參考版本 AFV  A  Faithful Version 的希臘文 2009版本   

耶和華的事，不謀利沒有版權

16. And they came near to him and said, “We will build sheepfolds here for our livestock, and cities for our little ones,

17. But we ourselves will go ready armed before the children of Israel until we have brought them to their place. And our little ones shall live in the fenced cities because of those who live in the land.

18. We will not return to our houses until the children of Israel have inherited every man his inheritance.

19. For we will not inherit with them on the other side of Jordan, or forward, because our inheritance has fallen to us on this side of Jordan, eastward.”

20. And Moses said to them, “If you will do this thing, if you will go armed before the LORD to war,

21. And all of you will go armed over Jordan before the LORD until He has driven out His enemies from before Him,

22. And the land is subdued before the LORD, then afterwards you shall return and be guiltless before the LORD and before Israel. And this land shall be your possession before the LORD.

23. But if you will not do so, behold, you have sinned against the LORD. And be sure your sin will find you out.

24. Build cities for your little ones and folds for your sheep, and do that which has come out of your mouth.

25. And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben spoke to Moses saying,”Your servants will do as my lord commands.

26. Our little ones, our wives, our flocks, and all our livestock shall be there in the cities of Gilead.

27. But your servants will go over, every man armed for war, before the LORD to battle as my lord says.”

(A Faithful Version)

16. 二族人的代表走前對摩西說：我們會在那地為子孫們建造牧場和城邑。

17. 我們會披甲上陣，與其他人一起作戰，直到征服那地為止。只是我們的婦孺會留守在這片土地，築城設防當地的居民侵擾。

18. 以色列人一日末戰勝，絕不回家。

19. 我們不會攤分約旦河的西邊的土地，在那裡承受產業，我們的產業就在現今約旦河的東面。

20. 摩西回應：若你們願意披甲上陣，為耶和華出征作戰，

21. 就作好準備，帶齊武器在耶和華面前過約旦河，把敵人驅散，

22. 直至完全被征服，回來之後，就免除這份義務。你們要求這片土地，耶和華及眾以色列人，都會認可擁有這地作為產業。

23. 若不如此，算是違背了與耶和華的約。要明白，違約會帶來後果。

24. 到時就可為婦孺建造城邑，為牲畜圈養牧地，照你們所期望的實現。

25. 迦得支派和流便支派眾人回摩西：必照我主所吩咐去履行。

26. 我們的家人和牲畜，都將安居在基列。

27. 你僕人到時必全副武裝，照我主吩咐，為耶和華渡河爭戰。

這段描述很有意思，顯明有信仰的，是可以有談判達成的可能，有私心的是不會出現放下尊嚴的和談。

上述的局面，用現今的說法是：Win – Win Nagotiation

Win-win negotiations are also known as integrative negotiations, collaborative bargaining, or interest-based negotiation.

These terms describe a strategy where parties work together to find mutually beneficial solutions that expand the total value created, rather than competing for a fixed amount of resources. Other related terms include mutual gains bargaining and principled negotiation.

Win-Win (Integrative) Negotiation: An Elaboration

Core Concept

Win-win negotiation is a collaborative strategy in which both parties work together to expand the total value available before dividing it. It rejects the assumption of a “fixed pie” — the idea that whatever one side gains, the other must lose. Instead, it treats the negotiation as a joint problem-solving exercise where creative trade-offs can make the pie larger for everyone.

Contrast with Distributive Bargaining

Dimension	Distributive (Win-Lose)	Integrative (Win-Win)
Focus	Positions (demands)	Interests (underlying needs)
Goal	Maximize own share	Expand total value, then divide
Relationship	Competitive, short-term	Collaborative, long-term
Information	Guarded, selective	Shared openly to find trade-offs
Issues	Usually single-issue (e.g., price)	Multi-issue, enabling logrolling
Outcome	One winner, one loser	Both parties feel they’ve won

A classic example: in a used-car sale, the buyer haggles over price (distributive). But if the buyer reveals they need the car quickly for a job change, and the seller values a clean, well-maintained vehicle more than speed, they might trade timing for condition — a value-creating exchange invisible in a pure price negotiation.

The Four Principles (Fisher, Ury & Patton — Getting to Yes)

1. Separate the people from the problem. Address the issue, not personalities. Be firm on the substance but soft on the relationship.
2. Focus on interests, not positions. A position is a demand (“I want $12,000”); an interest is the why (“I need funds quickly for a move”). Interests reveal the real issues and open doors to creative solutions.
3. Invent options for mutual gain. Brainstorm multiple possibilities before deciding. Introduce additional variables (timing, scope, payment structure, non-monetary terms) to find trades where one side’s low-value concession is the other side’s high-value gain.
4. Use objective criteria. Ground the outcome in fair, external standards — market rates, legal precedent, expert opinion — rather than willpower or threat.

Key Steps in the Process

1. Prepare: Identify your BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement), rank your interests, and research the other party’s likely interests and BATNA.
2. Explore interests: Ask open-ended questions and listen empathetically to uncover what each side truly values.
3. Generate options: Brainstorm broadly without premature judgment.
4. Evaluate and select: Apply objective criteria to narrow down to the best package.
5. Structure the deal: Use deal-structuring (contingencies, phased payments, trade-offs across issues) to bridge remaining gaps.

What Makes It Work

Win-win outcomes don’t happen by accident. They require four conditions: trust between parties, open communication about real interests, multiple issues on the table (so trade-offs are possible), and a long-term orientation. Strip away any of these, and the negotiation tends to collapse back into distributive mode.

When to Use It

• You have an ongoing relationship with the other party (partnerships, employment, community disputes).
• There are common or complementary interests beyond the single contested issue.
• The other party is willing to cooperate and share information.
• Short-term gains matter less than a sustainable, mutually satisfactory outcome.

It is less effective when interests are in direct, irreconcilable conflict, when the other party insists on a competitive approach, or when the relationship is purely transactional and one-off.

A Practical Note

Most real negotiations are hybrids. Skilled negotiators typically start integratively — exploring interests and creating value — and then shift to distributive moves when it’s time to divide the value they’ve jointly created. The sequence matters: you need to settle the size of the pie before you fight over the slices.

這方法和定義看來更多在商政事務，原則是適用，特別在人際關係。緣因不複雜，因為人心都自私自利，人對人就像在爭取自己最大的利益，如在商政當中爭取最大利益的心態相同。

因此，信仰中犧牲一詞，它產生救贖，意義上就不單是生命的價值，而是更廣泛的日常生活，意思就是退一步，海闊天空。

上述是正面價值，在現實，這種價值是被大多數人忽視，正因如此，人與人不會和談，就算和談都不會win-win 而是獨贏。這樣的心態存在於人的內心，就不可能產生和平和諧這局面出現，這是末世必來的緣因。

美國總統川普不同，他深明信仰立約是一回怎樣的事，談判到相贏，而他會作出某些地方的妥協。問題不在於他，而是所謂民主人士，他們不認錯，不為民，事實不同為民，因為大家都自私，又無遠見，這份內存的私心，讓他們無理性地只顧眼前。這心應很早就有，因為撒母耳記上8章就曾指出：人會用三代子孫作為現今的自身的利益作交換，將自己什麼都交王代理。蠢！

如果你真心相信雙贏是人生最大好處，你的信仰會帶你到新天新地。你相信就實踐又傳開，不單為己也為別人，是世界的組成份子。