- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
John 8 : 58-59
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
Why did those listening want to stone him? Seems pretty harsh, what was Jesus saying that would cause people to want to murder him? All he said was "before Abraham was - I AM"
Thoughts...
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
22 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYes. I'm of course being slightly oblique with the OP in that there are those here who claim that what he said has been either misinterpreted or mistranslated and doesn't actually state that Jesus was declaring himself - God almighty.
Maybe they wanted to execute him for blasphemy.
The point is, that if he wasn't saying that then what were those listening so upset about that they were they going to stone him.
22 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeestersorry uninterested in your dogma, make reference to the Greek text, otherwise we
Yes. I'm of course being slightly oblique with the OP in that there are those here who claim that what he said has been either misinterpreted or mistranslated and doesn't actually state that Jesus was declaring himself - God almighty.
The point is, that if he wasn't saying that then what were those listening so upset about that they were they going to stone him.
shall conclude you have no idea what the text actually says.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you saying that the Bible is also wrong (mistranslated) in that the people listening did not want to stone him?
sorry uninterested in your dogma, make reference to the Greek text, otherwise we
shall conclude you have no idea what the text actually says.
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
sorry uninterested in your dogma, make reference to the Greek text, otherwise we
shall conclude you have no idea what the text actually says.
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual scholars who would know the actual meaning in context and not just one word hiccups. You can't translate word for word from Greek to English.
Conclusion: One or two words being different, out of context, is hardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by divegeesterI am saying that i am uninterested in a theological premise for making assumptions
Are you saying that the Bible is also wrong (mistranslated) in that the people listening did not want to stone him?
about the text, i am interested in what the text actually states. Yes i believe that the
phrase 'I AM', and any significance attributed to it is the result of religious dogma and
bias in translation.
22 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232So now you are telling me what i know and what i do not know? Look, I can read
Why do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual sc ardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
Greek, I can read English, i understand Greek construct, i understand English
construct, do you? no? well no offence, but you dont know what you are talking
about. The rest of your text tells me that you dont know what you are talking about
because if you did, you would have made reference to the Greek text and you haven't.
I have studied it, in depth, you have not, your opinions are irrelevant. No offence,
just saying, your perspective is one of ignorance, as is self evident from your text.
for example
Conclusion: One or two words being different, out of context, is hardly a basis for an
argument.
what are you talking about? what words are out of context? what has context even
got to do with it?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSuit yourself - why bother to post then.
I am saying that i am uninterested in a theological premise for making assumptions
about the text, i am interested in what the text actually states. Yes i believe that the
phrase 'I AM', and any significance attributed to it is the result of religious dogma and
bias in translation.
The Bible tells us a story, an account of what happened, you should consider the text within the context of the story and what is going on in the streets of Jerusalem.
I think it's clear you are the one with the "dogma" issue my friend.
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by tomtom232Wait, so you're claiming that an in-depth understanding of a text and it's meaning does not require knowing what the text originally, actually said? Yikes!
Why do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual sc ...[text shortened]... ardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
22 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterYour absolutely correct, why bother, but then again, i only know what the text says, i dont
Suit yourself - why bother to post then.
The Bible tells us a story, an account of what happened, you should consider the text within the context of the story and what is going on in the streets of Jerusalem.
I think it's clear you are the one with the "dogma" issue my friend.
need to 'feel', the words, i can use my mind to reason, i dont need to take it upon trust
that the translation is accurate, i can just merrily go along in blissful ignorance, i dont
need to substantiate my arguments linguistically or textually, i have my dogma to
make arguments based on inaccurate translation, for me. Your absolutely correct, why
bother.
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by divegeesterbefore Abraham was, I AM
Please can I ask that we stick to the thread:
Why were the people on the streets of Jerusalem picking up stones to stone Jesus for saying "before Abraham was, I AM"?
Please can we use grammatically correct English. It would be a good place to begin.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
22 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm not asking you to "feel the words", I'm asking you a simple question robbie:
Your absolutely correct, why bother, but then again, i only know what the text says, i dont
need to 'feel', the words, i can use my mind to reason, i dont need to take it upon trust
that the translation is accurate, i can just merrily go along in blissful ignorance, i dont
need to substantiate my arguments linguistically or textually, i have my ...[text shortened]... ake arguments based on inaccurate translation, for me. Your absolutely correct, why
bother.
Why were the people on the streets of Jerusalem picking up stones to stone Jesus for saying "before Abraham was, I AM"?