Ducq's Harmonization
Farrell Till jftill@midwest.net
Fri, 05 Dec 1997 22:39:30 -0800 (00881411970, 2.2.32.19971206063930.00687454@midwest.net)
At 10:04 PM 12/5/97 +0500, ducq wrote:
>Farrell, i glanced over your "rebuttle;" it was quite amusing. 80%
>bluster and 20% content; but very good blustering at that. Honestly.
>I'm quite impressed by your confidence; just.... well i suppose we'll
>get into content soon enough; after all, i'm the one who's behind in
>answering some of the other lines. But i was kind of wondering; am i
>out of place by not using enough banter in my posts? I do hope this
>one makes up for some of it; i'm near 100% here :)
TILL
Well, just resolve the problem I have identified in my posting, and we'll
let the people on the list decide who is full of bluster. If you want to
claim the $1,000 I offered, you might also try to send to the list a
"narrative" that is coherent, contains all details in the four resurrection
accounts in the gospel, the book of Acts, and 1 Corinthians 5 and doesn't
resort to speculation. If you don't know what a narrative is, I'll be glad
to explain the meaning of the word. And in case you didn't recognize it, I
got right smack into the middle of content with my analysis of Matthew
28:1-9. Now your task is to show us how that Matthew's accounts allows for
your assumption that Mary went to the tomb alone, found it open, and ran off
to find Peter before the angel was encountered. This is a hurdle that
you'll never get over, because it just can't be done.
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net