Myer:


Do you know how much damage your org has done to some of your gullible members?
Because of your upside down interpretations of the bible, women die during child birth because their religious husbands won't accept blood transfusion.
I can't even imagine why govt still allows such husbands not to be jailed.
So thanks but you and Maximus69 can keep your religious principles to yourselves.

Nobody is forcing any religious principles on you, it's you who demands a reason for the faith we have in God's word.
We are only responding not imposing our beliefs on you, surely if you're feeling uncomfortable with our presentation it's a sign that you're unable ridicule our faith so it's making you feel bad as if you need to subscribe to it, but don't worry yourself.

Because faith is not a possession of all people! 2Thessalonian 3:2

So feel free my friend you have no problem!

TATIME:


Nobody is forcing any religious principles on you, it's you who demands a reason for the faith we have in God's word.
We are only responding not imposing our beliefs on you, surely if you're feeling uncomfortable with our presentation it's a sign that you're unable ridicule our faith so it's making you feel bad as if you need to subscribe to it, but don't worry yourself.

Because faith is not a possession of all people! 2Thessalonian 3:2

So feel free my friend you have no problem!

Hmmmmmmmm that's true brother.


Myer may be having the feeling that he has become our enemy simply because he doesn't subscribe to our beliefs o.

Myer:


Ok let's assume John never knew Jesus as the Messiah, you mean John never knew his own cousin?
Any way, no matter how much evidence is laid before your eyes, you clearly don't want to see any error in the bible.

You didn't get my earlier explanation.

John did knew Jesus as his cousin. Sure, they had that relationship as cousins and they both knew.

By the virtue of this, when you now read John saying, I KNEW HIM NOT, you should then know he wouldnt have been refering to their family relationship.

You must observe John's choice of words all through.

Note 1: 20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. He called him Christ, that is the focus of the discussion. Christ (Messiah). He never knew him as the Messiah until baptism.

Note 2: 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? The focus.

Note 3:. 29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.[/i]

[b]That is what he never knew before until Jesus' baptism. You dont know the Lamb of God by earthly relationship.


See his explanation below.

31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

Key facts:

verse 31, the essence of John's baptism is to make him know, to make manifest to Israel the Messiah. No one who who he was aside being Jesus son of Joseph, the carpenter son.

verse 32, evidence that John's revelation of Christ is divine. Observe how he narrate it in next verse.

verse 33, Observe:

1. I knew him not
2. John baptism was for a key purpose to look out for this: whom the Spirit descend and remaining....

This is a sign that has never been seen or experienced before, that is why is a key sign for John. The Spirit never descend and remained on anyone before then. It descend and go afterwards, But for he to be the Messiah God's direction to John is that such man will receive the Spirit and will remain on him.

This is what John never knew. He would have played with Jesus growing up, eat together, but he was never knew as the Messiah until this sign is seen with Him.

Remember John's contemplation when taken by Herod:

Matt 13:2-3
2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,
3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?

Notice, he said, Are you the one to come? That is what he never knew before but revealed at his baptism, THE ONE TO COME, THE MESSIAH. that cant be known by the flesh.

Remember Peter's experience

Matt 16:13-17
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Peter knew Jesus, but that was not what Jesus was asking them. He was asking of his divine status. THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Flesh and blood cannot know him but by revelation. Hence John's baptism is very key in God' plan for revealing Christ to Israel. The Messiah.

Myer:


Lol he has spiritual eyes so only he can see it. The rest of us need eye salve.

You shouldnt bother yourself with Janosky. I am not sure he can see beyond Christ's preexistence in any discussion. So anytime he sees the word "divine" he is always not at rest and ready to start arguments. Sadly if i join in it or ask him question now, he will face another corner.

This is what i wrote:
...Remember the birth of Jesus as divine was never disclosed by (Mary/Joseph). ...
...he knew Jesus in the flesh but was referring to his divinity as His baptism revealed him as the son of God,...

The same issues he had in bible interpretation by always lifting scriptures out of context is following him in the way he interpret everything. All he needed to do was to read the context of my explanation and not give an omnibus meaning to the word divine/divinity.

The word of God is inspired (2 Tim 3:16) hence, we can say scriptures are divine, why it was God's inspiration via the Holy Ghost. We can refer to a teaching as divine because of its inspiration (Spirit filled).

Matt 1:20
...for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Except Janosky is inferring again that the birth of Jesus is not God's inspired or by the Holy Ghost then he might need to check the effects of reading in RGB on himself and request for hand written notes of my posts. Unfortunately, my handwriting will confuse him more.

hupernikao:


You didn't get my earlier explanation.

John did knew Jesus as his cousin. Sure, they had that relationship as cousins and they both knew.

By the virtue of this, when you now read John saying, I KNEW HIM NOT, you should then know he wouldnt have been refering to their family relationship.

You must observe John's choice of words all through.

Note 1: 20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. He called him Christ, that is the focus of the discussion. Christ (Messiah). He never knew him as the Messiah until baptism.

Note 2: 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? The focus.

Note 3:. 29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.[/i]

[b]That is what he never knew before until Jesus' baptism. You dont know the Lamb of God by earthly relationship.


See his explanation below.

31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

Key facts:

verse 31, the essence of John's baptism is to make him know, to make manifest to Israel the Messiah. No one who who he was aside being Jesus son of Joseph, the carpenter son.

verse 32, evidence that John's revelation of Christ is divine. Observe how he narrate it in next verse.

verse 33, Observe:

1. I knew him not
2. John baptism was for a key purpose to look out for this: whom the Spirit descend and remaining....

This is a sign that has never been seen or experienced before, that is why is a key sign for John. The Spirit never descend and remained on anyone before then. It descend and go afterwards, But for he to be the Messiah God's direction to John is that such man will receive the Spirit and will remain on him.

This is what John never knew. He would have played with Jesus growing up, eat together, but he was never knew as the Messiah until this sign is seen with Him.

Remember John's contemplation when taken by Herod:

Matt 13:2-3
2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,
3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?

Notice, he said, Are you the one to come? That is what he never knew before but revealed at his baptism, THE ONE TO COME, THE MESSIAH. that cant be known by the flesh.

Remember Peter's experience

Matt 16:13-17
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Peter knew Jesus, but that was not what Jesus was asking them. He was asking of his divine status. THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Flesh and blood cannot know him but by revelation. Hence John's baptism is very key in God' plan for revealing Christ to Israel. The Messiah.

There's no explaining it away sir.

The bible erred. Having mentioned that Mary and Elizabeth were relatives, they goofed by portraying their children as strangers, that's grown Jesus and John.

There's no form of familiarity, relationship or endearment between the two in all the passages about them.

So Jesus god created Adam with clay but him god was born from woman he created.....god was killed by the people he created to die for the sin of the people he created....this one na yeye good!

Myer:


There's no explaining it away sir.

The bible erred. Having mentioned that Mary and Elizabeth were relatives, they goofed by portraying their children as strangers, that's grown Jesus and John.

There's no form of familiarity, relationship or endearment between the two in all the passages about them.

I guess you are now reading or seeing what you want to see. Funny enough, you all eisegesis also have verses used to defend it.

John/Jesus wasn't presented as strangers, you read than in yourself. An example of a perfect eisegesis.

hupernikao:


I guess you are now reading or seeing what you want to see. Funny enough, you all eisegesis also have verses used to defend it.

John/Jesus wasn't presented as strangers, you read than in yourself. An example of a perfect eisegesis.

Who is making up eisegesis between you and I?
I bet most Christians don't even know that John and Jesus were related.
This isn't even some thing to argue about.

Maybe you can share a verse that portrays they were related other than where Luke called Mary and Elizabeth relatives.

hupernikao:


I guess you are now reading or seeing what you want to see. Funny enough, you all eisegesis also have verses used to defend it.

John/Jesus wasn't presented as strangers, you read than in yourself. An example of a perfect eisegesis.

Try and see if you are in agreement with the rest of your cohorts criticising God's people.

Leave Myer (atheist) and go try the others, perhaps you can find PEACE amongst the enemies of God's people!

If they're not Jehovah's Witnesses, there can never be PEACE amongst them!

Why?

Because Satan is still at work and he is furiously working round the clock to see that Jesus (the Prince of Peace) is put to shame {2Corinthians 4:4} but in the midst of the true Christians (Jehovah's Witnesses) there is LOVE, JOY and PEACE! 1Corinthians 14:33

Before you argue this just try and see how compatible your beliefs are with other Churchgoers like you! 1Corinthians 1:10

Maximus69:


Try and see if you are in agreement with the rest of your cohorts criticising God's people.

Leave Myer (atheist) and go try the others, perhaps you can find PEACE amongst the enemies of God's people!

If they're not Jehovah's Witnesses, there can never be PEACE amongst them!

Why?

Because Satan is still at work and he is furiously working round the clock to see that Jesus (the Prince of Peace) is put to shame {2Corinthians 4:4} but in the midst of the true Christians (Jehovah's Witnesses) there is LOVE, JOY and PEACE! 1Corinthians 14:33

Before you argue this just try and see how compatible your beliefs are with other Churchgoers like you! 1Corinthians 1:10

The worst time of deception is self deception. And that's all you wrote up there.

Myer:


Who is making up eisegesis between you and I?
I bet most Christians don't even know that John and Jesus were related.
This isn't even some thing to argue about.

Maybe you can share a verse that portrays they were related other than where Luke called Mary and Elizabeth relatives.

I like logical and well organised arguments. You can't make a conclusion when arguments lack focus or evidence. So let's keep track on response from both sides.

Secondly, I am not "most Christians" and I don't hold brief for anyone, I don't make assumptions either for people. So let your discussion be based on what I discussed and the bible.

Lasty,
You were the one who said the scriptures presented John and Jesus as strangers. And I told you that you read that in. If this is not true, kindly show me where the scriptures presented them as strangers and show me from its context that it does.

It's not enough to make claims. Present your claims via bible explanation since you have read it and know it.

I will wait for this explanation based on bible context Sir.

hupernikao:


I like logical and well organised arguments. You can't make a conclusion when arguments lack focus or evidence. So let's keep track on response from both sides.

Secondly, I am not "most Christians" and I don't hold brief for anyone, I don't make assumptions either for people. So let your discussion be based on what I discussed and the bible.

Lasty,
You were the one who said the scriptures presented John and Jesus as strangers. And I told you that you read that in. If this is not true, kindly show me where the scriptures presented them as strangers and show me from its context that it does.

It's not enough to make claims. Present your claims via bible explanation since you have read it and know it.

I will wait for this explanation based on bible context Sir.

You're beginning to sound like Maximus69.
When you cannot defend your point you try to evade the question. It's typical.
I asked you to lay this argument to rest simply by quoting a verse that portrays a familiarity between John and Jesus in their adult lives. Once you do that you will get several verses that clearly point that their relationship was more of two strangers rather than relatives.

hupernikao:


The worst time of deception is self deception. And that's all you wrote up there.

I gave up on Maximus69 when he quoted 1 Corinthians 13:8 as the reason they don't believe in miracles in JW.

"Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away."

This is even beyond eisegesis. Their leaders obviously found a way of making the gullible members believe in the bible while taking away the pressure to perform any of the miracles in it.

One thing anyone who knows JW members for is that though they have knowledge, they have no spiritual essence. They are more of a social organisation like rotary club or APC, etc.

hupernikao:


The worst time of deception is self deception. And that's all you wrote up there.

It's OK o!

Myer:


You're beginning to sound like Maximus69.
When you cannot defend your point you try to evade the question. It's typical.
I asked you to lay this argument to rest simply by quoting a verse that portrays a familiarity between John and Jesus in their adult lives. Once you do that you will get several verses that clearly point that their relationship was more of two strangers rather than relatives.

I am not evading your question. You made an allegations first and I told you it's not true, then ask you to explain it. See your statement below

The bible erred. Having mentioned that Mary and Elizabeth were relatives, they goofed by portraying their children as strangers, that's grown Jesus and John.

https://www.nairaland.com/5782724/jesus-god-see/13#88818924

That is what you said earlier. Then you are in position to explain to me how the bible portray them as strangers. I need you to show that based on context of discussion to support your allegations. So, I am not in a position to prove your allegations. When you have shown from the scriptures your evidence then I can have a say along to answer your questions.

So, all I need from you is a contextual explanations of how you come about John and Jesus being shown in the letters as strangers. At least context should support your claim.

And lastly, scriptures one key facts you must understand is that Bible is not an all purpose book, not for answering all things. It has focus and anything not important to this focus need no documentation as it has no effect on its general message.

The bible is not a book for history even though it contain histories, the bible is not a book for John-Jesus family but a book for salvation through faith in Christ. Of this, any events that add no value towards this purpose is useless. The reason you see John the writer focus was tailored to key info. You can't expect John the writer to be documenting irrelevant relationships or family tie all around the scriptures. Every events of the bible presented some facts to us about its purpose.

What the scriptures reveals is Christ, his sacrifice and man's salvation in it not John's earthly relationship with Jesus. The reason John the writer documented John the baptist story is because of the relevant of his baptism to manifest Christ to Israel. Anything about John the baptist outside his message and practice of baptism is irrelevant to eternal purpose of God.

Even Mary, the mother of Jesus only come into play mainly at his birth because of how relevant that is to God's plan. Every other time she was paraphrased and not major, even Joseph existence was almost not documented after Christ birth, Jesus had siblings, John the baptist etc likely have siblings but not relevant.

So, when you understand the focus and application of the scriptures, the essence and it's purpose you won't treat it as story or history book. And there are things that you won't ask or bother with as they are absolutely irrelevant to the body of God's purpose as inspired by the author.

hupernikao:


I am not evading your question. You made an allegations first and I told you it's not true, then ask you to explain it. See your statement below



https://www.nairaland.com/5782724/jesus-god-see/13#88818924

That is what you said earlier. Then you are in position to explain to me how the bible portray them as strangers. I need you to show that based on context of discussion to support your allegations. So, I am not in a position to prove your allegations. When you have shown from the scriptures your evidence then I can have a say along to answer your questions.

So, all I need from you is a contextual explanations of how you come about John and Jesus being shown in the letters as strangers. At least context should support your claim.

And lastly, scriptures one key facts you must understand is that Bible is not an all purpose book, not for answering all things. It has focus and anything not important to this focus need no documentation as it has no effect on its general message.

The bible is not a book for history even though it contain histories, the bible is not a book for John-Jesus family but a book for salvation through faith in Christ. Of this, any events that add no value towards this purpose is useless. The reason you see John the writer focus was tailored to key info. You can't expect John the writer to be documenting irrelevant relationships or family tie all around the scriptures. Every events of the bible presented some facts to us about its purpose.

What the scriptures reveals is Christ, his sacrifice and man's salvation in it not John's earthly relationship with Jesus. The reason John the writer documented John the baptist story is because of the relevant of his baptism to manifest Christ to Israel. Anything about John the baptist outside his message and practice of baptism is irrelevant to eternal purpose of God.

Even Mary, the mother of Jesus only come into play mainly at his birth because of how relevant that is to God's plan. Every other time she was paraphrased and not major, even Joseph existence was almost not documented after Christ birth, Jesus had siblings, John the baptist etc likely have siblings but not relevant.

So, when you understand the focus and application of the scriptures, the essence and it's purpose you won't treat it as story or history book. And there are things that you won't ask or bother with as they are absolutely irrelevant to the body of God's purpose as inspired by the author.

Good. Your evasion of the question only confirms that you have unwittingly conceded to the fact that there is no verse to corroborate that they were relatives. The scriptures portrayed them to be strangers as adults even though Luke mentioned that their mothers were relatives.
The essence of this is of course once again just to expose one of the many inconsistencies and contradictions in the bible.

The bible is a religious book just like the Jewish Torah, the Islamic Quran and every other religious so called sacred book claiming to be handed to man from a deity who then decided not to speak to men again ever since neither performing any of the signs and wonders that it professes in our present day even though many have desperately prayed and tried faithfully to replicate them.
Yet you only believe the bible is God's word but the Torah and Quran are not divinely inspired even though they share almost the same stories but from different perspectives.

How these religious books have managed to be relevant over the years is a function of the fearful nature of man.
Once you overcome your fear, you will realize that whether there's a God or not, what will be will be.

Believers and unbelievers alike experience what you call God's Favor, Mercy and Grace. Believers and Unbelievers alike sleep and wake up, fall sick and recover, marry and give birth to children, live and die, etc.
Believers and unbelievers experience Love, Hate, Joy, Pain, Peace, Worry and every thing- Good or Bad.

People have been experiencing good and bad before the bible was ever written. Nations that do not practice these religions are fairing even better than religious nations.
But your pastor wants you to believe that it's your tithes and offerings that attracts God's favor to you. And when you don't pay you attract misfortunes to yourself or worse still you will end up in hell fire. Or that you must wake up by 3am fasting and praying before you can be blessed. Yet they will still quote scriptures that it is not by your works right?

Religion as they say, is truly the opium for the masses.

Myer:


Good. Your evasion of the question only confirms that you have unwittingly conceded to the fact that there is no verse to corroborate that they were relatives. The scriptures portrayed them to be strangers as adults even though Luke mentioned that their mothers were relatives.
The essence of this is of course once again just to expose one of the many inconsistencies and contradictions in the bible.

The bible is a religious book just like the Jewish Torah, the Islamic Quran and every other religious so called sacred book claiming to be handed to man from a deity who then decided not to speak to men again ever since neither performing any of the signs and wonders that it professes in our present day even though many have desperately prayed and tried faithfully to replicate them.
Yet you only believe the bible is God's word but the Torah and Quran are not divinely inspired even though they share almost the same stories but from different perspectives.

How these religious books have managed to be relevant over the years is a function of the fearful nature of man.
Once you overcome your fear, you will realize that whether there's a God or not, what will be will be.

Believers and unbelievers alike experience what you call God's Favor, Mercy and Grace. Believers and Unbelievers alike sleep and wake up, fall sick and recover, marry and give birth to children, live and die, etc.
Believers and unbelievers experience Love, Hate, Joy, Pain, Peace, Worry and every thing- Good or Bad.

People have been experiencing good and bad before the bible was ever written. Nations that do not practice these religions are fairing even better than religious nations.
But your pastor wants you to believe that it's your tithes and offerings that attracts God's favor to you. And when you don't pay you attract misfortunes to yourself or worse still you will end up in hell fire. Or that you must wake up by 3am fasting and praying before you can be blessed. Yet they will still quote scriptures that it is not by your works right?

Religion as they say, is truly the opium for the masses.

Strawman method, always speaking of religion as cover to avoid proper discussion.

I am wondering the relevant of all your wrote to this discussion. It's always sad when people raise arguments then divert to be addressing another thing afterwards. What has all these you wrote got to do with the fact that you raised an issue in the scriptures and I asked you to defend your claim.

A defendant that decoy to a strawman argument actually had nothing to say. And that's what you are showing already. But I still believe you have something to say So, lay your claim and defend. That isn't so hard if you are truly sure of what you are saying.

All I asked you is to go in context and explain your assertion based on the context. Or context isnt KING again in literature? But just the fact that all you claimed as contradiction are based on lifting verses out of its original context to satisfied your pursuit, it has become a tough task for you to defend.

I will advise you.
Always read well and read context very well before you draw opinion on any form of writing not just the scriptures. A man who give his own life and meaning to a text and deprive the text it's own life from its context is either dishonest, ignorant, lazy or dangerous. Most of the time, he is always a dangerous person. But like I said, I know you have your explanation, so give it.

Give your point in context than spending time to divert discussion as we see done most times on this forum. Any thing you know you can't explain from its context or give time to explain out, it is better to avoid it or look away from it.

And on your last paragraph. I am very sorry for you, if that was the experience you had. I have seen people passed through such pains over again. But experience has also shown me that the victims were actually fed with what they sought for, the lies you sought for, the strange desire, success, money and fame you fanned was ignited by the ones you disdained now. Very sad that you were an accomplice in the evil.

But it is also sad if you think everyone have such strange desires or reduce Christianity to materialism and shame. What you experience in those places either directly or indirectly wasn't Christianity but shame and scam that suit your taste.

Because when a scammer meets a greedy heart, the music is always romantic until the morning comes and your eyes are clear. Then you start blaming the whole world. I can't help that.

So, sorry Sir, let's face our main study here.
Give me a contextual based explanation of how the bible portrayed John and Jesus as strangers.

Selah.

hupernikao:


Strawman method, always speaking of religion as cover to avoid proper discussion.

I am wondering the relevant of all your wrote to this discussion. It's always sad when people raise arguments then divert to be addressing another thing afterwards. What has all these you wrote got to do with the fact that you raised an issue in the scriptures and I asked you to defend your claim.

A defendant that decoy to a strawman argument actually had nothing to say. And that's what you are showing already. But I still believe you have something to say So, lay your claim and defend. That isn't so hard if you are truly sure of what you are saying.

All I asked you is to go in context and explain your assertion based on the context. Or context isnt KING again in literature? But just the fact that all you claimed as contradiction are based on lifting verses out of its original context to satisfied your pursuit, it has become a tough task for you to defend.

I will advise you.
Always read well and read context very well before you draw opinion on any form of writing not just the scriptures. A man who give his own life and meaning to a text and deprive the text it's own life from its context is either dishonest, ignorant, lazy or dangerous. Most of the time, he is always a dangerous person. But like I said, I know you have your explanation, so give it.

Give your point in context than spending time to divert discussion as we see done most times on this forum. Any thing you know you can't explain from its context or give time to explain out, it is better to avoid it or look away from it.

And on your last paragraph. I am very sorry for you, if that was the experience you had. I have seen people passed through such pains over again. But experience has also shown me that the victims were actually fed with what they sought for, the lies you sought for, the strange desire, success, money and fame you fanned was ignited by the ones you disdained now. Very sad that you were an accomplice in the evil.

But it is also sad if you think everyone have such strange desires or reduce Christianity to materialism and shame. What you experience in those places either directly or indirectly wasn't Christianity but shame and scam that suit your taste.

Because when a scammer meets a greedy heart, the music is always romantic until the morning comes and your eyes are clear. Then you start blaming the whole world. I can't help that.

So, sorry Sir, let's face our main study here.
Give me a contextual based explanation of how the bible portrayed John and Jesus as strangers.

Selah.

In few words if you will, what's the difference between Christianity and Islam?
What convictio do you have that Christianity is the way and not Islam?

hupernikao:


Strawman method, always speaking of religion as cover to avoid proper discussion.

I am wondering the relevant of all your wrote to this discussion. It's always sad when people raise arguments then divert to be addressing another thing afterwards. What has all these you wrote got to do with the fact that you raised an issue in the scriptures and I asked you to defend your claim.

A defendant that decoy to a strawman argument actually had nothing to say. And that's what you are showing already. But I still believe you have something to say So, lay your claim and defend. That isn't so hard if you are truly sure of what you are saying.

All I asked you is to go in context and explain your assertion based on the context. Or context isnt KING again in literature? But just the fact that all you claimed as contradiction are based on lifting verses out of its original context to satisfied your pursuit, it has become a tough task for you to defend.

I will advise you.
Always read well and read context very well before you draw opinion on any form of writing not just the scriptures. A man who give his own life and meaning to a text and deprive the text it's own life from its context is either dishonest, ignorant, lazy or dangerous. Most of the time, he is always a dangerous person. But like I said, I know you have your explanation, so give it.

Give your point in context than spending time to divert discussion as we see done most times on this forum. Any thing you know you can't explain from its context or give time to explain out, it is better to avoid it or look away from it.

And on your last paragraph. I am very sorry for you, if that was the experience you had. I have seen people passed through such pains over again. But experience has also shown me that the victims were actually fed with what they sought for, the lies you sought for, the strange desire, success, money and fame you fanned was ignited by the ones you disdained now. Very sad that you were an accomplice in the evil.

But it is also sad if you think everyone have such strange desires or reduce Christianity to materialism and shame. What you experience in those places either directly or indirectly wasn't Christianity but shame and scam that suit your taste.

Because when a scammer meets a greedy heart, the music is always romantic until the morning comes and your eyes are clear. Then you start blaming the whole world. I can't help that.

So, sorry Sir, let's face our main study here.
Give me a contextual based explanation of how the bible portrayed John and Jesus as strangers.

Selah.

In few words if you will, what's the difference between Christianity and Islam?
What conviction do you have that Christianity is the way and not Islam?

Oya
Totori mi one time ~ To
Totori mi two times ~ To-to
Totori mi three times ~ To-to-to
Totori mi four times ~ To-to-to-to

How market?

Maximus69:
Oya Totori mi one time ~ To Totori mi two times ~ To-to Totori mi three times ~ To-to-to Totori mi four times ~ To-to-to-to
How market?

This cant be you sir,someone is using your phone

VERY RIGHT!

Myer:


In few words if you will, what's the difference between Christianity and Islam?
What conviction do you have that Christianity is the way and not Islam?

I am quite sorry, i dont have discussions like this. I believe discussions must be purposeful and definite.
The issue at hand has not be cleared, you have refused to attend to or prove your claim and allegations from the scriptures. That is what is key not not any other question.

Kindly provide your explanation and not get distracted with other claims or better still you can withdraw such claim without having to defend it.

hupernikao:


I am quite sorry, i dont have discussions like this. I believe discussions must be purposeful and definite.
The issue at hand has not be cleared, you have refused to attend to or prove your claim and allegations from the scriptures. That is what is key not not any other question.

Kindly provide your explanation and not get distracted with other claims or better still you can withdraw such claim without having to defend it.

I thought that was settled?
It's glaring to see that there no familiarity between Jesus and John the Baptist as adults as the bible portrayed them as strangers even though Luke mentioned that their mothers were relatives.

It's rather unfounded in the scriptures to try to prove what you yourself have said was not included as it was not important as the bible only focuses on Christ and not his relationship with John the baptist right?

But since you insist, here's an example.

When a dispute arose between the disciples of Jesus and John. Don't you think this would have been a point to introduce John as a relative of Jesus? As you and i both know, the bible is usually very detailed when it comes to matters of genealogy and family ties. But rather he was introduced as "He who was with you beynd the Jordan..."
John like wise referring to him as just someone he barely knew.

John 3:25-30
"Then there arose a dispute between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purification. And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!”

John answered and said, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven. You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but, ‘I have been sent before Him.’ He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease."

Myer:


I thought that was settled?
It's glaring to see that there no familiarity between Jesus and John the Baptist as adults as the bible portrayed them as strangers even though Luke mentioned that their mothers were relatives.

It's rather unfounded in the scriptures to try to prove what you yourself have said was not included as it was not important as the bible only focuses on Christ and not his relationship with John the baptist right?

But since you insist, here's an example.

When a dispute arose between the disciples of Jesus and John. Don't you think this would have been a point to introduce John as a relative of Jesus? As you and i both know, the bible is usually very detailed when it comes to matters of genealogy and family ties. But rather he was introduced as "He who was with you beynd the Jordan..."
John like wise referring to him as just someone he barely knew.

John 3:25-30
"Then there arose a dispute between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purification. And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!”

John answered and said, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven. You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but, ‘I have been sent before Him.’ He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease."

Glad, you attended to that. It quite showed your honesty towards the discussion.

You will now need to open yourself to properly reading the scriptures for the right purpose it was written and asking question in that line. There are questions that are borne out of inquest and there are questions borne out of lack of truthfulness. But in all, I will give you one key ingredient you must retain in your biblical discussion and argument irrespective of your view is the crucial law of biblical hermeneutics, which is that passages must be interpreted historically, and contextually. This is how you will present yourself with honesty, correctness and proper criticism of the scriptures.

Back to Discussion.

For you to fully understand what you are pointing out about John the Baptist and Jesus, you must first understand that the Bible like I told you before is not a book for all discussions. There is a central theme, focus of the scriptures and all interpretation, inquest, criticism must honestly trace that line. Let me state some few things you must know that clarity.


1. EVENTS/ACTIONS IN VERSES/PASSAGED OF THE SCRIPTURES ARE SUMMATIONS SUCH EVENTS/ACTIONS.

Bible have details, this includes narration of events, actions, teachings, explanation etc. But you must know as usual in most literacy writings, you will not have all the space in the world to document every steps and actions that led to a thing or events. Most times authors will use summation of actions, picking the key information that fully focus or give more insight to the to the arrival point. There are information that are never needed in writing else you will not be able to convey all your thought to the reader.

This is same for the writers of the bible, and more especially same for the Gospel of John. For example, you said, John didn’t record any relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist. The reason is John’s focus must be known and when known you will see why he wrote almost differently from other Gospel writers.

2. JOHN’S THEOLOGY AND STYLE OF WRITING

A key fact to understand in explaining John’s mind is his writing style. Every author has patterns, ways by which they communicate to their audience. This is same for John. John style of writing are focused on a single theme: CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD AND THE MESSIAH. And this is what gave birth to his Theology. John explained God from the viewpoint of Christ His Son.

John 1:1 Was with God
John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son
John 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God

KEY OBSERVATIONS that John’s letter deliberately omitted in other to keep his focus.

- No mention of Virgin Birth and The Name of Jesus’ Mother (MARY)
John didn’t mention the virgin birth or any historical facts about his birth. Infact John is the only author that never referred to Mary as the Mother of Jesus. I mean the name of His mother was never recorded by John. Same as mentioning that Jesus’ has a brother called James. He never went that direction and those are key information other authors gave us. Why did John do that? He has a focus; his presentation is the closest to the epistles among all the Gospels.

2 Cor 5:16
Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

His focus is God’s life in man: Christ.

- Avoided Accolades, Salutation and Earthly Lineage Links

John was never giving to writing accolades or mentioning names or speaking on lineage. Even his epistles, 1 John to 3 John. He was one of the few who never write any accolade or salutation at the end of his epistles. He is very direct. Compare to Paul, who spend time to give salutation and respect to deserving people. John is a man of many words compressed into limited writings.

- Recorded Only Seven (7) Miracles of Jesus[/b ]

Historically from the scriptures, Jesus performed about 37 different set of miracles recorded across the Gospels. But in John’s presentation, he only chose to mention just seven of it. But you must pay attention for John always do things with purpose. The 7 miracles John recorded were deliberate and pointed to the facts and theme of his writings ([b]CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD AND THE MESSIAH). He will regularly pointed to this as fulfillment of scriptures. They were selected to drive home his point. That is John’s theology.

In all, you shouldn’t find it hard when you now see John’s not mentioning John the Baptist/Jesus relationship as it is non relevant to his writings. John the Baptist was recorded by John specifically because of his purpose as a prophetic man to manifest Christ to Israel. So, John wasn’t portraying Jesus and John the Baptist as strangers but wrote based on relevance. Outside this, John sees no relevance. Note such writing style and mindset is what you will from all Epistles. Writings were based on key actors, focus and purpose. The reason you will see some names prominent in the Gospels but never occurred again the Acts or the Epistles, as Jesus is the message of the scriptures and every other person in the scriptures must be relevant to this purpose to be spoken of.

I hope we can now put this to rest.

Above All desires, I wish Christ Light to you.

hupernikao:



Glad you attended to that. It quite showed your honesty towards the discussion.
I hope we can now put this to rest.

Above All desires, I wish Christ Light to you.

Good. You showed why John may not have mentioned their relationship.
Now explain why Matthew, Mark and Luke didn't? Is it their style as well?

Theology can't explain this away.

Biblical inconsistencies and contradictions cannot be theologised.

I have a new one for you courtesy of Apostle Suleiman twitter rant today;
Two contradicting verses right after each other, maybe you can help unravel this mystery too.

Proverbs 26:4-5
4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest you also be like him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

First it says don't answer fools, then it says answer fools
By the way, those who choose to answer quote verse 5, those who don't want to answer quote verse 4.
Very convenient.


May the light of Christ give you understanding.

Rozz:
This cant be you sir,someone is using your phone

Well it's me my dear young lady!

What makes you feel it's not Maximus69?

Christians are free agents my dear, we only live our lives the best way ever which is for a purpose!

If it's about the music, we entertain ourselves with musics of all sorts we only filter it before digesting the song because music is another kind of food for the soul, if the composer is not influenced by God's holy spirit, Satan can use him/her to promote evil.

So since we don't live boring lives, we also feed our souls with music but we make sure we filter in order not to poison our souls!

Maximus69:


Well it's me my dear young lady!

What makes you feel it's not Maximus69?

Christians are free agents my dear, we only live our lives the best way ever which is for a purpose!

If it's about the music, we entertain ourselves with musics of all sorts we only filter it before digesting the song because music is another kind of food for the soul, if the composer is not influenced by God's holy spirit, Satan can use him/her to promote evil.

So since we don't live boring lives, we also feed our souls with music but we make sure we filter in order not to poison our souls!

not really the music but the playful mood

Rozz:
not really the music but the playful mood

Live is meant for enjoyment my dear, we eat, drink, play, dance, sing, romance, joke, sex, go for recreation e.t.c, that's what makes us different from unintelligent creatures (animals)!

Maximus69:

Live is meant for enjoyment my dear, we eat, drink, play, dance, sing, romance, joke, sex, go for recreation e.t.c, that's what makes us different from unintelligent creatures (animals)!

good to see this side of you

Rozz:
good to see this side of you

A true Christian must have all those qualities {2Timothy 3:16-17} Jesus had all except romance, because he has a short period to spend in the flesh so he can neither marry nor father a child!

But this is our own home {Psalms 115:16} and we need to get used to life on this planet, only to abstain from hurtful things, that's all! Act 15:28-29