Sunday, 28 December 2008

Oh My Girl

剛剛睇完上一季一齣我覺得好好睇, 但係冇乜人識欣賞o既日劇, 叫做 Oh My Girl. 我覺得非常鍾意, 但係喺日本冇人睇, 搞到要 cut 短到得返九集, 真係有冇搞錯? 個故事講有個做雜誌社o既男仔, 佢個好冇責任感o既家姐留低個女要佢照顧, 而呢個細路女係個童星, 亦有個女仔經理人跟住佢, 故事就講呢三個人住埋一齊o既大小事. 故事好簡單, 但係睇得好舒服, 好開心.



老老實實, 我一向都唔鍾意睇有細路仔做主角o既戲/電視, 我天生就係討厭細路, 尤其係人地覺得 cute 嗰 d. 但係呢齣個女仔主角唔同, 而家睇完齣嘢我變到好鍾意佢. 喺故事入面佢做明星, 下下都要食好嘢, 夜晚做 facial, 朝早起床跳埋 d 搞笑健康舞, 唔會扮 kawaii, 但係又唔會扮到好老成, 剛好喺中間. 連我呢種抱有"細路歧視"o既人都鍾意, 可見呢個細路女真係魅力非凡.



呢齣戲我最鍾意睇個細路女同男主角之間o既關係. 由開始互相唔鍾意, 到慢慢培養出雙向o既 attachment, 所以去到結局, 當個女仔同個主角講佢地要分開嗰時, 佢地由扮冇嘢到忍唔住一齊喊嗰幕, 我覺得真係好睇, 非常有 feel. 只係友誼, 同埋想黐住對方o既渴望, 比起成日有得睇o既男女浪漫, 我覺得更加 touching.



個女經理人都好多出鏡. 其實我之前都有喺其他劇集見過佢, 不過唔鍾意佢, 因為佢個混血樣好怪, 但係而家又覺得越睇越順眼, 都唔錯. 總之, 呢齣係好嘢. 雖然冇口碑, 亦冇人睇, 但係呢齣係我睇過最鍾意o既日劇之一. 主題曲亦好聽.

Bible Quiz (聖誕版)

可以唔睇聖經就答中呢十題o既, 我封你為高手. 提示: 每題都只有一個答案, 馬太福音, 或馬可福音, 或路加福音, 或約翰福音.

Questions:
========================
1 - Which Gospel talks about the magi?

2 - Which Gospel has Jesus born in a manger?

3 - Which Gospel talks about Herod's persecution of baby Jesus?

4 - Which Gospel says Jesus shall be called Emmanuel?

5 - Which Gospel talks about shepherds who hear about Jesus' birth from angels?

6 - Which Gospel talks about Joseph and Mary go to Bethlehem for taxing purposes?

7 - Which Gospel mentions a star that leads the way to baby Jesus?

8 - Which Gospel talks about Jesus' trip to Egypt?

9 - Which Gospel actually talks about the very day when Jesus was born?
========================

Sunday, 21 December 2008

玩到尾o既 RPG (7):Shadow Hearts: Covenant



老老實實, 雖然全世界講到 RPG 就會諗起 Final Fantasy, 但係我覺得呢隻真係歷史上最好o既 RPG 之一, 雖然名氣唔算大, 但係絕對算得上係經典. 呢隻係 Shadow Hearts o既第二集, 故事直接繼承第一集, 一開始就知道第一集個女主角 Alice 已經死咗, 得返男主角 Yuri 一個, 無無聊聊, 明顯有一定o既自殺傾向. 雖然我玩呢隻 game 嗰時未玩過第一集, 不過個故事都明, 跟到冇問題.

到底有乜咁好玩呢? 先講角色, d 角色真係寫得太好, 多個角色都好立體. 男主角 Yuri 係我最鍾意o既 RPG 角色, 佢性格設定寫得好深入, 表面上佢係個把口好衰, 乜都唔驚o既半人半怪獸. 呢隻 game 其中最搞笑o既 gag 就係 Yuri 多次開口勁寸 d 敵人大佬, 真係仲好笑過好多笑片. 但係內裡, 佢又極之脆弱, 由故事一開始佢就已經係一個內心支離破碎o既人, 朋友係隻狗, 同埋一個同樣失去咗親人o既一個老人家. 所以去到故事後半, 當 Yuri 再見到前女友一面, 但係又唔能夠幫佢復活嗰刻喊咗出嚟, 我覺得係好合理o既劇情發展, 亦好 touching. Alice 喺今集冇乜出鏡 (因為已經死咗), 但係佢同 Yuri 同 Karin o既三角關係都好深刻. Yuri 係好掛住 Alice, 但係隨住故事推進, 受 Karin 同埋其他朋友影響, 可以感覺到 Yuri 其實都改變好多.

除 Yuri 同埋 Karin 兩個非常討人歡喜o既主角, 仲有好多佢地身邊好精彩o既角色. 佢地其中一個隊友叫 Joakim, 係我打唔埋 RPG 以來最搞笑o既一個角色, 真係經典之中o既經典. 隻狗 Blanca 亦好型, 同埋個俄國公主 Anastasia 亦係一個好搞笑o既角色. 不單止佢地, 連敵人都好精彩, 例如 Lenny 同 Veronica, 佢地同幾位主角之間o既對話真係好笑到痺. Lenny 相當受歡迎, 所以喺 Shadow Hearts 第三集甚至安排咗個正派角色俾佢.

至於故事, 喺呢一班咁出色o既角色推進之下, 當然係非常吸引. 尤其係故事一開始就講到 Yuri 身受詛咒, 應該係冇得救, 雖然佢本身亦唔係好 care, 因為佢都有少少想死, 但係玩家就會由頭到尾都會諗到, 佢點算好呢? 不過我就唔係咁鍾意結局對 Yuri 同 Karin o既安排, 有點兒美中不足.

Saturday, 20 December 2008

女人與雞

多年前, 香港有條粉腸叫詹培忠, 口出狂言, 話所有女人都係雞, 十個女人十隻雞, 老婆就係私家雞. 呢個人分明就係壞腦, 所以家下佢甩晒頭髮我一 d 都不覺奇怪. 須知道, 雞, 即是妓女, 乃係一門職業, 又邊有可能所有女人都係妓女? 我就唔信所有女人同人上完床都會問人收肉金.

諗唔到香港人中壞腦o既唔止呢個詹培忠. 最近倪震單嘢人人都加把口, 好多學生哥臨近聖誕唔使返學, 特別得閒, 一單小新聞抄到咁大, 幾年前吳鎮宇喺 karaoke 咀陳雅倫咪一模一樣, 又唔見佢煲到咁大. 我特別留意到, 好多人都針對個學生妹張茆, 上 youtube 或高登睇下, 人人都話佢係雞, 又話佢姣, 又話佢勾佬之類... 佢當然唔係雞啦 都冇證據佢靠賣肉收錢. 如果"雞"o既定義連佢都可以包括在內, 咁詹培忠就真係講得冇錯, 所有女人都可以叫做"雞". 姣? 首先, 姣o既定義唔清晰, 如果係指鍾意識男仔的話, 邊個女大學生唔鍾意? 仲有, 勾乜佬? 倪震又未結婚, 莫講話佢有自由去結識可能更適合佢o既女性, 就算當佢已經係人老公, 佢去滾係佢o既錯, 鬧個女仔做乜? 我又唔見有任何人鬧倪震係鴨喎.

我不得不認為, 香港人都係習慣賤視女性, 有乜唔啱睇, 就標籤人係妓女, 所作所為可謂幼稚頂透兼夾賤到無倫.

Friday, 19 December 2008

玩到尾o既 RPG (6):英雄傳說: 風之軌跡 FC



過去幾個月, 我每一次開部 PSP 就係玩呢隻 RPG, 係風之軌跡三部曲o既第一集, 我玩嗰個係中文版本, PSP 真係好正. 但係我喺屋企係唔會開, 而係坐車呀, 出街食嘢等人 serve 呀, 等巴士呀, 每逢有少少空閒時間就開嚟玩, 上個禮拜終於爆機. 其實呢隻唔算係好出色o既 RPG, 故事太過簡單, 不過至少兩個主角都算係討喜, 兩個之間互動亦足夠. 不過個故事去到結局, 突然之間變得極為有趣, 非常有 feel, 此乃多得之前編故事嗰個人俾足夠空間去處理兩個主角之間關係. 老實講, 呢隻 game 玩到近尾, 我都開始覺得有 d 悶, 太過重複. 但係一睇完個結局, 我就立即開始玩第二集, 因為呢個三部曲故事有趣o既地方係喺第一集完結時才開始.

剛開始玩第二集, so far 似乎各方面都比第一集要優勝, 故事同角色都幾吸引, 我對佢期望都幾高.

Tuesday, 16 December 2008

保持通話



呢齣港產片係翻拍荷里活片 Cellular. Cellular 我睇過好多次, 因為係我最鍾意o既西片之一, 所以有人翻拍我覺得冇乜所謂, 多多益善. 之前睇好多影評, 有人話好睇過原版, 所以好期待. 睇完後就真係唔多覺.

故事方面, 同原版非常貼近, 只係細節上有分別, 同埋嘗試去補足原版中有 d 不合理o既地方. 例如, 原版主角部手機最後入晒水都仲用得, 當時我睇就覺得好無厘頭, 所以港版冇呢一幕, 同埋喺中間提及張家輝部手機入過水壞咗, 似乎係笑咗原版一嘢. 但係港版好多嘢拍得誇張過原版好多, 例如班 FBI 喺機場開槍殺人都仲想冇事, 又例如香港警察如何同班壞鬼 FBI 勾結上完全冇交代, 我就唔覺得喺"合理性"上有任何改進. 而原版其中一個吸引人o既地方, 就係兩個主角要不斷想辦法刻服佢地唔可以收線呢個難題, 由頭到尾都有事發生, 故事好緊湊; 但係呢 d 情節橋段喺港版中都冇乜分別, 重複用返晒, 所以已經冇晒第一次睇原版嗰時嗰種驚喜.

至於角色, 我最鍾意原版男女主角年齡上o既大差別, 所以睇到最後佢地見面, 為佢地之間o既友誼覺得好新鮮, 終於有齣荷里活片, 入面男女主角之間只有友誼, 完全冇其他幻想空間. 港版就唔同, 女主角年齡細咗好多, 男主角就大好多, 兩個都有個細路, 兩個都係失婚, 搞到最後曖曖昧昧咁, 仲荷里活過荷里活. 呢方面我覺得失望. 不過港版我好鍾意張家輝, 原版嗰個演員都好, 但係張家輝有種好討喜o既幽默感.

而港版拍最得好, 比原版好得多o既, 就係動作場面, 亦係陳木勝o既絕招. 飛車呀, 槍戰等等, 都拍得比原版厲害. 呢方面係出色o既.

總論, 我唔覺得港版比原版好, 最多只可以話, 香港成功拍出一齣比荷里活原著更加荷里活o既電影.

Sunday, 14 December 2008

討厭教會傳統的原因

=========================================
黃毓民今受浸 教友質疑 被指甚少返教會 黃:得閒一定返
(明報)12月14日 星期日 05:05

【明報專訊】信主8年的立法會議員黃毓民今日將受浸,但此事遭教友非議,指他甚少返教會及洗禮班。該教會牧師澄清,黃毓民完成了洗禮班,但承認部分教友與黃毓民一樣,因工作關係而無法每周日都返教會,牧師笑言黃毓民今年的出席率,比另一名教友、前立法會議員劉千石高。黃毓民表示,自己家住九龍塘,要到筲箕灣返教會是較遠,故他同時返另一間較近的教會,「總之我得閒一定返,成日返教會,若果只是發夢亦不代表虔誠!」

黃毓民於03年起信奉基督教,今午將在筲箕灣基督教善樂堂受浸,不過有自稱為該堂的教友向傳媒指出,「黃毓民從來無返教會,洗禮班出席率係零」,指教會牧師蒙騙教友,稱私下為黃毓民補課,質疑黃毓民有特權。

牧師:毓民已完成洗禮班

善樂堂牧師林國璋回應說,黃毓民自年多前開始參與教會聚會,「當然無可能個個禮拜返足,他有時周日亦要搞活動……都市人生活忙,返到六七成已經好巴閉!」他沒有透露黃毓民的出席率,但笑言黃毓民今年的出席率比加入該教會10年的前立法會議員劉千石高。

他補充,明白阿石亦有難處,以往有時亦要到內地探親,教會內亦有部分教友因在迪士尼樂園工作、揸巴士,或要輪班,無法參與教會聚會,教會自有機制處理,相信其他教友亦明白。

林國璋指出,教會對教友受浸沒特定的出席率要求,但黃毓民有完成洗禮班,即使黃毓民無暇上堂,他自己亦會親自到其經營的麵檔找他補課。

至於黃毓民當選立法會議員後,在議事廳「掟蕉」而被外界批評,林國璋說不會評論錯對,但他說:「我與鄭大班(鄭經翰)一樣,欣賞毓民的辯才,覺得不一定要到此地步。」他私下亦曾勸黃毓民少講粗口。

黃毓民回應時說,自己除了返教會,亦有參與查經班,甚至到過三藩市等地傳福音,他直言:「質疑我的人都『戇居』!」他又說:「倪匡都從來不返教會,但他都是基督徒,聖經比好多人還要熟!」

他慨嘆,並非所有教會都能接納他這種「出位」的教徒,「既是社民連主席,又在立法會掟蕉,在好多基督徒心中,我是異端,覺得基督徒不是這樣,怕了我。」他選擇在善樂堂受浸,一方面是與牧師關係好,而且教會能容納他。他說今日太太等家人都會見證他受浸。

明報記者 張岳弢

=========================================

我 d 朋友都知, 我份人最討厭教會傳統. 其實係有其源頭: 好多年前, 我仲返中學團契嗰時, 當時有個朋友, 為人好到不得了, 盲o既都知佢係一個好到不得了o既基督徒. 後來, 佢想受浸, 但係教會竟然唔比佢, 原因係佢老豆老母唔俾佢返星期日崇拜, 所以出席率唔夠高. 當時我, 仲有幾個頭腦清醒o既人都好反感, 受浸同出席教會次數有乜關係? 有邊句聖經有咁講過? 相反, 好多聖經人物受浸前根本就冇返過教會, 信o既人, 就應該受洗, 就係咁簡單. 受洗前要返夠幾多幾多教會, 受洗前要上足幾多幾多堂, 全部都係教會傳統, 只係傳統而已, 根本聖經就冇講過. 好明顯, 呢班壞腦o既人, 以為自己作出嚟o既傳統就係神o既話語.

估唔到今日又見到呢單類似o既新聞. 教會 d 人成日話人失見證, 以我所見, 再醜都及不上呢班自以為可以為聖經"釋法"o既蠢人. 辣塊媽媽, 真係好能憎教會傳統.

Friday, 5 December 2008

主日學廣告

好似冇喺呢度提及過, 其實我而家去緊間中文教會o既英文聚會. 其實我個人好"中文", 不過佢地個中文崇拜有晒國語翻譯同廣東話, 我唔想一樣嘢聽兩次, 所以谷鬼氣去英文嗰邊與蕉同行. 最近負責英文嗰個大佬叫我幫佢地開班英文主日學, 答應咗. 上個星期日佢地有個特別食嘢聚會, 順便叫我幫班主日學宣傳下, 因為佢地而家進行緊嗰班冇人去, 佢地希望一月開始新班會多 d 人. 以下就係我講過o既內容, 以我演講經驗, 我覺得反應唔錯, 計劃會有反應o既地方都聽到有人笑.

==========================================


A few weeks ago, Ed asked me to lead an adult Sunday school class, with a focus on the Old Testament. I shamelessly and irresponsibly agreed to do it, despite the fact that I don't know much about the subject matter at all. There is only one goal in this class: to have fun talking about the Old Testament. And I think it will be more fun if we focus on topics that we rarely talk about in church. It'll be boring if we just repeat what you've heard 10 thousand times, right? I can give you a preview of some weird topics that I can think of, they're not fancy, complicated topics, some of them are just basics.



For example, the most basic question, what's the Old Testament? The official answer: the word of God; divinely inspired, but what does that mean? You may even know that it means "God-breathed" in the Greek, I have the Greek for you there, but what exactly does "God-breathed" mean? This is the most important book in our life, can we be more specific about this? And OK, the bible is divinely inspired, but what is the bible? Why is Genesis in our bible; why is 1 Enoch, or 4 Ezra not in our bible? Who made that decision for us? Is that decision divinely inspired as well? Don't you want to talk about this in more detail?



We can also look at some interesting texts, such as this one: "Our boat stuck fast beside Mt. Nimush... I released the watch-bird in search of land. The bird came back within a day exhausted, unrelieved from lack of rest… I then released a raven in search of land. The bird took flight above more shallow seas, found food and found release and found no need to fly on back to me." Can you guess what this is? No this is not Noah in Genesis, this is the Gilgamesh Epic. If you want to know more about this, come to Sunday school.



Have you heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls? They're coming to Toronto next year, and I can tell you, they're extremely important to Old Testament studies. Such as how, you ask?



Do we have anyone who uses the NRSV bible here? Look at this passage in the NIV. And here is the same passage in the NRSV. Even if you cannot read English, I'm sure you can tell they look very different. Woo, what happened to our bibles? Didn't we hear that we can't add or subtract even a letter from the bible? It is because of the Dead Sea Scrolls. You may not know it, but the bible that you're reading changed and will change because of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Why is that? Well, come to Sunday school and I'll tell you more about it.



We may also look at some interesting bible passages, such as this one here. Bible quiz: who killed Goliath? We all know the story. David killed Goliath, a giant who is almost as tall as Karen Wong. But, a bit further in the Book of Samuel, there it says it was Elhanan who killed Goliath. Woo woo woo, this seems really wrong, well not just you, apparently the author of the Book of Chronicles also feels uncomfortable about this: he changed the text a bit, saying that Elhanan didn't kill Goliath, he just killed Goliath's brother. We can look at things like that.



We can also talk about some goofy stuff, such as the Bible Code, have you heard about that? I can tell you here and now, it is an insanely idiotic, ridiculously stupid idea, it just doesn't work. You can see I'm really angry, that's because I wasted 20 bucks on this piece of trash. I can tell you how stupid it is in Sunday school.



And we all love archaeology, I can show you a few cool things. Such as this one, the Tel Dan Inscription. Some scholars think that this is the earliest evidence of the expression "the house of David", but some others think, No, it doesn't say that. Why do they disagree on something so simple?



You all remember the amazing story about Hezekiah right? Jerusalem was under attack, so he dug a tunnel for water, and an angel of God killed his enemies for him. We have not found the angel, but we found that tunnel. In that tunnel we also found an inscription. What does it say? Of course I'm not telling you now, the whole point of this thing is just to tease you.



And sheesh there are so many things we can talk about, like all these objects that carry the names of a number of people in the Old Testament. But I think that's enough for a preview. We begin in January, anyone is welcome. Yeah, I'm sure you can tell already, we're going to touch on some sticky issues. But, in case you are, there's no need to worry at all, if you think about it, when you first became a Christian, you knew next to nothing about the bible; there's no way you'll lose your faith because you are going know more about the bible. I myself never fear to ask the most difficult questions, not just because I'm a rebellious person, but also because I hold firm to the conviction that the bible is the word of God, it is not like I'll ask a really challenging question and inadvertently destroy the bible. It just won't happen! I take this as the spiritual aspect of this class, just to have the guts to ask the most difficult questions regarding the bible is in itself a training of faith and confidence in the bible. But of course, I'm not your pastor and not your mom, I don't really care about your spiritual growth, our number 1 priority is just to have fun talking about the Old Testament. I'm pretty sure we can make that happen at the very least.
==========================================

Saturday, 8 November 2008

Kirbet Qeiyafa 刻文



繼冇幾耐之前提及過o既<基督杯>後, 最近又多一個考古發現得到好多注目同討論. 兩個星期前, 以色列考古學家發表, 喺一個叫做 Kirbet Qeiyafa o既地方, 發掘出一塊寫有文字o既陶器碎片. Kirbet Qeiyafa 鄰近 Valley of Elah - 聖經故事中, 大衞大戰巨人歌利亞o既著名場景.

學者相信呢塊碎片年前極早, 大約來自 1000 BCE. 學者仲未能夠完成翻譯上面寫o既文字 (因為太早期, 佢地唔熟識呢種字體), 不過佢地相信係希伯來文. 如果係真, 咁就係現有最早o既希伯來文. 對了解希伯來文o既歷史同演變會係非常重要o既資料.

現時我仲未見到有翻譯或 transcription, 相信係因為學者仲未搞掂呢段嘢. 不過最令人大惑不解o既係點解連張好 d o既相都冇. 而家網上流傳o既相片都係類似上面呢張, 唔知個攝影師係咪有男人手情意結, 有條契弟隊隻手埋去遮晒成個鏡頭咁滯, 乜字都睇唔到. 唔知佢地搞邊科.

Wednesday, 5 November 2008

魏如昀: 傻





正呀, 之前就好鍾意魏如昀, 所以聽到佢籌備緊張 CD 嗰時就已經好期待. 結果亦冇令我失望, 碟內幾乎全部歌都係佢自己寫o既, 而我又好 buy 佢嗰種風格, 所以覺得呢隻碟入面好多歌都好聽, 同佢把聲同唱腔又夾, 我覺得好正.

最鍾意係隻主題曲<傻>, 同佢之前喺歌唱比賽中唱嗰個版本唔同. 原來嗰個版本我都好鍾意, 成日喺 youtube 翻聽, 但係呢個新版亦好鍾意, 聽落有 feel . 希望今次第一隻碟賣得好, 已經開始期待佢第二隻碟.

Thursday, 30 October 2008

Mrs. 摩西?

今年我 TA 嗰科叫做 Modern Study of the Bible, 好過癮, 雖然係一年級o既科目, 但係我自己都學到唔少新知識, 接觸一 d 之前唔多識o既嘢.

早兩個禮拜講摩西律法, 其中民數記講到摩西有個 Cushite 老婆: "摩西娶了古實女子為妻.米利暗和亞倫、因他所娶的古實女子、就毀謗他" (民數記 12.1). 但係心水清o既人, 就會諗起, 聖經多次提及摩西有個外父 (有時叫 Jethro [出埃及記 3.1; 18.1], 有時叫 Reuel [民數記 10.29]), 係一個米甸祭司, 係一個 Midianite, 一個米甸人, 咁摩西應該有個米甸老婆先係, 點解呢度又話佢有個古實老婆呢?

古實同米甸係兩個唔同o既地方. 米甸喺北阿拉伯, 而古實就喺埃及以南, 係一個非洲黑人o既地方, 所以一個古實女人應該係一個黑人. 有學者, 如 Martin Noth, 指出哈巴谷書 3.7 將古珊 (Cushan) 同米甸放喺一個平衡句入面, 所以可能古實同米甸其實係同義. 但係 Cush 同 Cushan 雖然相似, 但畢竟唔係同一隻字, 呢個解釋我唔能夠接受.

最直接o既解釋就係, 聖經話摩西有至少兩個老婆, 一個係米甸祭司個女, 另一個係個古實黑妹. 另外, 可以留意o既係, 米利暗由於摩西個古實老婆想去玩嘢, 上帝俾佢o既刑罰係"米利暗長了大痲瘋、有雪那樣白" (民數記 12.10). Frank Moore Cross 認為, 黑對白, 係聖經刻意而有心思o既安排.

嘩, 一夫多妻, 摩西, 你真識食.

Tuesday, 21 October 2008

蔡智恒: 回眸

正. 痞子蔡有新書出, 叫做<回眸>. 今次唔係一本過長篇, 而係由三個故事組成一本書, 叫<回眸>, <遺忘>, <遇見自己, 在雪域中>. 同以往一樣, 雖然佢本書正開始發行, 但係仲會瘋狂地, 不計銷量地喺網上連載.

雖然佢已經過咗<檞寄生>o既最高峰, 但係對於佢每次出新書, 我都非常關注, 並且係一定會追. 上次<暖暖>我都覺得幾有 feel. 其實而家我都已經好少有心機去睇任何小說, 近年唯一會睇o既小說就係痞子蔡寫o個 d, 所以今次我都會追住嚟睇.

真係開心.

Monday, 20 October 2008

MC Hotdog: 差不多先生



其實我都好少有特別講邊隻 CD 好聽, 但係呢隻碟好鍾意, 要特別提及. 上次 Wake Up 好正, 今次亦冇令人失望. 全碟十首歌中, 我最鍾意'差不多先生', '謝謝啞虎', '毒', '我瘋了', Hotdog 表現當然出色, 歌詞亦填得好, 尤其係'差不多先生', 真係非常鍾意. 其實我鍾意'差不多先生'多過'我愛台妹', 聽落好有 feel.

===================================
差不多先生

我抽著差不多的的煙 又過了差不多的一天
時間差不多的閑 我花著差不多的錢
口味要差不多鹹 做人要差不多的賤
活在差不多的邊緣 又是差不多的一年

一個差不多的台北市 有差不多馬子
差不多又干了幾次 用著差不多的姿勢
看著差不多的電視 吃著差不多的狗屎
寫著差不多的字 又發著差不多的誓
差不多的夜生活 又喝著差不多的酒
聽著差不多的音樂 喝醉差不多的糗
有著差不多的絕望 做著差不多的夢
穿著差不多的衣服 腦袋差不多的空
差不多的掛 說著差不多抱怨的話
時間也差不多了 該我那差不多的家
差不多的瞎 指鹿為馬 都差不多吧
繼續吧 繼續瞎子摸象吧 有差嗎

我是差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 這個問題艱深
差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 總在見縫插針

差不多的反復 總是差不多又一無反顧
差不多的感觸 總是差不多又重產物
差不多的孤 差不多的毒
一條差不多的路 我吃著差不多的苦
我嗑著差不多的藥 又睡了一場差不多的覺
差不多的煩惱 差不多要把我逼瘋掉
差不多的糟 差不多的妙
差不多的鬧 又差不多的屌 
差不多的中國風 差不多要把耳朵蒙
改世不紅 差不多要把你送了終
差不多的歌手 擺著差不多的烏龍
差不多的麥克風 唱差不多的胡隆 都在哭窮
差不多都像個豬頭 偏偏我和他們是差不多的豬朋狗友
撒差不多的謊 唬爛差不多的強
罵人差不多的嗆 不然你要怎麼樣 

我是差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 這個問題艱深
差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 總在見縫插針

差不多的你 差不多的我 差不多的他 差不多的他媽
都差不多想發達 差不多打著哈哈
他罵著叉叉嘎嘎呼啦啦 都差不多的哢哢

差不多先生他像個笑話 有聞又在叫罵
差不多要跳不起來 還是要跳要吧
差不多要像烏龜 但烏龜烏龜翹吧
這差不多的人生 他妙嗎

差不多要力爭上游 想游到上流
差不多在心裡默念阿門和佛陀布的放流
差不多的生活很街頭 再差一點你就變成街友
我唱了八十八個差不多 都差不多
差不多先生不會在乎這麼多 日子應該怎麼過
差不多的2008怎麼霍 我是差不多先生 熱狗
我是差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 這個問題艱深
差不多先生 我的差不多是天生
代表我很天真 也代表我是個賤人
這差不多的人生 總在見縫插針
===================================

Friday, 17 October 2008

畫皮



頭先一個人喺屋企睇靜靜地睇<畫皮>. 本來睇, 係因為覺得張靚穎隻<畫心>好正, 而且又有陳嘉上做導演, 又有甄子丹睇; 點知結果齣戲比想像中好睇. 首先, 推進節奏 OK, 唔會好似其他國內古裝片咁, 掛住拍風景 show off 畫面, 而拖到慢晒. 故事由頭到尾都有追看性, 而且易明, 雖然係古代背景, 但拍出有種神話奇幻 feel, 切合故事本質. 我覺得最突出o既係音樂, 有 d 旋律寫得好搶耳, 有助觀眾投入劇情. 主題曲我之前都已經大力推介過, 唔使再講. 唯一唔好係趙薇: 陳坤同甄子丹為佢爭風? 說服力不高囉.

總括嚟講, 我覺得呢齣戲拍得好好, 陳嘉上有料到, 畫面, 音樂, 故事節制都掌握得好, 故事易明易 follow, 有幾位角色又討喜, 睇完好有滿足感, 我覺得係近年中國古裝片中比較好o既一套. 睇得過.

Monday, 13 October 2008

The Strangers



今日 thanksgiving 冇嘢做, 亦冇地方去, 不過夜晚就睇咗齣戲, 係靚女 Liv Tyler 做o既 The Strangers. 故事講佢地男朋友喺間屋入面, 點知俾幾個戴面具o既陌生人搞. 就係咁簡單, 幾個人做晒成齣戲. 除咗女主角特別秀色可餐外, 其實呢齣戲同其他同類型o既殺人片冇乜分別, 故事亦不見得有特別聰明之處. d 變態殺人犯個個都好似忍者咁, 又好似練就有凌波微步神功咁, 個個都神出鬼沒, 次次都係明明望住佢, 個鏡頭一轉就唔見咗人, 似鬼多過似人, 太過神化, 難以令人睇得投入.

強項: Liv Tyler. 有一幕講佢想走落床下底, 點知個身太大份, 入唔到, 算係全片最過癮之處.

弱項: 睇完都唔知發生乜事, 只知無厘頭有幾條友戴面具鍾意入屋殺人, 沒頭沒腦. 成日用大聲音響嚇人, 只係低下手法. 好多次 d 殺手明明可以輕易殺咗兩個主角, 但係又唔殺, 只令人覺得唔殺得佢地住因為齣戲一定要至少做夠個半鐘.

Wednesday, 8 October 2008

玩到尾o既 RPG (5):Tales of Vesperia



好耐冇繼續呢個話題, 因為做份 proposal 做到個人腦都實埋, 打機都冇乜時間. 不過而家既然已經搞掂, 就回歸打機生活囉. 尋晚就玩一隻 xbox 360 o既 RPG 玩到尾, 實屬難得.

難得在於, 我一向都唔鍾意 Tales 系列, 因為佢地一般都注重打鬥系統多過故事同角色, 所以呢個系列好少出到好o既 RPG, 所以我一開始都不對呢隻 game 抱有期望. 不過呢集有 d 唔同, 雖然故事都係一般貨仔, 但係幾個角色就 OK 吸引, 各有故事同性格, 足以吸引我玩到尾去睇佢地o既結局. 我認為, 呢隻係 360 上面唯一算出色o既日式 RPG. 不過當然, 比起 Shadow Hearts 或 Xenosaga 之類, 仲差好遠. 而家開始玩 Square 隻 Infinite Undiscovery, 似乎麻麻地, 差 Vesperia 一皮喎.

Wednesday, 1 October 2008

基督杯?



http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/10/01/jesus-bowl.html

最近法國考古學家 Franck Goddio 發表話發現到隻'基督杯', 喺 Alexandria (埃及) 水底出土. 佢認為隻杯係來自公元前第二世紀至公元第一世紀之間. 上面用希臘文寫住 DIA CHRESTOU O GOISTAIS, 依佢翻譯係'魔術師基督' (by Christ the magician).

問題係 CRESTOS 唔同 CHRISTOS, 係咪等於'基督'令人存疑. 古代羅馬文人 Suetonius 喺講到 Claudius 時期嗰時, 提到'the Jews constantly caused disturbances at the instigation of Chrestos'. 呢段文字好出名, 因為有可能係講緊第一世紀o既基督徒, 不過同樣問題, 呢度係講緊 Chrestos, 唔係 Christos, 所以有學者估會唔會係羅馬人唔熟教會嘢, 所以串錯基督個朵.

點都好啦, 既然個名又唔算全中, 而且個年期如果真係公元前第二世紀至公元第一世紀之間, 咁就太早, 冇乜理由呢隻杯同基督教嗰個耶穌有直接關係.

Tuesday, 23 September 2008

Proposal Defense 講詞

聽日就係我 proposal defense, 開頭要講十分鐘介紹自己個 proposal, 之後答 20-30 分鐘問題. 以下就係我打算要講o既說話:

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. In my dissertation, I'm trying to investigate the effects, if any, of the destruction of the 2nd temple on how the Jews imagined and described heaven. I suppose I don't need to repeat what I've said in my proposal, so in the following 10 minutes or so, I plan to give you a more personal account of how I came to this research topic, and why I think it is worthwhile to work on it as a dissertation.

How did I come to be interested in this topic? If you remember, about 2 years ago, we had a famous scholar named Eliot Wolfson on campus; he gave a special presentation on Jewish mysticism and showed some fancy-looking pictures of ancient manuscripts. But unfortunately, just like a selected few of the faculty members who are willing to admit and many graduate students who cannot help but confess, I did not understand his lecture at all. However, as diligent and enthusiastic a student I am, in preparation for the lecture, I read a number of his studies, which I somehow understood, and actually found intriguing at times. In some of those, Wolfson discussed the connections between heaven and temple in Jewish conceptions, that Jews believed that the temple on earth was built on the model of a heavenly prototype, and they imagined heaven in temple images. Being a knowledgeable graduate student of McMaster University who's done his comps and all that, I've heard of this idea many times before, but I have to say that it was on that occasion that I began wondering, since heaven and temple are connected conceptually, what would the destruction of the 2nd temple do to Jewish perceptions of heaven? Was there a shift after 70 CE?

At first, I thought to myself, the answer should be rather straight forward, because it just seems natural that the trauma of losing the temple would make quite an impact on perceptions of heaven, considering that the Jews traditionally imagined heaven as a temple. But then I saw an interesting idea that changed my mind in a recent article of David Suter, in which he points out that the authors and readers of the Second Temple apocalyptic literature believe that God can be found only in heaven, but not in the disqualified temple on earth, because many Jews considered themselves living in a state of a continuous exile in the absence of the temple even after they had physically returned from the exile. It was after reading this that I came to realize that the situation is a lot more complicated than I initially thought. I mean, I'm not too sure about the idea of an ongoing exile, but I think one aspect of this theory has some truth to it: that is, there was a relatively widespread dissatisfaction against the temple, that some Jews saw the temple or its priesthood as disqualified, they're not functioning the way they should. The community that copied and preserved the dead sea scrolls are an example of this, they're pious Jews, they're living a religious life, they're very keen observers of the torah, but they were doing so without the second temple, and they were quite OK with that. In other words, there might be a discrepancy between historical reality and the Jews' perception of the reality. In history, we know that the Jews lost their temple in 70 CE; but in the mind of some Jews, they had lost the temple way before its physical destruction. The starting point of the trauma of losing the temple is not necessarily the day after the temple's destruction; it could be much earlier. This observation, I think, turns this seemingly straightforward inquiry into an interesting puzzle that intrigues me.

Why do I think that this is an important topic to work on? In Judaism, there is an idea of sacred space. Some places are more important, more holy than others. And the most important of such sacred space are the temple which is God's dwelling on earth, and heaven which is God's permanent residence above the earth. A study that will enrich our knowledge of the development of the Jews' perception of these special places, that sounds pretty important to me.

Is my study of this important topic going to be important as well? Am I doing anything new that still needs to be done? Among other things, I think one significance of my dissertation is that I'll focus on comparing second temple literature with post-70 writings that date to before the 2nd century CE, instead of the Hekhalot literature that date to a much much later period like Elior did in her famous book The 3 Temples. And I think that is an important task. Just for example, let's say I want to find out the impact of the 9/11 attacks on movie making. The best way to do it is to compare movies that were made before 2001 with those that were made in the years or decades immediately following the event. I would not compare movies that were made before the event with those that are made half a millennium afterwards. I mean, I don't deny the value of doing that, but it seems quite clear to me that the materials that are closest in time to the pivotal event are the most important evidence for this kind of inquiry. That's what I'm doing, and to my surprise, that really hasn't been done adequately enough in the past as far as I know.

Saturday, 20 September 2008

歧視女性的基督教會?



我從來都不自居為女權主義者, 但係有時太過份o既歧視行為, 真係要忍唔住放出嚟俾人見識一下, 有幾過份. 我之前都講過好多次, 都係嗰句, d 人成日話自己o既決定係'合乎聖經原則', 不過其實係倒轉先真: 自己早有定論, 然後選擇性地搵 d 似乎係支持自己論點o既經文出嚟. 假借聖經o既名義嚟壓迫他人.

============================
Cover with women pastors pulled from shelves
By ERRIN HAINES Associated Press Writer © 2008 The Associated Press
Sept. 19, 2008, 2:36PM

ATLANTA — The five women on the cover are dressed in black and smiling — not an uncommon strategy for selling magazines.

But these cover girls are women of the cloth, featured in Gospel Today magazine's latest issue, which the Southern Baptist Convention has pulled from the shelves at its bookstores, though the magazine is available for sale upon request.

The group says women pastors go against its beliefs, according to its interpretation of the New Testament. The magazine was taken off stands in more than 100 Lifeway Christian Bookstores across the country, including six in metro Atlanta.

Published for nearly 20 years, Gospel Today is the largest and most widely distributed urban Christian publication in the country, with a circulation of 240,000. The magazine's publisher, Teresa Hairston, said she was just reporting on a trend, not trying to promote women pastors.

"They basically treated it like pornography and put it behind the counter," she said. "Unless a person goes into the store and asks for it, they won't see it displayed."

Nationally, the Southern Baptists have adopted statements discouraging women from being pastors, but their 42,000 U.S. churches are independent and a few have selected women to lead their congregations. The faith was organized in 1845 in Augusta, Ga.

......

============================

死海古卷@多倫多

非常期待.

============================
Dead Sea Scrolls to be showcased at ROM next year
Posted: September 18, 2008, 10:08 PM by Barry Hertz
Arts

By Natalie Alcoba, National Post

The biggest international exhibition yet of the Dead Sea Scrolls will be showcased at the Royal Ontario Museum next year.

Billed by some as Toronto’s largest ancient historical “blockbuster” since the Art Gallery of Ontario’s King Tut show in 1979, the scrolls are scheduled to be at the ROM next summer until December. Not every piece will be on display, but organizers say it will be the largest collection outside of Israel’s borders.

Similar, smaller exhibits in other cities have attracted hundreds of thousands of viewers in the past — the ROM show is expected to be even more popular.

The scrolls were discovered in 11 caves along the shores of the Dead Sea starting in 1947 and consist of more than 900 manuscripts, largely fragmented, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. They date back to 250 BC.

“Most people would say they are the most important document having to do not just with Jewish history, but the origins of Christianity,” said Alex Gropper, director of the University of Toronto’s Canadian Institute for Mediterranean Studies. “They’ve revolutionized our knowledge of this important period.”

Mr. Gropper helped bring the exhibition to Toronto. He is on the board of the Israel Antiquities Authority, the custodian of the scrolls. Marilynne Freidman, a spokeswoman for the ROM, said the museum would be releasing details about the exhibit next week, at an official launch.

......
===========================

Wednesday, 17 September 2008

畫心

頭先喺偶然之下, 聽到隻好好聽, 我好鍾意o既新歌. 一向都好鍾意張靚穎, 呢首歌真係啱晒佢唱. 非常期待遲下聽佢唱 live o既演出.

Wednesday, 10 September 2008

英雄救美之計

最近因為黃毓民關係, 係我第一次咁關注選舉經過同結果, 真係非常有趣, 睇到好多我之前冇留意過o既嘢. 最過癮者, 莫過於有日喺 youtube 見到梁燕城為梁美芬站台拉票:

http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=ImySlFq9280

http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=68SroaEMfTQ

對梁燕城, 雖然佢成日講埋 d 佢唔識o既嘢 (如考古, 聖經) 但係又講錯晒, 唔識又扮博學, 但係對佢冇乜厭惡感, 但係今次佢幫梁美芬拉票, 就真係令人心生厭惡, 又話佢係"鄰家女孩", 又話佢有"獨立思想", 真係唔知佢係有心講大話定係咁天真咁傻. 其實唔止佢, 仲有好多其他基督教大佬, 如李炳光, 陳世強, 陳樹安, 呂宇俊. 當中最出位者, 則當屬蘇穎智牧師, 佢喺主日崇拜聚會中要求會友為梁美芬代禱, 疑似為佢拉票. 而家梁美芬選上, 香港基督教會都幫佢唔少, 否則未必可以勝過毛孟靜.

梁美芬係乜人呢? 佢雖然以獨立參選人身份參選, 但係人人都知佢係共產黨無間道. 首先, 佢支持廿三條:

===============================
2007年5月11日。

【明報專訊】策發會委員老鼠芬、鄭赤焱和鄭國漢,昨日在策發會工作坊上建議,若不想下屆特首選舉提名門檻過高和有篩選機制,當局應盡快為《基本法》23條立法,並把條例內分裂國家、竊取國家機密等罪行,列入《行政長官選舉條例》,令干犯有關罪行者不能參選特首。
===============================

一個有正常獨立思想機能o既人又點會主動要求廿三條立法? 搵鬼信咩? 仲有, 喺選舉期間, 就俾人踢爆佢同共產黨選舉機器民建聯配票, 有晒證據, 俾人搵到工聯會 (亦係親共產黨) 內部信件, 其中1.69 萬份叫會員投俾梁美芬, 另外2.3 萬份就叫會員投俾民建聯.

到選舉當日, 由民建聯一早就收檔, 停止拉票, 原因當然係因為已經夠票當選; 而同時梁美芬就有成千人幫佢拉票, 明顯係民建聯幫晒手分票俾佢, 大家齊齊入立法會, 而結果亦係成功收場, 大團圓結局.

我真係唔明, 點解香港教會要支持一個支持廿三條o既人? 教會係咪 buy 廿三條先? 尋晚聽譚志強節目, 佢話曾經有教會領袖喺大陸出事, 不過梁美芬出手搞掂, 成功救人, 所以同教會關係密切云云. 假如屬實, 咁大佬呀, 呢條係 TVB 用到爛o既英雄救美之計嚟啫!!! 搵人搞你o個個又係佢, 英勇救你o個個又係佢, 咁白痴o既招數都睇唔出? 唉, 真係唔知佢地搞邊科.

Thesis proposal

搞咁耐, 終於到今日要交 thesis proposal, 剛好七頁紙, 講多一句都o吾得. 我其中一個 advisor 話: This is not a strong statement. 不過佢都比我兩個星期後去 defend. 有興趣o既朋友不妨睇下, 比下意見, 問下問題, 對我練習 oral defense 會有幫助. 不過o係呢度減晒 d footnotes.

Jewish Perceptions of Heaven and the Destruction of the Second Temple

Research Question
Through a literary and historical-critical inquiry into depictions of heaven in early Jewish literature, the proposed dissertation investigates whether the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. significantly affected Jewish representations of heaven. If so, how? If not, why? If not shortly after the catastrophe, when? Could a major shift in Jewish representations of heaven have occurred during the Second Temple period, whether due to reflection on the destruction of the First Temple in 586 B.C.E. and/or due to widespread dissatisfaction with the purity and priesthood of the Second Temple? In the process of addressing these questions, this dissertation will contribute to research on early Jewish attitudes towards the Temple, the history of reflections on heaven, and the effects of the destruction of the Second Temple on early Judaism.

Contexts of the Research Question
The word "heaven(s)" occurs over 400 times in the Hebrew Bible. The heavenly realm is imagined as a place somewhere high above the earth (Isa 55.9; Ps 139.8), reserved for God and spiritual beings (Job 1; 1 Kgs 22) , but it is never described in specific terms in pre-exilic and exilic literature. Some early biblical materials hint at the possibility that a few people gained glimpses of heaven. For instance, in 1 Kgs 22.19–22, Micaiah claims that he "saw YHWH" in heaven, and in Gen 5.22–24, Enoch is said to "have walked" with God and to have been "taken" from earth, presumably to heaven. These traditions, however, offer very few details regarding heaven itself. The first elaborate depictions of heaven appear in the centuries after the Babylonian destruction of the First Temple, Exile, and Return. For instance, a third-century B.C.E. apocalypse, the Book of the Watchers, describes in detail what Enoch sees in heaven (1 En. 14). In writings from between the third century B.C.E. and second century C.E., we find more detailed descriptions of heaven (e.g., 1 En. 71), of a heavenly Jerusalem/Temple (e.g., 2 Bar 4), and of the activities carried out therein (e.g., Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice).

Especially relevant to my inquiry is the notion that the ancient Israelites pictured heaven as akin to the Temple and/or traced the origin of the earthly Temple back to a heavenly prototype, much like their ancient Near Eastern neighbors. For example, in Exodus, Moses is said to have built the tabernacle based on a "pattern" that God made him "see" on a mountain higher than the cloud (Exod 24.18; 25.9, 40), thus suggesting that a proto-Tabernacle/Temple exists in heaven. Similarly, in Ps 11.4, the two places are paralleled: it is claimed that God can be found in the "holy Temple" and "heaven." In Isa 6, it is in the Temple that God and the heavenly creatures revealed themselves to Isaiah the prophet. The connection between heaven and Temple is explored more intensely in writings from the Second Temple period and onward. Some writings depict a heavenly liturgy with angels performing priestly tasks (e.g., 1 En. 39.13; Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice), while others explicitly identify heaven as the "holy of holies" or the "Temple" (e.g., T.Levi 3.4, 5.1; Ap.Zeph A).

In light of this temple-heaven association, scholars have found it rewarding to learn about Jewish perceptions of the Temple through their depictions of heaven, and vice versa. For example, several studies have shown that the depiction of a heavenly temple in the Book of the Watchers reflects a polemic against the Jerusalem Temple. Studies of Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice have similarly suggested that depiction of a celestial worship signal a dim view of the Temple as the Songs promote a legitimate cultic life to replace what the Temple has to offer. Second Baruch also depicts a heavenly temple that far surpasses the earthly one in every aspect (ch. 4), so a Temple on earth is no longer needed.

For the close association between heaven and Temple in early Jewish tradition, it stands to reason that a devastating event like the destruction of the Second Temple might have influenced how Jews imagined and described heaven. This has been suggested, most recently and extensively, by Elior. She compares the views of heaven in Second Temple and Hekhalot literature, and argues that although they share a similar interest in heavenly matters and exhibit some remarkable continuities in their depictions of heaven, the two sets of texts are inherently different: whereas the interest in heaven in Hekhalot literature was inspired by the trauma of the loss of the Temple, the same cannot be said for Second Temple texts because the Temple was still standing at the time of their composition.

At first sight, Elior's interpretation seems to make good sense. Closer analysis of the Second Temple Jewish materials, however, shows that the situation is more complicated. Recent research has demonstrated that some Jews in the Second Temple period saw the Temple and/or its priesthood as failing to function properly. If so, the Second Temple’s destruction might not have led to as dramatic a shift of perceptions of heaven as Elior proposes, because for some Jews of the Second Temple period, the Temple was already effectively absent, long before its destruction by the Romans. Recently, for instance, Suter has argued that Second Temple literature reflects a similar sense of the loss of the Temple as would Hekhalot literature. This view can find support in, for example, the Epistle of Enoch, which divides the course of history into ten weeks and places the Babylonian Exile within the sixth (1 En. 93.8). This second-century B.C.E. text, however, never mentions a return from the Exile nor the rebuilding of the Temple. Some scholars take this silence as evidence for the author's scorn for the Second Temple, which is here dismissed entirely.

Did the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. and its physical absence thereafter significantly alter how Jews imagined and depicted heaven? Or did early Jewish perceptions of heaven change relatively little, due to widespread dissatisfaction with the Second Temple and its priesthood? Had some Jews already adjusted to the trauma of living a religious life without a functioning Temple? At present, these questions remain unresolved, and it is the aim of the proposed research to try to answer them.

Anticipated Contributions of the Research
The proposed dissertation will be the first book-length investigation on the question of the impact of the destruction of the Second Temple on Jewish perceptions of heaven. This topic has been touched on in a number of recent studies, such as the books of Elior, Himmelfarb, and Wright. These books, however, raise this issue in the course of investigating other related issues, rather than focusing on the question of how the Second Temple’s destruction might have affected Jewish images of heaven. Considering the wealth of relevant textual evidence, spanning centuries, a dissertation-length study is timely and warranted.

Such a study will also require me to reconsider the notion of Temple-imagery in specific descriptions of heaven. I agree with the prevailing opinion that Second Temple Jews often imagined and described heaven in terms of the Temple. In my view, however, some of the arguments commonly invoked in favor of this viewpoint are problematic. For example, it is argued that heaven in 1 En. 14 is depicted on the model of the Temple because both constructions exhibit a tripartite structure. But the Temple was not the only building in antiquity that is known to contain multiple large courts. Another popular line of argumentation identifies angels in heaven with priests on earth, because angels are said to intercede for sinful humans (e.g., 1 En. 15.2), sing praise to God (e.g., Ap.Zeph 3.3–4), and worship as a group (e.g., 1 En. 39.12–14). But these are not exclusively priestly traits. To identify angels with priests simply on the basis of such flimsy connections is therefore not convincing. I am not alone in seeing this problem, as Fletcher-Louis has recently challenged the theory that the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice presupposes a heavenly Temple. Although his innovative interpretation has not been widely accepted, it has led a number of scholars to rethink and refine their views of the Songs. His advice not to assume a heavenly Temple in Jewish texts is well taken. In this light, I think it is now an apt time to reassess our views of the notion of a heavenly Temple in Jewish writings. It is necessary to anchor an important conclusion (i.e., that Jews described heaven in Temple imagery) on solid arguments. Only then can we fully appreciate how Jews highlighted the temple-heaven connection in their literary representations of heaven.

In addition, this dissertation will consider materials that Elior overlooked. It was not Elior’s intention to provide a comprehensive treatment of images of heaven in early Jewish literature; her aim, rather, was to compare views on heaven before and after 70 C.E., with an eye to later developments in Jewish mysticism. As a result, however, Elior skips over some important and relevant source materials. For instance, in her The Three Temples, she compares views of heaven and Temple in the Hebrew Bible, Second Temple Jewish literature, and the Hekhalot literature. Yet she mostly neglects sources, such as 2 Enoch, 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, 3 Baruch, Apocalypse of Abraham, and Apocalypse of Zephaniah, that date from the time between the Temple's destruction and the Rabbinic literature. To compare views of heaven before and after 70 C.E., in my view, writings from the first two centuries of the Common Era provide a better comparison with Second Temple literature than do late antique and early medieval sources like the Hekhalot literature.

The motif of angelification might further exemplify the significance of post-70 accounts of heaven. In post-70 Jewish literature, in particular, there appears to be an increased emphasis on the transformation of humankind into an angelic existence in heaven. Some pre-70 writings call Israel the “holy ones” of God (e.g., Dan 7.18–24), and “companions of the host of heaven” (e.g. 1 En. 104.6). Yet it is in post-70 texts that we find the most elaborate details of human angelification in heaven: individuals are said to be given permission to put on a special garment of priestly angels and to join them in a liturgy in heaven (e.g., Ap.Abra 13.15; 17.1–6; Ap.Zeph 3.3–4). Could this increase of interest in angelification be an attempt to cope with the absence of the Temple, to counter the sentiment of isolation between human on earth and God in heaven? Only a detailed exegetical investigation and careful comparison of the aforementioned literature can adequately address this question.

Primary Texts
The primary data for my research are Jewish writings penned during the time when the Second Temple was standing and in the two centuries immediately following its destruction. I will focus on texts that contain detailed information about heaven and/or activities carried out in heaven. Pre-70 sources will include the Book of the Watchers (1 En. 12–16), the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, the Aramaic Levi Document (4.1–5), the Self-Glorification Hymn, and the Similitudes (1 En. 39¬–71). Post-70 sources will include 4 Ezra (9.26–10.59), 2 Baruch (ch. 4), 3 Baruch (chs. 2–16), 2 Enoch (chs. 3–37), Apocalypse of Abraham (chs. 15–20), and Apocalypse of Zephaniah (A; chs. 3–12). I will also consider some texts of disputed provenance (i.e., Jewish or Christian?) and/or date (i.e., before or after 70 C.E.?), such as Testament of Abraham (chs. 11–14; 20.12–15) and the Testament of Levi (3.4–5.2). Also worth noting is a group of texts that describe an ideal and/or eschatological Temple which is not in heaven (e.g., New Jerusalem; Temple Scroll); although these texts provide limited direct information regarding heaven, they are a source of inspiration for texts that do describe heaven in detail. This list of sources is preliminary, and I remain open to include other important sources of data as I further my research.

Method of Approach
The proposed dissertation will be based on literary analysis of the source materials with a historical-critical approach. My analysis will be oriented towards trying to uncover the meaning of a text in its original context, that is, what it meant when it was composed and/or redacted. For each of the texts under investigation, I will try to answer four questions: (1) How does it depict heaven? (2) How does it depict the earthly Temple and/or the priesthood? (3) How does it describe the connection between heaven and the Temple? (4) How might its author(s)/redactor(s)’ view of the Temple influence the text’s description of heaven?

By noting the dominant concerns reflected and expressed in the texts, I will also try to gain a glimpse at the problems and crises that their authors/redactors and readers faced in the context of their specific social settings. My main concern, however, is with broader trends across different social groups and movements. I will thus compare pre-70 C.E. depictions of heaven with those from thereafter, so as to highlight the continuities and differences in order to determine the possible effects of the Second Temple’s destruction on Jewish perceptions of heaven. Since the Temple’s destruction is not the only possible explanation for the differences, it will be important to pursue an in-depth exegetical investigation of each relevant passage in context. Since my focus is on tracing the main shifts in Jewish images of heaven, this project is also one of intellectual history and aims to contribute to our broader understanding of the history of ideas about heaven.

Procedure
The dissertation will contain an introduction, four chapters, and a conclusion. The introduction will define important terms, explain research questions, discuss my approach, and survey the relevant past scholarship. The first chapter will survey descriptions of heaven in the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near Eastern traditions, thus laying the groundwork for my analysis of Jewish literature between the third century B.C.E. and second century C.E. The second chapter will focus on perceptions of heaven in Second Temple literature, to observe how heaven is depicted after such significant events as the First Temple's destruction, the rebuilding of the Temple, or the rise of the Hasmonean priests. The third chapter will consider post-70 writings, with the aim of identifying the continuities and differences compared with depictions of heaven before the Second Temple's destruction. The fourth will focus on texts of disputed provenance or date of composition; though this last group of texts will not be used as primary evidence, they may contain information regarding early Jewish views of heaven that can supplement the results of the preceding chapters. The conclusion, at last, will summarize and synthesize what my research can and/or cannot establish.

Thursday, 28 August 2008

高登為民建聯作詩一首

主建港好聯盟,
實幹有才能,
愛國共最熱心,
做事佢德服人。
公平正義自私,
懶惰退散為事,
未來香港佢帶
青年人才聚成。
常遭抹黑不少,
誣告事多陰招,
社民晒正義者,
論點得把聲,
心誰有天下知,
謾罵更低B。
知書禮民建聯,
從不亂心完全,
新秀輩出變龍,
好漢如雲盛隆。
民建歷史最悠
四年耕種九收,
五個選區彩旗,
強勁口人人記。
大家吝嗇選票,
精英民建聯,
地為你解疑難!

Friday, 22 August 2008

運動強國



==========================
Too Old and Frail to Re-educate? Not in China

By ANDREW JACOBS
Published: August 20, 2008

......

The two women, both in their late 70s, have never spoken out against China’s authoritarian government. Both walk with the help of a cane, and Ms. Wang is blind in one eye. Their grievance, receiving insufficient compensation when their homes were seized for redevelopment, is perhaps the most common complaint among Chinese displaced during the country’s long streak of fast economic growth.

But the Beijing police still sentenced the two women to an extrajudicial term of “re-education through labor” this week for applying to hold a legal protest in a designated area in Beijing, where officials promised that Chinese could hold demonstrations during the Olympic Games.

......

==========================

難怪運動強國攞咁多金牌, 真係身體力行, 做到人人做運動, 三歲到三百歲都要勞動, 磨其意志, 郁其體膚, d 領導可謂愛民如子.

我愛民建聯

民建聯一直為香港人勞心勞力爭取利益,這麼多年來
建立的形象又豈會被人惡意抺黑之下就崩潰?但總有
聯群結隊的人緊緊抓著民主的旗號,實質只是帶領些
最愛裝扮出一副有理想樣子的年青人,發出他們天真
無邪卻未經深思熟慮的激進政見。那種控制選票的無
恥行為是民建聯不屑去做的。民建聯為長者提供福利
正是一種常被攻擊的善行,但長者們的意願只傾向有
能之士,因此請大家停止抺黑民建聯。香港也只靠這
樣的鬥士才能繼續得到中央的大力支持,以及大恩惠

Sunday, 17 August 2008

這裡發現愛 DVD





好難解釋, 唔知點解我好鍾意這裡發現愛呢齣嘢, 所以忍唔住買咗套 DVD, 喺 yesasia 訂, 要成 $90, 不過好處係唔使俾運費, 亦唔使俾稅. 上個星期送到, 非常開心, 可以喺大電視睇靚女馬尾妹 Nancy, 而畫面質素當然好過之前喺電腦度睇好多倍, 同埋我都留意到有不少地方電視版冇o既對白同畫面, 喺 DVD 入面有.

不過我唔鍾意個包裝. 喺劇入面求其 cap 張圖出嚟都會靚過佢專登影o既嗰套宣傳相, 個封面則尤其核突, 真係唔明 d 宣傳諗乜. 同埋一張 DVD 入面其實分好多集, 有時一集完o既時機好古怪, 係一段好有 feel o既對白中間打斷, 算係缺點. 同埋畫面始終係 4:3, 唔係 16:9, 算係好落後, 連亞視都不如.

Thursday, 14 August 2008

DeConick: The Thirteenth Apostle



April, D. DeConick, The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says (London: Continuum, 2007).

呢本係最近我覺得最鍾意睇, 亦係非常重要o既一本書. 作者 DeConick 係 Rice U. o既聖經研究學者, 專長係新約聖經以外o既福音書, 如 Gospel of Thomas. 呢本書有乜咁重要呢?

話說幾年前, National Geographic 話發現咗 Gospel of Judas, 當時有出電視節目, 而家都仲應該有得 BT 返, 亦出咗本 critical edition, 當中有猶大福音o既 Coptic 原文, 同埋英文翻譯. 根據呢本英文翻譯, 猶大福音係公元第二世紀一本好有趣o既書: 猶大唔係壞人, 唔係叛徒; 相反, 佢係英雄, 耶穌門徒之中只有佢一個知道耶穌o既計劃, 而所謂"出賣"耶穌, 其實係幫耶穌逃離冇用o既肉身進入永恆, 係猶大o既英雄事蹟之一. 但係當 DeConick 自己仔細讀過猶大福音之後, 佢發現猶大福音根本就唔係咁: 猶大依然係壞人, 係叛徒, 耶穌亦有鬧佢. 而 National Geographic o個本書會搞出個咁o既猶大係因為英文翻譯有幾處重要o既地方都翻譯得好差. 所以佢就出咗呢本書仔, 將來佢仲會出一本比較 technical, 俾學者睇o既版本.

呢本書頭一半, 主要係講早期教會背景, 講到o係第二世紀, 其實教會入面有好多鬼打鬼o既不同支派, 包括現代人最熟悉o既使徒教會啦, 相信新舊約聖經其實有兩個神o既 Marcionite 啦, 重視聖經靈上身o既 Montanism 啦, 仲有好複雜o既 gnosticism. 而 gnosticism 中, 又有分 Valentinian, Basilidian, 同 Sethian. 佢講咁多背景, 係因為o係本書o既第二部份, 佢打算展示其實猶大福音係典型o既 Sethian 著作, 冇 National Geographic 講到咁神奇.

至於本書後半, 就係全書戲肉. 呢度講到現有o既 critical edition 出錯o既地方, 非常精彩, 提出強力而合理o既挑戰. 舉其中一個例子:

National Geographic 翻譯:
And when Jesus heard this, he laughed and said to him, You thirteenth spirit, why do you try so hard?

DeConick 翻譯:
When Jesus heard this, he laughed. He said to him, Why do you compete with them, O Thirteenth Demon?

根據 NG o既翻譯, 耶穌稱呼猶大為 spirit, 視佢為比一般人類更高一等. 但係呢隻字, o係 Coptic 入面其實係 daimon, 最順o既翻譯係 demon, 魔鬼. 唔使識 Coptic, 識英文都睇得出.

書中仲有講到其他有趣例子, 有興趣o既應該要睇睇. 總結, 呢本書易睇, 適合非學者睇. 但亦係學者必讀, 因為佢指出好多猶大福音 critical edition 好多大錯o既地方, 係重要o既學術貢獻.

Saturday, 9 August 2008

RPG 玩家恩物



我一向都係打 RPG 大. 當然, 好多其他類型o既 game 我都鍾意玩, 例如早排打 MGS4, 就好鍾意, 真係一個非凡o既經歷. 不過, 最吸引我o既, 始終都係 RPG. 不過, 我真係要講, 到而家為止, 幾部新o既遊戲機已經出咗幾年, 但係都仲未出過一個真正好o既 RPG.

XBOX 360 有好多所謂 "RPG 大作", 但係老實講, 我覺得全部都係垃圾. Blue Dragon 由故事到角色性格都非常幼稚, 係得畫面夠清, 實在冇乜可取之處. 至於亦將會喺 PS3 上推出o既 Eternal Sonata, 亦係麻麻. 雖然畫面唔錯, 配樂出色, 但係故事極差, 無無謂謂走來走去打怪物, 好無聊, 對白又寫得悶, 周不時由 d 角色講成半粒鐘獨白, 悶過聽道. 開始幾粒鐘, 覺得其中一個角色係蕭邦都幾過癮, 但係其實玩落就知呢個 idea 好無謂, 因為佢係蕭邦同故事無關, 而每個 chapter 之間加插講關於蕭邦生平o既片段亦係無謂, 同故事主線無關. 基本上, 蕭邦喺呢隻 game 入面只係一個用得好差, 令人失望o既綽頭. 至於最近雷聲大o既 Lost Odyssey, 亦係令人失望之作. 人物設計雖然出自名家, 但係其實除咗主角同佢老婆之外, 個個都好Q醜樣, 奸角又冇型. 雖然用成四隻 DVD 咁多, 但係其實畫面都唔係好靚, 只算普通. 而最大問題又係故事, 唔夠吸引, 幾位主角亦魅力極低, 我咁鍾意玩RPG都冇動力玩到尾. 呢幾隻所謂"大作", 比起PS2上面畫面差幾倍o既正 game 如 Shadow Hearts 2, Xenosaga 1 + 3, 真係天比同地比. 畢竟RPG就係要有好故事, 好角色, 對白寫得好, 唔係就點搞都係爛 game.

講返主題. 我發覺, 雖然我有 360, PS3, wii, 但係最近最多好 RPG 俾我玩o既係 PSP!!! 有兩個原因點解 PSP 係 RPG 玩家恩物. 首先, 可以喺 PSP 上面玩返 PSone d 舊 game. 而家我就玩緊之前成日聽人講, 但係未玩過, 而家俾人炒到成舊水一隻二手正版 game o既經典, 幻想水滸傳2, 仲要係英文版, 唔係日文, download 就有, 唔使買. 而家我只玩到一半咁上下, 但係真係好正, 故事刺激, 幾位主角之間關係有深度, 好想玩落去睇佢地結局如何, 論故事質素, 比起其實水準亦相當高o既幻想水滸傳5 仲有過之而無不及, 好玩過而家 360 上任何一隻 RPG 幾倍. PSone 有好多有質素o既 RPG, 仲有 Xenogears, FF 7-9, Vagrant Story, Legend of Dragoon, Chrono Cross, 只係翻玩都有排玩.

第二, 其實有好多好o既 RPG 只有日文版, 冇英文版. 但係, PSP 有好幾隻 RPG 都有漢化版, 例如英雄傳說 5 同 6, 我玩完水滸傳2 就會開始玩. 相信遲早第 6 集亦會有漢化版. 真係多 RPG 到玩唔切.

Friday, 8 August 2008

壞電腦






呢排部電腦都古古怪怪, 會無厘頭自己熄o左, 又會成日開唔到, 未入到 windows 就 hang 機, 要試幾次先開得返, 所以呢幾個星期我都唔夠熄機, 驚開唔返. 不過今日部機終於頂唔順, hang 咗一嘢之後就再開唔返. 所以出去買新機. 本來只打算買電腦, 但係連埋電腦買 mon 都幾抵, 所以買咗部 hp 電腦LG 22' mon. Total = $730 + tax.

不過好在佢死之前有咁多古怪, 所以一早就 backup 哂 d 嘢, 冇乜損失. 不過而家部機用 vista, 我真係唔識用個 Wifi Max, 所以聽日要出去買個 wireless router, 咁我 d 遊戲機同部 iBook 先上到網.

Tuesday, 5 August 2008

The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark



Stephen C. Carlson, The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark, Baylor University Press, 2005.

最近睇o左本令我覺得非常驚訝o既書. 作者唔係學者, 而係律師, 出本書話著名學者 Morton Smith 係大話精, 佢話發現到o既 Secret Gospel of Mark 其實係 hoax, 係惡作劇. 自從 Da Vinci Code 之後, 年中不知幾多唔係學者o既人出書講耶穌, 講教會歷史, 但係十本書中有十本都係垃圾, 一味亂 up 當秘笈. 但係呢本唔同, 著名耶穌學者如愛丁堡大學o既 Larry Hurtado 同 Duke U. o既 Mark Goodacre 都竟然極力推薦呢本書. 真係異數.

講少少背景. o係 1958 年, 一個天才學者叫做 Morton Smith o係 Mar Saba 修道院發現一封由 Clement of Alexandria 寫俾一個叫做 Theodore o既信, 而呢封信入面提及兼且引用到 Secret Gospel of Mark. Clement 係公元第二紀教會中一個好出名o既人, 所以如果係真, 咁 Secret Mark 就係年期算早o既福音書. 內容講到有一日有個女人求耶穌救返佢已經死o左o既細佬拉撒路 (新約福音都有類似故事), 不過耶穌都未做/講任何o野, 拉撒路就已經鹹魚番生, 自己走o左出o黎. 後來到晚上, 拉撒路只披住一張白布, "同耶穌過o左個夜晚" (意義不明...), 耶穌教佢"天國o既奧秘" (同樣意義不明...). Morton Smith o係 1975 年先出書講呢個新"發現"o既福音書. 問題係, 雖然有佢影落o既相, 但係當其他學者話要睇實物, Smith 就話封信係修道院o既物品, 佢唔可能帶走. 呢個解釋合理, 但係今日如果學者要睇實物的話, 修道院會話俾你聽已經搞唔見o左, 因為佢地有好多書, 唔見o野好平常. 所以就產生一個問題, 只有發現者 Smith 自己見過實物, o係冇得驗證o既情況下, 好難講到底係真有其信, 還是假o野.

由於 Smith 係知名學者, o係哈佛同哥倫比亞教書, 佢唔需要靠造假o黎出位, 所以好多學者都比幾乎面子佢. 有耶穌學者開始當 Secret Mark 係真o野o黎研究: 有人話 Secret Mark 其實仲早過聖經入面o既馬可福音, 亦有人話 Secret Mark 講到早期教會以斷背為一種宗教儀式云云... 不過當然, 亦有為數不少o既學者對 Secret Mark 好有保留.

而我想講o既呢本書, 就話 Secret Mark 係 Morton Smith (而家佢已經死o左) 搞出o黎o既 hoax. 作者好小心分開 forgery 同 hoax. Forgery 係為錢, 或為名而造出o黎o既假o野, 而 Smith 冇動機做呢 d 咁o野. Hoax 就唔同, 造假只為表示自己比其他人聰明, 有 d 類似惡作劇. 而 hoax 同 forgery 最重要o既分別係製作者o既心態: 前者雖然係造假o野出o黎欺騙人, 但係同時又希望終有一日會有人睇得出佢其實係講緊一個幾咁利害o既大話, 可以欺騙到人咁多年, 所以 hoax 會留有一 d 只有聰明人先睇得見o既"密碼", 係製作者以佢o既方式講"冇錯, 係我做o既, 而家先睇到, 你話你係咪 on9?"

呢本書o既作者係律師, 所以佢就以現代字蹟 forensic 去驗呢封信. 佢指出好多地方其實都有假造字蹟o既 characteristics, 例如筆劃最後唔尖, 有 d 應該直去o既筆劃變成彎彎曲曲, 有 d 筆劃斷開又再接返之類, 都指出寫呢封信o個個人似係好慢好小心咁"畫"字多過好順咁"寫"字. o係本書度有相睇, 我覺得佢指出o既地方的確有 d 詭異.

之後, 本書又提及 Smith o係其他學術發表當中有另一份文獻 (佢發表過大量呢類o既希臘文文獻), 而好怪異地, 呢份文獻o既字蹟同 Secret Mark 非常相似. 據 Smith 講, 抄寫呢份文獻o既人叫做 M. Madiotes. 但係 Madiotes 唔係真名, 希臘文根本就冇呢個名, 有可能係 madao (譯: 光頭, 或者古惑仔) 呢個希臘字, 加個希臘文常有o既 ending 落去 (好似日本名叫"光頭太郎"咁). Smith 佢o既名o既簡寫亦係 M., 佢係一個光頭, 如果佢係 Secret Mark o既仿製人, 咁佢就真係非常古惑. 所以 Stephen Carlson 認為, 呢個其實係 Smith o既簽名, 就好似 d 乜乜大盜偷完名畫留底個朵一樣.

而且, Smith 留底o既"簽名"唔止一個. o係呢封 Clement 寫o既信入面, 講到"當真o野同雜質混合埋一齊, 就會失色, 就好似鹽變到冇味一樣". 問題係古代o既鹽係一舊舊, 唔係一粒粒o既, 點樣同雜質混合呢? 而發明將鹽製成並且保持成粒狀o既人係 Morton Salt Company o既化學工程師, 當時係 1910 年. Morton Smith... Morton Salt Company... Stephen Carlson 相信呢個係另一個 Smith 玩o野證據.

呢本書仲有講好多其他o野, 不過我諗都講夠. 我覺得呢本書值得一睇. 唔係學者寫o既, 只有一百多頁厚, 但係竟然有學術價值. o係最近一期o既 Journal for the Study of History Jesus, 就有學者寫文反對呢本書, 證明呢本書係有討論o既價值, 唔似得好似 d 乜乜 Holy Blood Holy Grail 同 Jesus Papers o個 d 垃圾咁.

Tuesday, 29 July 2008

香港公安砌生豬肉

======================================
打完一鑊再砌襲警
2008-07-29

【東方日報專訊】警隊濫權變本加厲,觀塘法院昨日審理一宗襲警案時,爆出警員涉嫌在警署內毆打受查人卻反控對方襲警之醜聞,而兩名作供警員更在休庭期間公然「咬耳仔」,被法庭懷疑兩人有夾口供之嫌,裁判官鑑於兩警的行為可疑,加上他們的證供不盡不實,遂裁定涉事的區議員辦公室男助理一項襲警罪名不成立,將他當庭釋放兼判他獲賠堂費。

涉案被告謝德文(卅九歲),案發時為前區議員何秀蘭(相關)的辦公室助理,他原被控於去年十一月廿七日,在長沙灣警署內襲擊警員陳再武。謝當日到深水埗協助重建戶與房屋協會交涉期間,被指阻差辦公而遭帶署調查,其後有警員聲稱在搜身室遭謝踢打,警方遂起訴控謝襲警罪名,案件昨日開審。

同袍袖手於理不合

裁判官裁決時指,陳姓警員聲稱在搜身房內遭謝手」撞胸及腳踢膝頭,但另一在場警員袁玉驅竟無出言或出手制止,其「置若罔聞」反應於理不合,認為兩名警員證供並非誠實可靠,加上兩警作供期間被揭發私下傾談,被辯方質問傾談內容時又有不同版本,顯然不盡不實,對控方案情構成打擊。

隸屬長沙灣軍裝巡邏隊的陳再武昨供稱,當晚八時許在福榮街以襲擊及阻差辦公罪將謝帶署調查,入房後謝抗拒搜身,並向他批」及踢膝,更手摸腰間狀似取物,他大驚將謝推跌,並與警員袁玉驅合力將謝按在地,以襲警罪拘捕謝。袁亦供稱目睹謝襲擊陳,但未及即時制止,只稍後協助按着被告雙肩。

陳作供中途曾經休庭,惟再開庭時,辯方在庭上指出陳在休庭期間曾與稍後作供的袁傾談,陳直認不諱:「只係閒談,我唔覺得會惹人懷疑。」他更自言當差十三年作供數十次,明白作供期間勿與人交談的法則,卻解釋:「我只係問『尋晚華倫西亞場波係咪歐聯』及『個女警係咪守觀塘』。」認為與案無關,「傾都無問題」。袁則指二人只談及球賽。

謝德文自辯時則指,當晚被兩警帶入房後,他要求移往大廳作公開搜身但被拒:「呢度唔係你話事!」謝遂從褲袋取電話打算記下兩警編號及致電律師,豈料陳撲前想搶走電話,謝將手放後,陳即拳擊謝左胸再將他推跌,謝痛極蜷縮在地,陳竟再踢他左右小腿五、六次,每踢一次都大叫一聲「你襲警」。

邊踢邊嗌「你襲警」

謝一度向袁求助:「你同事咁樣打人屈人都得嘅?」惟袁只是旁觀,後來警署值日官高志明(譯音)入房察看及召兩警出房,謝再向高投訴:「呢度唔係大陸呀?」對方回應:「如果呢度係大陸就唔會係咁啦!」並派另一男警替他搜身。謝稍後聯絡到律師及拍下傷勢照片,他獲保釋後自行求醫,證實左胸及雙膝均有腫痛。

當日同被帶署的一名雜誌記者任辯方證人,他供稱被拘留時聽到有人大叫數次「你襲警」,但在場警員卻無動於衷,令他大感驚訝;他其後出房見謝已面容扭曲狀似想哭。而立法會議員張超雄亦撰信證明被告品格。

案件編號:KTCC 2673/2008
======================================

仆街差佬, 同大陸公安一樣, 打人仲話俾人踢下陰. 仲有, 我都唔相信長毛同陶君行襲警, 希望幾個月後o係法庭上一樣有一個公平o既審理.

Saturday, 26 July 2008

少林奧運



經典港產片"少林足球"最後一幕講中國周街都係武林高手, 有人用神妙劍法修剪樹葉, 成班西裝友用輕功跳上巴士等等. 諗都諗唔到, 原來係真有其事:



真係勁呀. d 小市民用頂級輕功淩波微步打尖, 而且個個橫練上乘內功, 所以能夠輕易舉起巨型鐵欄. d 公安就更加犀利, 你睇佢地以圍欄檔住人潮o個一幕, 仲勁過西片 "300" 入面 d 大隻佬以盾檔人o個下, 明顯身負九陽神功內勁. 香港記者唔識武功, 所以俾 d 公安三十六路大擒拿手推倒, 七十二路小擒拿手叉頸, 幾下就俾人打倒, 只能怪自己學藝不精.

簷前滴水

尋日聽蕭若元節目, 其中一個小環節講到廣州大同酒家一對對聯:

大包易賣, 大錢難撈, 針鼻削鐵, 只向微中取利;
同父來少, 同子來多, 簷前滴水, 幾曾見過倒流。

我個人都幾易被人感動, 睇小說, 睇電影, 睇電視, 聽歌, 甚至聽道, 都試過. 但係聽電台/網台節目突然覺得好有感觸, 呢次係第一次. 由一個成六十歲o既人講, 更加有 feel.

Sunday, 20 July 2008

新死海古卷流出 x 2

James Charlesworth o係網上發表o左兩塊之前未見過o既死海古卷碎片:

http://www.ijco.org/?categoryId=28682



http://www.ijco.org/?categoryId=28681



兩塊都係舊約聖經抄本, 一個係申命記 27.4-7, 另一個係尼希米記 3.14-15. 根據呢兩塊死海古卷o既收藏者, 兩塊都係來自昆蘭. 當然, o係進一步考究之前, 未可以確定來源. 不過假如真係來自昆蘭的話, 咁呢塊尼希米記抄本會係唯一來自昆蘭o既尼希米記抄本, 因為全本舊約聖經入面o既書本都有死海古卷抄本, 除o左尼希米記同以斯帖記以外.

唔知仲有幾多未見光o既死海古卷o係收藏家手中. 話唔定終有一日會出現以斯帖記抄本 tim.

Saturday, 19 July 2008

港姐黑幕?

頭先o係其他論壇睇到呢兩張相, 都係 tvb 網頁上面, 唔係假圖:

http://misshk.tvb.com/2008/images/announcement.jpg

http://misshk.tvb.com/2008/images/announcement2.jpg

以免 tvb 消滅證據, 我 cap 埋圖. 不過最好快 d 自己親手 click 下上面兩條 link.





點解 tvb 會造定兩張唔同o既賽果圖?

Thursday, 17 July 2008

Hazon Gabriel: 三日後, 復活!



記憶好o既, 可能會記得我之前有講過一塊怪石, 上面用墨寫有兩個 columns o既希伯來文, 學者 Ada Yardeni 相信呢塊石板係來自公元前後第一世紀, 耶穌o既時代. 佢叫呢份"文獻"做 Hazon Gabriel, 即是 vision of Gabriel, 因為裡面有講到有關呢個天使o既異像.

呢幾個星期突然好多報紙報導呢塊石, 主要係因為冇幾埋之前, 有個都相當出名o既學者 Israel Knohl 提出一個令人感興趣o既學說. 佢話, 如果小心睇呢塊石上面o既文字, 會發覺入面講到一個三日後復活o既彌賽亞 (即救世主). 對了解耶穌, 早期基督教會, 新約聖經好重要云云.

有興趣o既, 可以去搵佢份研究報告睇下: Israel Knohl, "'By Three Days, Live': Messiahs, Resurrection, and Ascent to Heaven in Hazon Gabriel," Journal of Religion 88 (2008) 147-58.

如果想睇 Ada Yardeni o既希伯來文 transcription 同英文翻譯, 可以睇:
http://bib-arch.org/images/DSS-stone-hebrew.jpg
http://bib-arch.org/news/dssinstone_english.pdf

o係 Yardeni o既翻譯入面, line 80 話: "lslwst ymyn h'[...]", 即是只睇到"三日後"兩個字, 然後就睇唔清楚後面, 只見到兩隻字母: het, aleph. 但係 Knohl 就認為, 細心睇之下, 可以見到清清楚楚: "lslwst ymyn h'yh", 即是"三日後, 復活!" 而佢認為, 文中三日後會復活o既人, 係以色列o既彌賽亞, "以法連".

所以, 基本上, 主要問題在於: 1) 呢塊石板係咪真貨, Yardeni 認為係真o野, 不過仲有待仔細考究; 2) 到底 line 80 有冇寫住 h'yh? 還是其實真係唔清唔楚? 我自己未睇過塊o野本身, 亦未搵到好高質素o既照片睇, 所以我係未可以下定論. 不過, 要一提o既係, h'yh 係一個有少少古怪o既串法, 因為通常係 hyh, 冇 aleph 呢個字母. 不過我同意 Knohl, 唔係最常見, 不過又唔係絕無可能; 3) 講緊復活o既係咪真係以色列o既彌賽亞? 其實我認為o係呢方面係有 d 唔清楚. 到底講緊邊個復活 (假設真係有"復活"呢隻字). 答晒呢幾個問題, 就可以開始諗下, 呢塊石板對了解耶穌同新約聖經有乜幫助. 相信以後幾年, 呢個都會繼續係聖經研究o既熱門話題.

Saturday, 5 July 2008

REC



好似 Blair Witch Project, Diary of the Dead, Cloverfield 咁, 全片都用 hand-cam 拍. 我一向都覺得呢種手法只係綽頭, 尤其係 Cloverfield, 由於題材係怪獸大鬧紐約市, 同呢種手法想令人覺得"真有其事"o既目的背道而馳, 變成拍出o黎令人頭暈, 但係又冇相對o既大優點平衡返, 所以只係綽頭.

但係 REC 呢齣西班牙片, 真係令我改觀, 拍得非常恐怖, 非常出色, 比其他用相同手法拍o既影片出色幾皮. 故事就講電視台派兩個人出去做節目, 個男仔做拍, 個女仔做主持, 跟消防員出隊拍佢地o既工作. 點知去到一間大廈, 有個肥婆痴 q o左線咬 d 消防員, 又有差佬o黎封o左間大廈, 唔俾入o左去o既人出o黎, 而呢兩個電視台o既員工就要想辦法不被咬死同走出呢間大廈. 過程非常緊張, 一浪接一浪. 有 Blair Witch Project 結尾咁恐怖, 但係就冇o個 d 無聊而沉悶o既對白. 其實用呢種"手拍"技倆拍o既電影都有個通病, 由於想表現出實感, 往往加插大量生活化但係沉悶冗長o既對話 (Blair Witch 同 Cloverfield 都有大量, 幾乎佔影片一半), 但係 REC 冇呢問題.

我睇過唔少喪屍片, REC 係其中最好o既一套. 算係經典.

Tuesday, 1 July 2008

Princeton 遊





六月中我有個 Enoch Seminar 要去, o係 Princeton Theological Seminary, present 一份有關以諾一書第 14 章o既研究. 我o係阿媽屋企出發, 要由 New York Brooklyn 去到 New Jersey Princeton, 主要係坐火車. 雖然要坐成兩粒鐘咁滯, 不過好在都唔貴, $15 咁上下. 由 Princeton Station 行到過去 PTS 都唔算遠, 大約 15 分鐘腳程.



呢個係佢地個 library, 我冇行晒成間. 比想像中細, 不過點都一定好過 McMaster. 話時話, 呢度環境真係幾好, 有樹有草, 好靚. 拍得住 Trinity Western.



呢度係食o野o既地方, 一日三餐食 buffet, 對我呢 d 食o野冇要求o既人o黎講算係幾好食, 起碼餐餐食到飽, 又免費. 大家都食完飯o係度傾計, 但係呢方面我真係完全唔掂, 食完o野就坐o係度, 冇辦法同人開始話題, 都唯有早 d 返宿舍用電腦睇 x-files. 浪費晒呢 d 識人o既機會. 唉, 我o係呢行睇怕都係冇乜前途.



呢度入面係 seminar o既地方, 好似酒店咁, 幾靚. 不過 d seminar 好鬼悶.





呢度係我住幾日o既地方, 係學校o既宿舍, 好在有冷氣, 同埋一人一間房, 不過沖涼要去個公用洗手間, 好有福音營 feel.

總括o黎講, 今次收獲不大. 既識唔到新朋友, 又冇機會同 d 大粒佬/婆傾計; d 人亦似乎唔係咁欣賞我份研究. 不過呢個係意料之中, 因為我 present o個時有兩個 chairs, Gabriele Boccaccini 同 Martha Himmelfarb, 我一早就知佢地唔會同意我o既研究結論. 我覺得我都有 defend 到自己o既觀點, 不過有幾個問題我覺得答得唔係咁好, 有 d 後悔, 太過緊張亦有所影響. 我亦見到 James Charlesworth 同 Lawrence Shifman, 後者尤其有型, 真係好正, 做佢學生聽佢書一定好開心.

而今次唯一收獲就係.... 有機會同 Annette Reed 見面, 因為佢地第一日有請佢o黎做嘉賓. 真係唔明, 同佢傾計我明明就對答如流, 乜都敢講, 但係佢一走o左, 我就有辦法同其他人一樣咁傾計.