Difference between revisions of "Talk:John 15-21 (Translated)"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Reversion explained)
(John's use of the Greek word for "right" may be a political statement here)
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
:::Well, this is a wordplay that's only valid for English, however, and not for aramaic or greek :P --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] 15:14, 27 February 2010 (EST)
 
:::Well, this is a wordplay that's only valid for English, however, and not for aramaic or greek :P --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] 15:14, 27 February 2010 (EST)
 +
 +
I disagree that the designation of "right" to connote "conservative" and "left" to connote "liberal" is purely arbitrary.  John's use of the Greek word for "right" may be a political statement here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:50, 27 February 2010 (EST)

Revision as of 15:50, 27 February 2010

Reversion explained

First, we don't censor ideas here. Second, the edit comment did not justify the censorship.

Discuss rather than censor.--Andy Schlafly 14:31, 27 February 2010 (EST)

Well, it makes perfect sense for Christians to believe that Jesus, the Son of God, would have known about the modern-day political meaning of "right" and "left" 18 centuries before; so from a Christian point of view this objection is not valid. --Maquissar 14:41, 27 February 2010 (EST)
I'll add the non-political translation: follow my instructions is correct (right) or Jesus leads him to the righteous way, to success. --Jpatt 15:13, 27 February 2010 (EST)
Well, this is a wordplay that's only valid for English, however, and not for aramaic or greek :P --Maquissar 15:14, 27 February 2010 (EST)

I disagree that the designation of "right" to connote "conservative" and "left" to connote "liberal" is purely arbitrary. John's use of the Greek word for "right" may be a political statement here.--Andy Schlafly 15:50, 27 February 2010 (EST)