tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post116336002558273963..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: The harrowing of hellRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1163377974693372962006-11-12T19:32:00.000-05:002006-11-12T19:32:00.000-05:00If every Evangel had mentioned the event, the debu...If every Evangel had mentioned the event, the debunkers would still cast their gaze upon it and deem it suspicious. If non-Christians had mentioned the event, the debunkers would say it was a Christian redaction of the text.<BR/><BR/>I get tired of all the doubting for doubting sake.kletoishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04937744112201328478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1163376514019934322006-11-12T19:08:00.000-05:002006-11-12T19:08:00.000-05:00This objection of his is patently frivolous. He r...This objection of his is patently frivolous. He readily admits that different writers have differing target audiences in mind. Matthew's audience is not the audience of Mark, Luke, or John. Matthew is reporting to Jews about persons who had risen from the dead and about which event it is likely they heard or knew. We're not a party to every conversation going on in the background to these gospels. They are not just "gospels" they are, after all, letters to particular persons or groups, so there is a presumption that his is discussing some details because his audience is in some way familar with them. It's as if Carrier said to me, "I heard you grandmother has cancer." To which I reply, "Yes, she does." However, if my Dad was to write a separate letter to another person and not mention it, it does not logically follow my grandmother does not or did not have cancer.GeneMBridgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504383610477532374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1163373050412806792006-11-12T18:10:00.000-05:002006-11-12T18:10:00.000-05:00Steve and I have discussed Matthew 27 and other ar...Steve and I have discussed Matthew 27 and other arguments similar to Richard Carrier's in previous articles. See, for example:<BR/><BR/>http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/09/gospels-as-historical-accounts.html<BR/><BR/>http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/09/presence-of-past.htmlJason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.com