On 31 Mar 2004 23:18:18 -0800, (Roger Pearse)
ejaculated:
Beowulf <beowulf_is_not_here@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<i8bm60hd4mqj8bg13m1i8l59mifdonm1kb@4ax.com>...
On 31 Mar 2004 08:25:28 -0800,
(Roger Pearse)
ejaculated:
Beowulf <beowulf_is_not_here@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<024j60ph8heer0avkncii4psbbjlcq0n08@4ax.com>...
Josephus was offered as an example of a contemporary reference to the
existence of Jesus. It is no such thing and that is all I was saying.
I'm sorry you didn't deal with my point.
I didn't deal with it because it was a non sequitor.
You don't have to respond, of course.
Of course, you don't have to make off-topic posts, but that doesn't
stop you. Why should I let it appear that you rebutted a statement I
made when you, in fact, did no such thing.
(NB: 'non sequitur'. Sorry if that sounds nitpicking).
I don't agree with this
comment, by the way.
I'm sorry the definition of the word contemporary doesn't change
because you want it to.
I'm sorry that you can't cope with ancient history.
I'm sorry you can't seem to use a dictionary.
--
<http://www20.brinkster.com/beowulf9/gottod/Jesus%20Hates%20The%20Little%20Children.html>
.
