Re: [XTalk] John the Baptist & Jesus
- on 31/8/01 11:04 AM, Antonio Jerez at antonio.jerez@... wrote:
> To make the record straight I do recall that besides Mt 1-2 I also mentioned
> that Gundy (and me) believes that several parables and the Last Judgement show
> clear signs of Matthew's inventiveness.
> Best wishes
> Antonio Jerez
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- At 04:26 PM 9/2/01 -0500, William Arnal wrote:
>Nah, for the reasons I've suggested above. I also think I've failed to makeIt seemed to me that your burden of proof argument was that you
>myself clear as to what I was getting at on the "burden of proof" argument,
>so maybe we should drop this. I agree that historical standards should be
>"more probable than not," but I was trying to get at how certain KINDS of
>arguments aren't on par with their counter-arguments.
are under no obligation to prove that Q lacked the baptism. Fine,
but I wasn't asking you to prove that. Rather, when a credible
case has been made for its inclusion, as it has because it did
convince the IQP, I was asking for you to point out how the case
is too weak to sustain the conclusion instead of just telling me
that you personally weren't persuaded. Since you did attempt to
point out the case's weaknesses, I would like to thank you for
>But on this issue, I'd like to hear what Ted Weeden has to say, when heMe too, and I hope that he has a good way to deal with the IQP's
>writes up HIS arguments on this matter.
inclusion of the baptism as "probably in Q."
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35