[Script Info]
Title: Merged Subtitles
ScriptType: v4.00+
WrapStyle: 0
ScaledBorderAndShadow: yes
Collisions: Normal
PlayResX: 384
PlayResY: 288

[V4+ Styles]
Format: Name, Fontname, Fontsize, PrimaryColour, SecondaryColour, OutlineColour, BackColour, Bold, Italic, Underline, StrikeOut, ScaleX, ScaleY, Spacing, Angle, BorderStyle, Outline, Shadow, Alignment, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Encoding
Style: Default, Sarasa UI SC, 14, &H00FFFFFF, &H000000FF, &H00000000, &H80000000, 0, 0, 0, 0, 100, 100, 0, 0, 1, 1, 2, 2, 10, 10, 10, 1

[Events]
Format: Layer, Start, End, Style, Name, MarginL, MarginR, MarginV, Effect, Text
Dialogue: 0,0:00:14.37,0:00:17.53,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}大家好，欢迎回到「原初教会」。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Hi folks, welcome back to The Original Church.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:17.53,0:00:21.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}今天我们要讨论一个叫做归属论的教义。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Today we're talking about something called the doctrine of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:21.100,0:00:27.52,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这是我之前关于三位一体教义视频的另一个后续视频。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And this is another follow-up video to one of my earlier videos on the doctrine of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:27.52,0:00:35.42,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}归属论是源自三位一体教义并支持它的教义之一。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The doctrine of appropriation is one of these doctrines  that flows from the doctrine of the Trinity and supports it.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:35.46,0:00:38.62,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}在我们开始之前，我需要澄清一点。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Now, before we get started, I have to make one clarification.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:38.62,0:00:49.99,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}当我在这里使用归属这个词时，我的意思并不像你听到文化挪用时所想的那样。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}When we use the word appropriation in the way I'm using it here, I don't mean it in the same way that you might think when you hear of something like cultural appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:00:50.11,0:00:59.21,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}文化挪用是指从一种文化中取用某些东西，并以\N不恰当的方式应用到不属于它的地方，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Cultural appropriation is kind of taking something from one culture and applying it where it doesn't belong in a way that's inappropriate, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:00:59.47,0:01:12.02,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以我们并不是完全按照那个意思使用这个词，而是用它来\N表示有些术语适合用来描述三位一体和三位一体中的位格。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So we're not really using the word quite in that sense, but we are using it in the sense that there are some terms  that are appropriate for describing the Trinity and the persons of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:12.02,0:01:17.06,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}同时也有一些描述三位一体位格的方式是不恰当的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And then there are some ways of describing the persons of the Trinity that are not appropriate.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:17.06,0:01:29.55,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以当我开始讨论这个教义时，你会看到我们所说的将这个或那个术\N语归属于三位一体的位格来描述和解释三位一体教义是什么意思。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so when I get into talking about the doctrine, you'll see what we mean by appropriating this or that term to the persons of the Trinity to describe and explain the doctrine of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:29.55,0:01:30.85,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}那么让我们开始吧。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So let's get into it.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:32.25,0:01:44.91,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}好的，所有与三位一体有关的教义都必须平衡神的\N合一性，即神是一，与三位一体三个位格的区别。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Okay, so all doctrines that have to do with the Trinity  You have to balance the unity of God, that God is one, with the distinction of the three persons of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:45.01,0:01:58.82,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}你不能以任何减弱神的合一性的方式谈论位格的区别，但你也\N不能以任何减弱三位性、位格区别的方式谈论神的合一性。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And you can't talk about the distinction of persons in any way that diminishes the oneness of God, but you also can't talk about the oneness of God in any way that diminishes the threeness, the distinction of persons.
Dialogue: 0,0:01:58.82,0:02:03.38,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以总是要在合一和区别之间保持平衡。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So there's always this balance of unity and distinction.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:03.38,0:02:13.21,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}如果你做得对，你就是在保持这种平衡，合一性，只有一位神，但有区别，三个位格。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And if you're doing it right, you're maintaining that balance  of unity, one God, one God only, but distinction, three persons.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:13.21,0:02:19.47,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}尽管如此，从某种意义上说，合一性总是首要的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Having said that, though, the unity is always primary in a certain sense.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:19.47,0:02:28.87,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}换句话说，三个位格的区别总是存在于本质合一性的保护伞下。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}In other words, the distinction of the three persons always exists sort of under the umbrella of the unity of substance.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:29.01,0:02:50.28,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以，是的，神里面有三位性，但这存在于合一性的保护伞下。因为从某\N种意义上说，神的合一性必须具有一定的优先性，这样我们就永远不会忘\N记我们只相信一位神，只有一位神，这不是任何形式的多神论，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so, yes, there is threeness in God, but that exists under the umbrella of the oneness  Because the oneness of God has to take a certain priority, in a sense, so that we never lose the fact that we only believe in one God, there is only one God, and this is not any form of polytheism, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:02:50.35,0:02:51.50,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}那么就是这样。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So here it is.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:51.50,0:02:54.46,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是归属论。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Here is the doctrine of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:54.46,0:02:57.04,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}归属论是这样说的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The doctrine of appropriation says this.
Dialogue: 0,0:02:57.68,0:03:08.79,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的任何事，你也必\N须能够说到其他两个位格，或者说到三位一体整体。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you have to also be able to say that about the other two persons of the Trinity, or about the Trinity in general.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:08.79,0:03:22.40,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}而你能说的关于三位一体整体的任何事，你也必须能够说到\N三位一体中的任何一个位格，但有几个非常重要的例外。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And anything you can say about the Trinity in general, you have to also be able to say that about any one of the three persons of the Trinity, with a few very important exceptions.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:23.10,0:03:31.81,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以，归属论的基本教义肯定并强调神的合一性，即只有一位神。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So, the basic doctrine of appropriation affirms and emphasizes the unity of God, that there is only one God.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:31.85,0:03:48.46,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但有一些例外定义并澄清了位格的区别，澄清了圣父不是圣子，圣子不是圣灵\N，圣灵不是圣父，等等。现在，在我们讨论这个之前，有一件事我必须指出。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But there are exceptions that define and clarify the distinction of persons, that clarify that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Father, etc. Now, before we get to that, there is one thing I have to point out.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:48.60,0:03:56.50,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}有一种异端过分强调神的合一性，以至于失去了所有的区别。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}There is a heresy  that emphasizes the unity of God so much that it loses all the distinction.
Dialogue: 0,0:03:56.56,0:04:08.53,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这种异端将三个位格混为一体，所以它把神理解为不是\N一个本质中的三个位格，而是一个有三个名字的位格。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}This heresy conflates all three persons into one, so that it conceives of God not as three persons in one substance, but as one person with three names.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:08.73,0:04:21.12,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}如果你做过功课，你就知道这种异端被称为形态论，它在今天\N的一些五旬节运动中仍然存在，有时被称为一位论五旬节派。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Now if you've done your homework, you know that this heresy is called modalism, and it is alive and well today in some Pentecostal movements,  sometimes called oneness Pentecostalism.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:21.16,0:04:31.41,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但它在一些原本信奉三位一体的教会中也存在，\N这些教会以平等的名义意外地破坏了三位一体。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But it is also alive and well in some otherwise Trinitarian communions that accidentally wreck the Trinity in the name of equality.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:31.47,0:04:45.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以，任何时候你听到三位一体被称为创造者、救赎者和维持者，那就是一种形态论。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So anytime you hear the Trinity named as creator, redeemer, and sustainer, that is a form of modalism.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:47.30,0:04:49.14,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}让我解释一下我的意思。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Let me explain what I mean by that.
Dialogue: 0,0:04:49.31,0:05:06.23,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}形态论的要点是，它基本上说在道成肉身中，圣父成为了圣子，圣父、圣\N子和圣灵之间实际上没有区别，圣父成为了圣子，然后圣子成为了圣灵。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The point of modalism is that what modalism does is it basically says that in the incarnation, the Father became the Son, that there is really no distinction between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that the Father became the Son, and then the Son became the Spirit.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:06.23,0:05:17.10,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}因此，神的儿子就被简化为不过是伪装的圣父，就像神父穿了一件皮套。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so then what happens is the Son of God is reduced to nothing more than the Father in disguise, like God the Father wearing a skin suit.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:17.29,0:05:24.37,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}现在，这样做的问题是它削弱或真正否定了耶稣的真实人性。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Now, the problem with this is that it diminishes or really denies the real humanity of Jesus.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:24.47,0:05:30.68,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}而削弱耶稣的人性就是打破他与我们之间的联系，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And to diminish the humanity of Jesus is to break the bond between him and us, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:05:30.68,0:05:42.18,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}道成了肉身，不是圣父穿上了肉身的外衣，而是\N道，即三位一体的第二位格，真正成为了人。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The Word became flesh, not the Father appeared in a fleshy suit, but the Word, the Logos, the second person of the Trinity became truly human.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:42.18,0:05:44.52,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这是一个重要的区别。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And this is an important distinction.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:44.62,0:05:58.85,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但形态论所做的是说，好的，如果神是一个有三个名字的\N位格，那么这些名字就与功能、活动或存在方式有关。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But what modalism does  Modalism says, okay, if God is one person with three names, then the names have to do with function or activity or mode of existence.
Dialogue: 0,0:05:58.91,0:06:02.01,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}存在方式，这就是为什么它被称为形态论。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Mode of existence, this is why it's called modalism.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:02.01,0:06:08.51,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以形态论者假设，当神处于创造者的模式时，你可以称他为圣父。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So the modalist assumes that when God is in the mode of being creator, you can call him the Father.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:08.51,0:06:13.28,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}当神处于救主或救赎者的模式时，你可以称他为圣子。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}When God is in the mode of being savior or redeemer, you can call him the Son.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:13.28,0:06:18.10,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}当神处于维持者的模式时，你可以称他为圣灵。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}When God is in the mode of being the sustainer, you can call him the Holy Spirit.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:18.30,0:06:19.94,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但这里有个问题。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But here's the problem.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:19.98,0:06:35.72,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}当你这样做时，你错误地暗示只有三位一体的第一位格是\N创造者，只有第二位格是救主，等等。这是不正确的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}When you do that, you make the erroneous implication that only the first person of the Trinity is the Creator, only the second person of the Trinity is the Savior, etc. And that's not correct.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:35.72,0:06:52.89,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以，任何时候你听到三位一体被描述为创造者、救赎者、维持者，在某种意义上\N，试图通过工作描述来区分三位一体的位格，这实际上是形态论异端的一种形式。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So anytime you hear the Trinity cast as Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer,  In a sense, trying to make distinctions between the persons of the Trinity by job description, that is actually a form of the heresy of modalism.
Dialogue: 0,0:06:52.89,0:07:00.95,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}因为，再次强调，这暗示圣子不是创造者，圣父不是救主，但我们知道这不是真的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Because, again, it implies that the Son is not also Creator, the Father is not also Savior, but we know this isn't true.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:00.95,0:07:02.19,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}看看旧约。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Look at the Old Testament.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:02.19,0:07:03.60,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}圣父是救主。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The Father is a Savior.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:03.60,0:07:04.77,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}看看出埃及记。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Look at the Exodus.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:04.77,0:07:06.32,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}看看新约。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Look at the New Testament.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:06.52,0:07:08.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}万物都是藉着圣子创造的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}All things were created through the Son.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:08.88,0:07:12.99,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}他是创造的代理，所以他也是创造者。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}He is the agent of creation, so he is also creator.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:13.35,0:07:17.75,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就把我们带回到归属论。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so this brings us back to the doctrine of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:19.47,0:07:22.17,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以关于形态论的那些东西，那是异端。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So all that stuff about modalism, that's heresy.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:22.17,0:07:23.87,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}那是不正确的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}That's not correct.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:23.98,0:07:32.16,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}归属论说，不，你不能通过工作描述来区分三位一体的三个位格。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The doctrine of appropriation says, no, you cannot make distinctions between the three persons of the Trinity by job description.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:32.16,0:07:32.96,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}为什么不能？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Why not?
Dialogue: 0,0:07:32.96,0:07:43.42,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}因为你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的任何事，你也\N必须能够说到其他两个位格，或者说到三位一体整体。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Because  Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you have to be able to say about the other two persons of the Trinity, or about the Trinity in general.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:43.42,0:07:51.74,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}如果不是这样，那么你就陷入了一种多神论的形式，在那里你\N有一个创造之神，一个救赎之神，等等。我们不希望这样。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And if not, then you're lapsing into a form of polytheism where you have a God of creation, a God of salvation, etc. We don't want that.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:51.74,0:07:56.95,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}我们希望能够说三位一体的三个位格都是创造者。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}We want to be able to say all three persons of the Trinity are creator.
Dialogue: 0,0:07:57.03,0:08:00.09,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}三位一体的三个位格都是救主。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}All three persons of the Trinity are savior.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:00.13,0:08:03.98,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}三位一体的三个位格都是维持者。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}All three persons of the Trinity are sustainer.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:03.98,0:08:06.100,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是归属论。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so this is the doctrine of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:07.01,0:08:17.69,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的任何事，你也必须\N能够说到其他两个位格，因为归根结底，这是一位神。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you also have to be able to say about the other two persons of the Trinity, because at the end of the day, this is one God.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:18.67,0:08:25.21,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以这个教义除了其他作用外，实际上是为了驳斥形态论，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so this is a doctrine that, among other things, is actually meant to refute modalism, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:08:25.21,0:08:44.38,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以再说一遍，任何时候你听到有人以创造者、救赎者、维持者的名义做祝福或者\N，神禁止，施洗，顺便说一下，那不是有效的洗礼，但他们也违反了归属规则。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So again, anytime you hear somebody do a benediction or, God forbid, a baptism in the name of Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer, well, by the way, that's not a valid baptism, but they are also breaking the rule of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:44.40,0:08:46.74,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以那是一种异端。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so that is a heresy.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:46.79,0:08:53.89,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}神不是一个有三个名字的位格，其中这些名字是工作描述。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}God is not one person with three names, where the names are job descriptions.
Dialogue: 0,0:08:54.84,0:09:01.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但要记住不可分离的运作教义，我有一个关于这个的视频，所以去看看。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But remember the doctrine of inseparable operation, and I have a video on that, so check that out.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:01.88,0:09:09.49,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}不可分离的运作教义说，三位一体的三个位格都参与所有的神圣活动。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The doctrine of inseparable operation says that all three persons of the Trinity are involved in all divine activity.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:09.53,0:09:15.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以你不能通过工作描述来区分三位一体的位格，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So you cannot make distinctions of the persons of the Trinity by job description, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:09:16.42,0:09:39.88,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以讽刺的是，形态论试图通过工作描述来区分三位一体的位格，这恰恰是\N你在描述三位一体的位格时不能做的事，因为你能说的关于三位一体中一个\N位格的任何事，你也必须能够说到其他两个位格，或者说到三位一体整体。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So ironically, what modalism tries to do, describe the persons of the Trinity distinctly by job description, that's the one thing you can't do when you are describing the persons of the Trinity, because  Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you have to be able to say about the other two persons of the Trinity, or about the Trinity in general.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:39.88,0:09:49.65,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所有这些，不可分离的运作和归属论，都是同质性教义的延伸。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And all of this, inseparable operation and the doctrine of appropriation, are all extensions of the doctrine of consubstantiality.
Dialogue: 0,0:09:49.65,0:09:54.59,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}我也有一个关于这个的视频，所以去看看我的视频「同质性是什么意思？」\N{\an2\fs10\i1}I have a video on that too, so check out my video, What Does Consubstantial Mean?
Dialogue: 0,0:09:54.83,0:10:06.96,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}你会看到我谈论同质性教义时的意思，即三位一体的\N三个位格，圣父、圣子和圣灵，都是一个神圣本质。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And you'll see what I mean when I talk about the doctrine of consubstantiality, that all three persons of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are all one divine substance.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:08.18,0:10:15.64,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}好的，所以，你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的\N任何事，你都可以说到三位一体的所有三个位格。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Okay, so, anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you can say about all three persons of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:15.64,0:10:19.49,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}三位一体的三个位格都是创造者，圣父、圣子和圣灵。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}All three persons of the Trinity are Creator, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:19.49,0:10:29.60,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}三位一体的三个位格都是救赎者，圣父、圣子和圣灵，\N等等。但如果是这样的话，他们之间的区别是什么？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}All three persons of the Trinity are Redeemer, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, etc.  But then if that's the case, what are the distinctions between them?
Dialogue: 0,0:10:29.60,0:10:39.20,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}为什么会有三个位格，而圣父不仅仅与圣子相同，或者圣子不仅仅与圣灵相同？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}How is it that there are three persons and that the Father is not simply the same as the Son or the Son is simply the same as the Holy Spirit?
Dialogue: 0,0:10:39.20,0:10:42.100,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}我的意思是，形态论者认为他们是相同的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}I mean, the modalists think that they are.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:42.100,0:10:51.96,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}那么，作为三位一体的基督徒，我们如何说圣父不\N是圣子，圣子不是圣灵，但三者都是一位神呢？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So how is it that we can say as Trinitarian Christians that  The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and yet all three are one God.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:51.96,0:10:57.00,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}好，这就是我们要讨论归属规则的例外之处。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Well, this is where we get to the exceptions to the rule of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:10:57.00,0:11:11.01,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以归属论说，三位一体的三个位格可以用相同的方式描述，但有这些非常具体的例外。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So the doctrine of appropriation says that all three persons of the Trinity can be described in all the same ways with these very specific exceptions.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:11.01,0:11:12.07,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是它们。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So here they are.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:12.07,0:11:13.53,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这些是例外。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Here are the exceptions.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:14.16,0:11:19.96,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}你能说的关于三位一体中一个位格的任何事，你都可以说到其他位格，除了这些。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Anything you can say about one person of the Trinity, you can say about the others except this.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:20.06,0:11:24.66,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}首先，只有圣父是非受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}First of all, only the Father is unbegotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:24.94,0:11:31.73,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}另一种说法是只有圣父是非被生的或无因的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Another way to say this is only the Father is ungenerated or uncaused.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:31.73,0:11:36.97,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}圣父的存在没有起源。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The Father has no origin to his existence.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:37.59,0:11:39.93,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}圣父是非受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}The Father is unbegotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:40.01,0:11:42.95,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}另一方面，圣子是受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}On the other hand, the Son is begotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:43.04,0:11:52.84,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}虽然圣子并不是在时间上后来出现或类似的情况\N，但圣子的存在仍有一种起源，那就是圣父。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And even though the Son does not come along later in time or anything like that, the Son still has a kind of origin to his existence, which is the Father.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:52.84,0:11:55.61,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以圣子是由圣父所生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}So the Son is begotten of the Father.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:55.61,0:11:57.91,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}或者我们说圣子是被生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Or we say the Son is generated.
Dialogue: 0,0:11:57.91,0:12:02.55,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}具体来说，我们说是永恒被生的，因为再次强调，这不是一个时间上的事情。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Specifically, we say eternally generated, because again, it's not a chronological thing.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:02.55,0:12:04.47,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}它不是在时间中发生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}It doesn't happen in time.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:04.47,0:12:06.17,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但你看到了区别。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But you see the distinction.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:06.35,0:12:13.93,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣父可以被描述为非受生的，只有圣子可以被描述为受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Father can be described as unbegotten,  Only the Son can be described as begotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:14.27,0:12:22.47,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}同样，只有圣子可以被描述为道成肉身的，因为只有三位一体的第二位格实际上成为了人。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Also, only the Son can be described as incarnate, because only the second person of the Trinity actually became human.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:22.48,0:12:33.36,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}当然，不可分离的运作，三位一体的三个位格都参与了道\N成肉身，但只有三位一体的第二位格实际上成为了人。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Sure, inseparable operation, all three persons of the Trinity were involved in the incarnation, but only the second person of the Trinity actually became human.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:33.66,0:12:37.80,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}最后，适用于圣灵的那个稍微复杂一些。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And finally, the one that applies to the Holy Spirit is a little bit more complicated.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:37.80,0:12:40.47,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣灵是发出的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:40.64,0:12:42.44,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这是一个复杂的话题。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}That is a complicated topic.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:42.44,0:12:47.67,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}如果你想看我关于「和子」的视频并深入了解，你当然可以。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}If you want to see my video on the filioque and go deeper on that, you certainly can.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:47.67,0:12:49.75,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}否则，你现在不必担心这个。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Otherwise, you don't have to worry about it for now.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:49.75,0:12:52.91,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但这些是规则的例外。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But these are the exceptions to the rule.
Dialogue: 0,0:12:53.13,0:13:02.64,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣父是非受生的，只有圣子是受生的，只有圣子道成肉身，只有圣灵是发出的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Father is unbegotten, only the Son is begotten, only the Son is incarnate, and only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:02.66,0:13:08.78,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这四个词是归属论的唯一例外。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Those four words are the only exceptions to the doctrine of appropriation.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:09.87,0:13:19.95,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}现在，是的，显然有一些只适用于圣子的三位一体第二位格的名字，比如耶稣、基督、道。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Now, yeah, obviously there are names for the second person of the Trinity that apply only to the Son, like Jesus, Christ, the Word.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:20.33,0:13:21.31,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}还有一些其他的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}There are a few others.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:21.31,0:13:24.67,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以，你知道，如果我们有更多时间，我们可以更细致地讨论这个。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so, you know, if we had more time, we could nuance this.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:24.67,0:13:33.96,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但除此之外，在大多数情况下，只有四个术语适用于\N三位一体中的特定位格且只适用于那个位格，对吧？\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But apart from those, for the most part, there are only four terms that apply to a specific person of the Trinity and only that person, right?
Dialogue: 0,0:13:33.96,0:13:36.00,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣父是非受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Father is unbegotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:36.00,0:13:39.02,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣子是受生的和道成肉身的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Son is begotten and incarnate.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:39.12,0:13:41.33,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}只有圣灵是发出的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Only the Holy Spirit proceeds.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:41.37,0:13:56.43,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}除此之外，你用来描述三位一体中一个位格的任何术语\N也必须适用或适合于其他两个位格或三位一体整体。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Other than that though  Any term that you can use to describe one person of the Trinity must also apply or be appropriate to the other two persons of the Trinity or to the Trinity in general.
Dialogue: 0,0:13:56.63,0:14:06.69,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但这四个特定的例外，这些是描述位格之间区别或差异的术语。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But these four specific exceptions to that rule, those are the terms that describe the distinction or the difference between the persons.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:06.69,0:14:13.36,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是为什么圣父不是圣子，因为圣父是非受生的，而圣子是受生的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}This is why the Father is not the Son, because the Father is unbegotten and the Son is begotten.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:13.40,0:14:20.09,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是为什么圣子不是圣灵，因为圣子道成肉身，而圣灵是发出的。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}This is why the Son is not the Spirit, because the Son is incarnate and the Spirit proceeds.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:20.09,0:14:22.07,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}所以你明白了这个概念。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so you get the idea.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:22.21,0:14:42.30,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}因此，在我们所称的教义发展中，随着时间的推移，三位一体的教义越来越清晰，直\N到尼西亚会议，然后是君士坦丁堡会议，这些4世纪的会议给了我们尼西亚信经。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so in what we call the development of doctrine,  As time goes on, the doctrine of the Trinity is more and more clarified leading up to the Council of Nicaea and then the Council of Constantinople, these councils in the 4th century that gave us the Nicene Creed.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:42.30,0:14:57.68,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}在尼西亚信经形成之前的时期，所有这些支持性教义都在持\N续澄清更大、最重要的三位一体教义的过程中逐渐就位。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}In the time leading up to the Nicene Creed, all of these supporting doctrines fall into place  in the ongoing clarification of the bigger, most important doctrine of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:14:58.04,0:15:09.19,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}因此，这个归属论只是那些发展起来帮助我们理解更大的三位一体教义的支持性教义之一。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And so this doctrine of appropriation is just one of those supporting doctrines that develops to help us understand the bigger doctrine of the Trinity.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:09.19,0:15:11.71,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}这就是原初教会的情况。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And that's how it was in the original church.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:11.71,0:15:12.99,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}感谢你的收看。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Thanks for joining me.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:13.07,0:15:14.65,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}嘿，感谢观看。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Hey, thanks for watching.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:14.69,0:15:15.93,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}好吧，你知道该怎么做。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Well, you know the drill.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:15.93,0:15:18.76,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}订阅，开启通知，等等等等。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Subscribe, notifications, blah, blah, blah.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:18.80,0:15:22.78,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}但如果你喜欢这个视频，请分享它。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}But if you liked this video, please share it.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:22.86,0:15:26.25,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}如果你想要更多，可以考虑购买我的一本或多本书。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}And if you want more, consider getting one or more of my books.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:26.39,0:15:32.71,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}或者更好的是，在Locals.com上加入我和原初教会社区。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}Or better yet, join me and the original church community on Locals.com.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:32.83,0:15:35.77,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}在那里你可以评论并与我们其他人互动。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}There you can comment and interact with the rest of us.
Dialogue: 0,0:15:35.77,0:15:36.53,Default,,0,0,0,,{\an2\b1}我希望在那里见到你。\N{\an2\fs10\i1}I hope to see you there.