's like news. Just updating myself. So I have read many websites that were against speaking in tongues (for example, the website "The Voice in the Wilderness") etc. I have been taking notice of others, so don't say I'm isolated like other TJCers. Still, unsatisfied with their truth, their doctrines and theological perspectives only help my faith in TJC as a result. So please, be blinded not by doctrines and teachings of your church. Instead, be like what I was fortunately enough to do - refer back to the Bible. The Bible is THE absolutely solid one - no matter how others change. Refer back to the Bible, then you wouldn't be blinded so easily. Judge for yourself which church. Once you find the church that suits you the most, go there. I force you not. We force no one. It's your choice. I hope God will open your eyes.
[ 22 ] iaW ( 2003/4/27 下午 01:18:00 )
John 10:4: "And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice." Luke 24:44: And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. == Please do not waste our precious time to convince Wai and John Lee. Those who are actively seeking for the Truth will not write with unedifying words. Our time can be better spent somewhere else.
[ 23 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/28 上午 09:03:00 )
To CVT, Just tell me one thing. Yes, just one thing! If you die tomorrow, do you think you will go to heaven????? Plese response, because a lot of people are watching.
[ 24 ] CVT ( 2003/4/28 上午 09:43:00 )
Hahaha you think I'll suffer from pressure because you said "a lot of people are watching"? I tell you what. NO MAN - yes, read this well: NO MAN can ever speak of anyone's salvation - even yourself. If you say, "I will go to Heaven, and this I am 100% sure." You'd be wrong. You'd be so wrong you make yourself appear foolish and misunderstanding the Bible. Read this verse loud and clear to yourself: Revelation 7:10: '...and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb!"' (RSV) Know the answer now? This is THE answer from the Bible. Salvation depends on God. We do not judge others - and judging whether one would be saved or not is actually a judgment too heavy for us to bare. You expect an answer from me? I give you the answer: ask God. No one who understands the Bible will ever disagree with me on this answer. If you do, sorry mate, you're not reading the Bible correctly. Misunderstanding can be a terrible thing.
[ 25 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/28 上午 11:34:00 )
To CVT, Good! Good! Very good answer, I like it! So you are not sure that the following doctrine is absolutely right: 真耶穌教會認為「得救」可為三階段：悔改相信耶穌是領受救恩的「準備階段」，領受水靈二洗是救恩的「完成階段」，遵守真神誡命是救恩的「保持階段」。人帶著肉體，都是軟弱的，必須靠著聖靈帶領，遵守神誡命，方能持續地保守自己在神的愛中，安然行走天路。 So, even you have not finished the period 2, you still not sure what God will judge. God may be still let you enter heaven!!!!
[ 26 ] CVT ( 2003/4/28 下午 12:14:00 )
But do mind one thing - salvation depends on God, but the church WILL be saved. TJC will be saved. A church is defined by God not men (I use the word "church" when I refer to denominations etc so poeple know what I'm on about). So speaking individually, we can only say salvation depends on God. The body of Christ, however, will be saved. Get it? Oh, now I get why you said that I doubted the doctrine. You got it wrong about me again. I never said the doctrine was wrong. But once you know Christ and heard the Word and believed in Him, you should obey Him or else your salvation may not be. Once you have the faith, you must have baptism and receive the Holy Spirit to complete the process of salvation, then to keep on the road to salvation. Because: 'Whoever knows what is right to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.' (James 4:17). So once you have the faith, you have read the Bible, and you know, yet you disagree with baptism being a necessary process of salvation, then you're sinning out of your doubt. The fact that Protestant churches do not think baptism is necessary for salvation but only faith is wrong. Once you have the faith, you must follow on the steps taught by the Bible. Whether you'd receive the Holy Spirit or not depends not only on your decision with the church anymore, but depends on both you and God. So it's the harder process. So, whoever has faith already, like yourself, and yet does not believe that the blood of Christ is necessary for salvation, you're not doing what is right, and therefore a sin. Remember - if you sin, you wouldn't have the blood of Christ to wash it. If you use the robber who was crucified with Christ as an example of being without baptism, you must keep in mind that the robber was unable to be baptised because he was crucified. It was not within his ability to be baptised (not to mention baptism was not complete then), therefore he did not fail to do what was right and not sinned on this, for he was unable. We don't say that other churches will not be saved to be conservative. But the verse is very important and is a key, that one who is not born of water and Spirit will not enter the Kingdom of God. With TJC, you can at least get the blood of Christ by consulting with the church, so it's easy to get. The Holy Spirit no longer depends on the church but God and yourself. Keep the verse about rebirth under water and Spirit in mind regarding salvation. Oh, and salvation truly depends on God, and since God Himself said that no one who is not reborn under water and Spirit will not enter the Kingdom of God, it's how it is. Nevertheless, being conservative is still the safe way :) Therefore we never said other churches will not be saved.
[ 27 ] CVT ( 2003/4/28 下午 12:25:00 )
Oh, and don't be too excited about having same views with me. With each message I tell you only parts of the entire picture. You wouldn't be smiling with the whole picture of the truth, becuase you don't believe in the truth. Oh and unless you try to dig holes with my messages, I said NO MAN is ever to claim whether one is to be saved or not for these reasons: "Judge not,..." (Matthew 7:1; RSV) "...Salvation belongs to our God...and to the Lamb!" (Revelation 7:10; RSV) Therefore, no MAN <--- no "MAN" is ever to claim whether one is to be saved or not. So we make no comment on that to obey God. Still, if you want to refer back to the Scripture and let the Holy Scripture talk to you, John 3:5 is still the verse for you. Get why I said those things now? Thus I told you not to be too excited :) The whole picture does not please your view, but pleases the Holy Scripture's view.
[ 28 ] CVT ( 2003/4/28 下午 05:02:00 )
Anyway it's such a big waste of time and effort talking to you who will not listen. I don't think I feel like discussing (not to mention it's useless discussion) with you anymore. I'll see my mood. So, I think it might be good-bye to your meaningless topic.
[ 29 ] 水 ( 2003/4/28 下午 06:44:00 )
好了, 夠了! 你們在這裡爭吵, 像話嗎? 大家都是信耶穌的, 應該知道什麼叫'愛'吧? 再這樣爭吵下去, 和法利賽人沒什麼分別.
[ 30 ] 博而不精的人 ( 2003/4/29 上午 06:14:00 )
只要有一方願意停止就可以了 不知道誰願意就是了
[ 31 ] 誰 ( 2003/4/29 下午 05:20:00 )
親愛的水： 是不是只要信耶穌，其他都無所謂呢？那麼摩門教和天主教也是信耶穌的，我們能同意他們嗎？不過我很贊同你說的一個重點：「不要爭吵」（血氣之爭），即使要為真理爭辯，也應該是出於「愛」。^^
[ 32 ] John Lee ( 2003/4/30 上午 11:17:00 )
To CVT, You think you know Bible better than me, but you told me you don't speak in tongues, so you don't have Holy Spirit. Therefore your understand of Bible is from flesh. Right? Wrong! I don’t think you fully understand the work of Holy Spirit. Holy Spirit regenerates (born again) people, and call them to repent by Holy Scriptures. A saved person is actually predestinated by God, through regeneration and effective calling, then justified by faith alone. God will preserve his faith until he dies. Read Romans Chapter 8 8:29 [hb5] 因為他預先所知道的人、就預先定下效法他兒子的模樣使他兒子在許多弟兄中作長子． [kjv] For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 8:30 [hb5] 預先所定下的人又召他們來．所召來的人、又稱他們為義．所稱為義的人、又叫他們得榮耀。 [kjv] Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. This is called "golden chain of salvation" from Romans chapter 8, http://www.prca.org/sermons/romans8.29-30.html you can see the sequence of salvation: foreknow (CVT)-> predestinate (CVT)->call (CVT)->justify (CVT) through faith in Christ->glorify (let Christ’s glory express in you through your faith and follow him daily). The golden chain also can be found in Ephesians 1:4-14 1:4 [hb5] According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 1:5 又因愛我們、就按著自己意旨所喜悅的、預定我們、藉著耶穌基督得兒子的名分、 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 1:6 使他榮耀的恩典得著稱讚．這恩典是他在愛子裏所賜給我們的。 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. 1:7 我們藉這愛子的血、得蒙救贖、過犯得以赦免、乃是照他豐富的恩典． -àGod’s Grace only In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; 1:8 這恩典是 神用諸般智慧聰明、充充足足賞給我們的、 àGod’s grace only Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 1:9 都是照他自己所預定的美意、叫我們知道他旨意的奧祕、 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: 1:10 要照所安排的、在日期滿足的時候、使天上地上一切所有的、都在基督裏面同歸於一。 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: 1:11 我們也在他裏面得了基業、〔得或作成〕這原是那位隨己意行作萬事的、照著他旨意所預定的． In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: 1:12 叫他的榮耀、從我們這首先在基督裏有盼望的人、可以得著稱讚。 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. 1:13 你們既聽見真理的道、就是那叫你們得救的福音、也信了基督、既然信他、就受了所應許的聖靈為印記． In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, -àfaith and seal the same time 1:14 這聖靈、是我們得基業的憑據、〔原文作質〕直等到 神之民〔民原文作產業〕被贖、使他的榮耀得著稱讚。 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his “glory”. I just want to let you know that you came to Christ not by your own choice, but by Christ’s predestinati
[ 33 ] CVT ( 2003/4/30 下午 01:35:00 )
This is going to be a long one. The thing is, I at least know the basics of the doctrine of salvation. That's the most important of all truth. With the truth of baptism alone, TJC is by far the most complete I have ever seen. With the completeness of TJC doctrine, I am sure I have the big picture. I only say that I have the big picture from TJC, but I never claimed I understood the Bible than you. In fact, I regard myself as a beginner. But knowing some of what other churches say, I know our picture is more complete (= bigger). Of course I know God already foreknows. In fact, how I got to believe in Christ is like a blueprint when I look back. It's like already planned and written. However, your understanding of the Holy Spirit, like other churches, does not coincide with the Bible completely. From the Scripture point of view, it never mentioned that believing = receiving the Holy Spiirt automatically. Let's see how the apostles experienced the Holy Spirit. Acts 1:8 'But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you;' (RSV) Jesus mentioned about time here, but did not specify the time to come. Therefore the apostles had to have some way to know the Holy Spirit had come. Acts 2:2-4 '2 And suddenly a sound cmae from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house, where they were sitting. 3 And there appearedto them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. 4 And they were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.' (RSV) By this, the apostles knew the Holy Spirit came. Later on people heard apostles speaking in tongues of their language, but remember that the apostles spoke in tongue at the same time, and therefore it was a combination of noise. When you hear a group of people speaking different things at the same time and place, you won't figure out what they're on about. It's simply too messy. Therefore it is God that opened the people's ears to have heard understood language. In Acts 10:47 Peter knew that the Gentiles have received the Holy Spirit because he heard them speak in tongues and praising God. You said that not all speak in tongue. I know where you got that from. 1 Corinthians 12:10 '...to another various kinds of tongues...' (RSV) 1 Corinthians 12:30 '...Do all speak with tongues?' (RSV) These are famous verses that Protestant churches use to deny speaking of tongues. However, it also means their theory contradicts with: 1 Corinthians 14:5 'Now I want you all to speak in tongues...' (RSV) Here indicates that all can speak in tongue. Note that whenever Paul mentioned about speaking in tongues as though not all spoke in tongue, he always has an 'interpreter' along with speaking in tongues. Why? Because Paul is really speaking of 'tongues' in 1 Corinthians 12 as in terms of edification for the church, which means prophesising with tongues. 1 Corinthians 12:7 'To each is given the manifestatioin of the Spirit for the common good.' (RSV) From this verse on, Paul talks about different gifts from the Holy Spirit. Therefore, subsequent verses are continued from verse 7, which is referring for the common good (edification of others and self). While in 1 Corinthians 14:4 Paul says: 'He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself...' (RSV) Why now, is speaking of tongue not for the common good? Therefore there are two different forms of speaking in tongues. One is prophesising in tongue, with an interpreter, for the church to be edified. One is praying in tongue, which is to God only and not men (1 Cor 14:2), just like a prayer is only to God not to men. These are thus two different types. It's obvious that Corinthian church confused the two, and therefore Paul wrote this part of the letter to teach them. Tongues, as what Prot
[ 34 ] CVT ( 2003/4/30 下午 01:41:00 )
>>Therefore we should work to become avoid >>evil. Sorry -_-; Ignore the word "become".
[ 35 ] Pisgah ( 2003/4/30 下午 05:01:00 )
關於屬靈恩賜，我想貼一篇以前的覆文來做補充，其中有些地方跟CTV 有些重複，請多包涵。 兩個希臘字, ”charisma”和 "dorea",前者是有所指涉的特別恩賜,如講道,醫病,趕鬼,翻譯等等,後者是指得到聖靈的恩賜；以英文來說,就是 charisma = spiritual gifts (複數; 因為有各種不同的恩賜) 與 Holy Spirit as a gift (dorea ; 單數;指得到聖靈而言) 如果你對照英文本,只要是原文用dorea 的地方, 英文是單數的gift, 但charisma 則有單複數都有. 使徒行傳１０：４５～４６記載： 「那些奉割禮和彼得同來的信徒、見聖靈的恩賜也澆在外邦人身上、就都希奇．因聽見他們說方言、稱讚神為大. 」 這裡聖靈的恩賜 (the gift of Holy Spirit), 用的就是dorea, 而且特別提到”因聽見他們說方言”,所以才確定他們得到聖靈的恩賜。 保羅在哥林多前書１２章所提到的各種屬靈恩賜（spiritual gifts）是指得到聖靈之後，所加添的各種能力，所以稱為 "gifts by the same spirit" (哥前１２：９) 另一個我們可以看出這兩者不同的,是在哥林多後書9:14～15 「 他們也因神極大的恩賜、顯在你們心裡、就切切的想念你們、為你們祈禱。感謝神、因他有說不盡的恩賜。」 保羅在同一句話，卻用了兩個不同的字來表示”恩賜”；這裡的”神極大的恩賜”「恩賜」二字，是與charisma同一字源的charis, 但”說不盡的恩賜”則是指dorea , 中文聖經譯為”說不盡的恩賜”並不是很恰當, KJV 用的是 "unspeakable gift" NASB用的是"indescribable gift" 所以它的意思是 ”難以用語言描述的恩賜”之意。 於是我們會思考，保羅所指的”無法用言語描述的恩賜”是什麼？ 有什麼恩賜是”無法用言語描述” ? 是指醫病、趕鬼、講道嗎？當然不是，他所說的，就是賜下”聖靈”這種奇妙的恩賜；正如約翰福音16:13 所說「只等真理的聖靈來了，他要引導你們明白（原文作進入）一切的真理」 從另外一個角度來看，哥林多前書所提到的聖靈的各種恩賜，並不是每一個人都有，如果有一個平凡的信徒，自認為什麼屬靈的恩賜也沒有，難道我們可以說他沒有聖靈嗎？當然不是，聖靈作為一種gift，是每個人都可能得到的，如果你查閱新約中所有使用dorea的經節 (共１１次)，你就能看出來 “Holy Spirit as a dorea ” 是每個人都有機會得到的，但spiritual gifts的恩賜則不一定如此，也不是每個人都相同。 另外，我想請John Lee 看下列經節關於腓利的故事： 使徒行傳8:：4~25這段記載告訴我們什麼？ １．撒瑪利亞的人聽了腓利所傳的福音（跟太監一樣）但並沒有得到聖靈. ２．彼得特地從耶路撒冷來看他們「為他們禱告、要叫他們受聖靈」(8:15) 可見他們「沒得到聖靈」是看的出來的． ３．按手之後, 他們得到聖靈, 連行邪術的西門也看出來了,所以他想買這種教人得聖靈的權柄（８：１９）他說：「叫我手按著誰、誰就可以受聖靈。」可見得到聖靈也可以看的出來,否則西門怎麼向人收錢發財呢？ ４．「彼得說、你的銀子、和你一同滅亡罷．因你想 神的恩賜、是可以用錢買的。」這裏的”恩賜”原文就是dorea, 指的是得到聖靈這種恩賜, ５．彼得把西門罵一頓,就回耶路撒冷去了, 故事結束! 通常猶太人旅行都會刻意避開撒瑪利亞，彼得特別從耶路撒冷跑了一趟撒瑪利亞，然後很快又回去耶路撒冷，所以這個故事到底講了什麼 ? 其實真正的重點有三個： １．不是信的人都能得到聖靈（受洗也不保證得聖靈）（8:16） ２．由聖靈充滿的人幫忙按手, 可以幫我們得到聖靈, 但自己的迫切也很重要 因為神會看人的心思意念﹔而且得到聖靈的話，其他人也看得到(如西門)。 ３．這種賜下聖靈的權柄, 完全在於神,人不能擁有這種權柄，也不能用條件來交換。 John Lee 引用以弗所書1:13~14 ：「 你們既聽見真理的道、就是那叫你們得救的福音、也信了基督、既然信他、就受了所應許的聖靈為印記．這聖靈、是我們得基業的憑據、〔原文作質〕直等到 神之民〔民原文作產業〕被贖、使他的榮耀得著稱讚。」 但聖經上並沒有“faith and seal the same time”的記載,撒瑪利亞人從信到受聖靈,中間顯然有時間差,請問“seal the same time”的說法何來？ 其次，如果得聖靈無法從外表判斷，那我們如何認定使徒在耶路撒冷等候的時候，聖靈在五旬節降下？在我們教會，自己有沒有聖靈是很清楚的事，但你是不是相信今日的所有基督徒，對自己有沒有聖靈也是很清楚？如果是這樣，何以以弗所的信徒，卻不知道自己有沒有聖靈？(徒19:2) (先談到這裏)
[ 36 ] CVT ( 2003/4/30 下午 06:14:00 )
Arrghhhh get so frustrated with so many mistakes I make in every message... including Chinese... X_x; maybe I should proof-read them more carefully next time... Anyway as for this sentence: >>but I never claimed I understood the Bible >>than you. I meant: but I never claimed I understood the Bible better than you.
[ 37 ] CVT ( 2003/4/30 下午 06:51:00 )
John Lee: 你知道嗎？ 我發現你沒有我一開始想像的糟糕！ 你雖然對本會有些誤會，雖然你甚至做網頁攻擊真耶穌教會，但是不同於其他人的是，你不無理取鬧，反倒願意開始談聖經。 你上封我大部分都同意。 其實，Protestant的神學，有不少我們教會同意。 我想，外教會對於我們教會特別注意，大概是因為我們教會稱為真教會，稱為真耶穌基督的身體而使外教會不滿吧。 如果我們沒有這點，我想外教會也不會如此排斥本教會，因為教義不同之問題，外教派許多教派都不太一樣，用不著只對真耶穌教會的教義爭論。 但是，這也是真耶穌教會重要教義之一，也是真耶穌教會信徒在受洗之前想清楚，信心包括這點受洗的。 我們教會雖然處處受攻擊，但是我們還是很勇敢的大聲宣傳我們教義，不因以為恥。 我想，有一天，如果你的教會也受到同樣的遭遇，你大概也會做我們做的事（不過我指的不包括我的言語，因為我知道我講話不夠婉轉，直插直入，有些剛硬）。 每個教會有不同的信仰，但哪個才是正確的，只有靠 神帶領。
[ 38 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/1 上午 09:33:00 )
To CVT, Thanks a lot for spending so much time in typing the information. I appreciate your open and honest altitute that I am also ask myself to have. I think we have some common ground if we put Bible the only source of authority. First, I hope you can clarify this point: You wrote: “Tongues, as what Protestant church explains, are languages of different nations, e.g. Chinese. However, this view, again, does not coincide with the Scripture completely. As mentioned, in Acts 2, there was a group of people speaking in tongue at the same time and space, and was therefore too difficult to distinguish what they were speaking, it was God who opened the people's ears to hear in their own languages.” Why you want to change “languages” into “non-languages”, and why you think too much noise would make persons fail to recognize their own languages? From all versions of Bible and Greek dictionaries, I think it’s clear that the “tongues” in Acts means “languages”. For the following text, it’s more than clear that “tongues” means “languages: :4 [hb5] And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 2:5 那時、有虔誠的猶太人、從天下各國來、住在耶路撒冷。 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 2:6 這聲音一響、眾人都來聚集、各人聽見門徒用眾人的鄉談說話、就甚納悶． Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 2:7 都驚訝希奇說、看哪、這說話的不都是加利利人麼． And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 2:8 我們各人、怎麼聽見他們說我們生來所用的鄉談呢。 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 2:9 我們帕提亞人、瑪代人、以攔人、和住在米所波大米、猶太、加帕多家、本都、亞西亞、 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 2:10 弗呂家、旁非利亞、埃及的人、並靠近古利奈的呂彼亞一帶地方的人、從羅馬來的客旅中、或是猶太人、或是進猶太教的人、 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 2:11 革哩底和亞拉伯人、都聽見他們用我們的鄉談、講說 神的大作為。 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Why you want to twist that? Also, you said “God who opened the people's ears to hear in their own languages” which verse you referred to? Why you want to twist these matters 180 degrees to support some argument? Tell me what point you want to make, so you need to twist Bible like that? We have 1000 people in my church, and we have sunshine worship once a year in a retreat center, when 1000 people (from more than 10 countries) chat together, I can not only recognized what kind of languages they are using, and also can hear clearly what they are talking (I know Taiwanese, Chinese, and English). Why you need to use imagination to think God enable everyone’s ear to interpret some meaningless noise into 14 different languages at the same time? Let me tell you the reason now! The reason is ---à>> The “tongues” True Jesus Church members have is “noise” from intensive vibration of tongues. It’s mono-tone without basic elements as a language. Please, please, don’t make Bible a fiction noble that allows us to add our imagination. We need interpret it sincerely and carefully. Did you figure it out yourself or just learned it from TJC? Do you know how many TJC’s members are suffering now; thinking God does not give them salvation? Do you know how many members prayed and asked God to give them “tongues” to prove their salvation for more than 10 years,
[ 39 ] CVT ( 2003/5/1 下午 02:46:00 )
Sorry for my aggressive language before... because I thought you were like Wai or 小蒙, but I was wrong. "Tongues" (Greek: glossa) in Acts 2:4 in Greek means: language, lingo, tongue when you look up a Greek dictionary. But this is not the most correct yet, because the Holy Scripture was written in ancient Greek, not modern Greek. Glossa in ancient Greek actually means: tongue language. Therefore, it's not just "language" in ancient Greek, which is one of the meanings in modern Greek. When the apostles received the Holy Spirit, there were only 11 of them (Acts 1:13). However, the languages listed were more than 14 (Acts 2:9-11), and the apostles were speaking in tongues at the same time (Acts 2:4,6). It is not to logic how 11, at the same time, could speak more than 14 languages. I know what you mean. When I'm with a group of people, because of the way our brain functions, we are able to exclude what we don't want and concentrate on what we want, so we can hear languages one at a time even when there were lots of people chatting in different languages. But the above paragraph shows that it's not logically possible unless it were not God who opened their ears. Furthermore, for this issue with "tongues" being explained as languages of men doesn't suit the Scripture completely, as I have mentioned (Romans 8:26; 1 Corinthians 13:1). In Acts, receiving the Holy Spirit seemed to be separate from believing and receiving baptism (baptism is separate from receiving the Holy Spirit: Acts 10:44,47; Believing is separate from receiving the Holy Spirit: Acts 19:2,5,6). The Holy Scripture never mentioned that believing meant automatically receiving the Holy Spirit. I don't know how others think. But there ARE sins that take away your salvation once for all, and they are mortal sins (1 John 5:16) that brings an end to hope of salvation. But as long as the three sacraments were done and the Holy Spirit is received, and the person does not commit mortal sin, we usually regard the person as somenoe that can be saved (but we don't make a definite answer to this because salvation depends on God). From the Holy Scripture's view, the person should be able to receive salvation. Yes, the Holy Spirit's downpour upon individuals really depends on His time and also the person's heart. Sometimes the person has the heart, but the time has not arrived yet. There are also many cases where the person does not have the heart but has received the Holy Spirit, and subsequently has the heart. As for those who have not received the Holy Spirit yet, they should know that God would not give them something they cannot handle (1 Cor 10:13), so by knowing this, they should endure in Christ. I don't know what kinds of believers you have encountered from TJC, but most of the believers I encounter in TJC are usually joyful in heart. Waiting for the downpour of the Holy Spirit can also be a trial from God on the endurance of your faith in Him. It is said: 'And I will put this third into the fire, and refine them as one refines silver, and test them as gold is tested.' (Zechariah 13:9; RSV). Besides, being conservative about salvation would help us be more humble in front of God, instead of saying, "God, I believe in you; my salvation is secure and I will meet You someday." We would say, "God, I believe in you; please receive me at the time of my death." There are believers who are faithful enough to know they will be saved, as a revelation from God. Of course these are special cases, because they were told by God that they will be received before they died. Of course, these died the most joyous death. But blaming on the church about how the believers are upset (strictly, they shouldn't be, for they should hold hope in God) for not receiving the Holy Spirit is not all that correct... bec
[ 40 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/4 上午 06:29:00 )
To Pisgah, Before I explain the verses you mentioned, please answer my folowing quesion. ----> You are telling me that all the Bible scholars from 100 A.D. to 1917 including the translators of King James version, the reformers (like Martin Luther and John Calvin), and translators of Chinese HoHo version Bible, and NIV translators were all made fatal mistakes in differentiating the “ dorea” and “ charisma”, so all believers used these versions of Bible were all lose their salvation. Because they thought not all men could speak in tongues, according to 1 Corinthians 12:30. 12:30 [hb5] 豈都是得恩賜醫病的麼．豈都是說方言的麼．豈都是翻方言的麼。 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? No only that, even they knew the necessity of tongues, they still couldn’t be saved, because the only God’s certified agent (in modern term) appeared in 1917, with correct tongues (mono-tone tongue voice). The only way to be saved is to understand the 6 verses in Acts 2 were all mistakenly translated. “Languages” needed to be changed to “tongue voice”, and also needed to add something to explain God twisted people’s ear to understand the mono-tone tongue voice in their languages. And after they understand this, they needed to come to TJC to be laid hands by Elders or preachers to receive mono-tone-voice, to assure their salvation (only 70% successful rate in their life time to get this mono-voice tongue and receive salvation) So, what’s the next thing TJC is going to do? Change, retranslate, and add some sentences to the following 6 verses? 2:4 [hb5] 他們就都被聖靈充滿、按著聖靈所賜的口才、說起”別國的話”來。 [kjv] And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with “other tongues”, as the Spirit gave them utterance. --> You need to change here to “FOREIGN MONO-TONE TONGUAGE VOICES” 2:6 [hb5] 這聲音一響、眾人都來聚集、各人聽見”門徒用眾人的”鄉談” 說”話”、就甚納悶． [kjv] Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his “own language”.--> you need to add a sentence “GOD ENABLED THEM TO UNDERSTAND THE TOUNGE VOICE” 2:8 [hb5] 我們各人、怎麼聽見他們說我們生來所用的”鄉談”呢。 [kjv] And how hear we every man in “our own tongue”, wherein we were born? --> you need to change here also “GOD ENABLED THEM TO TRANSLATE TOUNGUE VOICE INTO THEIR OWN LANGUAGES” 2:11 [hb5] 革哩底和亞拉伯人、都聽見他們用我們的”鄉談”、”講說 神的大作為”。 [kjv] Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in “our tongues” the wonderful works of God. --> you need to change here also “GOD ENABLED THEM TO TRANSLATE TOUNGUE VOICE INTO THEIR OWN LANGUAGES” 2:21 [hb5] 到那時候、凡求告主名的、就必得救。』 --> you need to change this verse, too!!! 2:38 [hb5] 彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈． [kjv] Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. --> you need to change this verse, too 10:45 [hb5] 那些奉割禮和彼得同來的信徒、見聖靈的”恩賜”也澆在外邦人身上、就都希奇． And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 10:46 因聽見他們說方言、”稱讚 神為大”。 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, --> you need to add a note : This verse will be used to check whether or not a believer can have salvation. The tongues should be mono-tone tongue voice. This verse is the only verse in Bible for the assurance of receiving Holy Spirit and salvat
[ 41 ] CVT ( 2003/5/4 上午 08:45:00 )
Sorry to cut in, because you addressed your message to Brother P. However, I have already explained that in Acts chapter 2, "langauges" in Ancient Greek actually means "tongue language". We need not alter, for the language already speaks for itself. I thought I had explained the "speaking in tongues" in 1 Corinthians. Furthermore, the Scripture must be studied not locally but wholly, therefore matching only a few verses does not mean it's the truth. Modern scholars fails to completely match the Bible with their explanation about tongues (Romans 8:26 and 1 Corinthians 13:1). There are two different types of speaking in tongues - one is prophesising in tongue and one is praying in tongue. The former is for edifying the church, and the later is for own self. 1 Corinthians 14:14 brings it further: 'For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.' (RSV) Mind (RSV), or understanding (NKJV, YLT) is unfruitful. This means an incomprehensive tongue. Of course, you might argue that it's a foreign language of another nation to you, so you may not understand. But please note this verse: 1 Corinthians 14:2 'For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.' (RSV) It actually tells us that this 'tongue' is not to be understand by humans. God would not be careless enough to let them speak in a language known to men, for it would not be a job too difficult for the church to find a stranger of such language to interpret to their language the mystery of God. No, a mystery is not to be known unless God reveals it, and 'no one understands him' who prays in tongue means 'no one' could understand - not even one man. Where there should be the truth, the truth should be in complete harmony with the entire Holy Scipture, for God contradicts not Himself. Harmony with parts of the Holy Scripture is not the truth. Therefore I have always emphasised on "the big picture" and not "partial picture". Paul Wei, one of our pioneer preachers, was truly of low education that educated people sometimes finds his diary hard to understand because of his poor writing ability. We boast not that we understand the Bible better than others, but we can say we see clearer the spiritual perspective of the Bible. In fact, we do not ignore what scholars from Protestant churches have studied, and instead study what they have published, and organise out the ones we agree. We learn biblical history from scholars of other churches, as do we for the background of the Bible. We also admit many translations of the Bible are very well done. We also admit that textual criticism of the manuscripts of the Holy Scripture done by other churches' scholars basically complete and we're at the closest point to having the very original Scripture. We neglect not others, but instead learn lots from others and organise out what we agree. We therefore boast not of our knowledge of the Bible, but we can say that on the spiritual side, we have a clearer picture. Our doctrines were given by God in revelation and not studied or searched through the Holy Scripture. We only study it later, after we have gained more biblical knowledge and understanding, and altogether come to amazement of how in wonderful harmony with the Scripture the truth given to us was, even when we referred back to the original languages. That is how we have become evermore sure of our doctrines.
[ 42 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/4 上午 11:37:00 )
Hi CVT, Could you elaborate this, How? --> Our doctrines were given by God in revelation and not studied or searched through the Holy Scripture.
[ 43 ] CVT ( 2003/5/4 下午 01:11:00 )
As an example, this is an unpublished history of TJC regarding Paul Wei (the book of history of TJC is unpublished and yet to be revised, because some parts of Paul Wei's diary was difficult to understand due to his low education). I heard this from a preacher who has read the book (I'm not sure if he participated in the making of the book): Paul Wei was a fervent believer of a church before the history of TJC began (of course you already know this). He prayed often at home. There was one day he prayed and Jesus spoke to him directly, and told him that Sabbath was Saturday not Sunday. He was excited to hear God's voice and went to his pastor and told the pastor. The pastor rebuked him and said that Sunday was the Sabbath Day agreed by the church authority. So Paul went back home. Then he received more revelation from Christ. This time Christ told him, "My name is Jesus. I am not Trinity. I am one." Again, excited with this revelation, he went and told his pastor. His pastor again rebuked him and said that Trinity was the truth made by committee long ago, and that Paul was heretic, and if Paul spoke of heresy again Paul would get kicked out. So Paul went back home again. Jesus revealed Himself again, and told him that He was going to grant Paul the Holy Spirit, and that when Paul received the Holy Spirit, he would pray in tongue. Paul received the Holy Spirit and prayed in tongue and was filled with great join in the Holy Spirit. Paul, filled with great joy, went to his pastor and told him what happened. The pastor said that he was the pastor, the higher one in position, the worker of God, and why did God not grant him the Holy Spirit but to Paul?! So Paul Wei was kicked out of the church. From then on, Paul continued to receive revelation and preached accordingly. This was one of the examples of how the truth of TJC came to be. Just like apostles, who received much revelation (e.g. Paul, John, Peter etc), TJC also began this way.
[ 44 ] CVT ( 2003/5/4 下午 01:21:00 )
sorry X_x; the word "join" was meant to be "joy".
[ 45 ] Pisgah ( 2003/5/4 下午 06:59:00 )
To: John 針對你的問題, 我的答覆如下: 1真耶穌教會的教義,並不是從鑽研世上的學問之後所得來的, 我們只求依照聖經;與聖經不符時,不管出自教皇、大學問家、或偉大的宗教改革者，我們必要依照聖經來考察，並慎思明辨, 要知道這道是與不是 ? (徒17:11; 林前14: 29). 我舉 “ dorea” 和 “ charisma” 的例子,只是想要指出: 認為”說方言只是屬靈恩賜的其中一種” 這種說法並不正確. 若要談論神學傳統與宗教研究的傳承,有那個基督教能勝過天主教, 天主教裡面那些敬拜馬利亞與諸聖徒的教士修女們,他們為主甘心奉獻,甚至犧牲生命,但他們能不能得救呢? 所以我說,我們不須去討論先聖先賢的問題, 要比先聖先賢, 沒有人會多過天主教! 正如同孔子能不能得救的問題,馬丁路德能不能得救是神的問題,不是我們的問題! 我們關心的是活在當下的我們,有沒有找到真正的得救之路 ? 迦瑪列、亞波羅、和未信主之前的保羅，他們對舊約的鑽研，遠遠超過”無知小民”的彼得，但是他們認識彌賽亞嗎 ? 若非聖靈的啟示，保羅汗牛充棟的知識， 還不是把耶穌基督當成蠱惑人心的異端。 2.你所舉的 使2:4~11 的經節，正是值得我們深思之處；事實上，“別國的話”是 other tongues 之意，原文根本沒有”國”的意思；啟示錄中的「各國各民」tongues 可做”國”來解釋，但此處的”tongues” 已經是”話”的意思，怎能把同一個字, 既譯為”國”又譯為”話” ? 後面經節的”鄉談”(his own language) 是由兩個字構成，與 “別國的話 (glossa) 根本是不同的字，為什麼會從glossa 變成“his own language”，我相信這就是如CVT 所說：神開了聽者的耳朵之故。 另外一個值得注意的經節是： 「革哩底和亞拉伯人，都聽見他們用我們的鄉談，講說神的大作為。 眾人就都驚訝猜疑，彼此說：這是甚麼意思呢﹖還有人譏誚說：他們無非是新酒灌滿了。彼得和十一個使徒站起，高聲說：猶太人和一切住在耶路撒冷的人哪這件事你們當知道，也當側耳聽我的話。你們想這些人是醉了；其實不是醉了，因為時候剛到巳初。」 （徒2:11~15） 我不知道John有沒有想過, 為什麼使徒們說方言,有些人聽見他們在讚美神,有些人卻覺得他們喝醉了 ? 所以彼得要特別澄清他們沒有喝酒! 其實道理很簡單，使徒們說方言的樣子，必然讓人誤以為醉酒了，聽懂的人，聽出他們在讚美神，聽不懂的人，看見他們的樣子，就以為他們喝醉了。 猶太人是很虔誠的，如果他知道你在讚美神，他絕不會「譏誚說：他們無非是新酒灌滿了」。 我提出這段討論，是希望從回當時的情境，只是不曉得在John的腦海中，說方言的樣子，是不是跟這段記載相符合。 ３．在John 的貼文中，反覆提到“mono-tone tongue voice”，我很好奇這個觀察是從何得來？因為這不是我們的禱告的情況。 所謂的“單音節舌音”是如同“Da-Da-Da, Du-Du-Du”之類間斷性的舌頭振動， 但我們禱告時，是非常流利的捲舌音，而且就像說話一樣，說靈言的方式也非常多樣式；我從前就曾說過，我們聚會禱告時，遠遠的聽，就像是”流水的聲音“跟你所描述的“mono-tone tongue voice”相去太遠，這一部份，我希望你可以就近考察。 我相信你所說修改聖經一事，只是開玩笑，我們所體驗的，既然與聖經相符，又何必去修改？倒是你所引的經節中有「彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗」一句，我倒想知道你們是奉耶穌的名受洗，還是奉“父子聖靈的名”受洗？ 另外，我前文引用“撒瑪利亞人”與“以弗所教會”的例子，來證明相信與得聖靈是有時間差的，不曉得你意見如何？
[ 46 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/5 上午 12:38:00 )
(太28:19) 所以你們要去、使萬民作我的門徒、奉父子聖靈的名、給他們施洗．〔或作給他們施洗歸於父子聖靈的名〕 "...in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," 父子聖靈的"名"是單數的"Name", 就是父子聖靈有一個獨一的名, 就是"耶穌" (英文 IESU - 直到 1629年版的 King James 聖經才改作 Jesus) http://home.attbi.com/~yjt712/LORD-IESU/id10.html (用 Iesu) http://home.attbi.com/~yjt712/LORD-IESU/id9.html http://home.attbi.com/~yjt712/LORD-IESU/id8.html http://home.attbi.com/~yjt712/LORD-IESU/id7.html (用 Iesus) http://home.attbi.com/~yjt712/LORD-IESU/id23.html (用Jesus) (但是當時的 J 與 I 同音, 好像今天的 HalleluJah, J 唸 [y] 的音, J=I, 過了 200 年後才變了音) IESU 唸 [yesu] [耶穌] 或 [依-e-穌]
[ 47 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/5 上午 02:12:00 )
(徒1:15) 那時、有許多人聚會、約有一百二十名、彼得就在弟兄中間站起來、說、 (NIV)13When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers. 15In those days Peter stood up among the believers[3] (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 請注意"went upstairs", "a hundred and twenty", 及(徒2:41) 於是領受他話的人、就受了洗．那一天、門徒約添了三千人． "一百多"個人在"樓上"禱告, 得到聖靈說起靈言(other tongues), 如果是說世界上的各地方言, 樓下廣場的"幾千人", 誰能聽清楚? 唯一的合理答案就是神開啟那些虔誠人的耳朵, 讓他們聽成十幾種不同的個人的家鄉話. 不虔誠的聽不懂, 才會譏誚他們是喝醉酒. 本教會或外教會也有得聖靈說方言, 但是被聽成外國語的例子. 除開某些受邪靈的異端外, 其它教會也有得聖靈說靈言的. (林前14:14) 我若用方言禱告、是我的靈禱告．但我的悟性沒有果效。 (林前14:15) 這卻怎麼樣呢．我要用靈禱告、也要用悟性禱告．我要用靈歌唱、也要用悟性歌唱。 (林前14:16) 不然、你用靈祝謝、那在座不通方言的人、既然不明白你的話、怎能在你感謝的時候說阿們呢。 (NIV)For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays... 這邊談到兩種禱告: 靈言禱告, 悟性禱告 靈言禱告是對神說的不需翻譯出來, (林前14:2) 那說方言的、原不是對人說、乃是對神說．因為沒有人聽出來．然而他在心靈裡、卻是講說各樣的奧秘。 說方言也有兩種: 方言禱告, 方言講道(作先知講道) 方言講道則是特殊恩賜, 是對人說的, 是神要藉著來造就教會的.(林前14:3) 但作先知講道的、是對人說、要造就、安慰、勸勉人。 (林前14:4) 說方言的、是造就自己．作先知講道的、乃是造就教會。 "作先知講道"(prophesy)是特殊恩賜, 就是被神的聖靈感動, 在會中說出方言(speak in tongue), 本來沒有人聽懂, 但神會安排本人或其他同靈有"翻譯方言"的特殊恩賜, 將方言翻譯成聽得懂的話, 造就教會. (林前14:18) 我感謝神、我說方言比你們眾人還多． 保羅常用靈言禱告, 造就自己. (徒19:6) 保羅按手在他們頭上、聖靈便降在他們身上．他們就說方言、又說豫言。〔或作又講道〕 (徒19:7) 一共約有十二個人。 這邊有方言禱告, 也有方言講道. 得到聖靈說出靈言(方言), 不是特殊的方言講道恩賜, 而是得到聖靈的憑証, 是看得到聽得到的! (徒2:33) 他既被神的右手高舉、〔或作他既高舉在神的右邊〕又從父受了所應許的聖靈、就把你們所看見所聽見的、澆灌下來。 (路11:13) 你們雖然不好、尚且知道拿好東西給兒女。何況天父、豈不更將聖靈給求他的人麼。 聖靈是虔誠禱告求來的, 當然也有聽道中就的聖靈的, (徒10:45) 那些奉割禮和彼得同來的信徒、見聖靈的恩賜也澆在外邦人身上、就都希奇． (徒10:46) 因聽見他們說方言、稱讚神為大。 (徒10:47) 於是彼得說、這些人既受了聖靈、與我們一樣、誰能禁止用水給他們施洗呢。 (徒10:48) 就吩咐奉耶穌基督的名給他們施洗。他們又請彼得住了幾天。
[ 48 ] CVT ( 2003/5/5 上午 03:17:00 )
呵呵 漏讀了 應該是約一百二十人啊^_^; 那這樣子這段可以有不同說法，然而，說是「別國的語言」還是無法與聖經其他部分符合，不能只是在一點繞圈子（如以前Wai吵洗禮問題一樣，只看一部份根本搞個沒完沒了）。
[ 49 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/5 上午 04:06:00 )
為何"還是無法與聖經其他部分符合"?
應該不會吧! 看起來"speak in other tongues" 就是"說起其它的語言", 這個"tongues"(語言)可以是靈言(舌音), 根據上篇的討論, 既然有不虔誠的人聽不懂, 表示不是這世界上的語言, 當然就是靈言.
(林前14:13) 所以那說方言的、就當求著能繙出來。(NIV)13For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.
(林前14:28) 若沒有人繙、就當在會中閉口．只對自己和神說、就是了。(NIV)28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.
所以"speak in tongue"若沒有翻譯出來, 就成了靈言禱告, 是向神說的, 不是世上的語言.
五旬節在樓上這一百多個門徒得到聖靈的澆灌, 說的是靈言, 但神讓虔誠的猶太人有翻譯方言的恩賜, 所以聽成了他們自己的家鄉話.
("神開啟他們的耳朵"是通俗的講法, "神讓他們有翻譯方言的恩賜"則是比較有聖經根據的說法, 如果他們聽不懂如何知道內容是"講說神的大作為")
"作先知講道" 也是 "說靈言", 不是在講台的"悟性講道", 說靈言作先知講道, 一定要能翻譯出來, 讓教會信徒聽得懂, 我們教會現在已經很少看到這種特殊的屬靈恩賜, 所以保羅也勉勵:
(林前14:12) 你們也是如此．既是切慕屬靈的恩賜、就當求多得造就教會的恩賜。
(林前14:13) 所以那說方言的、就當求著能繙出來。
至於大家一起跪下用靈言禱告, 那是造就自己的, 是個人向神讚美, 祈求, 述說各樣奧秘的, 不需要翻譯出來, 因是向神說的, 不是向人說的.
(林前14:39) 所以弟兄們、你們要切慕作先知講道、也不要禁止說方言。
[ 50 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/5 上午 05:07:00 )
真耶穌教會確實是真神親自設立的教會, 我們有很多愛主愛人愛真理的弟兄姐妹. 初期神的工人只是器皿, 我們沒有將他們聖化, 甚至也有些不甚合理正確的言行, 如改姓"耶", 也有跌倒的. 但這無損真教會傳揚得救真理, 教會還不是很完全, 但我們在真道上的規模, 卻無其他教會能及. 其他教會也有很多愛主愛人愛真理的弟兄姐妹, 也漸漸要在真道上合一, 但可惜目前在重要的得救真理上還仍被蒙蔽: 如: (弗1:13) 你們既聽見真理的道、就是那叫你們得救的福音、也信了基督、既然信他、就受了所應許的聖靈為印記． 這是保羅寫給以弗所教會的信徒, 請看當初在以弗所初傳教時: (徒19:1) 亞波羅在哥林多的時候、保羅經過了上邊一帶地方、就來到以弗所．在那裡遇見幾個門徒． (徒19:2) 問他們說、你們信的時候、受了聖靈沒有．他們回答說、沒有、也未曾聽見有聖靈賜下來。 (徒19:3) 保羅說、這樣、你們受的是甚麼洗呢。他們說、是約翰的洗。 (徒19:4) 保羅說、約翰所行的是悔改的洗、告訴百姓、當信那在他以後要來的、就是那穌。 (徒19:5) 他們聽見這話、就奉主耶穌的名受洗。 (徒19:6) 保羅按手在他們頭上、聖靈便降在他們身上．他們就說方言、又說豫言。〔或作又講道〕 (徒19:7) 一共約有十二個人。 (徒19:8) 保羅進會堂、放膽講道、一連三個月、辯論神國的事、勸化眾人。 許多外教會的傳道人說, '保羅說"你們既聽見真理的道、就是那叫你們得救的福音、也信了基督、既然信他、就受了所應許的聖靈為印記", 我們相信主耶穌, 就自動得到所應許的聖靈.' 真的是這樣麼? 那為何保羅問他們說、你們信的時候、受了聖靈沒有．他們回答說、沒有、也未曾聽見有聖靈賜下來。??? 以弗所的門徒是已經相信主耶穌, 但還沒有得到聖靈! 一直到他們奉主耶穌的名受了洗, 保羅為他們按手禱告, 才得到聖靈! 所以(弗1:13) 是對這些已經得到聖靈的以弗所信徒說的(也是對所有聽見真理的道、就是那叫我們得救的福音, 也信了基督、受了所應許的聖靈為印記的同靈說的) 不是任何人看到這節, 就可以說, 你看, 我信了主耶穌, 就已經自動得到所應許的聖靈. 何況不要忘了那節聖經的前半段, "你們既聽見真理的道、就是那叫你們得救的福音...", 大家聽到的是真理的道, 得救的福音? 如果不是, 如何有把握已經有聖靈內住? 可能連得救的資格都沒有, 信主一生卻無法得救, 豈不是太冤枉了? 還有如果信主自動得到聖靈, 為何主耶穌說你們要情詞迫切的直求聖靈? (路11:8) 我告訴你們、雖不因他是朋友起來給他、但因他情詞迫切的直求、就必起來照他所需用的給他。 (路11:9) 我又告訴你們、你們祈求就給你們．尋找就尋見．叩門就給你們開門。 (路11:10) 因為凡祈求的就得著、尋找的就尋見．叩門的就給他開門。 (路11:11) 你們中間作父親的、誰有兒子求餅、反給他石頭呢．求魚、反拿蛇當魚給他呢． (路11:12) 求雞蛋、反給他蠍子呢。 (路11:13) 你們雖然不好、尚且知道拿好東西給兒女。何況天父、豈不更將聖靈給求他的人麼。
[ 51 ] CVT ( 2003/5/5 上午 10:26:00 )
知者知于: 不是不是，你誤解了我的意思。 我是真耶穌教會的信徒所以別擔心。 我是說，John Lee說他曾經在一個有一千人，講各國不同語言的地方，他還是能夠找出自己的語言並傾聽。 我漏讀了使徒行傳二章十五節所以以為只有使徒十一人講靈言，所以跟John Lee說十一人在同時講方言不可能講出十四種語言，除非 神開聽眾的耳朵。 但是有一百二十人，所以這點說服不了John Lee，也因而我說，除了這段之外，解釋成別國的語言還是與聖經其他地方不符合。
[ 52 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/5 上午 11:14:00 )
To知者知于, Pisgah, CVT, and, 知者知于 wrote: 還有如果信主自動得到聖靈, 為何主耶穌說你們要情詞迫切的直求聖靈? (路11:8) 我告訴你們、雖不因他是朋友起來給他、但因他情詞迫切的直求、就必起來照他所需用的給他。 (路11:9) 我又告訴你們、你們祈求就給你們．尋找就尋見．叩門就給你們開門。 (路11:10) 因為凡祈求的就得著、尋找的就尋見．叩門的就給他開門。 (路11:11) 你們中間作父親的、誰有兒子求餅、反給他石頭呢．求魚、反拿蛇當魚給他呢． (路11:12) 求雞蛋、反給他蠍子呢。 (路11:13) 你們雖然不好、尚且知道拿好東西給兒女。何況天父、豈不更將聖靈給求他的人麼。 John's response: The Lord Jesus in this paragraph, once again, told the world that he would give salvation to all men who seek him (11:9, 11:10). These verses coincide with the conclusion of the Book of John. 20:31 [hb5] 但記這些事、要叫你們信耶穌是基督、是 神的兒子．並且叫你們信了他、就可以因他的名得生命。 [kjv] But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. The Lord Jesus never turns away (from 4 Gospel and his promises) any one seeks after him. As a matter of fact, he predestinated believers, and regenerates them in his own will. If you want to use these verses to support TJC’s pattern of seeking “speak in tongues” and then prove their salvation, then you can’t explain why 30% members in TJC can not get salvation (because no tongues, in your theory). (路11:13) 你們雖然不好、尚且知道拿好東西給兒女。何況天父、豈不更將聖靈給求他的人麼。 --à If you uses this verse, then you need to consider this verse is a guarantee that Jesus will give “something” to men who ask for “that thing”. Why 30% members in TJC can not get it? I was very sad when I saw all you folks spent so much time in twisting the “languages” in Acts (so apparent, even a second grader can understand) into “tongue-voice” to support TJC’s doctrine. Actually Paul Wei (without much education and theology background) adopted this doctrine from Apostolic Faith Mission, and all you guys in TJC just embrace it as truth and use it to build the “doctrine of salvation”. I believe your understanding of Acts 2 is wrong (I will summary it if I have time). Even if your understanding is not wrong, your use of these verses to build TJC’s doctrine of salvation is wrong. Because when you build “doctrine of salvation” you need to study more than 100 verses in the Old and New Testaments regarding salvation, and use primarily the words from the Lord Jesus and from Paul’s teaching and commands regarding this topic. Using some verses inappropriately to build a doctrine; or magnify, or shrink part of the truth in the Bible are common practices for cults. The reasons for two examples for the time lap between believing in Jesus and receiving Holy Spirit were because these believers either were pre-Pentecostal Christians in the transaction period of the downpour of Holy Spirit, or due to the necessity of Apostles’ validation for the right “belief” (for Samaritans and Ephesians; the early church’s foundation is Apostle’s teaching, due to New Testament has not finished that time yet). By the way, I want to emphasize again the first principle of Bible interpretation is to “read out” what it means, but not “read in “ what you think. The movement of the downpour of Holy Spirit in 4 “speaking in tongues” events in Acts (1. Jerusalem (chapter 2), Caesaera in Judaea (Chapter 10), Samaria (Chapter 8), and then Ephesus (Chapter 19) (consider uttermost part of the earth in NT time)) paralleled the movement of the spread of Gospel by believers who obeyed Jesus’ commands in Acts 1:8: Acts 1: 8 1:8 [hb5] 但聖靈降臨在你們身上、你們就必得著能力．並要在耶路撒冷、猶太全地、和撒瑪利亞、直到地極、作我的見證。 [kjv] But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses u
[ 53 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/5 下午 01:17:00 )
(路11:13) 你們雖然不好、尚且知道拿好東西給兒女。何況天父、豈不更將聖靈給求他的人麼。 這節聖經講得很清楚, 我們向天父祈求聖靈, 祂一定會賜給我們, 這是應許. 這明顯是聖經本意, 是”read out what it means”, 不是嗎? 雖然還有不少同靈沒有得到聖靈, 但請不要灰心, 主耶穌或者還要大家忍耐等候, 我們從來沒有看輕尚未得到聖靈的同靈, 或是外教會的朋友. 更不會宣判他們 “永遠的死”, 審判的權柄在主耶穌, 而且受了重生的洗, 應該已經進入得救的門檻, 不灰心的禱告是蒙主垂聽的. (路18:1) 耶穌設一個比喻、是要人常常禱告、不可灰心．(約3:5) 耶穌說、我實實在在的告訴你、人若不是從水和聖靈生的、就不能進神的國。 我們說, 應該要努力進天國, 要從水和聖靈重生, 這實實在在是遵行主的吩咐, 是勉勵, 是苦口婆心, 但若有人真的硬心到底, 自己不進去, 還要阻擋別人進去, 那也愛莫能助了. 實在是盼望大家都來接受這好得無比的福音. 請仔細思量, 如果你事實上還沒有得救, 但是有人對你說, 靠主的恩典, 你只要求告主名, 只要舉手決志, 就”已經”得救, 真是這麼簡單嗎? 你如果這麼相信, 萬一將來主耶穌說, 我從來不認識你, 就來不及了! 還是虛心的看看使徒行傳的得救記載, 比較保險, 不是嗎? (羅10:13) 因為『凡求告主名的、就必得救。』 (NKJV) For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." 求告主名必會得救是應許, 但不是求告主名, 就”馬上”得救. 彼得也說: (徒2:21) 到那時候、凡求告主名的、就必得救。』 但接下來呢: (徒2:37) 眾人聽見這話、覺得扎心、就對彼得和其餘的使徒說、弟兄們、我們當怎樣行。 (徒2:38) 彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈． (徒2:39) 因為這應許是給你們、和你們的兒女、並一切在遠方的人、就是主我們神所召來的。 如果求告主名就馬上得救, 彼得何必這麼麻煩, 還要說” 你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈．” 還有保羅所見証的自己如何得救: (徒22:16) 現在你為甚麼耽延呢、起來、求告他的名受洗、洗去你的罪。 求告主的名, 要奉主耶穌的聖名受浸, 洗掉了罪, 就必得救. 還要祈求聖靈的洗, 就是聖靈內住, 保惠師時刻更新我們的靈性, 若還沒得到聖靈, 只要不灰心, 常常禱告, 受道理的洗, 最終神是絕對不會離棄我們的. 當然走天國路, 還要時刻儆醒, 是否常守著至聖的誡命. (太7:21) 凡稱呼我主阿、主阿的人、不能都進天國．惟獨遵行我天父旨意的人、才能進去。(太19:17b)你若要進入永生、就當遵守誡命。 我們教會所傳的道理絕對不是” 錯誤的以經解經”, 而是絕對合乎真理的得救要道, 是聖靈教導的正確教訓. 正確的教義必能救我們進天國. 盼望能棄假歸真.
[ 54 ] CVT ( 2003/5/5 下午 02:08:00 )
Hrmph... it's very interesting how you keep on ignoring things that I have said. I emphasise for the third time, it's not tongue-voice, but the proper Greek word Glossa in ancient form means "TONGUE LANGUAGE" <--- please note that this is the language itself and we made no alteration. Find a dictionary of ancient Greek and look it up. We have not altered a single word. Again I emphasise that though Acts 2 may have different interpretation, since it is descriptive not definitive and therefore debatable, the truth matches under all circumstances, and Protestant churches cannot explain better elsewhere, ignoring some of the verses in their interpretation. If you could, then please explain Acts 2:33, 8:15-18, 10:44-47, 19:2-6, Romans 8:26, 1 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Corinthians 14:2,4,14,15; because I have not heard you explain these verses, but merely putting other verses and your own theory of vaguely revelant topic for an indirect reply to our explanation. You have not yet made an interpretation for these verses nor made a direct answer to the details of our explanation or your own explanation of these verses. I would appreciate if you also gave your explanation instead of just commenting us with verses indirectly relevant to the details we have mentioned. I'm sorry, but this is the only way you might convince us. "special historic events" I knew you would use this Protestant explanation. Sadly, this kind of explanation does not fit the Bible completely, a common mistake of having only 'partial picture' in nearly all Protestant churches. This event of speaking ini tnogue when receiving the Holy Spirit has been recorded 4 or more times in the book of Acts, not to mention letters of Paul. You might argue it's only when the apostles were still alive. But then: Isaiah 40:8 'The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God will stand for ever.' (RSV) Malachi 3:6 'For I the LORD do not change;' (RSV) If God's word is so enduring that it lasts forever, then why should there be a change now than when the apostles were alive? Besides, where in the Scripture did ever mention that this phenomenum of receiving the Holy Spirit time-limited? 'whoever believes in me shall have eternal life' Please note the word "believe" here. The word in Greek, pisteuo, has the following meanings: 1) to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in 1a) of the thing believed 1a1) to credit, have confidence 1b) in a moral or religious reference 1b1) used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul 1b2) to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith 2) to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity 2a) to be intrusted with a thing This word, which is usually translated as 'bleieve' in Greek, is often misused. Most Protestant churches say, 'If you believe in Jesus, you're saved/you will receive salvation.' 'Do you believe in Jesus? Yes? Then you will be savd!' It's often heard from Protestants. Is that right? Wrong. The word in Greek does not only mean 'believe', but also 'trust'. If I merely believe in Jesus but does not put my trust in Him so that I can rely on Him, my 'believe' is not according to the Scripture. There is a hidden meaning which Protestant churches so often misguide people. Also, from the spiritual perspective, the word 'believe' here covers all things. To believe in Jesus is to trust Him. How do we trust Him? We obey His will and not ours. If we were to obey His will, His Word in the Scripture must be obeyed, and this is why True Jesus Church believes in baptism and footwashing: Matthew
[ 55 ] CVT ( 2003/5/5 下午 02:13:00 )
Oh, add another point to the 5 points of grace from God: 6) having the chance to obey God and be a part with Him. These would basically cover all grounds... unless I left something out again.
[ 56 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/6 上午 10:29:00 )
To CVT, you wrote: 呵呵 漏讀了 應該是約一百二十人啊^_^; 那這樣子這段可以有不同說法，然而，說是「別國的語言」還是無法與聖經其他部分符合，不能只是在一點繞圈子（如以前Wai吵洗禮問題一樣，只看一部份根本搞個沒完沒了）。 John reply: try this: please replace tongues with 「別國的語言」, then you will see all the verses work together. Do you have a sister or brother who is a second graders? Ask them to read Acts 2, and ask whether they think "tongues" means "lanuguages"? or "tongue voice".
[ 57 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/6 上午 10:38:00 )
To CVT, I got reply from one in Westminster Seminary who knows Greek, this is his reply: Quick reply to Lee about Greek, A. Glossa in biblical Greek (NT times) could also mean language, i.e., regular linguistic system, according to Baur (or BDAG), 3rd, 2000, the standard scholar NT Greek lexicon. In Pentacost there could very well be more than 11 disciples, just check Scripture you'll see that. The text never says that the Holy Spirit only descended on THE Apostles, viz., the 11. Besides, even granted only the 11 were speaking, I can't see why they can't speak more than 11 languages. For example, I can speak Chinese and English, now including biblical Greek and Hebrew, just count on me you have 11 persons speaking 14 languages. :) B. Indeed Dora (Doron) and Charisma are different words, normally Doron is "gifts in general", which could mean either gift from God or gift to God; Charisma has more emphasis on "free gifts from above". But what's the point here? Can you give more Scriptural reference that they used in arguing?
[ 58 ] CVT ( 2003/5/6 下午 12:16:00 )
Yes, I do admit that I missed the verse that mentioned about having 120 people. However, I wouldn't trust those dictionaries as much as you do. I have seen those dictionaries, and those dictionaries tell you more than a normal language dictionary attempts to. It also explains words in the theological point of view, and therefore not a standard 'language' dictionary. The apostles did not have jargons such as 'grace', 'Holy Communion' etc. to write with. They wrote with plain language. It is always more secure to follow the 'language' dictionary when researching in Greek. However, the dictionary is largely excellent, and our church does have NT dictionaries on the shelf. The source of ancient Greek dictionary I use is from the web, and I do have to admit that it is a bit simple, but it does have basically the same meanings as the NT dictionary you mentioned. In ancient Greek it means a bit different. You can go have a look yourself (I just cutted and pasted its meaning, basically): http://www.kypros.org/cgi-bin/lexicon Once again, I emphasise on ANCIENT Greek. Not modern. You have to be precise to be correct. Languages change. (e.g. KJV's language 400 years ago: communication (KJV) = share (modern); take no thought (KJV) = be not anxious (modern); mean man (KJV) = common man (modern) etc.) >>try this: please replace tongues with 「別>>國的語言」, then you will see all the >>verses work together. Do you have a sister >>or brother who is a second graders? Ask >>them to read Acts 2, and ask whether they >>think "tongues" means "lanuguages"? >>or "tongue voice". Not 'tongue voice'. In ANCIENT Greek it's tongue LANGUAGE. Yes I do admit that both explanations fit nicely in Acts 2, because Acts 2 was descriptive and not definitive, therefore there can be more than a one way explanation when it's not written in enough detail. But again, I emphasise the Scripture elsewhere regarding speaking in tongues as wel, because you're restricting your view on only Acts 2, a common mistake other churches do. The Holy Scripture is made up of 66 books - and restricting yourself on only 1 part of one of the books is insufficient. An "all way" explanation must be done to convince someone's the the truth, because the true truth is in harmony everywhere in the 66 Holy Scriptures. Harmony with only parts of the Scripture is not the truth. This is why I always say 'the big picture', which is very important and you just can't ignore when you want to find the truth. I hope I can hear explanation from you with the verses I mentioned in my previous message that you have not yet explained in the view that you have learned from.
[ 59 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/7 上午 10:57:00 )
To CVT, These two articles are good on “glossa”. http://www.geocities.com/mcglover2000/glossa.html http://gospel-herald.com/noorbergen/glossolalia_book_1/g1_ch2_2.htm Acts 2:6 and 2:8 dialect =dialekto =languages Luke explained the “glossa” in Greek =language It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove “dialekto” is not “language”. I checked the engine you suggested. Yes, glossa = tongue language, but it does not rule out it’s in a linguistic system, like my friend suggested. I am busy now, I will answer your previous questions when I am free.
[ 60 ] CVT ( 2003/5/7 上午 11:59:00 )
Ok, let's just say glossa has multiple meanings, as an English word has, and both explanations are possible. Even with the explanation with just 'language' for glossa, our church can still explain with the big picture. But where the explanation is right, it sould fit in with the entire Holy Scripture, not just a focus on one or few points. I would appreciate that you can explain the verses I mentioned in the 2nd message prior to this one. You'll have to prove that your truth is of the entire Holy Scripture, not just locally like what you've been doing. From what I have seen, you have only been 'local' with the Scripture, but not putting the big picture together. If you can explain your theology with the entire picture and not just local, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
[ 61 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/7 下午 09:32:00 )
To CVT, I am sorry for my typo in the previous E-mail. The coprrect sentence is : It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove dialekto "is" language. "In a linguistic system" means if two persons in the same system, they can communicate with each other without a translator. While I am very busy with my full time job, I will answer your questions this weekend.
[ 62 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/8 上午 07:03:00 )
To CVT, Yoy wrote: This event of speaking ini tnogue when receiving the Holy Spirit has been recorded 4 or more times in the book of Acts, not to mention letters of Paul. You might argue it's only when the apostles were still alive. But then: Isaiah 40:8 'The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God will stand for ever.' (RSV) Malachi 3:6 'For I the LORD do not change;' (RSV) John reply: you are right about " the word of our God will stand for ever.' (RSV) " But " no tongues, no salvation" is TJC's words, not God's words. God' words is 'whoever believes in me shall have eternal life' God’s promise will not be changed; whoever believes in him shall have eternal life. The doctrine of "no tongues, no salvation" has been dropped from most of the Pentecostal churches which inherited the same doctrines with TJC from Apostolic Faith Mission. This doctrine could only survive in an isolated organization that discourages free discussion, and respects traditions and church harmony more than respects truth. Not all TJC leaders agree this wrong doctrine. I discussed with a senior leader in TJC years ago on this wrong doctrine, he refused to stand out to express his objection on this doctrine because of the pressure from tradition. His wife could not speak in tongues, but he could comfort her that tongues would not the sole evident to gain salvation. Don’t force me to spell out this person’s name, he is still very active in TJC. Do you think it’s “hypocrite” that simple-mined members suffered by this doctrine while senior leaders know the truth and can minimize the damage to their families. You wrote; If God's word is so enduring that it lasts forever, then why should there be a change now than when the apostles were alive? Besides, where in the Scripture did ever mention that this phenomenum of receiving the Holy Spirit time-limited? John reply; Where in the scripture indicates you can use this phenomenon of receiving the Holy Spirit to prove salvation?
[ 63 ] CVT ( 2003/5/8 下午 02:45:00 )
X_x; Well to conserve some energy for myself I'll just give you simple answers to what you have mentioned: Our Church doesn't make up things. We just follow quite strictly according to the entire Scripture, most strictly with doctrines of salvation. So we don't leave out what is mentioned. It's true that the Holy Scripture does mention that those who believe would be saved. But other things directly related salvation must not be left out either. Speaking in tongues is just a phenomenom of receiving the Holy Spirit, but what we mean by "speaking in tongue" is really receiving the Holy Spirit that we see as most important rather than just speaking in tongue. The spiritual world is full of mystery and unexplained things. There is just so much variety, sometimes speaking in tongues alone is insufficient. Discerning different spirits are also important. Anyway these verses are some of the verses why we say what we do; the following will also give you an answer to your second question (verses marked with * gives you the answer to your second question): (all quotes are from RSV) John 1:31 'I (John) came baptizing with water...' John 1:33 '...this is he (Jesus) who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.' *John 3:5 '...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he canot enter the kingdom of God.' *John 3:8 'The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know whence it comes out or whither it goes; so it is with every one who is born of the Spirit.' *Acts 1:5 'for John baptzed with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' *Acts 2:2 'And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a might wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting' *Acts 2:4 'And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.' Acts 2:13 'But others mocking said, "They are filled with new wine."' *Acts 2:33 '...the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you see and hear.' Acts 8:15-16 'who (Peter and John) came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.' *Acts 8:18 'Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given...' Acts 8:44 'While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. *Acts 8:46 'For they herad them speaking in tongues and extolling God.' *Acts 46-47 'Then Peter declared, 47 "Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy SPirit just as we have?"' Acts 19:2 'And he (Paul) said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"' *Acts 19:6 'And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.' *Romans 8:26 '...but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words.' *1 Corinthians 13:1 'If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels...' *1 Corinthians 14:2 'For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men bu tto God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.' 1 Corinthians 14:4 'He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself,...' *1 Corinthians 14:14 'For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.' 1 Corinthians 14:15 '...I will sing with the spirit...' *Ephesians 1:13-14 '13 ...were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 which is the guarantee of our inheritance ntil we acquire the possession of it...' *Ephesians 4:30 'And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.' *Titus 3:5-7 '5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, 6 which he poured out upon us rich
[ 64 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/10 上午 11:27:00 )
To CVT and others, 10:45 [hb5] 那些奉割禮和彼得同來的信徒、見聖靈的恩賜也澆在外邦人身上、就都希奇． [kjv] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 10:46 [hb5] 因聽見他們說方言、稱讚 神為大。 [kjv] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 10:47 [hb5] 於是彼得說、這些人既受了聖靈、與我們一樣、誰能禁止用水給他們施洗呢。 [kjv] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? For more than 20 years, I have argued with more than a dozen of TJC’s preachers and elders, but not till today I figured out an important key point in Acts 10: 45-46 while I meditated on these verses, and prayed God to give me wisdom to know what’s the real problem in TJC’s belief. This is my finding today: True Jesus Church is partially right that Peter heard about their “tongues” and used what he heard to judge the receiving of the Holy Spirit of gentiles, (although TJC is wrong on the “tongues” because it’s language here “ Praising God”, not voice of tongue). But for 86 years, TJC has been ignored the methodology Peter and belivers used in this verse: comparison. First, he had a reference point for comparison. In Acts 2, they had experienced “speaking in tongues”, and knew they received the promised Holy Spirit from God. Second, when they came to Caesarea and heard about the same “tongues” among Gentles when he was preaching, he compared the tongues in the two events to made the conclusion that “ God gave Holy Spirit to Gentiles”. So the main point about this verse is “comparison”, not the ability of “speaking in tongues”. Can we use this model to judge any one in receiving the Holy Spirit nowadays? Of course not, because we don’t have the first reference point any more. We don’t have the recording from 2000 years ago, and all apostles died. We don’t have a proven “tongues” from a “proven source- God”, how can we compare the “tongues” TJC members have with the true one, to certify that it’s the same as the true “tongues”. We just have nothing to compare. Although it’s disappointing that we could not use any visible signs like apostles did (note that New Testament had not completed that time) to have assurance of the receiving of the Holy Spirit, however, God wants us to trust in his promises, and use our heart to know that he abides in us. In addition, whenever our conscience warns us when we are in temptation, we know that Holy Spirit is working within us. In addition, the fruit we bear is also another result of our living according to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We can also use Bible reading, and prayers as means to know more about him and experience his love. 圣灵和信心 《海德堡要理问答》教导我们：只有那些借真信心而连接于基督，并接受他所有恩惠的人，才能得救。这里所提到的有两件事：一是圣灵的工作，他将罪人连接于基督。这联合非常密切，好像他与他们连为一体，这样两者就能分担分享一切：他分担他们的罪孽（为此他承受罪的刑罚）；他们分享他的公义（这是他用圣洁的生活得来的）。圣灵在人心中作信心之工，使他们相信基督已为他们取得了他们所需要的一切。 他们自己也有分内的工作：靠信心接受他所有的恩惠--就是他通过受苦受死为他们获得的一切--作为他们的财富。基督为他们承担了罪，他们接受他的公义和进入永生的权利，这是何等有福的交换哪！
[ 65 ] Pisgah ( 2003/5/11 上午 01:50:00 )
謝謝John 的回覆 我有一個簡單的問題想要請教 撇開TJC 不談 , In certain degree 你是不是相信, 當時的使徒是藉由 speak in tongue 來斷定有無得到聖靈的依據 ?
[ 66 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/11 上午 04:16:00 )
To Pisgah, Yes and no. Yes, in the whole Bible, only Acts 10:46, Peter used “speaking in tongues” to judge whether or not the gentiles received Holy Spirit with a precondition. The precondition was he could make this judgment because the similar “tongues” God used as a tool to testify Himself just happened in Jerusalem not long ago. God used “Tongues” as a tool to testify that He was God and Poured down Holy Spirit to believers like he promised in these three events only (Acts 2 and Acts 8, and Acts 19). Why God used “tongues” in the early church? One possible reason was three cases all involved with foreigners. When foreigners heard about Apostles used their native languages to praise the Lord, they knew right away that the miracle and sign was from God, because the uneducated Galileans could not speak foreign languages at all (Acts 2:7-8). God could use “tongues” as a tool, God could also use other signs or miracles to testify Himself, such as prophesies in Acts (19:6), or one of the following: visions, dreams, blood, fires, and smoke (Acts 2:17-19). Let’s use a practical example to illustrate this point. One man bought a Toyota Tercel in 1990, and his brother bought a same model of Toyota in 1992, he could know right away that his brother’s car was made by Toyota because it looked the same. But Toyota did not make Tercel any more after 1994. Toyota now is selling Prius (hybrid car) in 2003. If the man says that Prius is not a product made by Toyota because it’s not Tercel, then he is wrong. Because Toyata has it’s own plan in what model they want to build and what models they want to discontinue. Do you think God can only use tongues as a sign to prove a man’s receiving of the promised Holy Spirit. Of course not! God can use any thing he wants in his own will. The “no tongues, no salvation” theory was invented by Apostolic Faith Mission around 1901. This theory has not worked in True Jesus Church either, because 30 % of the members do not receive “Holy Spirit”, this contradicts what Jesus’ promised: 2:38 [hb5] 彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈． Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 2:39 因為這應許是給你們、和你們的兒女、並一切在遠方的人、就是主我們 神所召來的。 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call. This theory also contradicts the main theme of Bible that “whosoever believes in Jesus, shall have eternal life”. After Acts 20, “speaking in tongues” was not mentioned any more in Acts, it suggested that it was only used in early church for the Gospel to spread to Gentiles which was Jesus’ command that most Jews would never do according to their tradition. If you want to argue and use 1 Corinthian’s 12, 13 to emphasize the importance of Tongues, then you will just poke a bigger hole on the theory. 12:30 [hb5] 豈都是得恩賜醫病的麼．豈都是說方言的麼．豈都是翻方言的麼。 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? 13:8 [hb5] 愛是永不止息．先知講道之能、終必歸於無有．說方言之能、終必停止、知識也終必歸於無有。 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. Please be honest to me, do you agree with me on this point? I am sincerely trying to figure out what’s wrong with the “no tongues, no salvation theory” which has made so many members in TJC suffered so long, including many of my families. If you disagree, then please answer why Jesus' promise was not fullfilled in TJC? Also please tell me which churches' tongues are real, given thousands of Pentecostal churches claim t
[ 67 ] CVT ( 2003/5/11 下午 08:38:00 )
Can I ask you a question... When you said you were in a crowd of about 1000 people of different languages, where were you? were you in the crowd?
[ 68 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/12 上午 11:20:00 )
To CVT, Yes, I am in the crowd, and I am also stood in a distance with some people. Why not just do an experiment your self, and you will know what I am saying is true. You have not answered my question: Acts 2:6 and 2:8 dialect =dialekto =languages Luke explained the “glossa” in Greek =language It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove “dialekto” is not “language”. My final conclusion for the long discussion on my post “True Jesus Church is not a protestant church”: Some cult member just posted something on the E-board. It looks like “Eastern Thunderstorm”, you can tell it by studing the content of it. It tried to say something about “female Christ “. The cult proclaimed the re-appeared Christ is a female in China now. When you folks start to educate members how to tell a cult, you will more and more find out they all violated three principles: “only Scripture, only grace, only faith”. And you folks will understand what I am trying to do here is just wishing TJC can re-evaluate the mistakes the early founders made: “claimed TJC was the only true church in the East (like Eastern thunderstorm claim themselves), made “tongues” the sole assurance of salvation, and the concept of obeying all sacraments to get saved”. These all violated the three principles. I am a reformed Presbyterian. I just want to make my effort to get some feedback and attention from some “open minded” TJC members, and hopefully someone in TJC can suggest the theology education board of TJC to hold some conferences to invite internal and external Bible scholars to discuss some critical doctrines in the near future. To be a church member in TJC is not easy. Traditional Christian churches do not accept members of TJC, while TJC members also refrain to join other churches. The side effect of this is very obvious in the U.S., and Europe where many TJC members get loss because no TJC churches around. Also, most TJC members do not have ability to discern different Christian denominations. It’s a big difference between a reformed church and Methodist church, or Pentecostal church, for an example. TJC needs to let members aware of some denominations in protestant churches are very faithful to Bible, such as reformed churches and some evangelical churches. The isolation of TJC church in early 20th century successfully prevented the “liberal theology” crept into the church, but it had made real Christians in TJC lost the sense of belonging in the universal church. As a matter of fact, the real re-born Christians (repented, and accepted Jesus Christ as savior and Lord) in TJC are brothers and sisters of all believers in the history, like Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Newton (author of amazing grace), and modern Christians like Billy Grams, and millions of underground church members in China; because they all share the same faith to Jesus Christ. They are not alone, and they can embrace them when they sing either “amazing grace” or “Holy, Holy, Holy”. May be someone will disagree what I am saying here, because TJC does not accept Trinity of God, but I do believer even so, some TJC members are still true believers, and are predestinated by God ages ago.
[ 69 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/12 下午 03:52:00 )
John Lee 屢次說"It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove “dialekto” is not “language” 真耶穌教會的人很難否認"dialekto"不是"language". 希臘文的"dialekto" 就是"鄉談", "地方話", 是語言. 我們不需要否認, "dialekto" 不是"鄉談", "地方話", 我們也沒有否認. 但是(徒2:4)所用的"glossa" (other tongues, unknown tongues) 也出現在: (林前14:2) 那說方言的、原不是對人說、乃是對神說．因為沒有人聽出來．然而他在心靈裡、卻是講說各樣的奧秘。 這邊的"glossa"方言(靈言), 是"沒有人聽出來", 絕對不是這世界的語言, 而是屬靈的, 天國的語言. (徒2:6,8)的"dialekto"真的是這世上的語言, 但這是虔誠的人才聽得出來的, 不虔誠的譏誚他們喝醉酒, 因聽不懂, 不知在說些什麼, 不是聽不懂外國話! 如果像 John Lee 所說, 身處千人的聚會場所, 可以清楚聽出自己的鄉談, 那為何門徒們所"講說神的大作為", 剛好是不虔誠的人聽不懂的外國話? 這麼巧, 所有不虔誠的人都是這十多種語言之外的地方來的人? 他們又是什麼地方的人? 所以 "glossa" 不是這世上的語言, 而是不虔誠的人聽不懂的"other tongues" (其他的語言-就是靈言)或 "unknown tongues", 虔誠的人, 神讓他們那時有翻方言的恩賜, 可以聽得懂! 聽成 "dialekto" 自己的鄉談. John Lee 所說三原則: "only Scripture, only grace, only faith", 關於第一點, 我們一切都以聖經為依歸, 沒問題; 關於恩典及信心, 我們是用聖經指示的實際得救步驟去實質的領受神的大恩典, 我們順命的行為恰恰表現我們的信心不是虛空的信心, 不是口頭心裡的信心, 不只是因信稱義, 也因行為稱義. (雅2:21) 我們的祖宗亞伯拉罕、把他兒子以撒獻在壇上、豈不是因行為稱義麼。 (雅2:22) 可見信心是與他的行為並行、而且信心因著行為才得成全． 另外有關 "claimed TJC was the only true church in the East (like Eastern thunderstorm claim themselves), made “tongues” the sole assurance of salvation, and the concept of obeying all sacraments to get saved” 真耶穌教會是真神在東方親自設立的, 這是我們不能否認的歷史事實. 真的會自稱為真, 假的也會自稱為真, 但禁不起聖經的考驗(如東方閃電邪教). 不敢自稱為真的就一定是假的, 不是嗎? 是否唯一? 到目前為止, 有大部份教義相同的, 但完全一致的還沒有吧? 但等到大家都了解聖經真道, 合一也不難. 關於"說靈言"是得救唯一保証. 得救要如: (徒2:38) 彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈． (徒2:39) 因為這應許是給你們、和你們的兒女、並一切在遠方的人、就是主我們神所召來的。 但還沒有得到聖靈的同靈, 不要灰心, 繼續禱告, 神必定賜下聖靈, 這是應許! 千萬不要放棄, 這並不是很難受的痛苦吧! 又如主耶穌所說: (約3:5) 耶穌說、我實實在在的告訴你、人若不是從水和聖靈生的、就不能進神的國。 "遵守所有聖禮才能得救", 都是主所吩咐, 又叫我們遵行, 又與得救與主有份有關, 要得救, 怎能不聽主的話呢? 怎能缺一個聖禮呢?
[ 70 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/13 上午 01:41:00 )
關於: "遵守所有聖禮才能得救", 都是主所吩咐, 又叫我們遵行, 又與得救與主有份有關, 更正如下: "遵守所有聖禮才能得救", 都是主親自示範施行設立, 又吩咐我們遵行, 如:大水浸禮(入約但河), 洗腳(約13), 聖餐(太26), 又與得救與主有份有關,
[ 71 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/13 上午 04:30:00 )
John 所說: It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove “dialekto” is not “language”. 被搞迷糊了! "dialekto" 本來就是 "language" 家鄉話. 我們很難去 反駁, 反証, 否認, "dialekto" 不是 "language?" 就是我們很難去主張 "dialekto" 是 "language?" ...??? 不知前面在寫什麼了. 需要休息! 抱歉了!
[ 72 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/13 上午 06:18:00 )
to 知者知于 you wrote: 12.235.67.133 John 所說: It’s a difficult task for you folks in TJC to disprove “dialekto” is not “language”. 被搞迷糊了! "dialekto" 本來就是 "language" 家鄉話. 我們很難去 反駁, 反証, 否認, "dialekto" 不是 "language?" 就是我們很難去主張 "dialekto" 是 "language?" John reply, I am sorry, I confused myself and you again. I meant it's difficult for you folks to disapprove that "dialekto" is "language". So, just like you just said, you agreed that it's language, so it's differnet from True Jesus church's "tongue voice". Becuse True Jesus's "tongue voice" is not any kind of language, it lacks of basic elements of a language.
[ 73 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/13 上午 08:00:00 )
to 知者知于 I am kind of tired to discuss with you any more, because you did not get the point, even I spent days trying my best to explain the first principle of Bible interpretation: put your presupposition away for a way, and study the whole chapter of Acts 2, and then ask yourself an important question. Is it possible that this event happened just like it described in the whole chapter: God enabled apostles spoke in some languages, and Jews from more than 14 places heard their own languages? This would be a more accurate interpretation than using lot of imagination to twist the verses to support TJC’s doctrine. Another message I want to covey here is: if you want to use several verses to build the most important doctrine –doctrine of salvation, you need to be very careful, because you may make a big mistake, since hundred of verses in OT and NT support what Jesus said “ whoever believes in me, shall not be perished, but has eternal life”. Yes, you are encouraging members who can not “speaking in tongues” to keep seeking for “tongues”, but it’s not necessary if they are already saved by their faith. You just take away their peace and put a heavy burden on them. They cannot enjoy reading New Testament either, because all letters Paul wrote to different churches were for believers with Holy Spirit. In reality, many True Jesus Church members died without speaking in tongues; including one of my close family member died 6 years ago. So you need to examine all doctrines what you believe one by one. You may just inherited few wrong doctrines from some uneducated founders, like Paul Wei who might just adopted some doctrines from Apostolic Faith Mission to emphasize his experience in “speaking in tongues” and made it so attractive to people in the early 20th century in China. You should be able to understand what I posted on the Internet. Most of my opinions were not copied from other web sites except some articles I used to illustrate my point. My opinions were all through careful Bible study and thinking. But I know you just don’t want to agree, because you have strong conviction on True Jesus church’s doctrines. You are a faithful members of TJC, but you are not an open-minded believer, willing to have open discussion with some other Christians from other denominations who sincerely gave you some suggestions according to careful Bible interpretation and from doctrines of faithful Christian built and tested under fire for more than 500 years (I am using reformed theology as an example). Also, I have observed more than 20 years of TJC and have been lived with TJC members for more than 20 years under the same roof. These warning to you folks are really from bottom of my heart. Another side effect of pressing “no tongues, no assurance of salvation” have made some unsaved members ignored the true repentance of his/her sin (first step), and hence their “assurance” are false. Even they keep all the sacraments in addition to speaking in tongues, and have good works, they will not be saved and have eternal life. A close family member of mine who got “tongues” from TJC, and stayed in the church for more than five years, he turned away from TJC several years ago, and now he is a very passionate Buddhist.
[ 74 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/13 上午 09:52:00 )
To John Lee, 您寫: I meant it's difficult for you folks to disapprove that "dialekto" is "language". 這就清楚了! 沒錯, "dialekto" (家鄉話)是語言的一種, 與我們教會同靈/使徒時代同靈 所說的 "glossa" (靈言)是不同的! 但是您以下講的: "tongue voice" is not any kind of language, it lacks of basic elements of a language. 個人並不同意! 靈言既然也是我們口中所發出的, 大多為舌頭捲動的聲音, 雖說世上的人都聽不懂, 但靈言還是一種語言, 一種特殊的, 其他的, 聽不懂的語言(other tongues, unknown tongues), 可以說是屬天國的語言. 經過再仔細研讀 (徒2:4) 他們就都被聖靈充滿、按著聖靈所賜的口才、說起別國的話來。 "...began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave to them to speak." 這邊中文翻譯的"別國的話"應該翻譯為"其他的語言"(other tongues). 希臘文tongues(舌頭)這個字是"glossa", 跟 (徒2:3) 又有舌頭如火焰顯現出來、分開落在他們各人頭上。 以上這經文的"舌頭"是同一個字 "glossa". 所以您討論的(徒2:6,8)的"dialekto"鄉談, 家鄉話, 跟 "glossa" 是完全不同的字, 相信這是您同意的. 您又說"glossa"-"tongue voice" 不是語言, 所以"glossa"與"dialekto"涵意也完全不同! (林前14:2) 那說方言的、原不是對人說、乃是對神說．因為沒有人聽出來．然而他在心靈裡、卻是講說各樣的奧秘。 這邊的"glossa"方言(靈言), 是"沒有人聽出來", 絕對不是這世界的語言, 而是屬靈的, 天國的語言. 所以五旬節時門徒得到聖靈, 先講出來的是"glossa"(靈言) (tongues)(徒2:4), 然後在(徒2:6,8)那些虔誠的猶太人聽到的是"dislekto"家鄉話, 這應該也是很清楚的, 您同意嗎? 您說, 門徒得到聖靈, 先講出來的是"glossa"(靈言) (tongues)(徒2:4), 這是世界上的語言? 在前面所貼的也問過, 如果真是講世上的語言, 為何有不虔誠的人聽不懂, 還譏誚他們喝醉酒! 這一點, 您沒有答案? 針對原文來說, "glossa" 與 "dialekto" 都是世上的語言? 這一點與您前文說的矛盾, 而且砥觸(林前14:2)所說的"...乃是對神說．因為沒有人聽出來..", 您又如何解釋? 所以唯一合理的答案就是: "glossa" 不是這世上的語言, 而是不虔誠的人聽不懂的"other tongues" (其他的語言-就是靈言)或 "unknown tongues", 虔誠的人, 神讓他們那時有翻方言的恩賜, 可以聽得懂! 聽成 "dialekto" 自己的鄉談. 這並不是猜測想像(imagination)或扭曲(twist), 而是最合理最合乎聖經的推論. 我們並不是故意要這樣解經來符合真耶穌教會的教義. 而是聖經的本意, 原文的查考, 就是這個答案! 對於真耶穌教會所傳揚的得救真道, 個人花了很多時間, 一條一條仔細的查考, 還對照原文, 沒錯! 我們所傳的得救要道真是完全符合聖經. 關於"信主就有永生", "因信得救", 我們是同意的, 但是這都只是應許, 還需要順從聖經很多其他經文的指示, 全備的實質的用一些步驟來成全神的應許. 例如: 您只相信主, 但不接受洗禮, 可以有永生嗎? 您信主, 也受了正確的洗禮, 但拒絕接受僕人奉主耶穌聖名的洗腳, 您會與主有份嗎? 您接受了所有聖禮, 但卻犯姦淫, 您可以得救嗎? 個人也是誠心的從心裡呼籲, 您走錯了! 可惜您的家人也走錯了! 我們勉勵還沒有得到聖靈的弟兄姐妹, 不要灰心, 繼續禱告, 不需要有任何壓力, 只要長久在主耶穌基督的愛中, 神一定將聖靈賜給您的, 因為這是祂的應許. 當您看到已受洗的家人離世之前都還沒有得到聖靈, 您怎能知道, 在他離世那一剎那, 神沒有賜聖靈給他, 因為我們深信, 神必定不會忘記祂自己的應許! 還有一個關鍵在於: 雖然神應許, 但應許都是有條件的, 您是否滿足了神所要求的條件? 您是否如整本聖經所說的, 盡心盡性盡意盡力愛主你的神, 又愛人如己?
[ 75 ] Pisgah ( 2003/5/13 下午 05:44:00 )
To: John Lee 關於TJC的聖靈,我想有幾點須要澄清: 1.我們認為說方言是得聖靈的依據,而聖靈是進天國是的憑據,但這不等同於John 所說的 “no tongues, no salvation”. TJC也有信徒得到聖靈又失去的例子, 至於沒有得到聖靈,以及那些從來不曾聽過福音的人,他們得救與否? 是神的判斷, 我們只是力求遵照聖經而已! 這樣的立場,我們從沒有改變! 2. 我們相信得救的道路只有一條,正如同洪水時代,得救的方舟只有一個; 但我們也同時相信, 在主再臨之前, 所有得救的人, 必要「成一群、歸一牧」, 這是耶穌所應許的. 3.TJC 是個很低調而保守的教會, 我們不出風頭, 不譁眾取寵, 不搞個人崇拜, 八十幾年來, 同樣的教義, 同樣的熱誠,傳道人開拓福音之處, 有同樣的見證, 與同樣的聖靈; 中國大陸以外, 信徒超過十萬, 中國內地的信徒,估計有百萬. 在 70%的信徒都有聖靈的情況下, 那麼有七十萬的信徒是用靈言禱告的;但我們從不會自稱這是靈恩運動, 我們跟那些教會也沒有關係, TJC從來不是一個狂熱的教會. 在近代基督教史,你大概找不到有這麼多人、這麼久的時間 (80年)、在這麼大的範圍 (五大洲)、維持這麼一致的教義, 卻又明顯地沒有一個中央控制的組織, 行事卻又這麼低調的教會, 我相信TJC 的情況, 並不在你的經驗和知識範疇之內. 在30% 尚未得到聖靈當中, 有很多是初信者和慕道者, 也有很多是十三歲以下的兒童, 這樣說來,只要不斷有新的慕道者和新生兒,得聖靈的比例就不會是百分之百, 但我們相信只要持之以恆,必然能得到所應許的聖靈, 因為絕大多數的人, 都是最好的見證. 我相信你所親近的人,如果在去世之前得到聖靈, 或者就像本會有些人一樣, 在離世之前看見異象, 那麼今天的你, 對TJC 的觀感, 就會完全不同;但是,並不是由教會來決定一個人能不能得到聖靈 ? 神有神的憐憫, 神有神的時候, 如果你相信你所信奉的真理, 是可以讓你得救的真理, 那麼我相信,在你眼中,你的親人也已經得救了, 不是嗎 ? 這樣,你的sadness 豈不變得多餘 ?
[ 76 ] Pisgah ( 2003/5/13 下午 05:52:00 )
針對John 的貼文,我個人有如下的看法: 1 我覺得John 花很大的力氣,試圖證明TJC 的靈言禱告不是使徒時代使徒所用的方言禱告, 原因是使徒有第一手的example, 用來判斷撒瑪利亞人所得到的是不是聖靈 ? 但TJC卻沒有,所以, 他認為兩者不同；但同一時間他又要證明使徒行傳第二章所說的只是一種地方上的方言,是一種language, 不是TJC所謂的”靈言禱告”. 當我們把這兩者合在一起看,就看出了矛盾之處. 如果二章說的是一種地方性方言,那麼所謂「比較撒瑪利亞人的 speak in tongue」 就不成立; 反之, 如果彼得是藉著比較撒瑪利亞人的speak in tongue 來作為得聖靈與否的判斷標準, 那麼第二章當他們只是說出各地方言的例子, 算不算得聖靈 ? 這樣的矛盾將會繼續擴大,因為只針對一段經文,提出一種特殊解釋, 永遠會有見樹不見林的危險性. 舉例來說, 一般教會認為「相信耶穌 」就能得到聖靈, 那麼在二章44節, 有三千人因相信而受洗, 請問那三千人有沒有得聖靈 ? 又該如何判定他們有沒有得聖靈 ? 是依照當時他們有沒有說出 ” dialekto” ? 還是依照他們的 Glossa 是不是跟使徒相同 ? (有三千人之多哪!) 還是你確信那三千人, 必然同時得到聖靈 (雖然沒有 Glossa也沒有 dialekto ) , 若是如此, 為什麼路加醫生記載了12人得聖靈的故事(使19:7),卻刻意略去了三千人得聖靈的大事 ? 然後到了十九章,保羅問以弗所教會的信徒有沒有聖靈? 他們回答說沒有, 等到保羅按手之後, 聖靈就降在他們身上, 所以保羅就知道他們受了聖靈, 請問這些信徒在得到聖靈的前後, 到底有何不同 ? 是 dialekto還是 glossa ? 還是兩者皆非? 我提出這些問題,並不是要鑽牛角尖,也無意要讓大家confuse, 而是在凸顯一個問題: 如果我們的答案不能在聖經的每個章節取得和諧, 那麼矛盾絕對不會只發生在一處而已, 其結果就是愈看矛盾愈多! 2. John 的說明, 看起來像是對若干經節提出了解釋, 但我們也看得出來是有些避重就輕, 那些問題被避開了呢 ? a.為什麼不虔誠的人,會把使徒當成喝醉了 ? 就算聽不懂,也不至於把使徒的禱告當成喝醉了,是吧? 所以聽懂與聽不懂, 到底以什麼來區分 ? 關於醉酒的描述,意義何在 ? b.得聖靈與否, 到底能不能判斷出來 ? 按照使徒行傳的記載, 顯然是有辦法判斷, 請問判斷的標準是什麼 ? 當時的標準, 難道不適用於現在嗎 ? c.另外, 我想問John, 美國基督教界曾經發生許多牧師醜聞,他們貪婪而淫亂, 請問在他們犯罪之前,也因為相信耶穌而得到應許的聖靈 (他們曾經如此的虔誠 ) 那麼他們犯罪之後呢 ? 包括他們犯罪的當時,聖靈是不是仍然與他們同在 ? 你是不是也相信李常受後來的工作, 仍然是聖靈的作為 ? 簡言之, 即便有些行為是足以下地獄的, 你仍然相信一旦有了聖靈, 祂就永遠不離開嗎 ? 如果相信的時候,就得到聖靈,那麼起先相信,後來不信的人,怎麼辦 ? TJC有些見證是,有人起先相信,且得到聖靈,後來離開教會去拜偶像,聖靈也離開了他, 這對於主張”相信耶穌, 就必領受聖靈”的人,是不是很不可思議呢 ?
[ 77 ] CVT ( 2003/5/13 下午 09:51:00 )
John: I'll just make this without biblical support to save time. As for the member of your family that has become a Buddhist, it's his choice. Whoever does not belong to the herd will not stay in the herd. This is Christ's answer. There are seeds that grow without deep roots and die away without endurance. There are always people like that in a community. Whether your church, TJC, Pentecostal church, Catholic or whatever. Even organisations like Taiwanese Business Association etc. will have suh problems. We say baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit are essential as Holy Communion and foot-washing are, because faith is dead without work. Once you have the faith you should have the work. Work makes faith alive, just as the spirit make one alive. Open-mindedness... depends on how you look at it. As I have already told you, I am one of the believers that look out as well. I look out to see what's happening outside. It really depends on the believers whether they want to gain some knowledge about other churches. TJC only requires that your faith is not altered from the Truth. As long as that requirement is met, you can even study Buddhism or whatever. No one is restricted. Of course, with so many denominations, many want to unite all into one. Before I came to TJC I wanted that as well. But now, I realised something I never did before. This should be the work of God not men. We need not forcedly make this work. This is something that depends on God alone. Besides, uniting all the denominations and even including TJC into one is nearly impossible. That's what Orthodox churches are trying to do. If this should be done, each must change its doctrines in order to mix with others. This becomes a worldly event, not godly. If we allow this, it's just like accepting worshipping of angels in the Catholic church. Open-mindedness is what today's world emphasise, but it doesn't apply to all. It's because of open-mindedness that sexual relationship is so common before marriage, that divorce is so frequent, that violence became worse, that occult is accepted, that worshipping of evil spirits is not banned, that anti-christ books are published, that blasphemy is not punished under human law like the past, etc. Open-mindedness can be very dangerous. Unity of all Christian churches unavoidably means open-mindedness, changing of doctrines, etc. If the word of God is to be changed, then we don't need the Bible anymore. Unity is impossible by the way you said. Unity is impossible by men. If God were to call all His people to one church, it's God's work. This work you mentioned is of the world, and will never work without violating the Word of God. TJC is VERY conservative. It's very quiet, too. It's attacked by so many, yet it remains silent. Although I didn't sound friendly, I constrain my voice in our website, that only who comes will hear. I do not acitvely go to your church's website (if your church has one) and attack your church. We're very passive on this, because we're highly conservative.
[ 78 ] CVT ( 2003/5/13 下午 10:06:00 )
John: As you can already see, TJC is very strict on following the Bible. The entire Bible and not just local. Even Pisgah is emphasising on the big picture like what I have been emphasising on from the beginning. It's the entire Scripture, not parts of the Scripture, that brings you to the truth. Again I define what the truth is: The truth is one that coincides with the Holy Scripture completely as a whole, not just locally in parts of the Scripture. Should there be any contradictory points anywhere in the Holy Scripture at all, it's not the truth. Yes, the truth IS this strict, and apart from this definition nothing is the Truth of God. I emphasised to you to see the big picture from the beginning because I basically knew what you would begin to do from your argue points. As I have already said, I have been out there, and even now I am in here, I peek out. I am not isolated like you said. So I basically knew what would happen to your argument. That's why I emphasised on the big picture to you, and not just local. I emphasise for the Nth time that you should always view the big picture, not partial picture. This is the only way you can get to know the Truth of God unless God shows your revelation like Paul Wei of our church. Apart from these there is no way you can ever know the Truth of God.
[ 79 ] CVT ( 2003/5/14 上午 08:57:00 )
Oops. Of course, we can preach to you the truth, because we were given the truth. But the Bible is the solid one, and we always emphasise on the Bible.
[ 80 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/15 上午 11:30:00 )
To CVT, Now I think it’s time to tell you one of the most important concepts of Bible Interpretation, since you boasted so many times of your “big picture” approach of the Bible interpretation. The following concept I learned in a seminary class I took from one of the best professors in systematic . Bible is not too difficult to understand, but Bible is also complex. If a common Christian takes time to read Bible from beginning to the end with a humble altitude, the structure of the Bible (純正話語的規模) will gradually “float out” to him/her. Within this structure, one can see the doctrine of God, the doctrine of salvation, the doctrine of Christ, the doctrine of Holy Spirit, the doctrine of sanctification. Each doctrine is correlated with each other. All doctrines fit properly and work together in a big structure. Although an untrained Christian may find some contradictory doctrines, but it’s possible to put all pieces of doctrines together after research, discussion, and the observation of the practice of these doctrines in Churches through the ages (because we believed God had his guidance among his people.) One man should be very careful in building any doctrine by using proper verses, and prevent the doctrine he/her build to contradict with other doctrines or can not fit in a proper place in the whole structure. Most cults have been using improper verses, or magnify or shrink partial truth to surpass some clear doctrines. Now I want to point out the “big picture” approach TJC and you has been using is not a proper methodology. TJC used some verses in one historic book (Acts) to build one of the most important doctrines –doctrine of salvation could never be allowed in orthodox Church. TJC used some immature conclusions they derived from few verses to surpass what Jesus’ promises on salvation is deadly wrong. To magnify “no tongues->no holy spirit->no salvation” will dilute and deny the precious promise of the Lord Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and God’s promise through prophets, Jesus Christ, and apostles. The “big picture” approach of TJC is actually a “cock-tail” approach or “ laundry list” approach that is improper to interpret Bible as a whole. Although I believe there are some God’s chosen people in TJC, I will never associate or endorse an organization that denies Jesus Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient enough for a man to be saved through his/her faith alone.
[ 81 ] CVT ( 2003/5/15 下午 02:07:00 )
I am unsatisfied with what the professor says. It's too vague. I am a science student, and even though some parts of my studies can be vague, because the nature can never be studied in whole, I like definitive answers more, with clear support and clear definition. First of all, the Bible is not chronically sequenced with the compilation that we have now. Of course, reading it from the beginning to the end will bring you a pretty big picture, but vague (a deacon said he did not see the plan of salvation until he finished reading the entire Bible 2 times). But when you study the Bible in detail, the verses jump. For example, with the book of Isaiah - the verses jump around. One verse it's talking about destruction of a nation, and the next verse would be prophecy of the coming of Christ, and some verses that cut in would be rebuking Satan. It's not chronically based, nor is it topically organised. You really have to dig your head in to get the details. A big, but vague picture wouldn't satisfy me, either. What i meant the big picture was a big and clear picture. If you want to support your theology, you'll have to give examples, or else I'll be unsatisfied. Evidence of support is what science is all about, and only this will make me ponder whether to take the word or not. Even with what you have already said, you continually fail to answer the verses we bring up. If you could, I would like you to use your systematic theology to debate that the verses I have pointed out have no relation to the Holy Spirit nor relation to each other. If you fail to do so, I can only say I am unsatisfied. The theology of Trinity is one with a huge hole. I have already pointed it out in one of your other topics that you have posted. I shattered the theology of Trinity with one verse, and did not misuse the verse. If there were any misusage, point it out to me and prove to me WITH biblical evidence of support, or else I'll be unsatisfied, and I'll regard that as useless comment. Wai failed to do it and keep on saying, without evidence of support nor biblical source, that One God theology is wrong. It's easy to say this is a cult or that is a cult, but proving it's a cult is a different thing. You'll have to shatter our theology with biblical support, or else your debate with us would be in vain, and none of us would be satisfied with your articles. Wai has lost the debate over Trinity and One God. He never debated the points we mentioned and always says his own verses, sometimes repeatedly. He could never disprove it either. Nor could he shatter our theology. Instead, he never won a debate since he came last year. He never appeared to lose clearly, either, because he avoided answering the things we pointed out. You're basically doing the same thing now. You keep on failing to debate with the points I mentioned, yet we keep on debating the details of points you mentioned. You appear to be dodging the questions like Wai, and I am unsatisfied with your argument. That is why I keep on asking you to answer me the points I mentioned. So, to bring forth a satisfactory article against my points, you'll have to meet up with the requirements above. It's not me who is picky, but it's what people in general would ask for. I'm especially strict on this, however, because debate without evidence of support, or even proof, is useless in science, and I am more used to the scientific way. It's also useless for you to try and bring a satisfying article by quoting what others have said. It just doesn't work in TJC. Without sufficient BIBLICAL support, we TJCers regard it theologically useless, and can only be added to the cart of philosophy or hypothesis that can be pondered over on, but never taken as the truth.
[ 82 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/15 下午 02:10:00 )
現在終於了解, 為何 CVT 會失去耐心, John Lee 講了半天, 原來他的純正話語的規模, 他的"BIG picture of the Bible"(聖經的宏觀), 他從最有名氣的神學院教授學到的正確的解經術, 就得到這個結論: "人只要相信, 主耶穌基督的犧牲就必定拯救他/她." 所以他批評我們教會的那些話, 真是轉個頭講回到他自己. "只要信, 什麼其他事都不用作, 就得救了?" 這麼簡單? 這就是全備的福音? 騙騙三歲小孩罷了! 看清楚, 撒但就是用這種詭計來害人不能真正得救! 用"因信得救"這一句話, 可以拯救多少人? 真簡單!? 這就是寬門大道, 人人自以為得救, 個個卻引向滅亡! 聖經有多少經節講到, 除了信心, 還要用行為稱義? 除了信心, 還要從水和聖靈重生, 除了信靠神(這是基督道理的開端其中一項), 我們還要竭力進入完全的地步? 除了信心,...還要... 太多太多了! John Lee 對這麼多聖經的話, 真的是視而不見? 佯作不知? 好像他也從來不回覆關於守誡命的提問. 真正腦筋清楚的人, 不會如此執迷不悟. 看來真是被錯謬的靈所害, 可悲可嘆, 嗐! 不想浪費時間再纏下去. 虛心的人有福了, 他們會知道如何選擇, 得救的真道! 大家自求多福吧! 愛心多一點的, 禱告神, 或者神給他們悔改的心.
[ 83 ] CVT ( 2003/5/15 下午 05:12:00 )
By the way, unless one gives support to shatter our theology, whether it's the top professor in whatever type of theology in the world, I won't be satisfied. I am not overwhelmed with names like that. In fact, seeing many views of professors, doctors, scholars etc. on the same things, on TV or in the University or books, I have realised that all have their individual views. Each would have a different view, even on exactly the same topic. So I wouldn't take their word as if authority as you do. They are, after all, men. Let me give you an example. The view on Homo sapiens neanderthal. The first person to write a book about his view on the subspecies is that it's an ape. Hairy, ugly, robust, low intelligence, and was only smarter than a chimpanzee. But now scientists support the view that neanderthals were intelligent in the animal kingdom like we humans, and of course, the stereotypic view is that we humans are always the superior one. Some scientists think that they're a different species. Some think they're very closely related species. Some even think they're another race of Homo sapiens sapiens of the same species. Some believe there had been interbreeding among neanderthals and sapiens, yet some believe interbreeding was not practised, even yet some believe interbreeding was impossible. From now, we can see there are these different views on neanderthals: 1) Ape. A better ape than chimpanzee. 2) Intelligent. Inferior to sapiens. 3) Intelligent. A different species to sapiens. 4) Intelligent. A closely related subspecies to sapiens. 5) Intelligent. The same species to us. These are different views from some of the authorities in the world. Which is the answer? They don't have the answer!! Then, how authoritative is that? The best in the world does not mean THE answer. Comparatively he's the best. In reality, not good enough to have THE answer. None of them do, except on simple matters. On deep and complicated matters, NO one considered as the authority in their field has THE answer. There has even been a huge break-through hypothesis (not mentioned here) regarding neanderthals that sounds just as convincing as any, but not having the answer. So I even remain skeptic to what professors say. Vague answers like what you have mentioned does not satisfy me, even if he is the top authority even in the world. Just to give you a new view on this in case you forgot due to the name "professor".
[ 84 ] CVT ( 2003/5/15 下午 08:08:00 )
知者知于： 這就是為什麼我從一開頭就跟John Lee強調"the BIG picture"。 但是他總是不聽。 我老早知道外教會的信徒們會講一些什麼，所以一開始就跟他強調。 但是，果真與我預料的一樣，到現在還是這種僵局。 他會到現在還不答我們提出的一些問題，也是在我的預料中。 他會貼其他神學家的話，或沒什麼關連的加一些外教會的道理，或突然無聖經根據的說我們是異端，我早就一開頭就預料到了。 我很慶幸John Lee不會無理取鬧，不會像Wai或小蒙一樣。 小蒙是我目前看過最糟糕的。 我們講的話，他們從不會聽進去。 他們有的道理，我們都有了。 他們的錯誤道理，聖靈給我們啟示，帶領，讓我們不會有一樣的錯。 我們的教義，不屬世，與世上不同，世人無可接受，只看數量（接受的人或教會）評斷，就說我們少數但是完全依照聖經的是異端。 我們卻有許多他們啞口無言的道理，甚至推翻他們，他們還是不承認，跟著他們自己的道路走。 三位一體是最近向外教會澄清的。 證明了三位一體的錯，外教會的還是不承認。 變成不信聖經，信他們自己認為是真理的道理。 這些是他們的通病。 我早看得一清二楚，因為我以前就和Wai，Henry等來這裡鬧的外教會信徒吵過一段時間。 Wai來這個網站有一年多的歷史了，還是一樣。 所以我早就看清楚事情會發展的方向了。 也因而我一開始就對他們不禮貌，因為我預料到會怎樣了。 在未來幾個禮拜， 神若不感動他們，他們還是會有一樣的通病。
[ 85 ] ^^ ( 2003/5/16 上午 10:56:00 )
也並非所有的外教會基督徒都這樣的~~ 也有很謙卑互相請益的 也有很虔誠查考 後來來我們教會受洗的 各位 有些對我們來說自然而然明白的道理 對於尚未領受應許的聖靈的來說確是如此困難理解 這就是有領受聖靈的寶貴之處~~~
[ 86 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/16 上午 11:06:00 )
To知者知于 You wrote: 真正腦筋清楚的人, 不會如此執迷不悟. 看來真是被錯謬的靈所害, 可悲可嘆, 嗐! 不想浪費時間再纏下去. 虛心的人有福了, 他們會知道如何選擇, 得救的真道! 大家自求多福吧! 愛心多一點的, 禱告神, 或者神給他們悔改的心. John reply: Don’t be so defensive. “Cocktail” is not a bad word. The best approach for treating AIDS is cocktail approach invented by Dr. Hao. I used “cocktail” approach to describe the 10 doctrines that Paul Wei established in 1917. He adopted most of the doctrines from Apostolic Faith Mission, then he supplemented them with Adventist’s Sabbath. Then, he added “face down” baptism. He just added different things together, like a person mixes different kinds of juice to make a cocktail drink. This approach is dangerous, because it messes up the whole structure of biblical belief. For example, if the doctrines adopts “no Sabbath, no salvation” and “no foot washing, no salvation”, then it conflicts with“justification by faith”. If the doctrines adopts “good work to preserve the salvation”, then it conflicts with the doctrine of “believing Jesus has died for us and wash away our sins and give us eternal life.” The “Laundry list” is not an insulting word either. It means a comprehensive list. The Jews in the OT used this approach; added one after another to hundreds of laws. While this approach is not correct in New Testament, because we are justified by faith. TJC added many things besides “faith in Christ alone” for a person to be saved. If this approach is right, then someone will claim they have a more compressive list than TJC, because they can speak not only in tongues but also “prophesies”. They will claim Acts 19:6 included “prophesies” for the evidence of receiving Holy Spirit. Can you tell me which of the following 10 doctrines were from Apostolic Faith Mission; and which were from the direct inspiration of God to Paul Wei; and which were from the careful interpretation of Scriptures? 本書列出真耶穌教會十大基本信仰信條：第一條，信耶穌係道成肉身，為拯救罪人代死在十字架上，第三天復活升天；祂是人類唯一之救主，天地之主宰，獨一之真神。第二條，信新舊約聖經係神所默示，為證明真道唯一之根據，及信徒生活之準則。第三條，信本會係耶穌基督藉晚雨聖靈所設立，為復興使徒時代之真教會。第四條，信水浸係赦罪重生之典禮，必須由已受水靈二浸者，奉主耶穌聖名，在活水中給受浸者予以低下頭之全身浸禮。第五條，信受聖靈係得天國基業之憑據，並以說靈言為受聖靈之明證。 第六條，信洗腳禮係與主有分，及教訓相愛、聖潔、謙卑、服事、饒恕之典禮。對每一個受浸者，要奉主耶穌聖名給予洗腳一次，至於彼此洗腳，必要時亦可行。第七條，信聖餐為紀念主死，同領主肉、主血，與主聯合，能得永生，在末日復活之典禮。要時常舉行，但必須用一個無酵餅及葡萄汁舉辦之。第八條，信安息日（星期六）為神賜福之日。但要在恩典之下紀念創造及救贖之恩，並盼望來世永遠安息而遵守之。第九條，信得救係本乎恩，也因著信。但必須依靠聖靈追求聖潔、實踐經訓，敬神愛人。第十條，信主耶穌必於世界末日，從天降臨，審判萬民；義人得永生，惡人受永刑。 Also, please tell me why TJC does not need “prophesies” to be included as an evidence of receiving Holy Spirit? You have misunderstood my “faith alone”. Whenever I mention “believe in Jesus” I always say “ repent and accept Jesus as your personal savior” “the Lord Jesus” . If you go back to check all my posts, you will find my definition of “believe in Jesus”. We are Christians sincerely believe in him, and are willing to obey his commands, but we don’t think good works is a qualification to have salvation. I think TJC mess up “justification” and “ sanctification”. Please go back to read “Romans” on this topic.
[ 87 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/17 上午 01:10:00 )
請再仔細看看羅馬書, 保羅責備猶太人, 不信主耶穌, 只靠行律法, 不能得救. 所以... (羅2:26) 所以那未受割禮的、若遵守律法的條例、他雖然未受割禮、豈不算是有割禮麼。 (羅3:22) 就是神的義、因信耶穌基督、加給一切相信的人、並沒有分別． (羅3:27) 既是這樣、那裡能誇口呢．沒有可誇的了。用何法沒有的呢、是用立功之法麼．不是、乃用信主之法。 (羅3:28) 所以〔有古卷作因為〕我們看定了、人稱義是因著信、不在乎遵行律法。 但是信了主耶穌, 卻... (羅3:31) 這樣、我們因信廢了律法麼．斷乎不是、更是堅固律法。 (羅6:1) 這樣、怎麼說呢．我們可以仍在罪中、叫恩典顯多麼。 (羅6:2) 斷乎不可．我們在罪上死了的人、豈可仍在罪中活著呢。 (羅6:15) 這卻怎麼樣呢．我們在恩典之下、不在律法之下、就可以犯罪麼．斷乎不可。 (羅8:7) 原來體貼肉體、就是與神為仇．因為不服神的律法、也是不能服。 (羅13:9) 像那不可姦淫、不可殺人、不可偷盜、不可貪婪、或有別的誡命、都包在愛人如己這一句話之內了。 保羅沒有在羅馬書談到"如何實質的領受主的救贖". 這需要看看使徒行傳, 就是聖靈在使徒教會作工的記錄! 包括洗禮,得聖靈, 守安息日都有詳細確實的記載. 謝謝你貼出真教會的十大基本信仰, 這裡每一個字應該是經過幾十年來真教會的長執傳道們憑聖靈的帶領, 修改而成, 絕不是"雞尾酒"或"Laundry List(洗衣單?)". 我們沒有在聖經之外再添加規條, 請仔細看看, 那一條沒有聖經根據? 那一條不是合乎聖經的正道? 包括聖日安息日(星期六)註:不是星期五... 雖然當初聖靈指示魏保羅要面向下受浸, 但他不知聖經支持的經節(從他的書看不到), 他也有去查考安息日會. 但個人從來沒有聽說那幾條是 從那個教會來的? 可能是不了解的人仕所猜測的. 我們絕對不是靠行律法稱義(不相信主耶穌的法利賽人才是), 這也不是挑起無謂的紛爭, 而是為真道竭力爭辯. 弟兄姊妹應互相扶持造就 (但不是扶持錯誤的異端). 聖靈有九種不同的特殊恩賜, 說方言(造就教會)與翻方言是特殊恩賜, 但是得到聖靈的說靈言, 卻是得到聖靈內住的証據, 不可混為一談, 聖經只有根據"會說靈言-glossa"來判斷得到聖靈, 並沒有用"會說方言(造就教會)"來判斷得到聖靈, 為何要添加聖經沒有的? 請虛心的照主耶穌指示, 情詞迫切的直求, 得到真理的聖靈, 就會明白聖經隱藏的奧秘. 個人誠心相信, 有很多真心愛主的基督徒朋友們, 您們都是被聖靈感動, 能稱呼"主耶穌" (Kurios Iesous), 或"耶穌是主", 但是請仔細的對照整本聖經所記, 如何在悔改信主之後, 從水和聖靈重生, 進入神的國? (約3:5) 耶穌說、我實實在在的告訴你、人若不是從水和聖靈生的、就不能進神的國。 如何真的與主有份? (約13:8) 彼得說、你永不可洗我的腳。耶穌說、我若不洗你、你就與我無分了。 如何領受聖餐, 永生復活? 在靈裡(約6:54) 喫我肉喝我血的人就有永生．在末日我要叫他復活。 如何確實遵守誡命, 愛神愛人, 進入永生? 如何結出聖靈的果子? (如果說憑著有好行為, 有好果子, 就說自己有聖靈內住, 那麼不是也有很好行為的佛教徒, 回教徒, 或無神論者?) 如何.... 太多了. (雅2:26) 身體沒有靈魂是死的、信心沒有行為也是死的。 悔改相信主耶穌只是信仰的開端, 還要 (徒2:38) 彼得說、你們各人要悔改、奉耶穌基督的名受洗、叫你們的罪得赦、就必領受所賜的聖靈． (徒22:16) 現在你為甚麼耽延呢、起來、求告他的名受洗、洗去你的罪。 還要... 絕對不是"by faith alone"! 好行為不是得到救恩的先決條件, 得救恩是在神的揀選恩慈, 是憑我們對主耶穌的信靠, 不是憑好行為! 我們沒有混淆"稱義"與"成聖". 稱義是憑信主, 憑行為; 成聖是憑聖靈, 藉神的道, 水中寶血洗淨自己的罪, 順服聖靈. 但得救的步驟是你如何"實質"的得到救贖, 是聖經指示的步驟! 不能說這些得救的方法是"好行為"(good work)! 你們搞混了! 願主帶領祝福!
[ 88 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/17 上午 01:55:00 )
說方言(造就教會) 有時翻譯為"作先知講道". (林前14:22) 這樣看來、說方言、不是為信的人作證據、乃是為不信的人．作先知講道、不是為不信的人作證據、乃是為信的人。 這節第一個"說方言" 是指"用靈言禱告", 是我們自己跟神說, 是為不信的人作証據. 作先知講道, 就是說方言的特殊恩賜, 需要翻出來, 為信的人, 造就教會. (林前14:23) 所以全教會聚在一處的時候、若都說方言、偶然有不通方言的、或是不信的人進來、豈不說你們癲狂了麼。 這節並不是說, 我們不可一齊跪下用靈言禱告神. 而是每個人說方言(講道), 但卻沒有翻譯方言的人, 當然沒有人聽得懂. 說的方言(講道)想對人說, 卻變成向空說話. 但是一齊跪下用靈言禱告是向神禱告, 不是向人說, 是祈求感謝讚美頌揚真神, 造就自己, 不應禁止. (林前14:39) 所以弟兄們、你們要切慕作先知講道、也不要禁止說方言。
[ 89 ] CVT ( 2003/5/17 上午 07:17:00 )
John Lee: Have you been baptised under your church?
[ 90 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/17 上午 10:36:00 )
To CVT, I was baptized in a church in Tainan, Taiwan before you were born; probably even before your parent met each other. To save our time for my next question, can you use your 18 Bible search engines to search the verse supports “face down” for baptism – “…..in his likeness….”.
[ 91 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/17 上午 11:44:00 )
To 知者知于 and CVT, Today I don’t want to argue more, just paste this to show you that the original source of TJC’s doctrines came from some black preachers in the U.S. from 1901 to 1916. http://www.namb.net/root/resources/beliefbulletins/cults/oneness.asp · SHORT HISTORY OF ONENESS PENTECOSTALISM The modern Pentecostal movement is generally regarded to have begun in 1901 in a chapel prayer meeting in Topeka, Kansas, led by Charles Parham, a teacher at the small Bethel Bible College. A few years later in 1906 the Pentecostalist experience of "speaking in tongues" burst on the scene during a revival in a black Baptist church in Azuza Street in Los Angeles, California. Following these beginnings, pentecostalist preachers and churches spread rapidly coalescing into various denominations and factions. In 1913 one popular teacher, R. E. McAleister of Toronto, Canada, began to teach that the Trinity doctrine was untrue and that baptism should be done correctly in Jesus' name only -- not in the traditional Trinitarian formula. Other preachers such as Frank J. Ewart and John C. Sheppe joined McAleister in his non-Trinitarian perspective. By 1916 "oneness" views were being expounded by some ministers in the then young Assemblies of God (AOG) denomination. They were strongly rejected by the denomination council that year, and the AOG adopted a strong trinitarian stance in its Statement of Faith. More than 160 oneness ministers who were expelled from the AOG quickly formed their own alliances to promote their doctrines. After that time, a number of oneness sects formed, most of which were predominately African-American. The largest oneness movements today are the United Pentecostal Church International (UPCI) and The Pentecostal Assemblies of the World (PAW). The UPCI was organized in 1945 with the union of two predominately white groups started earlier in the century. Its headquarters and publishing firm, The Pentecostal Publishing House, is located at 8855 Dunn Road, Hazelwood, Missouri, 63042. The PAW formed in 1918 but later split along racial lines in 1924. Today it is predominately African-American and is now headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.
[ 92 ] 知者知于 ( 2003/5/17 下午 01:33:00 )
To John Lee, 雖然你不想辯了, 但是為了你貼的下文, 還是要說一說, 以正視聽. 不知道你對我們教會的資訊來源是什麼? 但個人要說, 這是第一次看到這種說法! 去了連結網站, 這是什麼信仰? 提供這個資訊的人, 一定沒有作功課. 要嘛找一個信仰稍微接近一點的也好, 還比較有說服力. 近代靈恩運動的歷史讓我們確信, 真神依照祂的應許, 在末世降下睌雨的聖靈. 雖然先出現在美國, 但是很多得到聖靈的基督徒, 沒有配合聖經純正的真理, 有些被邪靈侵擾, 有些對聖靈懷疑. 真教會初代的幾位工人, 的確曾在西方傳教士到中國設立的教會學習道理, 也有得到聖靈. 但是最重要的是, 真神親自啟示要更正萬國所傳不合聖經的道理. 因此, 我們教會所宣示的十大基本信仰, 可能有些與某些教會相同(或相似), 這是因為聖經的真理只有一個. 很多外教會可能領悟了某些真理, 但像真耶穌教會, 經過聖靈親自啟示, 能夠傳得全備的, 到目前看來, 全世界只有我們教會一個! 所以我們的基本信仰, 絕對不是如你所說, 這邊抄一點, 那邊抄一點! 而是真神啟示的全備得救福音. 所有人都應該珍惜. 當然也只有真神揀選的, 才有這個福氣能夠真正了解, 視為珍寶!
[ 93 ] CVT ( 2003/5/17 下午 03:36:00 )
What "18 Bible search engines"?? What do you mean? The verses I have typed out before are ones that are related to the Holy Spirit, not water baptism. Please don't confuse them. Face-down water baptism: John 19:30 'And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.' (NKJV) Romans 6:5 'For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,' (NKJV) Since you don't believe baptism is a part necessary for salvation, why did you get baptised?
[ 94 ] Pisgah ( 2003/5/17 下午 06:56:00 )
我不曉得John為什麼要堅持TJC跟其他的靈恩運動有關? 我們都已經說了又說,你還是認定你的看法是對的, 感覺上就好像強迫別人承認你所找來的家譜, 教義相同的部份,就是魏保羅抄襲而來, 教義不同的部份, 就是魏保羅杜撰的, 你知道嗎 ? TJC 從來不過聖誕節,你知道有那些教會不慶祝聖誕節嗎 ? 你知不知道有多少教會洗禮時,不是奉”父子聖靈的名” ? 其實魏保羅在TJC成立兩年之後就去世了, 我們從來沒有把他的角色,放置在高於其他工人的位子. 使徒行傳五章34~39節,記載了迦瑪列的勸戒, 很盼望John讀了之後, 能把個人對TJC的態度放一邊,讓問題的討論,能聚焦於聖經, 其實真耶穌教會如何起來並不重要, 重要的是我們對聖經的看法,有沒有可取或可議之處 ? 在一般的辯論場上,「訴諸權威」是無法說服別人的,道理很簡單,因為”權威”缺乏客觀的認定標準,好比說, 這世上有數億的人,可以因為某句話是毛主席說的,就完全相信,且讓其他的人都閉嘴,但這樣的權威並不一定就對, 這種討論的方式, 也不適用於其他理性開放的世界. 當天主教徒引用教皇的話, 回教徒引用回教教長所說的話,這樣的辯論是無法找出真理的. 某神學家所說的話, 自然會有其他的神學家去反對, 所以,在我看來, 他的title並不能增加他所說的話的正確性, 除非他完全依據聖經, 對於基督徒而言, 真理的唯一來源必須是聖經! 就算你想從系統神學的角度,先來檢驗解經的方法,又有何妨呢 ? 難道TJC真的經不起檢驗嗎 ?
[ 95 ] John Lee ( 2003/5/17 下午 10:17:00 )
To all, This discussion page is too long, I need to load a long time on my PC, I will answer all your questions in the 真耶穌教會不是基督教 (2). Don't go away, or you will miss something very important!!!
