The idea that Chirst is God comes from the phrase "Ego eimi", usually translated as "I am". This is what the name of the abrahamic deity, Yahweh, means (originally comes from the name Yahu, but since has been translated to "I am".
However, what Jesus actually said was "Ego eimi ho on", "I am that I am". This is an archaic expression saying "I'm telling the truth".
Because Christians only believe Jesus was God because of this phrase, it means that, in fact, the very basis of christian theology is nothing but an hilarious accident.
Christ, therefore, is not God. You've been blaspheming all along.
I've read somewhere ( don't ask me where) that at that time, everyone who was a little bit more religious often was called "Son of god". It was like saying that he is religous and no one thought that this person was really god's son. It is more blasphemic believing that, than being atheistic, I think And the right translation of "virgin" was "young woman" she never said that it was a virgin birth, not to forget that he had even older brothers, what makes it more absurd...
They called it something like "Exegetese" or something, they talk so long until you forget what you have asked about As much I remember, they say that she was two persons in one, one was a virgin always and forever and in the same time she was not with her brothers (and his own brothers didn believe him, the bible says). But I think they simply don't wanna correct the translation mistake, think she was called "alma" or someth like that in arameic, it is "young woman", and parthena is virgin in greek... Nietzsche wrote about that I think.
"Times of the greatest crimes are always times of the greatest ignorance. It is in these times, or usually so, that the greatest noise is made about religion. Men then follow mechanically, and without examination, the tenets which their priests impose on them, without ever diving to the bottom of their doctrines. In proportion as mankind become enlightened, great crimes become more rare, the manners of men are more polished, the sciences are cultivated, and the religion which they have coolly and carefully examined loses sensibly its credit. It is thus that we see so many incredulous people in the bosom of society become more agreeable and complacent now than formerly, when it depended on the caprice of a priest to involve them in troubles, and to invite the people to crimes in the hope of thereby meriting heaven."
If Christianity is a delusional cult because you singled out a passage, studying it "word per word" without knowing its context, then, how can you explain the following Passages? In their context and not in mere quotation of a single verse?
John 10:30 "I and the father are "ONE"?
Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel"
Isaiah 9:6 "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
Matthew 1:23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”
And most particularly, the following verses of John 1
(v.1)"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
(v.14)"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
Sir, before you interpret a certain passage, its good to know that you know their etymology and such, but its not enough. The basic rule of Bible interpretation is "Scripture interprets Scripture" which means that you cannot interpret a scripture without knowing its context. You cannot separate a text from another text because if you do that, then you will not get the whole idea of what is the text is saying.
And in the verse that you quoted, may I know what particular verse is that?
John was written after the other gospels, hence the mistranslation occured by then.
The Isaiah and Matthew passages, in their original koine greek, don't reffer to divinity. Hell, both Isaiah passages in english only have any sort of relation to divinity because of mentions of divine mandate; yet jewish texts use similar expressions for Moses, therefore either Moses is God's son as well, or you're an hypocrite.
The same applies to John 1, though overall it is written in metaphor, so in either case it does not matter.
I am quoting all uses of "Ego eimi" in the New Testament. For futher comparations, the koine greek translations of the OT also use the same expression in regards to Sammuel and Eve. Again, it'd be hypocrital to consider Jesus divine when neither of those characters are.
carefully.This is my
raffle. First one's
here's her prize:
This time, the
winner will get a
thigh-up similar to
these: Rules: You
have to be a watcher
of mine before this
journal was posted.
If you want to
In our continuous
effort to improve
Site Updates to keep
members informed and
to gather feedback.
Below is a list of
recent changes to
the site, bug fixes,
and feedback that
was brought up by
members in the last
NewNew Beta Tes...
want to make an
awesome tutorial for
your friends, and
anybody else who
might be interested
gning ...There are
some essentials you
are going to want to
keep in mind when
you make your
:Its not just a...
Okay this is
the first time
making a point
turns out great I'd
be sure to hold
another one again
be 6 winners!each
will get 50
join:1. Watch me and
: (she's my sis)2.
scheinbar is a much-loved and well-known deviant. Just one look at her gallery, filled with enchanting photography, will have you mesmerized. A deviant for over 7 years, Christiane can always be found posting inspirational features as well as regularly commenting on other deviations and encouraging and empowering her fellow deviants. We are inspired and insist that you too stop by and congratulate ... Read More