• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Did Jesus say he was God???

outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it.

FACT you have no knowledge to refute.


The final composition's comparatively late date, and its insistence upon Jesus as a divine being walking the earth in human form, renders it highly problematical to scholars who attempt to evaluate Jesus' life in terms of literal historical truth,

More FACTS
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
since you cannot refute it, you fail. You alse have the freedon to change wiki, of course you would fail there as well with your lack of knowledge on the subject
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it.


keep running with john as a eyewitness and see how that works for ya LOL
 
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it.
keep running with john as a eyewitness and see how that works for ya LOL
Click to expand...

More please.
And how about some more dishonest quotes?
The thread needs more entertaining posts.
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it.


is not dishonest it is the facts of the situation.

your failure to refute shows your desperation
 
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
Dirty Penguin said:
As can I.
Too funny. Wasn't trying to prove anything. I showed that it's not cut and dry as you make it. Scholars are divided in their exegesis.
Click to expand...
You know the vast majority of scholars are on my side.
But as I told before, it's not about scholars against scholars. We could use our minds too, can't we?
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Dirty Penguin said:
As can I.



Too funny. Wasn't trying to prove anything. I showed that it's not cut and dry as you make it. Scholars are divided in their exegesis.
Click to expand...


EXACTLY and why this statement applies so well

The final composition's comparatively late date, and its insistence upon Jesus as a divine being walking the earth in human form, renders it highly problematical to scholars who attempt to evaluate Jesus' life in terms of literal historical truth,
 
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
So, having enjoyed the above comic show,

I think the similarity between the verses is clear enough here.

[FONT=&quot]The contrast between [/FONT]γενεσθαι[FONT=&quot][genesthai] (entrance into existence of Abraham) and [/FONT]εἰμι[FONT=&quot][eimi] (timeless being) is complete. See the same contrast between [/FONT]ἐν[FONT=&quot] [en] in 1:1 and [/FONT]ἐγενετο[FONT=&quot] [egeneto] in 1:14. See the contrast also in Psa. 90:2 between God ([/FONT]εἰ[FONT=&quot] [ei], art) and the mountains ([/FONT]γενηθηναι[FONT=&quot] [genēthēnai]). See the same use of [/FONT]εἰμι[FONT=&quot] [eimi] in John 6:20; 9:9; 8:24, 28; 18:6.[/FONT]

γενέσθαι and εἰμί are simply different verbs. If the meaning intended was that Jesus came into existence like Abraham, but before him, the same verb would have been used.

John 8:58
I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί


 Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

πρὸ τοῦ ὄρη γενηθῆναι καὶ πλασθῆναι τὴν γῆν καὶ τὴν οἰκουμένην καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος σὺ εἶ

Note how "eimi" is used absolutely here too: σὺ εἶ (You are God)

The two verses are very similar:

σὺ εἶ: you are (You are God)
ἐγὼ εἰμί: I am
The same verb ειμι, Present active indicative. (used in the absolute sense)

So by comparison, it means "I am God".

ἐγὼ εἰμί[FONT=&quot] used absolutely, where no predicate is expressed or implied, is the equivalent of the solemn [/FONT][FONT=&quot]אֲנִי־הוּא[/FONT][FONT=&quot], I (am) He, which is the self-designation of Yahweh in the prophets.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
By the way, even the few translations (including the NWT) that render John 8:58 as "I was/have been" render Ps 90:2 as "Thou art/You are God", which proves them wrong.
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
outhouse said:
EXACTLY and why this statement applies so well

The final composition's comparatively late date, and its insistence upon Jesus as a divine being walking the earth in human form, renders it highly problematical to scholars who attempt to evaluate Jesus' life in terms of literal historical truth,
Click to expand...

Exactly. There's nothing like this to be found in Mark where Matthew and Luke drew most of their information from. Then John comes along and it's almost a 180 from their gospels. Most of this stuff is written like a Greek story with the sprinkle of history here and there to make is all seem plausible.
 
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
Dirty Penguin said:
Exactly. There's nothing like this to be found in Mark where Matthew and Luke drew most of their information from. Then John comes along and it's almost a 180 from their gospels. Most of this stuff is written like a Greek story with the sprinkle of history here and there to make is all seem plausible.
Click to expand...
:biglaugh:
Then you're admitting your defeat.
Why are you discussing it then?
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Dirty Penguin said:
Exactly. There's nothing like this to be found in Mark where Matthew and Luke drew most of their information from. Then John comes along and it's almost a 180 from their gospels. Most of this stuff is written like a Greek story with the sprinkle of history here and there to make is all seem plausible.
Click to expand...


its also why many dont view it as a valid as the first 3 synoptic gospels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top