note Re: Short Sun blog

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 30 Sep 2010, 15:20 · from 2010-September.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: danldo at gmail.com (Dan'l Danehy-Oakes)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:20:03 -0700
Subject: (urth) note Re: Short Sun blog
In-Reply-To: <4CA3F62A.90302 at io.com>
References: <SNT123-W555D2A473AB2A9B034642FCF670 at phx.gbl>
	<4CA3F62A.90302 at io.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikbZnMGLqi7_KqDjp50EvB21S6OZBy8Yi0zH0F_ at mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com> wrote:

> Considering even Jesus Christ Himself still had wounds visible to the
> disciples after rising from death and a couple of days of decomposition, I'd
> say your standards are a tad high.

That's a little confusing - He seems to have had the wounds only when
they were convenient. On a couple of occasions, people who knew Him
well would not recognize Him after the resurrection, and you'd think
the wounds would have been a dead giveaway.

-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net