To: topcat54; count-your-change
Ask him to articulate the thesis which requires us to believe they are two different events.No thesis necessary -- only the logical reading and comparison of the Luke to Matthew in the light of subsequent history.
17 posted on
04/09/2008 8:30:45 AM PDT by
Uncle Chip
(TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
To: Uncle Chip
Please fellas, you can’t carry on a conversation THROUGH me, with each other, yes, with me, yes, but not through me. I’m not a conduit and don’t speak for anyone but myself. thanks.
19 posted on
04/09/2008 8:45:09 AM PDT by
count-your-change
(you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: Uncle Chip; count-your-change; MrB
No thesis necessary -- only the logical reading and comparison of the Luke to Matthew in the light of subsequent history. Odd brand of "logic". By what system of logic are you permitted to ignore the obvious parallels between the two narratives to conclude they are speaking of entirely different events? (The Greek wording is identical in many verses.)
Which confirms that there is no logical thesis that demands we accept a highly questionable conclusion.
22 posted on
04/09/2008 10:06:30 AM PDT by
topcat54
("Light beer is the devil's beverage.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson