Asili Bilong Bilip bilong Paul

Asen i Paul i Bilongim

King i Jesus (Pus 5)

By John Gresham Machen

Tru, ol man i no ken tok “Lord” we ol Kristen i usim, em i no kam long ol kult pagan. Long taim, tok “Lord” i bin wailus long ol man long Graec, olsem tok “God.” Ol man i no ken tok “God” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim. Ol man i no ken tok “Lord” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim, long narapela man i no ken usim.

Em i no ken tok “Lord” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim, long narapela man i no ken usim.

becomes

Asen i Paul i Bilongim

King i Jesus (Pus 5)

By John Gresham Machen

Tru, ol man i no ken tok “Lord” we ol Kristen i usim, em i no kam long ol kult pagan. Long taim, tok “Lord” i bin wailus long ol man long Graec, olsem tok “God.” Ol man i no ken tok “God” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim. Ol man i no ken tok “Lord” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim, long narapela man i no ken usim.

I rewrite

The Origin of Paul's Religion

The Lordship of Jesus (Part 5)

By John Gresham Machen

Certainly the mere fact that the Christians used a title which was also used in the pagan cults does not establish any dependence upon paganism. For the title "Lord" was almost as well established as a designation of divinity as was the term "God." Whatever had been the origin of the religious use of the word, that use had become a part of the Greek language. A missionary who desired to proclaim the one true God was obliged, if he spoke in Greek, to use the term "God," which of course had been used in pagan religion. So if he desired to designate Jesus as God, by some word which at the same time would distinguish Him from God the Father, he was obliged to use the word “Lord,” though that word also had been used in paganism. Neither in the one case nor in the other did the use of a Greek word involve the slightest influence of the conceptions which had been attached to the word in a polytheistic religion.

into

Asen i Paul i Bilongim

King i Jesus (Pus 5)

By John Gresham Machen

Mi no save, ol Kristen i usim nem “Lord” we i bin usim long ol kult pagan, i no mean ol Kristen i dependim ol kult pagan. Long taim, nem “Lord” i bin wailus olsem nem “God.” Ol man i no ken tok “God” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim. Ol man i no ken tok “Lord” long ol Kristen, long Graec, long ol man i no ken usim, long narapela man i no ken usim. I tambu long tok “Lord” we i bin usim long ol kult pagan. Long narapela siden, em i no ken tok “Lord” we i bin usim long ol kult pagan, i no mean ol Kristen i save usim ol aidea we i bin long ol kult pagan.

Em i gat wan strong reason bilong yusim Grik term "Lord" long Jesus olsem wan tok we i no wailim long ol man we i save tok Grik. Yusim bilong dispela term long matmat long ol man i no limit long ol kult pagan tasol, em i appear long Grik Olpela Testamen tu, na sapos i strongim moa. Ol i yusim "Lord" long Septuagint long translate "Jahwe" long Hebru tekst. I no relevan long toktok long ol reason we i governim ol transleita long ol i chosim dispela tok. Nogat doubt, wan tok bilong "Lord" i nidim long ol aociation we i bin cluster long Hebru tok. Na ol i save givim ol reason bilong chosim "kyrios" long stanim moa long narapela Grik tok we i mekim "lord." Maybe rot bilong "kyrios" i express moa strong long aidea we i intendim; o, maybe tu, wan meanin bilong god i bin attach long "kyrios," we narapela tok i no gat. Long ol kas, wanem i bin reason, "kyrios" i bin tok we i chosim.

Na ston, dispela fact i gat biknem importance. Em i go long ol man i redim Septuagint. Septuagint i bin Bible bilong ol manmeri bilong sinagog, na long sinagog, ol man i harim dispela Bible i read, i no ol Juda tasol, i tambu long ol Gentile, ol "God-fearers" bilong Buk bilong Acts. Em i go we Gentile mission i stat long ol "God-fearers". Na even long ol Gentile i kamap long bilip, ol i no go long skul bilong sinagog long taim bilong ol, ol i stil i usim Septuagint long ol. Olsem, taim ol krisman misunat i usim wud "Lord" long Jisas, ol i save kwik long wanem ol i mekim. Ol i save kwik long Jisas i gat wanem kain ples, kain ples i go long God tasol. Long wud "Lord", i usim olsem long ol graun long ol skripja bilong grek, olsem ol i usim long olsem nem bilong covenant God bilong Israel, na ol pasaji i appli kwik long Jisas.

Dispela usim Septuagint long wud "Lord", long applikasi long ol pasaji bilong Septuagint long Jisas, i no apim long ol epistol bilong Paul, i bin long biknem importance long krisman misunat long taim bilong ol, na i givim laip long as tok long wud i apim long Jisas. Tasol, usim wud long ol kult bilong pagan i interesing, na i no wail i shoim long Bousset na narapela, i mas i resivit. Wanpela fact i bin i stap strong long research bilong modren—fact long wud grek "kyrios" long yia 1, i go long olsem, i no stret long olsem nem bilong divinity. I stil i usim wud long ol, wud i ekspresim relesin bilong master long ol slave. Tasol, wud i kam long olsem wud bilong religion, na i go long olsem, spesel long Septuagint, i apim long Niu Testamen.

Olsem, em i no stret long stil bilong New Testament, taim Jesus i kolim "Masta" long narapela man long modren Church, olsem long "Lod." Sampela taim, ol i mekim olsem long protest long kontrepela New Testament long tingting bilong God long Jesus; Jesus i tok long "Masta," long olsem long narapela man i lider long skul long aat i kolim "Masta" long ol man i followim. O nogut, wail long narapela me, dispela wail i meanim man i mas obeyim. Tasol, sampela taim, modren stil i adoptim long man i laik long God, na woman i laik long God, ol i thinkim olsem, wail long tok Inglis "Lod" i go we, na stil "Masta" i klostu long mining bilong Greek Testament. Dispela ting i no true. Long translation long New Testament long Jesus, wan man i no ken desirem go bek long orijinal mining bilong wail "kyrios." Long Greek wail, i bin go we, na long application long Jesus long New Testament, i klia long wail long God. I bin long association long wail "Lod" long Inglis. Na long olsem, long association bilong wail "kyrios" long New Testament, i bin kam long Bible usage, long usage bilong Septuagint. Kristen i ken remember, "liklik larning i danjerus." Olsem, uniform substitution bilong "Masta" long "Lod," long tok long Jesus, i no save long freshness na originality. Long reality, sampela taim, i min long depart long spirit bilong New Testament usage.

Olsem, Bousset i bin mekim servis long setim klar long relief long mining bilong wail "Lod." Tasol, i no succeed long explainer long aplikim wail long Jesus.

Olgeta save, Bousset i no save long stori yet. Dispela "Lord" we i tambu long Jisas, na ol man i lukim Jisas olsem, i kamap long ol get-together bilong ol komuniti olsem dispela komuniti long Antiok, na i kamap long ol arap long kon셉. Tasol Bousset i no yet eksplenim olgeta long as bilong Paulinism. Paulinism i samting i go weytim moa long ol man i wership ekstatik long kult-god; personal relate long Krais i kontrolim olgeta area bilong laif bilong aposel.

Bousset i rekognisim dispela fact. Relijen bilong Paul, i tambu, i samting i go weytim moa long relijen we i ekspres long ol get-together bilong Church long Antiok. Tasol i ting ol arap elament bilong relijen bilong Paul, i go weytim, i gat olgeta starting-point long kult. I gat wanpela elament we i no save long ol konstruksion. Bousset i no save long ol individualistic karakter bilong relijen bilong Paul. O nogat, i no success long showim olsem Pauline laif "long Krais" o "long Lord" i kamap long ol eksperiens ekstatik long ol get-together bilong Church long Antiok.

Tasol sapos relijen bilong Paul i kamap long "kult", olsem i kamap? Olsem i eksplenim introduksion bilong ol new elament? Bousset i atakim dispela problem long bikman. Na i try long showim olsem relijen bilong Paul olsem i appear long Epistel i kamap long kult relijen bilong Antiok long identific long "Lord" wantaim "Spirit", na long ol generalizing na etikizing bilong koncept bilong aktiviti bilong Spirit.

Doktrin bilong Spirit long Paul, Bousset i bilip, i kam long ol rit religion bilong ol pagan long taim bilong Hellenistic. Olsem, Bousset i no save long terminoloji - olsem long kontensens bilong Reitzenstein i olsem Bousset i tingim i olsem stret- fundamental pesimistik dualism bilong Paul i base long dispela kain tingking na laifstil we i appear long ol misteri religion na long ol writings bilong Hermetic. Long dispela pesimistik tingking, salvation i no inap long human nature, even long help bilong divine, tasol long nupela stat, we i kam long change bilong divine nature long ol man. Bousset i go het, long apostel Paul, dispela super-naturalism, dispela conception bilong kontrol bilong divine power long nupela laif, i go longwe long limit bilong kult o long ol visionary experiences; Spirit i mekim i rul long laif bilong Kristen; no longwe prophecy, tongues, healing, na olsem, i now i lukim olsem fruit bilong Spirit, tasol tu, love, jo, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.

Tasol dispela Pauline extension bilong aktiviti bilong Spirit, Bousset i insist, i no involve liklik weaken bilong super-naturalism we i characteristic long orijinal conception; Spirit we i produsim love, jo, peace, i no save long human spirit olsem Spirit we i mekim man i tok long tongues. Na dispela super-naturalism we i appear long glorified form i derive, Bousset i conclude, long ol rit religion bilong pagan long taim bilong Hellenistic.

i no stret. Herem em:

The Pauline doctrine of the Spirit, Bousset believes, was derived from the pagan mystical religion of the Hellenistic age. Quite aside from the matter of terminology-though the contentions of Reitzenstein are thought by Bousset to be essentially correct-the fundamental pessimistic dualism of Paul was based, according to Bousset, upon that widespread type of thought and life which appears in the mystery religions and in the Hermetic writings. According to this pessimistic way of thinking, salvation could never be attained by human nature, even with divine aid, but only by an entirely new beginning, produced by the substitution of the divine nature for the old man. By the apostle Paul, Bousset continues, this super-naturalism, this conception of the dominance of divine power in the new life, was extended far beyond the limits of the cult or of visionary experiences; the Spirit was made to be the ruling principle of the Christian's life; not only prophecy, tongues, healing, and the like, were now regarded as the fruit of the Spirit, but also love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control. But this Pauline extension of the Spirit's activity, Bousset insists, did not involve the slightest weakening of the supernaturalism which was characteristic of the original conception; the Spirit that produced love, joy, peace, had just as little to do with the human spirit as the Spirit that caused men to speak with tongues. And the supernaturalism which here appears in glorified form was derived, Bousset concludes, from the mystical pagan religion of the Hellenistic age.

Korok..

Doktrin bilong Spirit long Paul, Bousset i bilip, i kam long ol rit religion bilong ol pagan long taim bilong Hellenistic. Olsem, Bousset i no save long terminoloji - olsem long kontensens bilong Reitzenstein i olsem Bousset i tingim i olsem stret - fundamental pesimistik dualism bilong Paul i base long dispela kain tingking na laifstil we i appear long ol misteri religion na long ol writings bilong Hermetic. Long dispela pesimistik tingking, salvation i no inap long human nature, even long help bilong divine, tasol long nupela stat, we i kam long change bilong divine nature long ol man. Bousset i go het, long apostel Paul, dispela super-naturalism, dispela conception bilong kontrol bilong divine power long nupela laif, i go longwe long limit bilong kult o long ol visionary experiences; Spirit i mekim i rul long laif bilong Kristen; no longwe prophecy, tongues, healing, na olsem, i now i lukim olsem fruit bilong Spirit, tasol tu, love, jo, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.

Tasol dispela Pauline extension bilong aktiviti bilong Spirit, Bousset i insist, i no involve liklik weaken bilong super-naturalism we i characteristic long orijinal conception; Spirit we i produsim love, jo, peace, i no save long human spirit olsem Spirit we i mekim man i tok long tongues. Na dispela super-naturalism we i appear long glorified form i derive, Bousset i conclude, long ol rit religion bilong pagan long taim bilong Hellenistic.

Dispela kontendishun olready i bin discusim, na i bin poinim out ol weakness bilong en. Doktrin bilong Sirit long Paul ino derive long kontemporerí paganism. Tasol eksposishun bilong teori bilong Bousset ino finis yet. Sirit we i aktivitiz i go long olgeta area bilong laif bilong Kristen, Bousset i say, i identifi wantaim "Lod" (2 Kor 11.17). Identifikashun we i kam long dispela i eksesaitim impoten influens long ol element we i bringim togeta; i eksesaitim impoten influens long konsepshan bilong "Lod" na bilong "Sirit." If "Lod" i identifi, o i bringim klosap, wantaim Sirit, na aktiviti bilong Sirit i go long olgeta laif, orait "Lod" ino inap long Paul tasol i lukim olsem kult-god we i present long miting bilong Chuch. Knap, em i mas i present olsem we Sirit i present - dat i, em i mas i olsem we Kristen i laif na i move na i gat em i stap. Olsem Paul i inap formim dispela fraz "long Krais" o "long Lod," we Bousset i admitim no ana logi i findim long pagan religen. Long narapela han, konsepshan bilong Sirit, Bousset i biliv, i mas i modifaim long konekshan we i gat wantaim "Lod." Long identifikashun wantaim narapela person we i laif tasol a few yia bilong en, "Sirit" i gat kwaliti bilong person we ino gat a priori. O, long narapela wur, fraz bilong Paul "long Lod" ino eksaktly sem mean long fraz "long Sirit"; dat i gat narapela karakter bilong person. "Dispela mixing bilong abstrakt na personal," Bousset i say, "konekshan bilong prinsipil bilong religiun wantaim narapela person we i wakin here long dis erth na i sufferim det, i wanpela fenomen bilong narapela paoa na orijinaliti."

Long dispela taim, Bousset i go long narapela danjer bilong no tru long ol prinsipol olsem base bilong reconstruction bilong en; en i go long narapela danjer bilong bringim religion bilong Paul i kam long koneksyon wantaim konkretim man bilong Jesus. Tasol en i detekteim danjer na avoidim. No nap, em i say, Paul i no hadim olsem clear impression bilong ol karakteristik bilong istorikal Jesus. Olsem, sapos en i hadim olsem impression, en i no nap konektim Jesus wantaim wan abstraksion olsem Spirit. Olsem, olsem, em i no interes long fact olsem Jesus i livim na speshal long en i dai.

Tasol, dispela ol bare fact i thought olsem i sufficient long giveim Paul's notion bilong Spirit-Lord dat peculiar personal quality we i arouse admiration bilong Bousset! Tru, Bousset i findim en yet long dis point face to face wantaim difficulty we i beset every naturalistic explanation bilong genesis bilong Paul's religion. Trouble i olsem, close connection bilong Paul wantaim istorikal Jesus i imperatively required long historian long order long giveim Paul's relation to Christ dat warm, personal quality we i shines out long every page bilong Epistles; tasol, long narapela han, wide separation bilong Paul long istorikal Jesus i just as imperatively required long order olsem Paul i no hampered long historical tradition long raising Jesus long divine dignity na long bringim en i kam long koneksyon wantaim Spirit bilong God.

Kritisisim moden i go bek na forwards long tupela requirement; em i try long save mmeri long olgeta. Bousset i save lukim requirement nambawan; Wernle, man i kontrapela, i save lukim requirement nambawan. Tasol tupela i wong long olgeta. I gat wanpela wailaut long dispela problem. Dispela wailaut i ol na i radikal. Tasol wailaut bilong scholarship i no save kam bek long en long liklik. Problem bilong eksplenim as tok bilong Paul i kamap i no go we long taim i go; i no save go we long ol kompromis. I go we tasol long taim Jisas i rekognisim long olsem Jisas i wailaut long Paul i presuppose, na ol Gospels i tokim olsem— i tambu Son bilong God, i kam long graun long save man, nau i sitin long tron bilong glori, na i wok long het bilong ol disaipel long Spirit bilong en, olsem God tasol i save wok. Solusen olsem i no popola olsem i tambu nau. Akseptim solusen i involve wanpela revolusen Copernicus long planti department bilong thought na laif bilong man. Tasol rifusim akseptim i lusim problem bilong historia we i no solve yet.

Long taim, Bousset i admit, em i save long stori bilong Paul i base long wanpela istorikal fak. Em i base long dai bilong Jisas. Tasol Bousset i bilip, long ol important particulars, interpretasion bilong Paul long dai bilong Jisas i kam long kontemporeri pagan religion; notion bilong Paul long dai na risim wantaim Krais i kam anan long influence bilong ol widespread pagan konsepsen bilong dai na risim god. Dispela asertoshen i kamap kwik long ol recent skolars; material long support bilong en i kolekt long konvenient form long M. Brückner. Tasol long tru, evidens long support bilong asertoshen i ol feeblis kain. Reviu bilong Hellenistic religion we i try long Chapter VI i reveal, long tru, fak bilong ol certain gods, speshal Attis, Adonis, na Osiris, i represent long frst long dai na long afta long resuscitate. Similarity bilong ol dispela figures long narapela i no save explaine long hypothesis bilong ol, ol i orijinal vegetation gods, we dai na resuscitation bilong ol i represent long withering bilong vegetation long autumn na renewal bilong en long spring. Long ai na long stat, parallel bilong ol dispela gods na Jisas i no save kamap striking. Jisas tu i represent long dai na long kam bek long laif. Tasol wail significance bilong parallel? Kan en min long ol narapela New Testament stori bilong dai na resurrection bilong Jisas i derive long ol vegetation myths? Olsem i konklusen bilong ol certain modern skolars. Tasol kurs konklusen i absurd, na i no save favor long Bousset. Esenshal historicity bilong bilif long Resurrection bilong en long narapela man i stand too firm long no shaken long eni teori bilong dependence long pagan mit. Olsem argument drawn long parallel bilong New Testament stori na pagan mit bilong dai na risim god i prove too much. If en prove olsem, en prove long New Testament stori bilong resurrection i derive long pagan mit. Tasol olsem view i no save hold long eni serious historians. Olsem i no save admit long parallel bilong bilif long Adonis na Osiris na Attis i dai na risim, na bilif long Jisas i dai na risim, i no produce long dependence bilong wan stori long narapela. I no save recognize, olsem, long parallel i no save mean long relenship bilong dependence. Na if en no save do so long wanpela poin, perhaps en no save do so long narapela.

But Bousset i go long long tok, olsem story bilong New Testament long dai na risim bilong Jisas i no kam long mit mitol bilong man nogut, yet influens bilong mitol bilong man nogut i mekim olsem i kamap long interpretensan Paul i putim long story. Paul i bilip olsem man i bilip long Krais i dai wantaim Krais na i risim wantaim Krais. But wanpela konsepsen olsem i appear long mitol bilong man nogut. Ekspresen klasikal bilong dis laik i kamap long ol wurds i reportim long Firmicus Maternus, "Gutim, yupela i go long initiasen, long taim god i save; na long yumi, salvation i kam long troblu."

But i mas rememba olsem toktok bilong Firmicus Maternus i lait long taim, na evidens bilong konsepsen i no planti long taim bilong bipo.

Kisim tok strong bilong ol writer i tambu long ol materis ia i no wail laik astonis. Ol manmeri i no save read liklik narapla i go long olsem investigetor i ken rekonstruk konsepsen bilong wan god i dai na ris, na bilong share we ol man i go long dai na ris, long olsem wan stuoa bik ol information long ol souses i eksisten. Long tru, no gat olsem. Ol information i eksisten long konsepsen we i no save kwestin i scanty long ekstrim, na long olsem ol i go long taim bilong Paul. I go we i tambu, long tru, long seim long olsem konsepsen bilong wan god i dai na ris, wantaim signifikens bilong relijen, i no bin eksisten bifo long taim bilong Paul. Wan teks bilong Ajipt i bin kwot long Er-man, we i mekim welfer bilong man i go long Osiris: "Olsem Osiris i laif, em tu i go laif." Olsem konsepsen i konekted long olsem long karing na long narapla i go long Attis na Adonis. Sapos konsepsen i eksisten long taim bifo Paul, i no mean i go long olsem i go long komon. Tru long olsem, i no wail long ol yia i go. Kontra long olsem i go long ol exaggeresen, J. Weiss—we i no ken akes long no save long ol metod bilong komparativ relijen long aplik long Niu Testamen—i kol atensen long 1 Kor. i. 23. Krais i krusifai, Paul i se, i go long ol Jentail olsem olsem tok i no save. Olsem i no luk olsem ol Jentail we Paul i go long olsem i save long olsem konsepsen bilong wan god i dai. Sapos Brückner i kontent long olsem, sapos konsepsen bilong wan god i dai i go long olsem komon long taim bilong Paul, krus i no go long ol Jentail olsem tok i no save; long kontrari, i go long ol Jentail olsem i go long olsem naturul ting long wol.

Bai, nogut long ston, sapos konsept long man i dai na risim, wantaim ol religious significance, i no strong long ol samting olsem, dependens long Paul i no prove. Long wanem, konsept long Paul i totally different. Wanpela diferens, i klia long ai, na manmeri i recognize - Paul i tokim Christ i dai long stil, na i dai long man. “Yu i laikim mi,” Paul i say, “na i givim laif bilong yu long mi.” I no gat konsept olsem long ol pagen religion. Osiris, Adonis, na Attis i no save dai; Jesus i givim laif bilong i free. Diferens i strong; i involve het long religion bilong Paul. Yu no save? Yu no save long we? Konsept bilong Paul long gras bilong Christ i kam long we? I kam long Jesus yet? I kam long save bilong Paul long karakter bilong Jesus? Supos i no natural. Bai, nogut, long point bilong Bousset, i no ken go. Long wanem, sapos Paul i save long karakter bilong Jesus, yu no save, Jesus, man i no save, i no ken olsem heavenly Lord?

Anita narapela i laikim yet. I dai na i resusit bilong ol god i tambu long ston. I dai na i resusit bilong Krais i Paul i tok, em i samting i go long historia. Ol man i save long ston long ol manmeri i tambu, ol kult i tambu long ol manmeri i no wail, long ai bilong ol man i save long ston, ol mit i kam long ol kult, no ol kult i no kam long ol mit. Olsem long kas i "i dai na i kisim laif" long ol god, wanpela i no wail long ol mit. Stori bilong Atis, i tok, i no wail long planti form, na i no wail long ol man i wais Atis long ston, long ston i no wail long ol man i wail long ston i dai na i kisim laif. I no wail long ol mit i tok long Atis, Adonis, na Osiris i no wail long ston. I dai na i kisim laif i no wail long ol kult. I go long yia, long Mun, ol man i wais Atis long Roma i lukim god i dai long diwai, na i kisim laif. I dai na i kisim laif i no wail long ol samting i go long bipo. I wail long ol man i wail long festival.

I tok bilong Paul long i dai na i kisim laif bilong Krais i no wail. Bousset i tok, i no wail, i tok i no wail long Bousset i try long soim i dai na i kisim laif bilong Paul i kam long ol sakramen. Tasol i no wail long error. I no wail long ol leta i wail long ol man i wail long ston. I wail long ol man i wail long historia. I tok bilong Paul i go long samting i go long historia. I kult i wail long ol man i wail long ston, na ol sakramen i wail long ol man i wail long ston i dai na i kisim laif. I dai na i kisim laif i wail long ol man i wail long ston.

Em i stap long ston bilong ol manmeri long narapela pasin bilong Paul na pasin bilong manmeri nau. Pasin bilong Paul no bin philosophy; no bin set bilong instrukshun long rausim manmeri long sori bilong graun; no bin tok bilong ol manmeri long wanem i bin true oltaim. Nius, em i bin tok bilong wanem i bin hapen. Thing i bin hapen, olsem, no bin hidim long pasin long taim bilong bipo. Tok bilong em no bin kamap long ol manmeri long ol form bilong lotu. Nius, i bin kamap long ded na ris bilong Jisu, long we Paul gospel i base, i bin hapen tasol long few yia bipo. Na ol fact i bin show long ol testemoni; ol testemoni i bin laip na Paul i apim long ol testemoni long detail. Wanpasin, 1 Kor. xv. 1-8, i sufin long putim bikfala gap long Kristen Jisu na ol saviour-god bilong pagan. Tasol karakter bilong Pasin bilong Paul no depend long wanpasin. Oltaim long Epistel, Paul i putim ol laif bilong em long truth bilong we em i tok long ded na ris bilong Jisu. Gospel we Paul i preach i bin tok bilong wanem i bin hapen. Sapos tok i true, orijin bilong Pasin bilong Paul i explain; sapos no true, Church i base long error we no explain.

Ol aita bilong lita i bin eksaminen long diskusin bipo. Sapos Jisu no bin divine Redeemer we Paul i tok em i, olsem i kamap long religion bilong redim we Paul i preach? Tri great hypotheses i bin eksaminen na i bin findim we ol i no good.

Pasin bilong Paul, i bin show, no bin base long Jisu bilong modern naturalism; sapos Jisu i olsem we ol historian naturalistic modern i tok, olsem, wanem i really distinctive bilong Paul i no kam long Jisu. Establishment bilong fact i bin notable achievement bilong Wrede na Bousset. Tasol sapos we i essential long Pasin bilong Paul i no kam long Jisu, we i kam long?

Em i no kam long ston bilong pre-Kristian apokaliptik ol notion bilong Mesia, olsem Wrede i bilip; long apokaliptik Mesia i no olsem man i save worshipim, na i no olsem man i save laikim. Em i no kam long religion bilong pagan, long accordance long brilliant hipothesis bilong Bousset; long influence bilong pagan i exclude long testimonial bilong Paul, na ol paralel bilong pagan i no wail. Tasol even long ol paralels i kloser long ten taim long ol i, em i no touchim hat bilong problem. Hat bilong problem i found long relation bilong Pauline long Krais.

Relasion bilong Paul long Krais i no save describe long simple count bilong detail; i no save reduce long liklik term; em i olsem wan thing i simple na i no save dividim. Relasion bilong Paul long Krais i olsem relasion bilong laikim; na laikim i exist olsem long person. I no olsem group bilong idea i save explain, sapos Paulinism i save account, tasol laikim bilong Paul long Saviour bilong en. Na laikim i rooted, no long wanem Krais i save tok, tasol long wanem Krais i save mekim. Em "i laikim mi na i givim em i self long mi." I tambu long basis bilong religion bilong Paul; i tambu long basis bilong ol Christianity. Basis i confirm long account bilong Jesus i givim long ol Gospel, na givim, olsem, long ol sources. I oppose long ol modern reconstruction tasol. Na ol reconstruction i olsem i bruk down. Religion bilong Paul i no fon long kompleks bilong idea i kam long Judaism o long paganism.

I fon long historical Jesus. Tasol historical Jesus i fon long en, i no olsem Jesus bilong modern reconstruction, tasol olsem Jesus bilong ol New Testament na ol faith bilong Kristian; no olsem teacher i survive long memory bilong disciples bilong en, tasol olsem Saviour i mekim redeeming work na i stil alive na i save laikim.

John Gresham Machen (1881-1937) em i man Amerika Presbyterian New Testament olsem, husat i go long ston against modernist theology long Princeton, na i stabilim Westminster Theological Seminary olsem long Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

revised to

John Gresham Machen (1881-1937) em i man Amerika Presbyterian long olsem skol long Testament, husat i go long ston against modernist theology long Princeton, na i stablim Westminster Theological Seminary olsem long Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Further Revised

John Gresham Machen (1881-1937) em i man Amerika Presbyterian long olsem skol long Testament, husat i go long ston against modernist theology long Princeton, na i stablim Westminster Theological Seminary na Orthodox Presbyterian Church.