OK Aineo i stand corrected. It is as you say. 6 months before so Luke is saying. I misread it. Trust me i am not interpreting the Bible for my own agenda as you say. There is nothing suspicious about me, i am very open and genuine. My conversations regarding New Testament text are with regards to jesus i have no interest in John. He was only thrown into the pot so the disciples could claim John as being a holy figure to later claim in life that Jesus was the Prophet that his disciples were claiming him to be. John the Baptist well isnt that conveniant ? That is what brought me to mention him although i was in error regarding the claimed statement about when the conception was supposed to have taken place. I am still not wrong about Luke claiming John to have been born as Jesus was with the divine intervetion of God as claimed by Mathew and as proclaimed by the Angel Gabriel.
Elisabeth was Old ugly and barren and there is no statement of sexual encounters with Zacharias. The Holy Ghost was going to come to Lizzie and that divine intervention is how Lizzie managed to get pregnant. Just as it was with Mary the christians invented angel Gabriel appeared to tell Zach that God was going to intervene and cause Elisabeth to become pregnant and so John was born by supernatural means just as Luke has claimed. Curious even further when in later claims the people thought that John the Baptist was the chosen one. How odd even that John would even be mentioned in the first place. Of course verse 41 is where i misread all this getting filled with the Holy Ghost stuff and babies leaping into the womb well any man is bound to become confused by sucha tale.
And why should i pay much attention to the New Testament when it is all fabricated with just one purpose and that is the proclomation by the disciples of Jesus that their Master Jesus was the very Prophet that Moses and Isaiah were writing about. Which is that very specific Prophet that God promised Moses he would raise up. No wonder they needed the added input of adding John the Baptist to their list of proclaimers. especially with the reputation that they have written out for him. After all how could they know all this information when they themselves were not present and so were not witnesses. They bear false witness.
Luke can certainly spin a tale and i find these virgin birth stories highly entertaining especially when it is claimed that God had a hand in those Births of Jesus and of John. Still i stand corrected and withdraw my statements to the times of conception but not to the Virgin births. The Angel Gabriel did appear to Zach and tell him that God was going to answer his prayers for a child and cause his wife to become Pregnant and clearly that tale was to show that her pregancy was of suprnatural means. For it is clear that Zachs wife was Old and Barren and would not have born a child had it not been for this Divine intervention.
Other matter raise a curious eyebrow. For as Zach and his wife were aged in years then they would have given up praying for a child long ago. And just how was Luke able to speak on the prayers of Zacharias. Just who is then claimed to have given Luke that information.
Seems there is a lot more to this birth of Jesus and of John than first meets the eye.