Ranchhoddas:
It's the name or the personality behind the name and not the language. As long as the user is referring to the famous Nazarene, the results shoould be the same.

well.
The dude was a jewish rabbi,,who practised the life of the ''essenes''..or was one of them...and was the disciple of john the baptist who was an essene..not the other way round...(my views) and he wasnt from nazareth...

raphieMontella:

well.
The dude was a jewish rabbi,,who practised the life of the ''essenes''..or was one of them...and was the disciple of john the baptist who was an essene..not the other way round...(my views) and he wasnt from nazareth...

Explain this

raphieMontella:

well.
The dude was a jewish rabbi,,who practised the life of the ''essenes''..or was one of them...and was the disciple of john the baptist who was an essene..not the other way round...(my views) and he wasnt from nazareth...

Ranchhoddas from the above statement you can clearly see why I said he is ignorant of Scripture and only argues for the sake of it.

John the Baptist himself declared that he was unfit to lace the shoes of Jesus yet this guy sayd Jesus was disciple of John the Baptist...I think he needs to show you scriptural proof of this.

Plus he says Jesus the Son of Man was not from Nazareth even when He was clearly identified as a Nazarene and the books of Luke and Mathew declared He was from Nazareth Galilee.

I am tired of facepalming and shaking my head for this guy as he clearly shows that even as an Atheist who enjoys ridiculing Christianity he lacks knowledge of Scripture.....

How can someone claim Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist who the bible described as his forerunner and who had to play the script of Baptising Jesus in order to fulfil all righteousness. ..

I don tire abeg. Afterwards now he will also call it a typo.

4everGod1:



Ranchhoddas from the above statement you can clearly see why I said he is ignorant of Scripture and only argues for the sake of it.

John the Baptist himself declared that he was unfit to lace the shoes of Jesus yet this guy sayd Jesus was disciple of John the Baptist...I think he needs to show you scriptural proof of this.

Plus he says Jesus the Son of Man was not from Nazareth even when He was clearly identified as a Nazarene and the books of Luke and Mathew declared He was from Nazareth Galilee.

I am tired of facepalming and shaking my head for this guy as he clearly shows that even as an Atheist who enjoys ridiculing Christianity he lacks knowledge of Scripture.....

How can someone claim Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist who the bible described as his forerunner and who had to play the script of Baptising Jesus in order to fulfil all righteousness. ..

I don tire abeg. Afterwards now he will also call it a typo.

I was flummoxed by his response. I was waiting for him to come and explain himself before asking him whether he has ever read the Gospels, because from the top of my head I can remember Jesus saying ''a prophet is not honoured in his own country'' ie Jesus Himself acknowledged His nationality. I don't know where Raphie is getting his information from.

Ranchhoddas:
I was flummoxed by his response. I was waiting for him to come and explain himself before asking him whether he has ever read the Gospels, because from the top of my head I can remember Jesus saying ''a prophet is not honoured in his own country'' ie Jesus Himself acknowledged His nationality. I don't know where Raphie is getting his information from.

From what I saw yesterday and today I can deduce that confusion or gross misinformation led him to atheism.

4everGod1:



Ranchhoddas from the above statement you can clearly see why I said he is ignorant of Scripture and only argues for the sake of it.

John the Baptist himself declared that he was unfit to lace the shoes of Jesus yet this guy sayd Jesus was disciple of John the Baptist...I think he needs to show you scriptural proof of this.

Plus he says Jesus the Son of Man was not from Nazareth even when He was clearly identified as a Nazarene and the books of Luke and Mathew declared He was from Nazareth Galilee.

I am tired of facepalming and shaking my head for this guy as he clearly shows that even as an Atheist who enjoys ridiculing Christianity he lacks knowledge of Scripture.....

How can someone claim Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist who the bible described as his forerunner and who had to play the script of Baptising Jesus in order to fulfil all righteousness. ..

I don tire abeg. Afterwards now he will also call it a typo.

i dont take my knowledge from only the bible brother....im not a partaker to ''sola scriptura''

just as oyedepo became richer than adeboye...oyedepo's fanatic followers can claim adeboye was oyedepo's ''boy''...
Do you understand me sire?
Ranchhoddas

4everGod1:



From what I saw yesterday and today I can deduce that confusion or gross misinformation led him to atheism.

you saw nothing yesterday sire...
We can talk about today...
Today would seem so..because its what you believe in sire...

Ranchhoddas:
Explain this

m on it bro..

raphieMontella:

i dont take my knowledge from only the bible brother....im not a partaker to ''sola scriptura''

just as oyedepo became richer than adeboye...oyedepo's fanatic followers can claim adeboye was oyedepo's ''boy''...
Do you understand me sire?
Ranchhoddas

I dare say that you are sorely confused! Assuming I want to go with this your howler can you show me any proof of anywhere you claimed to have read that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist?

Plus can you tell me who was greater? John the Baptist or Jesus?

I asked this because even this your usage of Oyedepo and Adeboye is absolutely without a doubt wrongly applied. So answer my questions.

Also are you a fanatical follower of John the Baptist to claim Jesus was his "boy" Disciple

Ranchhoddas:
I was flummoxed by his response. I was waiting for him to come and explain himself before asking him whether he has ever read the Gospels, because from the top of my head I can remember Jesus saying ''a prophet is not honoured in his own country'' ie Jesus Himself acknowledged His nationality. I don't know where Raphie is getting his information from.

to me...his ''legacy'' created the city nazareth...
Reasons
1) Nazareth does not appear in the Old Testament,
nor does it appear in the volumes of
Josephus's writings (even though he provides
a list of cities in Galilee)...*at the alledged time of jesus's existence*
2)Nazarene seems to refer to a christian movement or adherents to the early christian movement as seen in acts 24:5...
3)Nazarene may be derived from the word ''nazara'' which was given to people devoted to God from birth..
Like john the baptist(luke 1:15..
Paul also was accused of being the leader of the sect and making asking some men to make a nazarene/nazara vow (acts 21:23--26)

raphieMontella:

to me...his ''legacy'' created the city nazareth...
Reasons
1) Nazareth does not appear in the Old Testament,
nor does it appear in the volumes of
Josephus's writings (even though he provides
a list of cities in Galilee)...*at the alledged time of jesus's existence*
2)Nazarene seems to refer to a christian movement or adherents to the early christian movement as seen in acts 24:5...
3)Nazarene may be derived from the word ''nazara'' which was given to people devoted to God from birth..
Like john the baptist(luke 1:15..
Paul also was accused of being the leader of the sect and making asking some men to make a nazarene/nazara vow (acts 21:23--26)

Strange...When you and other 'Jesus-deniers' usually want to disprove the existence of Jesus, you declare the writings of Josephus as unreliable hearsay but now that you need it Josephus is now an authority. Anyway, I personally consider the New Testament to be the most reliable document of the life and times of Jesus. I see no reason to take the writings of relatively obscure authors over that of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Do you?

4everGod1:



I dare say that you are sorely confused!

pls baba..we are not quarreling oo
abeg

Assuming I want to go with this your howler can you show me any proof of anywhere you claimed to have read that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist?

its just what i deduced sire..
1) he was baptised by john
2)after the baptism,,before and after john's death..his disciples remained distinct and didnt follow jesus (acts 9:1-7)...in the second century they were known as the ''Mandeans'' and had theological conflicts with christians...the polemics of early christianity confirm this...

Plus can you tell me who was greater? John the Baptist or Jesus?

jesus without a doubt

I asked this because even this your usage of Oyedepo and Adeboye is absolutely without a doubt wrongly applied. So answer my questions.

Also are you a fanatical follower of John the Baptist to claim Jesus was his "boy" Disciple

lol..his adherents still exist till this day...
Just that they've shifted a bit in their system
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandaeans

---

and im not a follower of john..
I speak for myself...and pls no be quarrel o

Ranchhoddas:
Strange...When you and other 'Jesus-deniers' usually want to disprove the existence of Jesus,

i never said jesus never existed...
I strongly believe he did...but not the way he was potrayed

you declare the writings of Josephus as unreliable hearsay but now that you need it Josephus is now an authority.

the passage of jesus being crucified is clearly a forgery...truthfully undisputed
but i get your idea sha...

Anyway, I personally consider the New Testament to be the most reliable document of the life and times of Jesus. I see no reason to take the writings of relatively obscure authors

contemporary evidence...thats what they are for

over that of Matthew Mark, Luke and John. Do you?

matthew is off the charts for me...
He's an exaggerator...fictional,over zealous, and miscontructs and misinterprets events to his own needs...
Mark is the one i trust most...
Luke clearly said he's not an eyewitness..but a re-teller of events told
john? I dont know...seems gnostically inclined..
But they were in ''fourth to fifth person accounts...
Also they were many gospels..the catholic church chose ''those four''....

raphieMontella:

pls baba..we are not quarreling oo
abeg

its just what i deduced sire..
1) he was baptised by john
2)after the baptism,,before and after john's death..his disciples remained distinct and didnt follow jesus (acts 9:1-7)...in the second century they were known as the ''Mandeans'' and had theological conflicts with christians...the polemics of early christianity confirm this...

jesus without a doubt

lol..his adherents still exist till this day...
Just that they've shifted a bit in their system
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandaeans

---

and im not a follower of john..
I speak for myself...and pls no be quarrel o

Please answer this question using the options below;

Who was Present during the days of Jesus

a. Mathew
b. Mark
c. Luke
d. John
e. Josephus
f. Raphiemontella

When you are done answering that then answer this;

Whose words are to be trusted. ..One present with Jesus or one who was not?

Then answer this question;

since you already can attest to the fact that Jesus was greater than John then why should their doctrinal conflicts matter for surely the greater is to be followed.

Did the Madeans die for the sins of the world? The prophecy regarding the coming of a messiah was it pointing at the medeans?

If it wasn't what then should be your concern about them and the beliefs they hold? Should it in some way then negate the ministry of Jesus Christ?

Like I said before, you are sorely misinformed and confused....but like you said ....no be quarrel!

raphieMontella:

i never said jesus never existed...
I strongly believe he did...but not the way he was potrayed

the passage of jesus being crucified is clearly a forgery...truthfully undisputed
but i get your idea sha...

contemporary evidence...thats what they are for

matthew is off the charts for me...
He's an exaggerator...fictional,over zealous, and miscontructs and misinterprets events to his own needs...
Mark is the one i trust most...
Luke clearly said he's not an eyewitness..but a re-teller of events told
john? I dont know...seems gnostically inclined..
But they were in ''fourth to fifth person accounts...
Also they were many gospels..the catholic church chose ''those four''....

Please what is the source of your information and why is it to be taken over what is documented in the New Testament? The 'hidden gospels' contain way more exaggerations than the available ones (eg The young Jesus performing tricks on His friends--From the book of Thomas if my memory serves me right ) so I don't get your reason for even mentioning them at all.

4everGod1:



Please answer this question using the options below;

Who was Present during the days of Jesus

a. Mathew
b. Mark
c. Luke
d. John
e. Josephus
f. Raphiemontella

none sir

When you are done answering that then answer this;

Whose words are to be trusted. ..One present with Jesus or one who was not?

i dont believe the gospel writers were present with jesus...
Thats where the problem stems in..
Thats where our two views arise..

Then answer this question;

since you already can attest to the fact that Jesus was greater than John then why should their doctrinal conflicts matter for surely the greater is to be followed.

good point..
But there's more to ''early christianity''

Did the Madeans die for the sins of the world? The prophecy regarding the coming of a messiah was it pointing at the medeans?

If it wasn't what then should be your concern about them and the beliefs they hold? Should it in some way then negate the ministry of Jesus Christ?

prophecy?
Which one?
The ones i know are non-prophecies...
Well i dont expect you to see reason with me on this..
Its like two sides of a coin

Like I said before, you are sorely misinformed and confused....but like you said ....no be quarrel!

confused?.....
Misinformed?? Hell no..
I read broadly..and i always look at two sides of a paper before leaving my signature on one..
Jesus existed..hell yes..
But other added stuffs to his existence and his ''divinity'' etc are weird...

raphieMontella:

none sir

i dont believe the gospel writers were present with jesus...
Thats where the problem stems in..
Thats where our two views arise..

good point..
But there's more to ''early christianity''

prophecy?
Which one?
The ones i know are non-prophecies...
Well i dont expect you to see reason with me on this..
Its like two sides of a coin

confused?.....
Misinformed?? Hell no..
I read broadly..and i always look at two sides of a paper before leaving my signature on one..
Jesus existed..hell yes..
But other added stuffs to his existence and his ''divinity'' etc are weird...

All these your "good point" comments...pls this is not a debate because I know u love debates.

Do you agree that Jesus was Divine? If yes why would you claim anyone added anything to his existence and divinity especially when it clearly declares in John 21 vs 25

And there are also many other things which Jesus did. If they should be allrecorded one by one [in
detail], I suppose that eventhe world itself could not
contain (have room for)the books that would be
written

So to you Mathew Mark Luke and John never encountered Jesus and never knew Him? Let tow your train of thought and ask you this....
If you say they were not with Jesus and Josephus also was not why would you take Josephus's words as an authority when he lived in 100AD?

So there was no Prophecy about the birth of Jesus?

ok grab your Bible if you have any and read up

Isaiah 7:14 (NIV):
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a
sign: The virgin will be with child and will
give birth to a son, and will call him
Immanuel.

Micah 5:1-2 (NIV):
1 Marshal your troops, O city of troops,
for a siege is laid against us. They will
strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a
rod.
2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though
you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me one who will
be ruler over Israel, whose origins are
from of old, from ancient times."


Genesis 49:10 (NIV):
The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler's staff from between his
feet, until he comes to whom it belongs
and the obedience of the nations is his.


Isaiah 11:1-10 (NIV):
1 A shoot will come up from the stump
of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will
bear fruit.
2 The Spirit of the LORD will rest on
him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of
understanding, the Spirit of counsel and
of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of
the fear of the LORD--
3 and he will delight in the fear of the
LORD. He will not judge by what he sees
with his eyes, or decide by what he hears
with his ears;
4 but with righteousness he will judge the
needy, with justice he will give decisions
for the poor of the earth. He will strike
the earth with the rod of his mouth; with
the breath of his lips he will slay the
wicked.
5 Righteousness will be his belt and
faithfulness the sash around his waist.
6 The wolf will live with the lamb, the
leopard will lie down with the goat, the
calf and the lion and the yearling[1]
together; and a little child will lead them.
7 The cow will feed with the bear, their
young will lie down together, and the lion
will eat straw like the ox.
8 The infant will play near the hole of the
cobra, and the young child put his hand
into the viper's nest.
9 They will neither harm nor destroy on
all my holy mountain, for the earth will
be full of the knowledge of the LORD as
the waters cover the sea.
10 In that day the Root of Jesse will
stand as a banner for the peoples; the
nations will rally to him, and his place of
rest will be glorious.

There are several more even from Jeremiah and others.
Were those additions to the Bible or speaking about someone else?

Ranchhoddas:
Please what is the source of your information and why is it to be taken over what is documented in the New Testament? The 'hidden gospels' contain way more exaggerations than the available ones (eg The young Jesus performing tricks on His friends--From the book of Thomas if my memory serves me right ) so I don't get your reason for even mentioning them at all.

like the infancy gospel of thomas...matthew also hyped jesus's miracles...

Luke 1Good News Translation (GNT)1 Dear Theophilus: Many people have done their best to write a report
of the things that have taken place among us. 2 They wrote what we have been told by those who
saw these things from the beginning and who
proclaimed the message. 3 And so, Your Excellency, because I have carefully studied all these matters
from their beginning, I thought it would be good to
write an orderly account for you.

this in no way invalidates the account tho...but i hope you get my idea..
And they're many scriptures..not only the ''gnostical hidden ones''..
A lot of new testament apochryca...
Matthew and luke sourced from ''mark'' etc

4everGod1:


All these your "good point" comments...pls this is not a debate because I know u love debates.

oga abeg oo

point - /pɔɪnt/ noun
4. a single item or detail in an extended discussion,
list, or text.

18. an important phrase or subject, especially in a
contrapuntal composition.

oga i didnt think of that..pls

Do you agree that Jesus was Divine? If yes why would you claim anyone added anything to his existence and divinity especially when it clearly declares in John 21 vs 25

i dont believe his divinity..
The gospel of john was the last among the others...had enough time to elevate jesus's status etc more....

And there are also many other things which Jesus did. If they should be allrecorded one by one [in
detail], I suppose that eventhe world itself could not
contain (have room for)the books that would be
written

......

So to you Mathew Mark Luke and John never encountered Jesus and never knew Him?

they never did..

The person closest to encouter jesus is ''james the just''....
But his works,version of christianity disciples etc were lost..
Best bet :the jewish war and destruction of the temple at 70 ad

Let tow your train of thought and ask you this....
If you say they were not with Jesus and Josephus also was not why would you take Josephus's words as an authority when he lived in 100AD?

he is not a supreme authority
but he is a much more credible source for contemporary evidences because he is a certified historian...and was versatile in his work..

Others during jesus's time like philo and pliny did nothing on jesus.

So there was no Prophecy about the birth of Jesus?

ok grab your Bible if you have any and read up

Isaiah 7:14 (NIV):
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a
sign: The virgin will be with child and will
give birth to a son, and will call him
Immanuel.

not a prophecy.. Mistranslated word..
Mary,joseph never called jesus immanuel
(dont say he was God)

Micah 5:1-2 (NIV):
1 Marshal your troops, O city of troops,
for a siege is laid against us. They will
strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a
rod.
2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though
you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me one who will
be ruler over Israel, whose origins are
from of old, from ancient times."

bethlehem ephrathath..a name for the descendants of ephrathath..in jesus geneology ephratath was not listed and is not a town

Genesis 49:10 (NIV):
The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler's staff from between his
feet, until he comes to whom it belongs
and the obedience of the nations is his.

the descendants....

Isaiah 11:1-10 (NIV):
1 A shoot will come up from the stump
of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will
bear fruit.

i see....but this would work out well if jesus was a descendant(seed) of joseph..(i dont believe the virgin birth)
the prophecies seem to speak of a literal descendant of jesse/david...not a miraculously concepted one
and one who will be king of israel and deliver their enemies into israel's hand...during his lifetime

There are several more even from Jeremiah and others.
Were those additions to the Bible or speaking about someone else?

the power of ''rome''....