Okay then, could you please answer my earlier question about scientific consensus in one particular instance? State your own opinion. It seems meta-relevant to the discussion. (My impression so far is that you are not as accepting of d-separation as the general public here. As in, the set of mammals and the set of unicellular organisms are d-separated, and at least one set that 'blocks' mammals from unicellulars is 'part of reptiles'. It means that learning some new feature about mammals, you can theorize about the corresponding feature/lack of it in reptiles, but you can't infer much about unicellulars. Consider this model: God -> Physics -> Civilization. God and Civilization are d-separated, with Physics as the blocking set.)

Actually, this is getting to the point where it doesn't seem worth anyone's time. You seem to have said:

• that you reject the Hebrew Bible, or at least consider it irrelevant

• that the Gospels have a clear meaning which we should understand without explanation from you (and which you believe).

This may not contradict itself directly, but it certainly seems impossible to maintain once we admit that countless Christians read passages like that one differently. Why would the Gospel accounts of Jesus be clear to us, when your co-worshipers don't agree on what they mean?

If you do continue the conversation on this topic, please try to explain yourself more coherently.