Hi, Soccerfun, Just find out that you have a blog. Hope this reply can reach you. I was thinking to write a little more on that subject, however, when I came back, rainbow has been sacked by some 泰坦尼克號巨貼.... :) 抱歉，上次的帖子，說的不清楚。 如同我在第一個帖子中提到的, to always keep “ipsum esse subsistens”in mind helps me to understand the relation between Grace and freedom. 球迷弟兄，看你的貼，有一種似曾相識的感覺。 “只有人既可以選擇信又可以選擇不信，這個faith才是這人的faith” 類似的話,我也說過. 我以前寫的都是針對這句話或者這個想法. Yes, “… he could reject it”, 另一方面， 我們能完全獨立的“選擇”信嗎？如果不是完全獨立，我們的自由意志是不是就被損害，或者說被限制了？上述推理 －我的自由意志被損害/被限制 隱含着一個非此即彼的假設，它是基於我們對有限世界的認知，我們能用同樣的認知來解釋上帝與人的關係嗎? 。不直接討論定義， 教義,談些個人感受. 希望能提一些思路，供您參考 最初,我並未深想ipsum esse subsistens ,甚至有些小小腹誹，這麼喜歡拉丁文?! One day either on Youtube or Word on Fire,“… as if a zero-sum game, if man gets more the glory, God get less…. No! God is not a being….”聽到這裡我想，又來了。But this time, somehow, zero-sum比喻觸動了我。反覆思考後, 我意識到自己並不明白”自有永有”意味着什麼。我勉強自己買書，努力讀了幾天。老實說感受就是每個字都認識，放在一起不認識。慢慢的也有收穫. 即使現在，我只能說明白了一點，也希望我向您解釋清楚了這一點， 那就是God is not a being, therefore, this is not a zero-sum game –e.g. either He did it or I did it. In God, there is no distinction between Essence and Existence - ipsum esse subsistens - the sheer act to be itself. God is “not” a true god or a good spirit etc. God is “the sheer act to be good” itself, to be true itself, …. In that moment we move to be good, to be true, to say I believe, how could we do it without God? How could we do it independently完全獨立? 如果一定要比喻，或者可以用 共振？好比盪鞦韆。我自己找不到,也做不到,那個完美的頻率。是這個最完美的頻率,帶動了我。當我們說上帝自有永有，全美全善， 我們潛意識中將上帝理解為一個美善的存在。全美全善是形容詞， 自有永有成了名詞。在我看來，ipsum esse subsistens 或者ST. Thomas所闡述的，就是要打破這個finite reality image. 讓我們能憑藉理性的思考，而稍稍窺見the mystery of God. 中文翻譯簡潔，優美，無需改變，需要改變的是我們的理解，賦予它更為豐富的含義。全美全善與自有永有緊密相連，合起來還是一個動詞 (個人想法，不一定妥當).Because God is the sheer act to be itself, He can do it through me. God, our creator, give us this beautiful gift of intellect and will and only He can move it without breaking it. His Grace does not impair our will, our intellect, but “enrich” it. From ipsum esse subsistens, I clearly and firmly know that there is NO contradiction in the doctrines. 我個人的困惑，或者說令我轉向天主教最初緣由，既不是“ipsum esse subsistens”也不是關於預定，恩典或自由的Catholic doctrines. 因此， 如前文所述，我沒有在這上特別重視或向RCIA的神父請教。因為一時興趣，找了些書看看。有一些新的認識，完全是意外收穫. 當然個人淺見，肯定有錯漏的，歡迎指出。我也搭個中文順風車，學習一下。最後還是回到St. Thomas – In God, there is no distinction between Essence and Existence. God bless. p.s. - To believe is not merely to be good, to be true or to be free. One can poke so many holes. I also intentionally skip the discussion of good act vs. bad act etc. 請勿深究,就當我在這兒隨意寫寫感想, musing the divine infinity. - As to predestination, again without touching definitions and doctrines, all I can say is that I am content with my understanding of Catholic interpretation. Fixing my eyes at the crucifix, I am “at peace” with this doctrine. |
