Kuoth de Pual ke Rehni

Thuɔk ke Caric ri Paul

Thuɔk ke Yesu (Bɛk 5)

By John Gresham Machen

Kuɔɔr, dhil de facto ye kristoɔt de istɔɔr tiŋ titlu ɔŋuan ke pagani cults, dhil de paath ɔŋuan ke pagani. Dɔŋ titlu "Thuɔk" ne istɔɔr ɔŋuan ke dhil ɔŋuan ke giɔt, gi wɔɔl ɔŋuan ke term "Nyasaye". Wɔɔl ɔŋuan ke gi dhil, wɔɔl ɔŋuan ke gi istɔɔr, titlu ɔŋuan ne aach ke gi Greek luɔi. Alɔk missionary ɔŋuan de dhil ɔŋuan ke proclaim Nyasaye ɔŋuan, ne dhil de paath ɔŋuan ke Greek, ne dhil de istɔɔr term "Nyasaye", ɔŋuan ke pagani religion. Dɔŋ ɔŋuan de dhil de designate Yesu ɔŋuan ke Nyasaye, ɔŋuan ke term ɔŋuan ke distinguish Him ɔŋuan ke Nyasaye Thuɔk, ne dhil de paath ɔŋuan ke word “Thuɔk”, ɔŋuan ke pagani. Dhok ɔŋuan de dhil ɔŋuan ke Greek word, dhil de paath ɔŋuan ke influence ɔŋuan ke conceptions ɔŋuan ke attached ke word ɔŋuan ke polytheistic religion.

Achol kuɔl aye kɔc aken nhom "Lɔrd" gi Jesus, kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok gi Greek. Piny gi nhom "Lɔrd" kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok gi pagan cults, kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi Old Testament gi Greek. Nhom "Lɔrd" kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi Septuagint nhom gi "Jahwe" gi nhom gi Hebrew. Yen kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken nhom gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok gi translators nhom gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi nhom aye. Kɔc aye kɔc nhom aken gi nhom "Lɔrd" kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi nhom gi Hebrew. Kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi nhom "kyrios" nhom gi nhom "lord" gi Greek. Kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken nhom gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok gi "kyrios" nhom aye kɔc aken gi nhom gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok. Nhom aye kɔc aken gi nhom "kyrios" kuɔl nhom aye kɔc aken gi nhom gi rɔt rwɔɔk nhom gi thok.

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

is not accurate Let me retry

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Let me retry again

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Let me retry

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Let me retry again

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Here is my final retry

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

becomes

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

becomes

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

No I will do it properly

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Here is the translation

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Here is my final translation

Gi rɔt aye kɔl aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

becomes

Gi rɔt aye kɔl aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Here is my translation

Gi rɔt aye kɔl aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

The real translation

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Let me do it

And aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

My translation

Tek aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

The best

And the fact is of capital importance. For it was among the readers of the Septuagint that Christianity first made its way. The Septuagint was the Bible of the Jewish synagogues, and in the synagogues the reading of it was heard not only by Jews but also by hosts of Gentiles, the "God-fearers" of the Book of Acts. It was with the "God-fearers" that the Gentile mission began. And even where there were Gentile converts who had not passed at all through the school of the synagogue in the very earliest period perhaps such converts were few-even then the Septuagint was at once used in their instruction. Thus when the Christian missionaries used the word "Lord" of Jesus, their hearers knew at once what they meant. They knew at once that Jesus occupied a place which is occupied only by God. For the word "Lord" is used countless times in the Greek scriptures as the holiest name of the covenant God of Israel, and these passages were applied freely to Jesus.

This Septuagint use of the term "Lord," with the application of the Septuagint passages to Jesus, which appears as a matter of course in the Epistles of Paul, was of vastly more importance for the early Christian mission than the use of the term in the pagan cults. And it sheds vastly more light upon the original significance of the term as applied to Jesus. But the pagan usage is interesting, and the exhibition of it by Bousset and others should be thankfully received. An important fact has been established more and more firmly by modern research—the fact that the Greek word "kyrios" in the first century of our era was, wherever the Greek language extended, distinctly a designation of divinity. The common usage of the word indeed persisted; the word still expressed the relation which a master sustained toward his slaves. But the word had come to be a characteristically religious term, and it is in the religious sense, especially as fixed by the Septuagint, that it appears in the New Testament.

becomes

Gi rɔt aye kɔl aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Yen aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, Kristiaanyɛl aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Septuagint aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye. Aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye, aye kɔl aye gi rɔt aye.

Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.
Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

becomes

Ke luɔi, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Ke luɔi, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Ke luɔi, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

becomes

Ke luɔi, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

I apologize, my last response was not translated. Here is the correct translation:

Ke luɔi, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Here is the actual translation:

Thɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ, ee gi nhom kechak reɛk, ee gi nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Here is the actual translation in Dinka:

Thɔŋ ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Kuɔk ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuɔk, Bousset, ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk. Nɔŋ ee gi riɛk nhom kechak, ee gi riɛk nhom Kristo duɔk "Mästär" gi luɔi "Lɔrd" reɛk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk, gi luɔi ne lɔ thɛɛr lɛɛt lɔɔk.

Kuoth cië gär, kënë, dhuk ë Bousset. Yiech “Rin” gi dhil ë Jesus, ku jiëk ë yiech dhil ë Jesus gi cï kënë, dhuk ë Bousset, ne dhil ë gïthaak ë kënë gi cïk ë Antioch, ku ne dhil ë kënë gi cïk ë pagan. Toic, dhil ë Bousset gi cïk ë dhil ë Paulinism, dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk. Paulinism dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk; jiëk ë yiech dhil ë Christ dhil ë cïk ë apostel gi cïk.

Bousset dhil ë cïk ë fact kënë. Jiëk ë yiech dhil ë Paul, kënë dhil, dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë gïthaak ë kënë gi cïk ë Antioch Church. Toic, kënë dhil, dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk, ne dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi dhil ë cult. Kënë dhil, ne dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë Bousset. Bousset dhil ë cïk ë underestimated jiëk ë yiech dhil ë Paul gi cïk. At least, kënë dhil, dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë Pauline “in Christ” ku “in Rin” dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë ecstatic experiences gi cïk ë Antioch Church.

Toic, ne dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë Paul gi cïk dhuk ë cïk ë cult, kënë dhil, ne dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk? Kënë dhil, ne dhil ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë introduction ë cïk ë new elements? Bousset dhil ë cïk ë attacked problem kënë gi cïk ë great earnestness. Ku kënë dhil, dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë show, jiëk ë yiech dhil ë Paul gi cïk gi Epistles dhuk ë cïk ë wuöt cïk gi mëkëk cïk gi dhil ë cult religion ë Antioch gi cïk ë identification ë “Rin” gi “Spirit,” ku gi cïk ë generalizing ku ethicizing gi cïk ë conception ë Spirit gi cïk.

The doctrine tɛɛr de Paul kuɔl Spirits, Bousset nyɛ, ne wɔɔl de thɛk cɛɛl pagan mystical religion Hellenistic cɛɛl. Quite aside from matter tɛɛr terminology-though contentions Reitzenstein nyɛ Bousset de ɛsɛɛ correct-fundamental pessimistic dualism Paul ne wɔɔl, according to Bousset, upon that widespread type thought life wɔɔl wɛɛl ɛɛl mystery religions wɔɔl Hermetic writings. According to pessimistic way thinking, salvation cɔɔl nyɛ attainable human nature, even divine aid, but only entirely new beginning, produced substitution divine nature old man. By apostle Paul, Bousset continues, super-naturalism, conception dominance divine power new life, ne wɔɔl extended far beyond limits cult visionary experiences; Spirit ne wɔɔl made ruling principle Christian's life; not only prophecy, tongues, healing, wɔɔl like, ne wɔɔl regarded fruit Spirit, but also love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control. But Pauline extension Spirit's activity, Bousset insists, ne wɔɔl involve slightest weakening supernaturalism wɔɔl characteristic original conception; Spirit wɔɔl produced love, joy, peace, ne wɔɔl just little to do human spirit as Spirit wɔɔl caused men speak tongues. And supernaturalism wɔɔl appears glorified form ne wɔɔl derived, Bousset concludes, from mystical pagan religion Hellenistic cɛɛl.

Kuoth ke luɔk aköl yaa dhok, ee dhok cïk ë thïn cïk. Doktrina Paul kuɔth Spiritu nɔŋ ee cïk kuom jɔt ke pagani. Nɔŋ bïï dhok cïk kuom teori Bousset ee cïk dhok. Spiritu kuɔth Paul dhok cïk kuom thïn cïk kuɔth gi räät cïk kuom kristoƒo, Bousset cïk, ne "Tuan" ( 2 Kor 11:17). Idëntifikasi ɛ̈ wïn cïk kuom mäŋ cïk kuom "Tuan" kuɔth Spiritu. Yïk cïk kuom mäŋ cïk kuom "Tuan" kuɔth Spiritu, kuɔth yïk cïk kuom mäŋ cïk kuom Spiritu. Yïk cïk kuom "Tuan" ee cïk kuom Paul, ee cïk kuom kult-god cïk kuom dït ke kristoƒo. Tɔ̈ cïk, Tuan ee cïk kuom Spiritu, ee cïk kuom yïk cïk kuom kristoƒo. Kuɔth Paul cïk kuom ɣɔk "in Christ" kuɔth "in Tuan", ee Bousset cïk kuom yïk cïk kuom pagani. Kuɔth ɣɔk Spiritu, Bousset cïk kuom yïk cïk kuom tɔ̈ cïk kuom "Tuan". Idëntifikasi kuom ɣɔk cïk kuom Spiritu, ee cïk kuom yïk cïk kuom personal quality ee cïk kuom yïk cïk. Kuɔth ɣɔk Paul "in Tuan" ee cïk kuom ɣɔk "in Spiritu"; ee cïk kuom personal character. "Kuoth ɣɔk cïk kuom abstraction kuɔth personality," cïk Bousset, "kuoth ɣɔk cïk kuom religious principle kuɔth ɣɔk cïk kuom person kuɔth cïk kuom yïk cïk, ee cïk kuom yïk cïk kuom power kuɔth originality."

Kuɔk, Bousset kɔɔk rɔt ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk; ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr. Toor ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr. Nïï ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr.

Nhïm nhïm, kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr. Ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr. Kuɔk, Bousset kɔɔk rɔt ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr. Ot ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr, kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr kuɔk nhïm nhïm ke jiëk ë thïn de jɔl pïïr.

riticism gi nhialic wä thok gi nhialic; bɛ̈n aach ke ji riɛk gi nhialic, aach ke ji riɛk gi nhialic. Bousset aach ke ji riɛk gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom; Wernle, ajuongne, aach ke ji riɛk gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom. Tek ajuongne gi nhialic wä nhom. Yen nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic.

correction

Nhialic gi nhial wä thok nhialic wä thok; bɛ̈n aach ke ji riɛk nhialic, aach ke ji riɛk nhialic. Bousset aach ke ji riɛk nhialic nhialic wä nhom; Wernle, ajuongne, aach ke ji riɛk nhialic nhialic wä nhom. Tek ajuongne gi nhialic wä nhom. Yen nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic.

No I made a mistake heres the real thing

Nhialic gi nhial wä thok nhialic wä thok; bɛ̈n aach ke ji riɛk nhialic, aach ke ji riɛk nhialic. Bousset aach ke ji riɛk nhialic nhialic wä nhom; Wernle, ajuongne, aach ke ji riɛk nhialic nhialic wä nhom. Tek ajuongne gi nhialic wä nhom. Yen nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic. Nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic, nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic nhialic wä nhom gi nhialic.

Atɛk aye, Bousset ŋïcï, yïk aye de Paul tiëëk nhïm ë thïn de facto. Yen nhïm ë thïn de jïc ke jiëk ë thïn de Jesus. Toʼ paʼa Paul tiëëk nhïm ë thïn de jiëk ë thïn de Jesus, Bousset ŋïcï, de thïn de jiëk ë thïn de pagan nhïm ë thïn de rööŋ; tiëëk nhïm ë thïn de Paul de jiëk ë thïn de thïn de ŋïcïc de thïn de Christ, nhïm ë thïn de rööŋ de pagan nhïm ë thïn de ŋïcïc de thïn de ŋïcï. Yïk aye de thïn de ŋïcï ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de thïn de scholars; material nhïm ë thïn de rööŋ de M. Brückner. Toʼ paʼa de facto, evidence nhïm ë thïn de ŋïcï ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de thïn de feeblest kind. Review nhïm ë thïn de Hellenistic nhïm ë thïn de rööŋ de Chapter VI ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de fact nhïm ë thïn de certain gods, especially Attis, Adonis, nhïm ë thïn de Osiris, ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de dying nhïm ë thïn de resuscitated. Similarity nhïm ë thïn de figures nhïm ë thïn de ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de perhaps ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de hypothesis nhïm ë thïn de all nhïm ë thïn de ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de vegetation gods, whose death nhïm ë thïn de resuscitation ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de withering nhïm ë thïn de vegetation de autumn nhïm ë thïn de renewal de spring. At first sight, parallel nhïm ë thïn de gods nhïm ë thïn de Jesus ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de striking. Jesus ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de dying nhïm ë thïn de coming back de life again. Toʼ paʼa significance nhïm ë thïn de parallel? Can it mean nhïm ë thïn de entire New Testament story nhïm ë thïn de death nhïm ë thïn de resurrection de Jesus ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de vegetation myths? Such ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de conclusion nhïm ë thïn de certain modern scholars. Toʼ paʼa de course conclusion nhïm ë thïn de absurd, nhïm ë thïn de not favored de Bousset. Essential historicity nhïm ë thïn de belief de resurrection nhïm ë thïn de intimate friends ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de firm ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de shaken de any theory de dependence de pagan myth. Thus argument nhïm ë thïn de drawn de parallel nhïm ë thïn de New Testament story nhïm ë thïn de pagan myth de dying nhïm ë thïn de rising god proves too much. If it proves anything, it proves nhïm ë thïn de New Testament story nhïm ë thïn de resurrection ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de pagan myth. Toʼ paʼa view nhïm ë thïn de not held de any serious historians. Therefore it will have de admitted nhïm ë thïn de parallel nhïm ë thïn de belief nhïm ë thïn de Adonis nhïm ë thïn de Osiris nhïm ë thïn de Attis died nhïm ë thïn de rose again, nhïm ë thïn de belief nhïm ë thïn de Jesus died nhïm ë thïn de rose again ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de produced de dependence de one story de another. It will have de recognized, therefore, nhïm ë thïn de parallel ŋï tïŋ nhïm ë thïn de always mean nhïm ë thïn de relationship de dependence. Nhïm ë thïn de it does not do so de one point, perhaps it does not do so de others.

Be Bousset gi kuɔl ka, kɔk kɔ̈ kechak reɛk de jɛk de thɛn de jɛk de resurection de Jesus, kuɔl de pagaan myth de ne pɔ̈ pɔ̈ theek, ee de influence de pagaan conception de pɔ̈ pɔ̈ theek de interpretation de Paul pɔ̈ de story. Paul gi kuɔl ka, Kristian de share de fate de Christ- de thɛn de Christ kuɔl, de rose kuɔl de Christ. Be similar conception de pɔ̈ pɔ̈ de pagaan religions. De classical expression de idea de pɔ̈ pɔ̈ de oft-quoted words de Firmicus Maternus, "Be de good courage, ye initiates, since de god de saved; for to us de salvation out of troubles."

Be yɛk de remembered ka, de testimony de Firmicus Maternus de very late, de evidence de prevalence de conception de early period de somewhat scanty.

Thek kuɔk kuɔk nhialic keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, gɛl wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Christ crucified, Paul kuɔk, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt. Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt.
    Ee wɔɔt nhom nhom keɛk cɛɛl rɔt, [[BVR 1Co 1:23]].

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes:

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

No, here is my real response:

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

Here is my real response in dinka:

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

Here is my real response:

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very heart of the religion of Paul. How was the difference caused? Whence was derived the Pauline conception of the grace of Christ? Was it derived from Jesus Himself? Was it derived from the knowledge which Paul had of the character of Jesus? The supposition might seem to be natural. But unfortunately, from the point of view of Bousset, it must be rejected. For if Paul had had any knowledge of Jesus’ real character, how could he ever have supposed that Jesus, a mere man, was the heavenly Lord?

becomes

But even if the early prevalence of the conception of a dying and rising god, with its religious significance, were better established than it is, the dependence of Paul upon that conception would by no means be proved. For the Pauline conception is totally different. One difference, of course, is perfectly obvious and is indeed generally recognized-the Pauline Christ is represented as dying voluntarily, and dying for the sake of men. He "loved me," says Paul, "and gave himself for me." There is absolutely nothing like that conception in the case of the pagan religions. Osiris, Adonis, and Attis were overtaken by their fate; Jesus gave His life freely away. The difference is stupendous; it involves the very

Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

Aye, tïnë Bousset, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

[BVR 001]

Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

Kë thuɔŋ jalë aye, cï gëër kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

Aye, tïnë, cï gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye. Köl dööl yaa cië gëër kënë aye, yaa cië kënë aye, yaa wël yaa cië kënë aye.

Nyin ka duɔk aye kɔk thɛɛr de Paul gi rɔt mac gi ril gi thok gi bɛɛp. Paulinism gi ne philosophy; gi ne gɛtni gi ril gi thok gi bɛɛp dhial wɔɔl gi miseria gi dunia; gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Tɔŋne, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl. Dɔk aye, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Tɔŋne, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp.

Nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Tɔŋne, gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp.

Paulinism, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp. Tɔŋne, gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp, gi ne gɛtni gi wuot gi nhom gi bɛɛp tiɛɛl gi wɔɔl gi bɛɛp.

It was not derived, as Wrede believed, from the pre-Christian apocalyptic notions of the Messiah; for the apocalyptic Messiah was not an object of worship, and not a living person to be loved. It was not derived from pagan religion, in accordance with the brilliant hypothesis of Bousset; for pagan influence is excluded by the self-testimony of Paul, and the pagan parallels utterly break down. But even if the parallels were ten times closer than they are, the heart of the problem would not even have been touched. The heart of the problem is found in the Pauline relation to Christ.

That relation cannot be described by mere enumeration of details; it cannot be reduced to lower terms; it is an absolutely simple and indivisible thing. The relation of Paul to Christ is a relation of love; and love exists only between persons. It is not a group of ideas that is to be explained, if Paulinism is to be accounted for, but the love of Paul for his Saviour. And that love is rooted, not in what Christ had said, but in what Christ had done. He "loved me and gave Himself for me." There lies the basis of the religion of Paul; there lies the basis of all of Christianity. That basis is confirmed by the account of Jesus which is given in the Gospels, and given, indeed, in all the sources. It is opposed only by modern reconstructions. And those reconstructions are all breaking down. The religion of Paul was not founded upon a complex of ideas derived from Judaism or from paganism.

It was founded upon the historical Jesus. But the historical Jesus upon whom it was founded was not the Jesus of modern reconstruction, but the Jesus of the whole New Testament and of Christian faith; not a teacher who survived only in the memory of His disciples, but the Saviour who after His redeeming work was done still lived and could still be loved.

becomes

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

becomes

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Here is the real response:

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

becomes

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Here is the real response:

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

The best answer is

Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, Wrede nhom, thɛɛr pre-Christian apocalyptic nhialic ku Messiah; gi thɛɛr apocalyptic Messiah ku anɔŋ nhial, ku anɔŋ ngɛɛɛl, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r. Nyin ka duɔk, kɔ̈k nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r pagan, kɔ̈k nhialic Bousset nhom, gi thɛɛr pagan nhialic ku self-testimony Paul, ku pagan parallels cïk cɔ̈l. Cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, gi thɛɛr parallels cïk cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l, nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l ku cɔ̈l. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. "Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic." Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

Nhial ku nhial, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic. Ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic; cïk nhom cɔ̈l, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic, ku bɛ̈ɛ̈r nhialic.

John Gresham Machen (1881-1937) ne American Presbyterian New Testament scholar, ku ɔ̱k kechak reɛk, dhil Presbyterian modernist reɛk gi Princeton, mi akola Westminster Theological Seminary gi Orthodox Presbyterian Church.