Page 3 of 3
Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?
Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 3:48 am
by mlinssen
Bernard Muller wrote: ↑Thu May 06, 2021 3:37 pm
to Peter Kirby,
You seem to be saying that it is a general rule that one would never introduce an incidental character with no more information than a name.
Not any name, just common name then such as James or Jesus or John.
Cordially, Bernard
It is hilarious how you make up rules that are perfectly suited to your ideology, Bernard.
You can try to deny that it is so, but you and I both know that you will not survive that struggle without losing a limb or two LOL
That leaves only one very burning question though: regardless of your little rule being true or not, and Needless to say that it undoubtedly applies perfectly to the NT - WHY is this so?
Why, Bernard, is this little rule there? Do you have an explanation for its existence?
1. Do you have a reason for it being applied not to, say, Peter or Mary?
2. And was Jesus a common name then?
Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?
Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:21 am
by Bernard Muller
to mlinssen,
It is hilarious how you make up rules that are perfectly suited to your ideology, Bernard.
What is hilarious is that you have "Luke" and "Matthew" seating side by side writing their gospel.
Why, Bernard, is this little rule there? Do you have an explanation for its existence?
It is not my rule, it is Josephus' rule.
That leaves only one very burning question though: regardless of your little rule being true or not, and Needless to say that it undoubtedly applies perfectly to the NT - WHY is this so?
This so-called rule is relative to Josephus' works.
Why, Bernard, is this little rule there? Do you have an explanation for its existence?
Yes, it is applied in Josephus' works.
1. Do you have a reason for it being applied not to, say, Peter or Mary?
2. And was Jesus a common name then?
"Peter" was not a common name then, but "Jesus" was.
Cordially, Bernard
Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?
Posted: Fri May 07, 2021 7:28 am
by mlinssen
I would put that in my signature if it wasn't too damn long.
This sums up all the hundreds, likely thousands conversations with "the other side" that I've had
to mlinssen,
It is hilarious how you make up rules that are perfectly suited to your ideology, Bernard.
What is hilarious is that you have "Luke" and "Matthew" seating side by side writing their gospel.
Why, Bernard, is this little rule there? Do you have an explanation for its existence?
It is not my rule, it is Josephus' rule.
That leaves only one very burning question though: regardless of your little rule being true or not, and Needless to say that it undoubtedly applies perfectly to the NT - WHY is this so?
This so-called rule is relative to Josephus' works.
Why, Bernard, is this little rule there? Do you have an explanation for its existence?
Yes, it is applied in Josephus' works.
1. Do you have a reason for it being applied not to, say, Peter or Mary?
2. And was Jesus a common name then?
"Peter" was not a common name then, but "Jesus" was.
Cordially, Bernard