The intention here is to go through the entire book by chapter. I do not expect everyone to agree to anyone's single opinion. I however hope that those with the spirit be led by the spirit and those led by other things or by themselves to be led by that which leads them. I am aware that for some of us, there is no god. However, let this not be the thread for it.

I can not impose rules as I do not have the authority, but might I ask that the rules of Nairaland be strictly adhered to. May I also plead with you to go by chapter so as not to derail the thread.

I must add this personal because I know I will have to say it at some point, Sciencewatch, please refrain from derailing this thread! (Forgive me.)

I have chosen the New International Version but do not allow yourself to be limited by my choice.

Here's to a fruitful discussion. So mote it be.

John 1

Let There Be Enlightenment!

The chapter begins by stating the importance of the word. At the time, the written word itself was deemed of great importance amongst the Jews, to whom this was most relevant. It was even deemed holy amongst some and not meant for those who were considered unholy so this would have been like Prometheus who defies the gods by stealing fire and giving it to humanity thereby enabling progress and civilization.

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us".

Behold, the Tree of Life!




A correction was necessary in light of conversation with MuttleyLaff. See posts below. I had previously written,
[s]Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil![/s]

John 2

Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!

In this chapter Jesus makes two things, wine and a whip of cords. As the skeptic that I am, I am more likely to believe there was some science behind the wine making. Besides, it reminds me of my clubbing days when people used to ask me for pills and I freely gave them Tictacs. You wouldn't believe how high people got on them! Perhaps the wine wasn't the fermented sort, is what I am suggesting here as sufficient time for fermentation had not elapsed. Or perhaps it's like the palmwine in the Orolu Kingdom - it tastes better diluted.

I'll focus more on his Daddy Freezeness act of asking that the temples not be made into shops! Rather pertinent to our own times, won't you agree? It does amuse me that he too is asked what/who authorises him to tell the pastorpreneurs of his day to stop selling their fake gods!

The fact he didn't "entrust himself" to those who believed him is saying something I am sure we'd return to later.

budaatum:
John 1

Let There Be Enlightenment!

The chapter begins by stating the importance of the word. At the time, the written word itself was deemed of great importance amongst the Jews, to whom this was most relevant. It was even deemed holy amongst some and not meant for those who were considered unholy so this would have been like Prometheus who defies the gods by stealing fire and giving it to humanity thereby enabling progress and civilization.

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us".

Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

I enjoy my breaks away from Nairaland, it gives me much needed time to communicate with more enlightened Atheists on other internet platforms.

Your topic, " The Gospel Of John - A Study" is sadly stagnant for obvious reasons, it is the most powerful book/gospel on the reality of the spirit world of LIGHT. There is no room for darkness. Did you expect Atheists to flock to this topic? Atheists are tired after consistently displaying their foolishness.

I may be wrong, but I sense an unusual humility in you and that you may have a genuine higher interest in The Gospel of John which is unusual for an Atheist. If that is the case I can make a meaningful contribution to this topic.

ScienceWatch:
I enjoy my breaks away from Nairaland, it gives me much needed time to communicate with more enlightened Atheists on other internet platforms.

Your topic, " The Gospel Of John - A Study" is sadly stagnant for obvious reasons, it is the most powerful book/gospel on the reality of the spirit world of LIGHT. There is no room for darkness. Did you expect Atheists to flock to this topic? Atheists are tired after consistently displaying their foolishness.

I may be wrong, but I sense an unusual humility in you and that you may have a genuine higher interest in The Gospel of John which is unusual for an Atheist. If that is the case I can make a meaningful contribution to this topic.

Stagnant? Hmmmmm

I expected no one else but you to contribute to this thread! As to others, if the Gospel has Power, why should I have to bother if they flock or not?

Lets call it our bedroom for you and I until others arrive and turn it into the living room.

budaatum:
John 1

Let There Be Enlightenment!

The chapter begins by stating the importance of the word.
At the time, the written word itself was deemed of great importance amongst the Jews, to whom this was most relevant.
It was even deemed holy amongst some and not meant for those who were considered unholy
so this would have been like Prometheus who defies the gods by stealing fire and giving it to humanity thereby enabling progress and civilization.

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us".

Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

What's the correlation between
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us"
and
Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

MuttleyLaff:
What's the correlation between
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us"
and
Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

The first mention of consciousness of the being in the Yahweh Book was when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

I am proposing that when it is written that "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth", that we are being made conscious of things again, just like Adam and Eve were.

budaatum:
The first mention of consciousness of the being in the Yahweh Book was when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Genesis 3:7 is a galloping verse, with lots of dots in it though

budaatum:
I am proposing that when it is written that "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth",
that we are being made conscious of things again, just like Adam and Eve were.

I can see, do see, how you are trying to align John 1:14 with Genesis 3:7
however elaborate with further detail what you mean by:
"... conscious of things again, just like Adam and Eve were"

MuttleyLaff:
Genesis 3:7 is a galloping verse, with lots of dots in it though

I can see, do see, how you are trying to align John 1:14 with Genesis 3:7
however elaborate with further detail what you mean by:
"... conscious of things again, just like Adam and Eve were"

Adam and Eve became conscious of their unclothedness, amongst other things. "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us", is another instance of a making humans consciously aware.

budaatum:
Of course I can see. That's why I wrote it

Coolio.

budaatum:
Adam and Eve became conscious of there unclothedness

Did you type "unclothedness"?
Or is it one of those amazing miracles that happen on Nairaland where what you type gets changed to a sanitised equivalent word version
If you did, do type "unclothedness" verbatim, then explain what you mean by:
Adam and Eve became conscious of their unclothedness
What is "unclothedness"
If Adam and Eve became conscious of there unclothedness, then they must before have been conscious of clothedness of some sort, do you accept

budaatum:
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us", is another instance of a making humans consciously aware.

I still dont see the correlation between the below, reproduced, your earlier remark
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us"
and
Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

What is this "behold, the fruit" bit on about?
What is being beheld, what and/or who is the fruit, in your "Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!" statement?

MuttleyLaff:


Did you type "unclothedness"?
Or is it one of those amazing miracles that happen on Nairaland where what you type gets changed to a sanitised equivalent word version
If you did, do type "unclothedness" verbatim, then explain what you mean by:
Adam and Eve became conscious of their unclothedness
What is "unclothedness"
If Adam and Eve became conscious of there unclothedness, then they must before have been conscious of clothedness of some sort, do you accept

I did type "unclothedness", to get around the sanitiser.

I take the actual verse in the Bible to mean "they lacked awareness of the state they were in"

MuttleyLaff:

I still dont see the correlation between
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us"
and
Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!

Nor the behold, the fruit bit too

Behold, as in, 'become conscious (and aware)" of that which was at the beginning, and is, and always will be..

I personally hold that the "In the beginning" in Genesis, and in The Gospel of John, are connected. The Fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil is some sort of 'Light" both it, and John's Word, enable seeing (awareness, consciousness).

We have the whole of John to find an answer to your last question. The simple, off the cuff, not think too much response, however is that which some call Christ.

budaatum:
I did type "unclothedness", to get around the sanitiser.

Coolio

budaatum:
I take the actual verse in the Bible to mean "they lacked awareness of the state they were in"

What state? Which state? Is it the pre-Genesis:3-7 state or the Genesis:3-7 state?
There are at least two states
1) There was a state, they knew they had clothedness, and were cool with it
2) and there was a state, they knew about unclothedness to an extent, and got disturbed about knowing this

budaatum:
Behold, as in, 'become conscious (and aware)" of that which was at the beginning, and is, and always will be..

I personally hold that the "In the beginning" in Genesis, and in The Gospel of John, are connected.
The Fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil is some sort of 'Light" both it, and John's Word, enable seeing (awareness, consciousness)

In a laboured way, it is some sort of "'Light" albeit, in regards, to the Knowledge of Good
but what about, in regards to the Knowledge of Evil?
After all, it was a tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, wasnt it?
A combination?, as it were

budaatum:
We have the whole of John to find an answer to your last question.
The simple, off the cuff, not think too much response, however is that which some call Christ.

It was, the three inner caucus disciples, as in, Peter, James, and John, that, at first, beheld the glory of Jesus

MuttleyLaff:
Coolio

What state? Which state? Is it the pre-Genesis:3-7 state or the Genesis:3-7 state?
There are at least two states
1) There was a state, they knew they had clothedness, and were cool with it
2) and there was a state, they knew about unclothedness to an extent, and got disturbed about knowing this

There is no indication in the text from which I can say 1 applies. I have no evidence to suggest they were cool with their unclothedness. What the text implies is that they became aware that they had been unclothed and they were not happy that they were.

MuttleyLaff:
Coolio
In a laboured way, it is some sort of "'Light" albeit, in regards, to the Knowledge of Good
but what about, in regards to the Knowledge of Evil?
After all, it was a tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, wasnt it?
A combination?, as it were

The text says, "God knows that when you eat it your eyes will be opened. You'll be like God, knowing good and evil." So, I assume they got to know both good and evil, both of which the text implies they were not, prior to that, conscious of.

Kind of makes me think they could have been like apes. Totally devoid of conscious states of awareness.

MuttleyLaff:
It was, the three inner caucus disciples, as in, Peter, James, and John, that, at first, beheld the glory of Jesus

Ok. Though, the text points to John the Baptist becoming aware of Christ. And then making others aware of him when he told them to "Behold, the Lamb of God". Perhaps being conscious of Jesus, and becoming aware of Jesus' Glory, are separate incidences. I can live with that.

budaatum:
There is no indication in the text from which I can say 1 applies.
I have no evidence to suggest they were cool with their unclothedness.
What the text implies is that they became aware that they had been unclothed and they were not happy that they were

When one puts on righteousness as a clothing, you'll be cool with whatever your unclothedness is
The moment one takes off righteousness as a clothing, one wont be happy and will hide

budaatum:
The text says,
God knows that when you eat it your eyes will be opened. You'll be like God, knowing good and evil."
So, I assume they got to know both good and evil, both of which the text implies they were not, prior to that, conscious of.

I agree with you totally
The phrase "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil", as a matter of fact, actually is a merism.

The Good in "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil" signifies, all that's beautiful in life
and the Evil in "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil" signifies, all that's about adversities in life

Without mincing words, whoever eats of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil,
is going to be forced to deal with a whole gamut of beautiful and adversity
Dont take my word for it, go check out the meaning of "towb" (i.e. the original word Good was translated from)
and "ra" (i.e. the original word Evil was translated from)

budaatum:
Kind of makes me think they could have been like apes.
Totally devoid of conscious states of awareness.

Totally devoid of conscious states of awareness?
But before the fall from grace, Adam was aware of Eve
But before the fall from grace, both Adam and Eve were aware of the tree

budaatum:
Ok. Though, the text points to John the Baptist becoming aware of Christ.
And then making others aware of him when he told them to "Behold, the Lamb of God".
Perhaps being conscious of Jesus, and becoming aware of Jesus' Glory, are separate incidences. I can live with that.

You seem to be conflating persons here, combining John the Baptist, together with, John, the brother of James

John the Baptist, said: "Behold, the Lamb of God..."
meaning:
"Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!"

Meanwhile, John, the brother of James, reliving what he beheld, as in what he saw in company of Peter and James,
in seeing Jesus transfigured before them, said, they, the three, have seen:
"We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son,"

MuttleyLaff:
When one puts on righteousness as a clothing, you'll be cool with whatever your unclothedness is
The moment one takes off righteousness as a clothing, one wont be happy and will hide

I agree with you totally
The phrase "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil", as a matter of fact, actually is a merism.

The Good in "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil" signifies, all that's beautiful in life
and the Evil in "the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil" signifies, all that's about adversities in life

Without mincing words, whoever eats of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil,
is going to be forced to deal with a whole gamut of beautiful and adversity
Dont take my word for it, go check out the meaning of "towb" (i.e. the original word Good was translated from)
and "ra" (i.e. the original word Evil was translated from)

Totally devoid of conscious states of awareness?
But before the fall from grace, Adam was aware of Eve
But before the fall from grace, both Adam and Eve were aware of the tree

You seem to be conflating persons here, combining John the Baptist, together with, John, the brother of James

John the Baptist, said: "Behold, the Lamb of God..."
meaning:
"Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!"

Meanwhile, John, the brother of James, reliving what he beheld, as in what he saw in company of Peter and James,
in seeing Jesus transfigured before them, said, they, the three, have seen:
"We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son,"

I've limited myself to the bits in purple. Yes. I notice your signature is a refererence to this fact. It is echoed in the Gospel of Thomas, and experienced by Saul on the way to Damascus.

Ok, maybe not totally devoid. Some other text claim Adam named all other animals, so a level of consciousness must have entailed. I think we are in agreement that awareness increased.

As to who first saw the lamb, well,.......

budaatum:
I've limited myself to the bits in purple.
Yes. I notice your signature is a refererence to this fact.
It is echoed in the Gospel of Thomas, and experienced by Saul on the way to Damascus.

Ok, maybe not totally devoid.
Some other text claim Adam named all other animals, so a level of consciousness must have entailed. I think we are in agreement that awareness increased.

As to who first saw the lamb, well,.......

My signature? Which one? Which part of it?

You shouldn't limit yourself to the bits in purple alone, because remember you wrote:
"Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!"
aiming to equate the Word as being beheld as the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil,
when in actual fact, the Word is the Tree of Life

Yep, awareness, sure indeed increased. The good, the bad and the ugly flooded in

MuttleyLaff:
My signature? Which one? Which part of it?

You shouldn't limit yourself to the bits in purple alone, because remember you wrote:
"Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!"
aiming to equate the Word as being beheld as the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil,
when in actual fact, the Word is the Tree of Life

Yep, awareness, sure indeed increased. The good, the bad and the ugly flooded in

I see your point. And would have to reconsider. I suppose they ate of the fruit of that tree, as it wasn't forbidden to them. Will research it and come back to you.

budaatum:
I see your point. And would have to reconsider.
I suppose they ate of the fruit of that tree, as it wasn't forbidden to them.
Will research it and come back to you.

Yes, the tree of life wasn't off-limits like the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was.

But you are aware that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil eventually became absent but the tree of life lives on its presence, aren't you?

MuttleyLaff:
My signature? Which one? Which part of it?

"The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off " - Gloria Steinem

Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]" GoT

MuttleyLaff:
Yes, the tree of life wasn't off-limits like the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was.

But you are aware that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil eventually became absent but the tree of life lives on its presence, aren't you?

Yes, I can see how the tree of life is said to live on. It is what is inferred in Christ's Everlasting Life. We'll perhaps learn what this means as we journey through this Gospel.

John 3
‎
The Kingdom of God?‎
‎
There is much more to this chapter than I will touch on in this post. I will begin with ‎verse 4, knowing I do a disservice to even that verse.
‎
‎4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”‎

Nicodemus here asks a question you would hear many of us atheists ask when we attempt to ridicule religious belief. Our failing, (on both sides, I would claim), is a misunderstanding of what may have been meant‎.

To be born, is to become as a baby, completely devoid of ideas, like an empty vessel waiting to be filled up, which unfortunately, we just are not. We hold on to preconceived ideas that act like sunglasses distorting reality. It is like Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, we all see things from our own subjective viewpoint and lack objectivity. We are people in the darkness grabbing on to bits of an elephant and defining what the entirety is from the little we know. Any filling of the vessels we are would involve emptying its current content and refiling us with new stuff. 

The Kingdom of God cannot be comprehended within the limits of the ideas that we have especially if we are opposed to it, or comprehendeth it not. It will sound as ridiculous as describing an elephant by knowing only its trunk, or as being born again sounds to Nicodemus.‎ Perhaps what we need do is be willing to suspend our beliefs, and not assume we already know it all. "How can this be?" Indeed, this is going to prove as difficult as reentering ones mother's womb! It is not impossible though, if not taken literally, and if you were to try to consider.

Anything said on the entire chapter would be ignoring the elephant in the room if I do not mention verse 16.‎

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ‎

I personally have issues with the word "believe" in that verse. My preconceptions get in the way, so to speak, as while I believe some things - I believe I will wake up tomorrow‎, for instance - I require evidence for the things I believe. ‎I have woken up everyday so far is evidence that I will likely wake up tomorrow. 

I have always claimed that I cannot 'believe' in the existence of a God, or gods. ‎If I were a Christian, I would know there is a God and would have to arrogantly state, "I know there is a God", and my Bible will read as follows:

‎‎For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever knows‎ him shall not perish but have eternal life. ‎
‎‎
There is a difference, in my opinion.‎‎

I am hoping more flesh would dress the idea of "The Kingdom of God" as we step forward.‎
‎

budaatum:
John 3
‎
The Kingdom of God?‎
‎
There is much more to this chapter than I will touch on in this post. I will begin with ‎verse 4, knowing I do a disservice to even that verse

If you're bent on going through the entire book chapter by chapter, then you need to be careful though
because remember the bible wasnt originally in chapters and verses
‎

budaatum:
‎4 “How can someone be born when they are old?”
Nicodemus asked.
“Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”‎

Nicodemus here asks a question you would hear many of us atheists ask when we attempt to ridicule religious belief

Well, Nicodemus in that verse, as a matter of fact, was completely discombobulated
and certainly wasnt deliberately attempting to ridicule any religious belief

Jesus, even, was telling Nicodemus off,
for him being a teacher and not knowing about these basic factual stuff

Also dont you notice that Nicodemus, was fishing for information
during the clandestine informal investigation meeting,
but actually hadnt at all, asked a question yet before Jesus straight up and straight to the point
told Nicodemus that:
except a man is "born from above", he cannot see the kingdom of God (i.e. recognise demonstrations & power of the kingdom of God)

budaatum:
Our failing, (on both sides, I would claim), is a misunderstanding of what may have been meant‎.

To be born, is to become as a baby, completely devoid of ideas, like an empty vessel waiting to be filled up, which unfortunately, we just are not. We hold on to preconceived ideas that act like sunglasses distorting reality.
It is like Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, we all see things from our own subjective viewpoint and lack objectivity.
We are people in the darkness grabbing on to bits of an elephant and defining what the entirety is from the little we know.
Any filling of the vessels we are would involve emptying its current content and refiling us with new stuff.

I love John chapter 3 a lot and have noticed that John chapter 3 actually should have appropriately started from John 2:23
but it sad to see, many, be under a delusion, living in a fool's paradise and cavorting with the born again cliche

Most familiar with driving a car or riding a motor-cycle
know how a car's flat/dead battery is brought back to life
or how a motor cycle thats being lying sitting for months/years is brought back to life

Many so-called believers, "believers" and/or christians, misunderstand John chapter 3
and as a result, unnecessarily slip into resorting to using a born again cliche

I am unable to understand why some and/or others dont ever wonder why Jesus never publicly gave, not even one born again teaching
I guess it's because born from above aka born again, actually isn't a badge of honour, but is a matter of just fact

Humans comprise of body, spirit and soul.
The most sought after out of all, is the soul.

The body goes to the ground, spirit goes back to God, and the soul goes a place to awaiting to be brought forward to hear a pronoucement of judgment 

There is and was no John Chapter Three ignored elephant in the room
The arresting point that got Nicodemus captivated was regeneration
Jesus said to Nicodemus, it takes one having a spirit renewal or spirit re-birth, to see and recognise the kingdom of God
He said, except born from above, one cant accept the truth of nor admit the existence of the kingdom of God
If one isnt, then such one, will rubbish, ridicule, make fun of, poke fun at, make jokes about, scoff at, be sarcastic about the kingdom of God
Such one not born from above, will take the mickey out of demonstrations & power of the kingdom of God

Notice, it's, born from above, in order to be able to acknowledge the demonstrations & power of the kingdom of God
and its' born of water and born from above, in order to enter into the kingdom of God

Here is an illustration,
to explain "see the kingdom of God" and "enter into the kingdom of God"
When you're on a plane from France to Ghana, with a connecting flight at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, you see Holland
you dont go beyond Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, you see Amsterdam city and/or Holland from inside Amsterdam Airport Schiphol,
Except you have the correct travelling documents etcetera, you cannot enter into Amsterdam city and/or Holland

budaatum:
The Kingdom of God cannot be comprehended within the limits of the ideas that we have especially if we are opposed to it, or comprehendeth it not.
It will sound as ridiculous as describing an elephant by knowing only its trunk, or as being born again sounds to Nicodemus.‎
Perhaps what we need do is be willing to suspend our beliefs, and not assume we already know it all.
"How can this be?" Indeed, this is going to prove as difficult as reentering ones mother's womb! 
It is not impossible though, if not taken literally, and if you were to try to consider.

Anything said on the entire chapter would be ignoring the elephant in the room if I do not mention verse 16.‎
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,
that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ‎

I personally have issues with the word "believe" in that verse.
My preconceptions get in the way, so to speak, as while I believe some things
- I believe I will wake up tomorrow‎,
for instance - I require evidence for the things I believe. ‎
I have woken up everyday so far is evidence that I will likely wake up tomorrow. ‎

Weh done Sir, this is so spaghetti messy.
You're all over place, you cut corners and so ended up with a muddled mess summary of John Chapter Three
You are and/or were just like a chameleon dropped in a bag of skittles

budaatum:
I have always claimed that I cannot 'believe' in the existence of a God, or gods.
‎If I were a Christian, I would know there is a God
would have to arrogantly state, "I know there is a God", and my Bible will read as follows:

‎‎For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, 
that whoever knows‎ him shall not perish but have eternal life. ‎
‎‎
There is a difference, in my opinion.‎‎

I am hoping more flesh would dress the idea of "The Kingdom of God" as we step forward.‎

It is a reality there is God and god(s)
but you say: Perhaps what we need do is be willing to suspend our beliefs, and not assume we already know it all
OK, I can live with that and what good are wings without the courage to fly
So bud, test your sails
Describe, the nouns God and god(s)
with god(s), as in, being all you understand a god to be
Explain in details, with as much examples, you can muster what god and God is

budaatum:
John 1

Let There Be Enlightenment!

The chapter begins by stating the importance of the word. At the time, the written word itself was deemed of great importance amongst the Jews, to whom this was most relevant. It was even deemed holy amongst some and not meant for those who were considered unholy so this would have been like Prometheus who defies the gods by stealing fire and giving it to humanity thereby enabling progress and civilization.

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us".

Behold, the Tree of Life!




A correction was necessary in light of conversation with MuttleyLaff. See posts below. I had previously written,
[s]Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil![/s]

To say the truth, i saw this thread, but ignored it because i still held the thought that you were who i suspected you were. I don't really read your posts until you quoted me in 'S.eun Does Not Exist' thread. Then it dawned on me that, the guy i suspected you were lacked the stamina and the intellectual capacity you have to engage in a discourse as long as you did consistently and coherently.

Most of your atheists brethren here only just throw jibes and insults, but when held down in a consistent
and coherent discourse they run off, spitting invectives as they go. So, i just decided to ignore them.

I'm sorry i didn't take you seriously before now.
I will follow up here so as to get into your mind more and see what makes you thick. lolzzz.

budaatum:

Stagnant? Hmmmmm

I expected no one else but you to contribute to this thread! As to others, if the Gospel has Power, why should I have to bother if they flock or not?

Lets call it our bedroom for you and I until others arrive and turn it into the living room.

I think i'll like this guy. Don't get me wrong pls.

budaatum:
John 1

Let There Be Enlightenment!

The chapter begins by stating the importance of the word. At the time, the written word itself was deemed of great importance amongst the Jews, to whom this was most relevant. It was even deemed holy amongst some and not meant for those who were considered unholy so this would have been like Prometheus who defies the gods by stealing fire and giving it to humanity thereby enabling progress and civilization.

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us".

Behold, the Tree of Life!

A correction was necessary in light of conversation with MuttleyLaff. See posts below. I had previously written,
[s]Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil![/s]

budaatum:
Stagnant? Hmmmmm

I expected no one else but you to contribute to this thread! As to others, if the Gospel has Power, why should I have to bother if they flock or not?

Lets call it our bedroom for you and I until others arrive and turn it into the living room.

Emmanystone:
I think i'll like this guy. Don't get me wrong pls.

I think, he is, someone matured and with an educated mind
I liked how he paid attention
and took enough notice of what was said of his "Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!" remark

Notice, how, in his John chapter 1, second post of the thread,
he edited it, by striking out the "Behold, the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil!" remark,
this shows he listens and is open to correction

Emmanystone:

To say the truth, i saw this thread, but ignored it because i still held the thought that you were who i suspected you were. I don't really read your posts until you quoted me in 'S.eun Does Not Exist' thread. Then it dawned on me that, the guy i suspected you were lacked the stamina and the intellectual capacity you have to engage in a discourse as long as you did consistently and coherently.

Most of your atheists brethren here only just throw jibes and insults, but when held down in a consistent
and coherent discourse they run off, spitting invectives as they go. So, i just decided to ignore them.

I'm sorry i didn't take you seriously before now.
I will follow up here so as to get into your mind more and see what makes you thick. lolzzz.

Whatever clothes a spirit wears, it is identified by its fruits.

Welcome to the thread.

MuttleyLaff:
If
Jesus said to Nicodemus, it takes one having a spirit renewal or spirit re-birth, to see and recognise the kingdom of God
He said, except born from above, one cant accept the truth of nor admit the existence of the kingdom of God
If one isnt, then such one, will rubbish, ridicule, make fun of, poke fun at, make jokes about, scoff at, be sarcastic about the kingdom of God
Such one not born from above, will take the mickey out of demonstrations & power of the kingdom of God

That does sound prettey much like we atheists lol. All you stated is what we do! We are not born from above.

MuttleyLaff:
If
Weh done Sir, this is so spaghetti messy.
You're all over place, you cut corners and so ended up with a muddled mess summary of John Chapter Three
You are and/or were just like a chameleon dropped in a bag of skittles

Do note that I will be messy, all over the place, muddled, cut corners etc, and perhaps, and unfortunately, chameleon like in a bag of skittles (hopefully, the "man against son" type, and not the "wolf in sheep skin" sort). For I bring only wheat. Others will bring the yeast, salt, sugar, etc and then perhaps we shall bake bread. And if we're fortunate, someone will bring fish too and we shall be fed.

MuttleyLaff:

Describe, the nouns God and god(s)
with god(s), as in, being all you understand a god to be
Explain in details, with as much examples, you can muster what god and God is

I actually tried to respond to this, but found I was unable to make a graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above.

Gods, however (least my above sounds evasive) are human constructs used to explain existence to one another.

budaatum:
John 2

Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!

In this chapter Jesus makes two things, wine and a whip of cords. As the skeptic that I am, I am more likely to believe there was some science behind the wine making. Besides, it reminds me of my clubbing days when people used to ask me for pills and I freely gave them Tictacs. You wouldn't believe how high people got on them! Perhaps the wine wasn't the fermented sort, is what I am suggesting here as sufficient time for fermentation had not elapsed. Or perhaps it's like the palmwine in the Orolu Kingdom - it tastes better diluted.

I'll focus more on his Daddy Freezeness act of asking that the temples not be made into shops! Rather pertinent to our own times, won't you agree? It does amuse me that he too is asked what/who authorises him to tell the pastorpreneurs of his day to stop selling their fake gods!

The fact he didn't "entrust himself" to those who believed him is saying something I am sure we'd return to later.

Interesting post. Looking at Chapter 2 from a purely historical aspect the miracle of water being turned into wine is rather curious. To what end does the Son of God turn water into wine? For merriment? It is not a miracle worthy of Divinity, to my mind the story is entirely gratuitous. As is often the case in the Christian scriptures, we learn more not by what it states, but by what it omits there is more than meets the eye in this story even if it were Jesus’ own wedding and there was pressure to provide more booze.

Have you read about Heron of Alexandria? He was an Alexandrian who lived in the first century roughly between 10 and 60CE, he was a Mathematician an Engineer and inventor par excellence, the Leonardo da Vinci of his day, amongst other things he invented the first steam and coin operated apparatus, things like pressure operated sliding doors that opened by lighting a fire at the altar, he was known as the “Machine Man” and he regularly demonstrated his inventions for the entertainment of royalty.

One of the more curious inventions of Heron was his “Magical Jug” which through the ingenious use of siphons and pipes the operator could alternate between the pouring of water or wine or a combination of both from the same vessel. An original account and image of this device is contained in Hero’s treatise on siphons, entitled ‘A Vessel from which Wine or Water may be made to flow, separately or mixed’.
It seems to me that the account of John 2:10 is a description of the use of this device and that the Johanine authors simply wanted to let it be known that they were abreast of the technological advances of the day. Conjecture of course.

budaatum:
The intention here is to go through the entire book by chapter. I do not expect everyone to agree to anyone's single opinion. I however hope that those with the spirit be led by the spirit and those led by other things or by themselves to be led by that which leads them. I am aware that for some of us, there is no god. However, let this not be the thread for it.

I can not impose rules as I do not have the authority, but might I ask that the rules of Nairaland be strictly adhered to. May I also plead with you to go by chapter so as not to derail the thread.

I must add this personal because I know I will have to say it at some point, Sciencewatch, please refrain from derailing this thread! (Forgive me.)

I have chosen the New International Version but do not allow yourself to be limited by my choice.

Here's to a fruitful discussion. So mote it be.

Following with keen interest.

John 4
‎
For Yahweh does not associate with Allah?‎

As usual, I have focused on a tiny portion of this chapter. Of significance is that, Jesus healed a man who was close to death. It was the second sign performed after coming from Judea to Galilee.

The first part of the chapter presents us with a thirsty Jesus alone by the Samaritan's well. The Samaritans were a tribe of people who based their worship on the Samaritan Pentateuch, which they believed was the true religion of the ancient Israelites from before the Babylonian captivity. The Samaritan Pentateuch had been preserved by those who remained in the Land of Israel, as opposed to Judaism, which was based on the Torah, and which the Samaritans saw as an amended and corrupted religion, brought back by those returning from the Babylonian Captivity. Heresy, basically, made up by some jumped up gone away captive slaves! Their claim against Judaism was probably that some Babylonianism had crept into the Torah.

I am proposing that the difference between the Jews and the Samaritans is of a similar nature as that between Islam and Christianity today, or worse even, as Jews considered that mere touching a Samaritan was enough to send one to hell! Yet, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?”

".... a time is coming ...... when the true worshippers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

I can't help but be reminded of lambs and lions dwelling together. Did we not have a thread recently where vegetable lions came up?

It must be acknowledged that the chapter gives an answer to the question "What is God?" It however poses two further questions, which I hope will exercise the minds this week.

"What is spirit?"

"How must his worshippers worship in the Spirit and in truth?”

budaatum:
I actually tried to respond to this, but found I was unable to make a graven image

No one was asked to make a graven image
Does any need to make a graven image of you before you can be described?

budaatum:
or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above.

Quit being facetious
there wasnt a request asked to make a likeness of any thing that is in heaven above

budaatum:
Gods, however (least my above sounds evasive) are human constructs used to explain existence to one another

Now that you're talking, this is more like it
You're right about human constructs, after all, since we live in a world of fantasy and reality, human constructs are bound to be developed

We have some gods that actually don't ever and at all exist,
they are ideas made up and developed by humans for purpose of clarification and trying to fill knowledge gaps
and so, yes, we have gods, that are human constructs.

Teraphims are gods, that's a fact
but if aiming to up the ante, then to corroborate your assertion that:
"gods are human constructs (entities, ideas) that people use to explain existence to themselves and others"
the bible, like as in Isaiah 46:1 & Jeremiah 50:2 below about Marduk, does give a few of these human constructs a mention(s)

The god Bel bows down; the god Nebo stoops low.
Their statues are seated on animals and cattle.
The gods that you carry are burdens, a load for weary people.
- Isaiah 46:1

Raise the signal flags; shout so all nations can hear--Babylon will be captured!
Marduk, Babylon's god, will be ashamed and terrified, and his idols broken.
- Jeremiah 50:2

And I will punish Bel, the god of Babylon, and make him vomit up all he has eaten.
The nations will no longer come and worship him. The wall of Babylon has fallen!
- Jeremiah 51:44

Bel, was the chief deity of Babylon
and is another name for the sun god, Marduk
Nebo, the god of learning and writing, was the son of Marduk

Now there are other gods, and these arent necessarily part of the human constructs
They are part of the universal construct, and are such, can be just as like God, and all God is about.
The only exception of their likeness to God, is that,
these other gods, due to their essence(s), have their authority limited to each own's sphere of influence & sphere of activity.
The gods, like God have jurisdictional boundaries, but unlike God, they cant transpose themselves or overstep laid down boundaries
Also unlike God, they cant by themselves resolve arising jurisdictional issues