The No-Burial Theory

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

In a message dated 99-02-10 01:52:51 EST, you write:

ELF
<< any contrary
 assertion is tantamount to an Ad Hominem "poisoning the well" type attack on
 historians of antiquity in general since you are accusing them all (at least
all
 the ones who talk about crucifixion) of duplicity or incompetence.
  >>
===================
Joe Alward:

I've snipped your rebuttal to my questions about the no-burial issue, since I
think I will very soon be quite convinced that nailing was the most common
method of affixing victims to the cross (see my post to Jason Filley).

However, I cannot let pass the comment cut and pasted above.  It should
suffice for me to say that you've gone way, way too far.  I haven't attacked a
single historian by name, or even implied that I would disagree with any of
them; all I've done, I believe, is ask to be shown which historian said what. 

• Previous message: The No-Burial Theory
• Next message: An Introduction and a Question
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]