Talk:Failure of John the Baptist

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Theology This redirect is supported by theology work group. Religion: New religious movements Low‑importance Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This redirect is supported by New religious movements work group. Theology Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What we hope to show, using scripture passages straight from a King James version the truth as reported about the relationship John the Baptist had with the commujnity around him, the community at large and his relationship with Jesus. It is complicated but we hope to last long enough to build and present this case. The intent is not to detract John or place Jesus in a pitiable light, but to present a case of failed human interaction and the lessons to be learned therefrom. It is a vaules centered argument. Thank you for your patience. Robby159 22:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In response to a speedy delete tag - which I have removed - I think this material could be merged into John the Baptist#Unification Church view.

But there is also some info on this topic at either

No doubt that there is (or could be) some good content here. I take issue, however, with two items. First, this article is written from a Unificationist perspective and thus it is at its core very POV. That would be true of any article that assumes as fact any religious precept. My second concern is a more mundane one; there won't ever be enough content to justify this as a standalone article, so it should be merged into John the Baptist. Gregmg 22:26, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the doctrine of the

failure of John the Baptist" give the reader the impression that the article endorses the UC perspective? Uncle Ed

00:39, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

At present, this article treats Jesus and John both as historical figures. For a Christian there is no question that they were. For a non-Christian, it may be a matter of some debate. Further, the article is written from a UC perspective. Whether it remains as an independent article, or is merged, it needs to be revised to remove all bias and simply present the facts. The Trinity article is quite well done and serves as a good example of how an article on a religious topic should be written. Gregmg 02:58, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is this position unique to the Unification Church? My studies in other Christian theologies have found that John's "failure" is of little or no importance. If so, this article should probably merge with John the Baptist, under "this is the UC position on him"; with a cross reference to UC. Allegrorondo 14:09, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to have been a burst of discussion here for only a few days, and almost a year later, no action taken. The content is obviously theology, the

Instead of deleting it, I creadted a redirect.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 01:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]