Phil..Ok Phil let me know if i missed somthing...... The verse does not mention spring or summer......true.....that's my point! we ar left with what then to make a determintaion? Pete, made the afirmitive assertion that it was spring time! thus the burden of proof is on Pete to demonstrate that it was in fact spring and not just assumed to be spring....I showed his argument to be based on assumptions ...... Pete has attempted to argue his position based on the phrase "the time for figs was not yet" and "observable facts" ..I showed that it is factualy and logicaly erronious to make that assertion because there is nothing in the verse that demands that be the case. Thus, it is nothing more then an assumption to make the calim that it was spring time! Phil, I stated it implies summer ..I then demonstrated that impitcation based on the following considerations without any assumptions: 1. Fact: the passover takes place in the first month; 2.Fact: the first month is demonstrated to take place with/ in the harvest; 3.Fact: the harvest is demonstrated to take place in the time of year when there is little to no rain (even the wheat harvest) ..Since Peter made appeal to "observable facts" ,..I stated it is an "observable fact" that the summer not the spring is the time of no or littel rain ... 3. Fact: The first month named is also the name of the egyptian month given to them in the same day they came out of Egypt. ..It is an egyptian month............ .(.It is an observable fact" that Egyptian month is july-agust and that niehter the egyptain nor jewish moth dirifted thorouout the year.). 4. Fact: The curse of the fig tree took place only days before the crucifixtion.... 5 Fact: Christ message was about the harvest and bringing fourth furit... 6. It is a "observable fact" that the figs come before the leaves..the tree had leaves there is reasonable expectation to find fruit on it.... 7. It is an "Observable fact" that Figs get ripe even the early ones (before the harvest of figs) in the summer time! ( by definition all that is "imply") I have not made assumptions. On the other hand, I have refused to allow assumptions (this is spring time) to be part of any "interpretaion" of these facts.......If Pete can demonstrate that this was spring time without assuming things about the text the text does not say then he would have a vlaid argument/ position. ............... UNTILL THEN.......Pete has no logical scriptural or factual evidence to calim that this was sping time!..further, as I stated from the very begining of this debate: for all the ideas, speculations and conjectures there is only one thing to calim the scriptures demonstrate (without assumptions)..Namely: since: The passover takes palce in summer time and thus Christ was crucified in the july-august summer (the fig tree curse took place in summer time) thus Scripture can only be said to demonstrate that Christ birth took palce in December...... see also part two....of the scriptural demonstration..... --- On Wed, 8/27/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Birth and Death of Christ To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 4:05 PM Secondly Summer time is implied even in this verse .... Allen That is your assumption.. ME. Phil to use the verse he used as a demonstration of sping is false becuase A. The verse does not mention spring, Allen or summer.. Me. What assumptions are you accusing me of ?.That one will do.Please be specific.... and do you know what we are discussing? No not at all. I know what Pete is saying.. no problem.. Phil. ----- Original Message ----- From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 8:28 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Birth and Death of Christ Phil, You simply amaze me..LOL. ok "one paragraph" for Phil....All I did was prove and demonstrate that any calim that the verse Pete used has to do with spring is logicaly, scripturaly and factualy erronious...in other words Phil to use the verse he used as a demonstration of sping is false becuase A. The verse does not mention spring B. There is nothing in this verse that requires it ot be spring thus any calim that it is spring is a unessisary assumption. Secondly Summer time is implied even in this verse C. The perponderance of other scripture only demonstrate and nessesitate summer not spring. Punch line: Thus there is no scripture that demonstrates spring but ther is pleny that demonstrate summer...Pete's argument is the only one using assumptions ... What assumptions are you accusing me of ?..Please be specific.... and do you know what we are discussing? --- On Wed, 8/27/08, allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Birth and Death of Christ To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 3:14 PM What?!...what part of my the first paragraph did you not understand?....there is no spring time in the verse Pete quoted nor is there even a implication of such. I proved that....Thus, there is no logical or scriptural way to claim or even suggest this verse is discusing Spring time?!....maybe you your read it without the suds..lol --- On Wed, 8/27/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Birth and Death of Christ To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 2:50 PM Pete , You are perfectly valid in pointing out Mark's comments..but you keep making & using false assumptions to “interpret” with. Allen I'm just one vote here, but Allen I favour Petes demonstration interpretation as more valid than your assumptions. I get more certain of that from the fact that if you had it right, you could have answered it in a short paragraph or so, and not the never ending 10 page rave it took trying to avoid admitting you were beaten...Lock stock and barrel..... but I have neve yet ever seen you concede any point anywhere on any subject.. Could you perhaps find somewhere in the archives proof I am wrong... It would be nice. Philip.