John the Baptist

[John V]

That loud snapping sound was my irony meter breaking.

Based on what follows, I think it was your bullshit generator clicking on.

Let me remind you of something: You are the believer. I'm just a non-believer.

No, you’re a critic. Note your name and tag-line.

Non-belief doesn't involve imagination and assumptions. It involves reading something and seeing if it makes sense or not.

You’re the one assuming that Jesus called Peter and Andrew in John 1. I’m the one going with the actual text.

But back to the topic, the Synoptic Gospels depict a ministry that starts with the baptism of JtB, he goes into the wilderness by himself (he had no disciples following him around at that point) for 40 days, comes back when JtB is in prison and begins to gather disciples and finally concludes with the "cleansing of the temple".

In John's Gospel, Jesus meets with (but is not baptized by) JtB, gathers disciples, makes wine at a wedding, never goes into the wilderness (since that story would make less sense for the Trinitarian Jesus that had developed by the time John was written), cleanses the temple as the kickoff of his ministry and then sets up a rival baptizing business next to JtB's franchise, all before JtB is ever thrown into prison.

I'm just reading the different stories as they are written. You are the one acting like a fanboy trying to come up with explanations for all the continuity gaffes.

Incorrect. You’re reading in words like “starts with,” “begins to gather,” and “kickoff” that aren’t in the texts. I’m sticking with the actual texts.

1 & 3 are concurrent, with 1 not mentioning the baptism. I.e., another argument from silence. ...Then 2. Then 4.

That really doesn't fit. After his baptism in the Synoptics, Jesus goes by himself "immediately" into the wilderness (no disciples following him yet) and then starts his ministry in Galilee once JtB is put into prison.

The time in the wilderness wasn’t in the original analysis. It would come between between the booming voice and the extra bit of ministry, due as you note to the “immediately” in the text.

1. Baptism.
2. Immediately went to the wilderness for 40 days.
3. JtB thrown in prison.
4. Jesus comes to Galilee preaching.

No, now we have a 5-point timeline to make:

1. Spirit like a dove (checked and didn’t see booming voice in John)
2. Immediately went to the wilderness for 40 days.
3. Ministry specific to john
4. JtB thrown in prison.
5. Jesus comes to Galilee preaching

Now in John Jesus meets JtB, the next two days gathers disciples and the following day attends a marriage.

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
John 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;
John 1:43 The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.
John 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:

So timeline:
Day 1: Baptism
Day 2: Gather discples
Day 3: Gather more disciples
Day 4: Attend wedding

No room for ad hocs here. John specifies JC's activities for three days after his meeting with JtB. Mark et al say JC was immediately taken into the wilderness for 40 days.

OK, I’ll concede a conflict between Mark (not et al, the others don’t say immediately) and John on this.

And we haven't even addressed how Jesus gathered his disciples twice.

I’ve addressed it by noting your misunderstanding of the word disciple. Again, Jesus gathered disciples throughout his ministry. “Disciples” aren’t limited to the twelve apostles.

Did I mention God spoke to me and told me to tell you that It wants you to renounce Jesus and become a deist? Why wouldn't you believe me? Lack of any reason to think so? Argument from Silence!

You see, there's a reason Argument from Ignorance is a fallacy. Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence in cases where evidence should reasonably be expected to be found.

Already agreed, with key words bolded. You have yet to explain why John should include everything that’s in the synoptics.

Wouldn't think was legitimate? These were public miracles done in front of crowds. His fame spread to neighboring provinces. The rich and poor sought him out. Herod Antipas wanted to know if he was JtB (the guy he executed) resurrected. He caused a major disruption single-handidly at the Temple (twice by your account). The priest were so annoyed by him the met on freaking Passover Eve in an elaborate conspiracy to get rid of this guy.

But, if the chronicler thinks these things were legitimate, you dismiss his account as Christian mythology.

What does a guy have to do to get attention in your version of the ancient world?

We’re still discussing Jesus today, so he obviously got attention. You dismiss the accounts of what he did as mythology.

And yet, JtB gets more press from the 1st century historians without any miracles at all. And that's just one example I know of.

No, Jesus got more press than JtB, you just dismiss those records as mythology.