Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 675:
Line 675: + + + + + + +
Talk:John 1-7 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 08:25, September 23, 2012
, 08:25, September 23, 2012→Strange change of perspective: I'm afraid you a wrong, Aschlafly
::::::The bottom line is this: "For God so loved '''''you''''' that He gave His only Son" is obviously a more effective statement, and [[Jesus]] surely made the most effective statement possible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:20, 23 September 2012 (EDT)
::::::The bottom line is this: "For God so loved '''''you''''' that He gave His only Son" is obviously a more effective statement, and [[Jesus]] surely made the most effective statement possible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:20, 23 September 2012 (EDT)
:::::::You seem to say now that this is a part of Christ's speech, so it is a quote (''I never meant to suggest that [[#John 3:16|John 3:16]] was a quote''). Don't you think that John gave the best possible rendition of Christ's original Aramaic words?
:::::::If John had agreed with you, he could have written: Οὕτω γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς ὑμᾶς
:::::::You find phrases telling us that God loves us in the epistles - which predate the gospel of John. See e.g., 2 Thessalonians 2:16 (Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν, ὁ ἀγαπήσας ἡμᾶς)
:::::::You are right that this verse is abused by many. But you can't stop this abuse by deliberately mistranslating this verse, disregarding the rest of the gospel. That is just a form of lying.
:::::::You are beginning to write your own good book, filled with verses you think to be the most effective. And you declare that some of the most powerful writers of mankind weren't able to think of your formulations, because their language lacked this capability? The examples in the epistles show that you are wrong.
:::::::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:25, 23 September 2012 (EDT)