>>10544252if it looks, smells, and tastes like shit its not hard to tell that its shit. don't forget there is dissonance between what you think you wrote and the actual meaning that comes across. but i'll post your first paragraph and actually show you why/how its problematic. I read the whole thing in full, before I started writing this, btw. Just so you can’t claim that I don’t understand it because I didn’t look at every word. I did.
you want scholarly but from the looks of this thread you just call anyone who criticizes you retarded...there is a saying where if everyone you meet is retarded maybe it is you yourself who is the retard
>Jesus Christ was the most impactful person in history.sure if you say so. sounds like your opinion
>He did this by becoming humanity’s first true individual. not sure how you were able to discern that no other human existing before jesus was a "true individual." this is the no true scotsman fallacy btw.
>What I mean by this is that he was the first to claim himself God, rather than to defer to one’s authority.not sure what "one's authority" means in this context. god's authority or the true individual's, or jesus's? its not clear and is confusing and the context doesn't explain it. also, this is just fucking wrong there were people who engaged in self-deification before jesus (Naram-Sin, Empedocles, Pharnavaz, Antiochus IV), ordinary, non-noble people who were later declared divine before jesus ( buddha, ezra, homer, imhotep), and rulers of varying cultures were considered gods before jesus was born (egypt, japan, Mesopotamian, china). Regardless, the bible does not directly call himself the son of god within the text of the bible. sure it might be implied (John 10:30, 14:9), but u show me a bible passage and i'll show you 100 ways to interpret it
(1/?)
