text:
Back in 2006, I was working on an analysis of the Guard Story at the end of the Gospel According to Matthew during Easter season (naturally), when I became involved in an exchange on Victor Reppert's "Dangerous Idea" web journal with his friend the atheistic apologist Dr. Keith Parsons on hallucination theories and visions of Jesus by the first disciples.
Along the way, the topic of a missing body logically came up, and aside from the usual points of discussion I provided some hints at what I was analyzing (but was not yet ready to publish anywhere); and also (somewhat more vaguely still!) hinted that this would also help provide an answer to a peculiar question often overlooked in apologetics for or against the bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth:
why didn't the Sanhedrin fake providing a body?!
It was this exchange which led directly to me being invited here to the Cadre as a guest author, and I eventually posted a series of articles on the Adventure of the Guards (links will be provided below after the jump), but I've never gotten around to publicly posting a discussion on this peculiar question. I just always had something else I was doing on site for Easter, I guess! {g} (Most pertinently, I had to post up the series analyzing the Guard Story first.)
This year my most recent big project will have to start up after Easter, so (even if a little late in the day--literally and figuratively!) I thought I would finally post an article on this topic. If you're poking around the internet this Easter Weekend and want to see a discussion you probably won't hear much of elsewhere, feel free to click the jump and proceed!
For our current purposes, my discussion of the question will be in context of the argument and analysis I made concerning the second part of (what I call) the Guard Adventures at the tomb in GosMatt. I'll have to presuppose my reader's familiarity with the discussion and its results (whether you agree or disagree with some or all of the results), so here is Part 1 in a series of 10 posts (including a post-series appendix) for "A Curious Key To A Historical Jesus".
Here is a quick refresher of 40 points developed from the series, which approaches the topic from an initial position of extreme scepticism about the factual accuracy of the content of the text. (This is most of Part 9, by the way.) For the arguments arriving at these points, please refer to the series itself.
1.) A man named Jesus existed--the same man whom GosMatt's writer (and his sources, if any) wrote about (and more importantly, for this study, were talking about to some Jews): i.e., Yeshua bar-Yosef, Jesus son of Joseph, Jesus the Nazarene, who came to be called by some: Kristos, Hamaschia, Messiah, the Anointed One. (The Jewish opposition to GosMatt's writer and his audience, or the ones our author had in mind anyway, were not saying "This guy never existed" or "You've got the wrong guy, you should be talking about..." They were saying "Yeah, and his disciples stole his body!")
2.) Jesus had disciples.
3.) Jesus was important enough to his disciples, that they might want (or at least people would feasibly believe they might want) to steal his dead body, even at the risk from guards.
4.) The chief priests (i.e. the Sanhedrin) thought Jesus was dead.
5.) Rome either didn't care about the body or didn't care enough to take (or maybe keep) formal possession of it.
6.) The Sanhedrin, as a formal group, somehow didn't have full possession of the body either.
7.) Someone had possession of the body who couldn't keep the Sanhedrin from setting guards over it (or else didn't care if the Sanhedrin did so.)
8.) The Sanhedrin put guards over the body of Jesus (despite not having full possession of the body themselves.)
9.) The Sanhedrin had reason to set guards over the body of Jesus. (i.e. they had reason to suspect tampering; and they had reason to prefer the body not to be tampered with.)
10.) Someone had possession of the body who had enough clout to keep the Sanhedrin, who had reason to set guards over the body, from securing the body so completely that no eventual theft story would ever be even initially believed.
11.) The guards were most probably Jewish (and probably official Temple guards, not just guys hired out on the street on Saturday night.)
12.) At least two guards were sent ('guards' in the plural are being referred to for testimony by both sides in the dispute reported in the Key.) The more guards, the exponentially less likely the 'terminally lazy' story becomes (unless drugs were involved). Relatedly, this sets some feasible upper limit on the number of guards: the sleeping story has to be at least a little probable (i.e. not fifty or a hundred guards, or any vast number we might find in later apocryphals. Say ten-ish.)
13.) The guards were guarding overnight (at the very least).
14.) The time and conditions between Jesus' death and the final guarding of his body, were such that his body could still be identified as "Jesus". For example he hadn't been burned to a crisp in Jerusalem's flaming garbage dump, or mauled to pieces by wild dogs, or decomposing on a shelf for more than a couple of weeks.
15.) The placement of the body before its final guarding was such that it could later be positively recognized to be "missing". (e.g. it hadn't been consumed and excreted by vultures and wild dogs, either before the guarding or during.)
16.) The body had to be at least semi-exposed in a place where a thief (more specifically Jesus' disciples, per the contra story) might have some remotely feasible opportunity to get it. (e.g., not locked up tight in the Temple cellar--no Jewish ninjas, and the early counter story is about something else than how the disciples used Satanic magic to work their way into the Temple bowels, etc.)
17.) The guards must either have been able to identify the body when they were posted; or else they thought they had reasonable assurance the body was nearby even though they couldn't see it.
18.) The body was not thrown into a common grave.
19.) The body was not simply left sitting out in the open; it was put somewhere. (Neither the Sanhedrin as a political group nor the Romans ended with direct control over the body; which leaves the family or the disciples of Jesus, either of whom would not have left it sitting around in the open.) This also means the body was not left poked on a pike or hanging in a gibbet (which would be implausible anyway if we later decide to accept that this event happened during the Passover weekend--Jews would want the bodies even of universally admitted criminals disposed of and nominally interred. A common grave would count as nominal interment--but the body wasn't put there, either.)
20.) The guards didn't simply go to the wrong resting place of the body. (Otherwise the officially-backed story of our Jews would be "the guards said they went to the wrong tomb", not "the guards said they slept and the body was stolen by the disciples"; assuming any such explanation would be needed at all, since the body would still be easily accounted for--in which case our GosMatt writer and his audience would not be easily accounted for!)
21.) The guards believed the body was missing one morning.
22.) Some physical sign must have been available to the guards to alert them the body was gone.
23.) The body's departure was believed by the guards to have happened during the previous night.
24.) The Sanhedrin also believed the body to be missing.
25.) The Sanhedrin also believed the body to have disappeared during the time the guards were posted.
26.) These guards lived after the events of that night, long enough to spread at least one story of what happened.
27.) The guards testified in public (in some fashion and to some extent), that Jesus' disciples stole the body.
28.) Whoever had nominal control over the body wasn't who the guards, or the Sanhedrin, thought had taken it. (That person would have had a right to move it, but the guards are afterward spreading the explanation that someone stole the body.)
29.) The disciples of Jesus were considered by the Sanhedrin to be an ethical opponent (because the claim of the guards, who were appointed by the Sanhedrin, was that the disciples stole the body.)
30.) The guards also claimed that they were all asleep (or extremely inattentive, or anyway an embarrassing failure at their job) when this happened.
31.) There was some reason, involving the disciples of Jesus in some public fashion, for why the guards thought it was important to embarrassingly indict themselves, in public, in a culture heavily invested in shame and honor, about failing to guard the body.
32.) The guards thought it was important to spread a story that not only indicted them for failing in their duties, but was also (after any thought) easily seen to be a implausibly weak explanation.
33.) No body was recognized as being Jesus', by anyone in official position in Jerusalem at any time when opponents to the resurrection were in control; or, if this did happen, the opponents somehow failed to get this information to the Jewish counter-apologists in contact with GosMatt's audience, with any practical force.
34.) The story of the guards reached the Jewish population in contact with GosMatt's audience, with official (i.e. Sanhedrin-level) force.
35.) At least some Jews in contact with GosMatt's audience accepted the explanation of the guards, despite it being an implausibly weak explanation.
36.) Jews in communication with the Christian audience of GosMatt, were saying (in effect): "The guards who were set as watch-detail over the body of Jesus, testify themselves that they fell asleep while on guard; and that the disciples stole the body during this time."
37.) The Jews near GosMatt's Christian audience had no stories about finding a body that were worth our writer's time to talk explicitly about. (Note: this is not the same as concluding that those particular Jews, whoever and wherever they were, had no such stories at all; nor that they never told those stories also; nor even that our GosMatt writer was not replying to such stories tacitly somehow, in a fashion unrecognizable to us now.)
38.) The disappearance of the body must in some fashion have been important for the purposes of GosMatt's Christian audience (because this is what the polemic reported in the Key is about).
39.) The disappearance of the body must in some fashion have been important for the purposes of the original disciples of Jesus. (There is no discontinuity between the deployment of this explanation to GosMatt's audience in his day, and the original deployment of this explanation by the guards relatively soon after the disappearance of the body--however much earlier that might have been than GosMatt's composition as received.)
40.) Some historical person, in a historical context, did certainly write GosMatt, including the verses I have been discussing as the Key.
Caught up now? Okay.
In Christian apologetics, I will occasionally find people trying to argue that the body must have been missing because the Sanhedrin didn't produce the real body in order to stop the people from being deceived by the claims of Jesus' followers concerning that body.
I myself don't regard this as being a very good argument, not least because it's an argument from silence. (No doubt anti-Christian apologists will cheerfully quote me on that. {wry g})
But the concept raises what, to me, is a far more interesting and peculiar question: why didn't the Sanhedrin fake finding a body?
In theory, this could have been done fairly easily. In practice, however, we know for a fact that this was not done. We can be sure of this, not merely due to a lack of Christian response to such a tactic, and not merely due to a lack of subsequent Jewish appeal to the Sanhedrin having produced 'a body' of Jesus (either of which would involve arguments from silence), but because at whatever time GosMatt in its final form was authored/compiled/redacted/whatever, the most important Jewish counter-apologetic that the author thought worth trying to reply to (regardless of whether he invented any details or made guesses about them or not) was the testimony of the guards. And I think we can all agree that whenever GosMatt was written, however early that might have been would still be far too late for the Sanhedrin to try that tactic afterward!
So, why wasn't a fake body supplied by the Sanhedrin?
We can be sure (assuming my previous analysis holds up) that they didn't have full control of the body before it went missing; and we can be sure that the body went missing despite the presence of enough guards to thwart any usual grave-robbing attempt. We can also be sure that the body did not go missing for any reason the Sanhedrin regarded as legitimate. We can still be sceptical about whether the Sanhedrin bribed the guards, but I arrived at these results from an initially very sceptical position and logically considering alternate sceptical positions as I went.
The easiest and most charitable answer would be that the Sanhedrin wasn't that corrupt. This wouldn't be an answer many Christians would be comfortable with (or even many non-Christian Jewish heirs to the Pharisee party, who have been taught the corruption of the Sanhedrin party under Annas and his sons plus his son-in-Law Caiaphas). But Christian texts preserve strong evidence that the Sanhedrin was generally split over whether to support or convict Jesus and His followers or not. Caiaphas secured a unanimous vote for death (with two abstentions if GosJohn is accurate on that point) under irregular circumstances in a high-stress situation, against significant internal pressure not to railroad Jesus on trumped charges. Afterward, Acts reports that the Sanhedrin continued being wary and divided about what to do concerning Jesus' followers. Various canonical texts (which in any case are the earliest texts we possess with any historical significance worth even debating about) mention in passing that chief priests and Sanhedrin members converted to being followers of Christ not long after His death (as well as supporting Him against increasing pressure from their fellow religious authorities prior to His conviction and execution).
There may have simply been enough pressure to stop them from seriously considering (much less implementing) a well-intentioned fraud. But if my previous argument is correct about the historical accuracy of the guards and their counter-Christian testimony, we can also find a strong reason along that line for why the Sanhedrin would find it practically impossible (whatever their opinions of the propriety of doing so might have been) to attempt such a fraud.
Before I discuss the difficulty, let me talk about the factors that would have otherwise made it easy for them to do so, assuming enough of them agreed about the propriety and/or necessity of it. (Some of this is reposted from my discussion with Dr. Parsons, by the way.)
Let us suppose, for purposes of argument, that the Sanhedrin becomes irritated enough by the preaching of the disciples that producing the body seems like a good idea.
If the body had been in their power to produce, would the fact that the body was "dead" be a bar to them? No. The Romans themselves might agree that digging up and presenting the body would be a good idea to quash potential rebels. After all, the Romans had cared enough about the danger of Jesus and/or keeping the Sanhedrin happy to crucify Jesus in the first place! But even if the Romans couldn't be bothered about it (and Pilate in the canonical accounts does not end the incident on particularly good terms with the men in the Sanhedrin who had been pressuring him to execute Jesus), it would not be hard to hire unobservant Jews or even non-Jews to recover and handle the body.
The Sanhedrin could even have gotten personally involved in order to turn the shame and repellance into a positive thing. "Yes, we don't want to do this--we delayed in fact partly in the hope we wouldn't have to. But: this is how bad we think these cretins and their claims are--we'd rather do this, and suffer the shame of it, than see our beloved people of Israel led astray from God by the followers of this deceiver. Blah blah, rend our garments, insert further similar rhetorical counterpunches here, anyone wanting to stone these people now will have our blessing. Stones are free of charge in case anyone was worrying, having gone to the Temple in recent years..."
Would the public scandal of them displaying a body be a bar to them? The more accurate question would be whether this would be a bar to men who had been willing to turn a man regarded by many as a prophet and even as the Messiah over to the hated pagan Roman overlords to be tortured to death in a fashion regarded as cursed by God! The question of public scandal practically answers itself: they (or many of the Sanhedrin, aside from whoever converted of course) already thought that Jesus was a major public scandal, likely to bring a curse from God on Israel and/or Roman military intervention.
Most Jews no doubt pitied any Jews slain by Roman government (especially in such a horrid and religiously cursed fashion). Would the Sanhedrin have regarded this a bar to proceeding? They hadn't regarded it as a bar to handing Jesus over to be crucified in the first place! Even more to the point, most Jews wouldn't generally have much pity for freaking blaspheming pretender Messiahs executed at the behest of their own God-sanctioned religious authorities (even if the pagans were the ones to pull the trigger). The popular notion (as, again, the Gospels quite
realistically report) was always that Jesus was going to save Israel from
her oppressors. The reported reactions of the crowds when it looked like He had no intention of doing that, are again quite realistic. And He (or in their understanding 'he') did worse than merely fail. The end. (Except, it wasn't: here are his damned followers again--why are they here? Shouldn't they be crawling into a hole in shame??)
This is where most Christian apologists would fetch up with "therefore they must not have had a body". I can already argue that very solidly on other grounds, though. But this bring us to a question that must be faced: would a lack of a body have been a practical bar in itself? Maybe a moral bar, if enough of the Sanhedrin thought it would be wrong to lie to the people for their own good by producing a fake body. But by itself would a lack of the body have been a practical bar?
I think the answer is obviously: NO!
Crucified bodies of male Jews of approximately the proper age, body-build and hairstyles (or dead male Jews who could be posthumously crucified) could be easily supplied from such a large population. Within a plausible range of time, not too early and not too late, it need not even look much like Jesus at all: he was beaten and scourged and crucified and then decomposing in a grave somewhere for however-many-weeks-or-months, right?
But the body becoming putrescent goo is not really an issue. That was the ideal result in 1st Century Palestine (it's what the spices and flowers were for, to accelerate the body's composition down to the bones faster.) But even today we're still sometimes pulling fairly intact bodies out of the ground dating back to that time and place. (Such as the man recovered from a tomb of the 1st Century Jerusalem super-rich back in the year 2000. He died of tuberculosis; but he wasn't quite yet putrescent goo.) If the Sanhedrin says they decided to recover or even to preserve the body instead for such a contingency, it's plausible enough to be believed.
Such an attempt at deception wouldn't have convinced the core group of Christians, of course. But the Sanhedrin's goal would not have been to de-convert the main converts; the point would be to inoculate the populace against heresy (even blasphemy). When the Inquisition of the College of Cardinals arrives in town, displaying the remains of Josh the Freaking Heretic, does it really matter whether the body is identifiable by terms of 1st century forensics? If the Sanhedrin says THIS IS THE BODY, then the faithful can say, "Yes sir, great illuminated rabbi! Glad you showed us!", and fly the flag of loyalty.
Regardless of how popular the Sanhedrin might have been among the people at this time, they were the ones completely controlling the sacrificial system and rituals without which (an observant Jew would believe) there could be no atonement with God for sins. (Later Jews had to come up with solutions in the aftermath of the Temple's destruction, but this is not relevant at any time that the Sanhedrin could have faked showing a body to dissuade converts.) Annas, at least, had been properly chosen as high priest, and even if strictly speaking his sons (and son-in-law) hadn't been properly sanctified for the task the "real" high priest was giving his sanction to their actions. The office is what is important in such a culture, moreso than the character of the person.
So the Sanhedrin's success at such a ruse wouldn't have to depend on what their general standing was among the population. They only have to be accepted enough as proper authorities; and if the population didn't accept them enough as proper religious authorities there would have already been rebellion to throw them down.
More than relying on the people having an especially high opinion of them, the Sanhedrin would be relying on the people having a normally low opinion of blaspheming heretics, dying a cursed death abandoned by God without even standing up to the goddless pagan oppressors and freeing the "good" people from the "bad" ones.
The apostles (and other evangelizing disciples) are the ones having to go against the natural grain here--and without a living Jesus to point to, either!
So is there any reason, aside from moral restraint, for not foxing the apostles and other disciples by producing a "body" of Jesus, even if the Sanhedrin didn't have the real body to work with?
they had already lent their weight of authority to sanction the story that the disciples of Jesus stole the body.
This would put them in a tight quandry.
1.) They don't have the real body to produce;
2.) Producing a fake body while contradicting their own official story would naturally lead to strong suspicion about their fake body;
3.) Worse, their panicked first-response story was itself terribly weak!
They can't simply take back what the guards were told (maybe paid) to say with Sanhedrin-backed authority. Neither can they plausibly sustain that first story under much close scrutiny.
The best tactic for the Sanhedrin then would be:
(a) to quickly and quietly drop support for the guards without outright repudiating the guards;
and then
(b) never lend direct support again to any theory about what really happened to the body.
They can't stop the stolen body guard story from spreading anymore, but they can minimize its spread in ways that don't require publicly going back on their initial official support of it. This also means, however, they have inadvertently barred themselves (regardless of any moral problems they might also have) from trying a fake body ploy so long as there is any risk of the population remembering that first the Sanhedrin officially backed a (very weak!) testimony from guards of the body about disciples stealing the body.
The population meanwhile is presented with a confusing problem: Levite guards, good trustable Jewish servants of the Temple, started out incriminating themselves on a serious failure of their duty in order to testify that the disciples stole the body--a self-incrimination which, in a shame and honor culture, might be seen as lending some weight to a story which has some serious implausibility problems on closer scrutiny (or which might be seen as calling the testimony of the guards into immediate question since by their own admission they were being sadly incompetent)--but the disciples who supposedly stole the body to fake a resurrection don't start talking about it--okay, so maybe the guard testimony had some real weight after all and kept the disciples from doing so--but then the Sanhedrin quickly stopped directly supporting and promoting the guards' story without outright admitting they were wrong to support the story--and dang, here are the disciples showing up again after Pentacost insisting that Jesus rose bodily from the grave and appeared to them by a miracle of God! But the Levite soldiers aren't supported by the Sanhedrin anymore in trying to combat this claim!--in fact the Sanhedrin avoids taking any position on what happened to the body at all anymore!
That's the theory.
How well, abductively, does it fit the facts insofar as those can be established?
We can solidly infer that the body was gone; that guards had been set to guard the body; that they had no idea what happened to the body; that they started telling fellow Jews that they themselves (the guards) were the ones at fault for lapsing in their duty allowing disciples to steal the body; that this story was spread with official sanction; and that whenever GosMatt was written, Jews in contact with its author (and/or his congregation) still thought it had enough weight to use it in counter-apologetics. Also, the author thought it had enough weight in some way (which, from the resultant shape of the data, we can solidly conclude had to be thanks to its official authoritative backing by the Sanhedrin) that he considered it important enough to spend time and effort counter-replying to it somehow. This leads to the indisputable fact that GosMatt includes a story rebutting this Jewish counter-Christian apologetic about the missing body of Jesus of Nazareth.
We also know from other textual results, both Christian and Jewish, that despite official backing by the Sanhedrin this story of the guards gained very little traction--so little that none of the canonical authors thought it was worth their effort to reply to the charge directly: not even in the Acts of the Apostles, which is the earliest existent such record of the early Christian years (and by far the one with the best historical bona fides compared to other "Acts" texts, regardless of how good or poorly anyone judges the accuracy of the details on their own merits), and so which of all texts might have been expected to be the one to feature rebuttals to such a charge. But Luke (or whoever authored it), either didn't know about the charge or thought it not worth his time replying to it, and represents the Sanhedrin as operating during the same time period the guards must have been testifying as though the guard's story just isn't a factor in their deliberations and oppositions to the Christian movement.
On the other hand, the story of the body being stolen does survive sporadically in Jewish texts for the following centuries; but only in a very offhanded way. In fact, despite its rare deployment, it's the most (relatively) poplar specific theory about what happened to the body (aside from general charges of sorcery and/or deception).
Does the theory fit the facts?
Yes: it fits and explains the facts. The guard story is weak enough to be both plausible as a panicked first invention of what happened to the body (the Sanhedrin thought they had to come up with some explanation fast and get it out to the public, and didn't have the wherewithal under the circumstances to invent or infer a stronger one), and also something the Sanhedrin would want to quickly withdraw their support from. But it was official enough and heavily promoted enough at first that even if the Sanhedrin believes it has to pull back support for such a weak story, to save their reputation, they would also be consequently trapped about changing the story about what happened and doubling down on having their reputation ruined. Not unless they could be sure they were backing the truth--which creating a scam with a fake dead body certainly wouldn't be! (Assigning an energetic and popular young advocate to hunt down the disciples, and demonstrate to the people that the disciples are frauds, would be a better idea. Maybe he could learn, in a provable way, what really happened to that body!) Besides, any converts to Christianity among the Sanhedrin and its supporters would be providing at least quiet pressure to keep opposition fair.
Christians meanwhile wouldn't be too eager to bring up the guard testimony themselves, even if the Sanhedrin quietly drops support--after all, that would be impugning the honor of Levite Temple soldiers, and the disciples hardly have a live Jesus to show by contrast! They're already working at a huge disadvantage against major cultural challenges. Why borrow trouble? The evidence suggests the guard story was strongly promoted at first and then quickly lost direct authority support; that could have happened well before Pentacost, leaving good reasons for neither side to be fond of bringing it up afterward. "Luke", researching and compiling from eyewitnesses (as he claims) several decades later might not even learn about it, or think it worth addressing on his own steam, or find anything among eyewitness tradition to report disputes between the disciples and the Sanhedrin about the guards. But the researcher does report, in Acts, that some of the chief priests and their supporters converted to "the Way", as Christianity was called in its early days.
Yet the initial strong thrust of the guard story carries on in sporadic leaps (sporadic because quickly deprived of direct authoritative support; but still carrying on due to the original authoritative support, in lieu of any better explanation), and GosMatt's author (at whatever time and place) finds it a challenge worth responding to when he's composing his account. It continues to show up sporadically for the next centuries ('showing up' and 'sporadically' for the same cluster of reasons), and Christian apologists occasionally address it in reply.
The facts have causes of some sort for why they are the shape they are. And this theory bridges establishable (if somewhat disputable) facts over here, with establishable (and largely indisputable) facts over there.
To put the theory shortly: even the ruthless crooks among the Sanhedrin didn't bother acting secretly as a coterie (against larger Sanhedrin moral concerns, if any) to fake a "found" or "recovered" body of Jesus, which would have required official Sanhedrin backing to be worthwhile as counter-Christian evidence, because the Sanhedrin had already hastily backed a story so weak they had felt it wiser to quietly drop support of it. This wouldn't have been a problem had they ever found, in a truly demonstrable way, the body of Jesus of Nazareth (or at least what had happened to the body); but they never did.
(Or, one of the Sanhedrin advocates, looking for that body, thought he had found it where he wasn't expecting it, to say the least.)
Jason Pratt
composed and posted on Good Friday, 2012
nearing sundown local time
commemorating once again
the death and burial
of that body
The members of the CADRE maintain this blog for commenting on various items of interest to apologetics. We welcome input. E-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.com.
The Religious a priori is an apologetics website covering philosophy of religion (existence of God) religion and science bogus atheist social science, and issues of Biblical Scholarship.
Our Books
The Trace of God
Joe Hinman
Transcending Proof
Don McIntosh
Defending the Resurrection
J.P. Holding, Ed.
Trusting the New Testament
J.P. Holding. Ed.
Shattering the Christ Myth
J.P. Holding, Ed.
Defining Inerrancy
J.P. Holding and Nick Peters
Cry of Justice
Jason Pratt
Blog Archive
- ► 2016 (162)
- ► 2015 (55)
- ► 2014 (29)
- ► 2013 (58)
- Ten (bad) reasons not to believe in God, part 3
- Debunking Athiest Fortress of Facts part 2
- Distinguishing between moral ontology and moral ep...
- Debuncking the Atheist Fortress of Facts part 1
- 10 Resurrection Myths From Mike Licona
- Remember The Thieves On The Cross!
- Why Didn't The Sanhedrin Produce A (Fake) Body of ...
- Ten (bad) reasons for not believing in God, part 2...
- In the Bedroom
- ▼ April (9)
- ► 2011 (124)
- ► 2010 (151)
- ► 2009 (142)
- ► 2008 (202)
- ► 2007 (289)
- ► 2006 (331)
- ► 2005 (412)
CADRE Blogs of Interest
Comments Policy
Popular Posts
A visitor to the CADRE site recently sent a question about Paul's statement in Acts 20:35 which records Paul as saying, "And rememb...
Study: The Miracles: A Doctor says "Yes" by Richard H. Casdorph.(Logos International, 1976) Richard H. Casdroph collected medi...
A couple of months ago, I wrote a post about the Gospel of Matthew's account of the slaughter of the innocents. Therein, I argued that som...
One of the most interesting passages in Mark's Passion Narrative, from a historiographical perspective, is Mark 15:21: A certain man from C...
As we approach Martin Luther King Jr. Day, I have been thinking about U2's song Pride (In the Name of Love) (hereinafter, " Pride &quo...
pie charts from Pew study In the late 90s, atheists began making the argument that less than a majority of scientists believe in God. In ...
Today is Good Friday, the day that we commemorate Jesus' death. Why, given the nature of that remembrance, is it called "Good Frida...
The manger in which Jesus was laid has colored our imagery of Christmas. A manger, "[i]s a feeding-trough, crib, or open box in a stabl...
What are your favorites from any tradition, including classical, country, praise & worship, contemporary Christian, Christian rock, gosp...
Lately, I have been listening to a series of lectures by Hubert Dreyfus, Ph.D., a Philosophy professor at U.C. Berekley, concerning the writ...
Translate This Blog
Back in 2006, I was working on an analysis of the Guard Story at the end of the Gospel According to Matthew during Easter season (naturally), when I became involved in an exchange on Victor Reppert's "Dangerous Idea" web journal with his friend the atheistic apologist Dr. Keith Parsons on hallucination theories and visions of Jesus by the first disciples.
9 comments:
- Jason Pratt said...
Here are some links to the original discussion. These aren't necessary to follow the argument, but they're where I first talked about it (if obliquely), so I thought I should present them.
Part 1 of my exchange with Keith can be found here, which was based on Keith's reply to a critique by J. P. Holding. (...I think. I've slept since then.)
The second part of my first contributions to that exchange, can be found (not very well formatted by Victor in posting it to his weblog unfortunately) here.
Keith's reply to me can be found here; and my reply where I correct some of my misunderstandings of his argument (among other things) can be found here. Whew!
There was also a sort of intraquel reply between my first and second exchanges with Keith, where I commented on someone else's attempts at defending Dr. Parsons here.)
- Metacrock said...
The sandherin faking a body sounds like a plot for I love Lucy. "Lucy, You got some 'splaining to do." Talk about a hair brained scheme. Can't you just see Lucy and Ethal trying to work up the nerve to steal a body?
The thing is it would be too easy for the disciples to say "that's not him." Only Lucy would think of it anyway. She wouldn't be allowed on the Sanhedrin.
- Jason Pratt said...
Discples: "That's not him."
Population: "That messed up crucified dead male Jew of the proper age and body build and hair style isn't him?"
Disciples: "Of course not! He's alive and we've seen him."
Population: "..." {backing slowly away to find some stones}
Easy enough to say it isn't Him; not so easy to prove it when they themselves lack a body at all (especially a body in the condition they're saying it's in instead!)
Whereas, unless the Sanhedrin has done something recently which would call their competency and/or honesty into question by producing a body now, would have all the advantages in their favor.
(Except, they did do something like that recently. {g})
- Jason Pratt said...
Whoops, bad grammatic composition there. It ought to read, "Whereas the Sanhedrin, unless they have done..." etc.
- Metacrock said...
Don't you think here's a little matter of what he looked like. The disciples knew better what he looked like. Even stupid ancient world people were smart to know people have different faces. Height, Weight and hair color (they all had black hair) don't' make people the same person.
- Jason Pratt said...
As I noted up in the article, the goal of producing a fake body wouldn't be to convince the disciples, but to inoculate other people against the disciples. (My reply in the comments followed the same thrust; in my humorous dialogue, the disciples remain firmly convinced it isn't Jesus.)
Different faces also look even more different after they've been heavily damaged by beating and then left in the ground for a few weeks. A face that plausibly looks kind-of similar keeping those factors in account is all they would need.
I specifically said that they would have to match body-style (i.e. height and weight but also other factors such as making sure he's a circumcised Jew not a Gentile, proper skin coloring, a muscular woodcarver/artisan sort who has been walking a lot recently instead of being skinny or pudgy) plus hair-style (which would involve not only coloring but parts, receding hairlines or not, Nazarite hair-tail or not) and general age (not too old or too young).
But with a large population of Jewish males to choose from, finding one who had recently died (before or after Christ), maybe even from crucifixion (although for 1st century standards they could scourge and crucify him after the fact if necessary), shouldn't be too problematic.
A really hardcore coterie of Sanhedrin crooks might even arrange for someone to fit the bill who hadn't died yet. "It is better for one man to die for the nation", as one such fellow once said in very related circumstances. {g}
- Jason Pratt said...
So yes, I do think "there's a little matter of what he looked like", and that such an attempt wouldn't fool the disciples. I acknowledged and accounted for those specifically in the argument.
- Anonymous said...
I think your article is too speculative. We need to be wise about speculating. All we do know is that the view that the disciples had stolen the body was still a popular view. The text says that and it is believable because it meets historical standards.
Anything more than that is speculation. Perhaps the empty tomb and appearances were so wide spread that the Jews couldn't have even considered bringing out somebody's body and acting like it was the body of Jesus. Furthermore, the San. would have to purposely try to decieve by producing a fake body. Surely they wouldn't do that because of the assosiated risks of deception. It would boost the disciples claim that Jesus was risen if the San. were shown to be deceiving.
Holding on to one view, and perhaps ignoring many of the disciples claims about the risen Jesus that had surely spread all througout Jerusalem and the outskirts, would have helped them. Changing stories, as you showed, would have made them lose crediability. Thus, there probably was just the theft story, as Matthew reports.
- Jason Pratt said...
Anon: {{We need to be wise about speculating.}}
Well, you didn't explain what you mean by "wise", but I qualified my speculations out the wazoo, and connected them with very detailed analyses of the historical situation. So I wasn't just throwing them out there.
{{All we do know is that the view that the disciples had stolen the body was still a popular view.}}
We also know that this was such a non-popular view that none of the other evangelists, nor St. Paul, ever bother to mention it--not even in Acts where it would have made the most sense to do so.
We also can figure out pretty easily that the Sanhedrin could have faked showing a body.
So there are two important questions: why was the body-theft story important enough to survive for GosMatt's audience to face yet so unsupported that none of the other evangelists felt like they had to directly address it? And why didn't the Sanhedrin just fake a body discovery, when they could have easily done so?
The theory bridges those two problematic questions to explain the shape of the resultant data.
{{Perhaps the empty tomb and appearances were so wide spread that the Jews couldn't have even considered bringing out somebody's body and acting like it was the body of Jesus.}}
The empty tomb, by definition, could not have been "widespread"; and producing a faked body would have answered the empty tomb. The texts meanwhile indicate that the appearances were not widespread, and definitely not so widespread that the Jewish leaders wouldn't have considered faking a body. Your speculation doesn't fit the resulting shape of the texts; and if the appearances were that widespread so that everyone knew Jesus had really risen from the dead so thoroughly a faked body wouldn't have convinced them otherwise practically all Judaism (not to say all local Gentiles) would have become Christian! And would have quickly ousted the Sanhedrin representatives had they insisted on not becoming Christian, too.
This, to put it mildly, did not happen.
{{Holding on to one view... would have helped them.}}
But the resulting data indicates they quickly dropped direct support to the stolen body claim (while not directly renouncing it either).
{{Surely they wouldn't do that because of the associated risks of deception. It would boost the disciples claim that Jesus was risen if the San. were shown to be deceiving.}}
That's true, but they had already (one way or another) backed the guard story--with direct intention to deceive, if GosMatt's source is accurate. The guards themselves were already a major risk of turning around and admitting deception.
At least some of the Sanhedrin were willing to temporarily back a clearly weak explanation, so they were already willing to at least partially deceive at risk to their reputation. But of course my theory involves this being (in synch with GosMatt details) a panicked first response on their part, not a calculated plan of deception (even if some of them paid off the guards to spread the stolen-body story). As you say, they'd be gambling a lot on a faked body ploy even if they hadn't already put their authority behind an official explanation at odds with a discovered body.
Anyway, my argument was that my previous argument about the historical veracity of the Sanhedrin backing a stolen body story, helps solve two subsequent problems in historical apologetics: why didn't they just fake a body? (Because they had already hastily backed a weak stolen body claim.) Why wasn't the stolen-body claim important enough for other evangelists to address directly? (Because it was so demonstrably weak the Sanhedrin would have naturally wanted to drop direct support of it, even though they couldn't renounce it without something much stronger to present--which they didn't have.)
Use of Content


text:
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Waning Summer, C'mon Fall!
Happy Autumn, y'all! Still officially a few weeks off, but I am excited about the cooler weather and deeper shadows here in NC. A number of shows, sales, and exhibitons coming up. You can check out the following link for more details. Hope to see you out and about in the pottery world!
Posted by ronan kyle peterson at 6:54 AM No comments: Links to this post
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
by Maha Huneidi and Hilary Burt (separately)
I was in boarding school when I read the Famous Five series by Enid Blyton. I remember that I couldn't wait for homework time, because we had to sit in the library for two hours whether we'd finished homework or not, so I got to read my precious books after homework… sometimes even before!
I just loved the smell of the old library and being among all those old books.
I must admit that I started with the Secret Seven series, but it's faded in my memory. When I finished the series I began reading The Famous Five.
Forty five years later, I still remember one character vividly. I was immediately captivated by the character of George.
Don't get me wrong: I loved all four characters, as well as Timothy the dog. They complemented each other, but my absolute favorite was definitely George. I loved her independence, courage, dignity, defiance and vulnerability. I liked to imagine that I was like her!
Those books were my respite from the confinement of boarding school and I longed to be transported into the adventures of George, her cousins Anne, Dick and Julian, and Timmy.
Maha Huneidi is a self published author of the children's picture book, When Monsters Get Lonely. She is a certified meditation and yoga instructor and the creator of the website Empowerment and Kids.
Browse Famous Five books on Amazon.
Best Children's Books - Find, Read or Write home page.


text:
Tweak UI: Customize Windows XP With This Official Microsoft Tool!
April 10, 2011 | Windows | No Comments|
Tweak UI is a Power Toy which help us to change the Default User Interface of Microsoft Windows XP. It is released by Microsoft and we can trust it. But it is recommended only for Advanced Users only.
Tweak UI is available for free download at Microsoft Windows XP Download Center. You can use the following link to download Tweak UI


text:
(best price)
Raise up to 2.00%.
Donnay Vandam Mens Canvas Shoes The Mens Donnay Vandam Canvas Shoes are ideal for everyday wear with a classic look with a simple fabric upper along with a contrasting trim round the outsole. These Donnay canvas shoes... show more
Products you may also like:


text: A good place to start is to decide for yourself how you'll be reloading. Myself, I'll reload after firing a couple hundred rounds, so a simple single stage press works fine for me. If you think you might fill a bucket with empty brass between loading sessions, then a progressive rig is definitely in order. Give yourself an honest evaluation on how much and how often, and that'll answer a lot of your questions right there. :)


text: Our Rainforest Hoodie features a vibrant green knit coupled with a colorful Rainbow print. Photos just don't do this Hoodie justice – the print resembles beautiful iridescent rain drops shimmering in the sun and the beaded lanyard adds just the right touch of color and whimsy. Perfect for year-round wear. . . in the summer for homes with air conditioning or cooler climates and also for the Fall and Winter to keep your bird warm and cozy! NOTE: The lining color will vary; Hoodie must fit over your bird's head to wear. Please see pull-down menu for available sizes. Price: $27.99


text: 7/02/12 8/23/10 POPSUGAR Living Cute Animals Happy Fourth Birthday, Funi! August 23, 2010 by Pets 0 Shares Chat with us on Facebook Messenger. Learn what's trending across POPSUGAR. View on One Page Photo 1 of 16 ADVERTISEMENT () Share This Link Copy ← Use Arrows Keys → 1 Happy Fourth Birthday, Funi! Previous Next Share this post Cute AnimalsFuniGiant PandasZoosAustraliaScoop


text:
- IDEALS Home
- →
- College of Business
- →
- Dept. of Finance
- →
- Dissertations and Theses - Finance
Dissertations and Theses - Finance
Recent Additions
(2015-07-17)The first essay shows that political capital is an important determinant of corporate investment and innovation. Using the unexpected exits of legislators from the U.S. Congress as exogenous shocks to politically connected ...
application/pdfPDF (4MB)
Essay 1. Accrual Effect in Stock Returns: Earnings Management or Sluggish Market Reactions? Essay 2. The Accrual Effect on Future Earnings (2000)In the second essay, I examine the accrual effect on future earnings and measure the potential economic consequence of earnings management. I find that the aggregate future earnings, on average, will be impaired by $0.20 ...
application/pdfPDF (5MB)
(1999)Essay three: Nonparametric estimation of multifactor diffusion processes and its applications to Heath-Jarrow-Morton interest rate models . This essay develops a nonparametric estimation framework for multifactor diffusion ...
application/pdfPDF (7MB)
Nonparametric and Parametric Analyses on the Forward Rate Volatilities and Their Implications on Interest Rate Options Pricing (1999)Based on the results obtained in the nonparametric analysis, this paper proposes an HJM volatility model and estimates it in the GARCH-family models. The proposed volatility model is compared with four alternative HJM ...
application/pdfPDF (5MB)
(2000)Chapter III examines how a firm's financial decisions are influenced by both its corporate tax status as well as the personal tax status of its particular investors. Using the Tax Reform Act of 1986 as exogenous shock to ...
application/pdfPDF (6MB)


text:
The First Sinners
At A Glance
The Sinners Club Prequel
On Sale November 26, 2013
Kensington Books
Historical Erotic Romance
- Prequel: The First Sinners
- Book 1: The Sinners Club
- Book 2: Tempting A Sinner
- Book 3: Mastering a Sinner
Their identities a secret, they are men of mystery with hidden pasts and dark passions. Welcome to the Sinners Club…
Secret Desires
Faith Pelly is tired of being the responsible daughter. She longs for adventure with a man who will introduce her to the secrets of carnal desire. But she never dreams she will meet the Savage Rake who flirts with her, seduces her and takes her as his own…
Dark Secrets
Asked to investigate charges of treason, the Earl of Westbrook attends a house party determined to discover the truth. That includes using all his sensual wiles on the lovely Miss Pelly, a beguiling young woman eager for erotic excitement with a man who will fulfill all her secret fantasies. And he plans on being that man…


text:
News By Tag
Industry News
News By Location
Industry News
Susan Culver Solo Exhibition February 25th to March 29th at Meinhart's Gallery in Pitman
Susan Culver is an artist that lives in Pitman in Gloucester County, New Jersey. She grew up in Maple Shade, NJ. Culver paints in oil and acrylic and draws with pencil.
Culver attended the Tyler School of Art, which is a part of Temple University in Philadelphia. Culver earned a Bachelor of Fine Arts and Art Teaching Certificate and Elementary Ed K- 12. Culver graduated at the top ten percent of her class, at the age of forty. She opened her own studio and taught after-school classes to children age five through eighteen and taught adults in the evening for many years. Since that time Culver has exhibited her work in local art shows in the Philadelphia area. Including the 43rd Annual Juried Art Show at the Haddon Fortnightly in Haddonfield, NJ. Most recently her work was exhibited in the See.Me art show and Gallery in New York City on October 5th 2013.
"I am a storyteller. I tell stories that are whimsical, quirky and unique. Sometimes I tell these stories with paint, sometimes I tell them with words. I interpret the world differently then most people. I see all the colors and all the shades in between. It has been my experience in life that if you expect to find happiness and joy you will find it. If you think the world is full of hatred and ugliness then that is what will come to you.
The natural world is my love, a blue and white sky, and beautiful birds bright and full of music. I love to depict water and mountains, and plants in new and delicious colors.
I play with reality and juxtaposing objects that wouldn't ordinarily live in the same space. I like to experiment with mixing the real with the imagined. I experiment with size of objects in my work. I collect interesting and unusual objects. I bring these objects together and create something new with them. They have their own story to tell. I let them do it.
Sometimes I paint a memory or a dream. I want to share it.
I am leaving the best part of myself behind for others to discover when I no longer exist in this realm anymore. I am leaving my dreams, love and joy."
Meinhart's Gallery & Curio, Inc. is a contemporary, representational fine art and crafts gallery and curiosity shop. The gallery caters to emerging and professional artists showcasing clear skill in 2D art and handmade crafts. Business hours are Tuesday through Friday from 12pm to 6pm, Saturday 11am to 4pm, and closed on Monday and Sunday. For more information please contact the gallery.
Meinhart's Gallery & Curio, Inc.
Account Email Address Account Phone Number Disclaimer Report Abuse


text:
Where SurfacesCome Alive
Register Now
Surface Design Show is delighted to support Maggie's Centres. Maggie's Centres offer vital practical, emotional and social support to people with cancer and their family and friends, following the ideas about cancer care originally laid out by Maggie Keswick Jencks.
Built in the grounds of NHS cancer hospitals, Maggie's Centres are places with professional staff on hand to offer the support people need.
Their Centres are places to find practical advice about benefits and eating well; places where qualified experts provide emotional support; places to meet other people; places where you can simply sit quietly with a cup of tea.
Click here to find out more and donate online
On Friday 16 September Surface Design Show took part in Maggie's Culture Crawl.
A 10 mile evening walk through London stopping at buildings not usually open to the public incorporating some extraordinary performances.Our exciting route featured some of the capital's most spectacular venues including; Tate Britain, Kensington Palace, The V&A, Serpentine Pavilion, Foster + Partners Studio and the Royal Academy of Arts alongside our West London Centre.
Maggie's is very proud to be official Charity Partner for SDS17. All funds generously raised will go to support people with cancer across London. Design is key to our centres and it's such a natural partnership and delighted to be working together
Lizzie Hunt, London Development Manager, Maggie's
Surface Design Show returns to the Business Design Centre from 6-8 Feb 2018
Privacy Policy
Montgomery9 Manchester SquareLondon, W1U 3PLT: +44 (0)20 7886 3000F: +44 (0)20 7886 3101W: www.montex.co.uk
Copyright © 2017 www.montex.co.uk. All rights reserved.
website by expocms


text:
|By Jeremy Geelan
Article Rating:
|December 21, 2004 12:00 AM EST
Tim Bray
Brief description: One of the prime movers of XML, now with Sun
Further Details:
Described recently as "a perennial figure of the Web," Tim Bray's typical bio is frighteningly full of accomplishment: He was manager of the New Oxford English Dictionary Project at the University of Waterloo, a co-editor of the XML spec, co-founder of Open Text Corporation, and is the founder and CTO of Antarctica Systems. He is a member of the W3C Consortium's Technical Architecture Group, which serves an architectural oversight function for the Web. As James Horner has observed: "To put it simply, his efforts change the way we work with, and perceive, information."
Bray blogs enthusiastically, and recently joined Sun as Director of Web Technologies.
While most people regard .NET as the chief threat to Java's status as the de-facto standard basis for large-scale software development, Bray - ever the contrarian - argues that rather it is the family of dynamic or "scripting" languages such as Python and Groovy that will inevitably occupy a larger and larger piece of the software-development universe. He believes that this trend is "impossible to resist, and that this is potentially a good thing for Java."
Closely involved in the world's most successful XML vocabulary, "RSS", which is used for news syndication, Bray is co-chair of the IETF "Atom" project which is designed to be its future.
Other SYS-CON stories about Tim Bray:
XML Pioneer Bray: "Secret-Source Software...Looks Weirder and Weirder"
"I Didn't Invent XML Dammit," Says Tim Bray
XML Pioneer Tim Bray Applauds Newest Version of NeoOffice/J
Tim Bray: "iPod? Blackberry? Texting? Not For Me, Thanks"
|Dick Morley 02/22/05 03:09:34 PM EST
re greatest software heros.
The list concentrates on the desktop toys of the academics. where is CNC, Radar, embedded, Word processing etc
|jim scandale 01/18/05 10:59:21 PM EST
For a list labeled "top 20 Software People" there are an awful lot of what I would call purely hardware people. No doubt that they contributed greatly but "software people" they're not.
|Anonymous Fielding Fan 01/07/05 01:49:11 PM EST
Roy Fielding was key in giving us the internet we know today. His contributions to HTTP and URI, REST, etc., open source Apache and in helping establish Apache.org as we know it, he has helped countless open source projects from both technical and legal means. He was key in creating the technology environment that not only allowed the WEB to grow, but also open source. Roy's work in Web Arch. in particular REST is proving to help sanity check current WebService efforts and fix huge flaws in SOAP:
|conscientious objector 12/15/04 01:08:25 PM EST
Donald Knuth
|conscientious objector 12/15/04 01:02:06 PM EST
This reminds me of the VH1 top muscian lists.
So many credible names left off the list and the inclusion of more recent popular names that this effort has no credibility at all.
|KarenAnne 12/14/04 05:07:35 AM EST
Butler Lampson, and any number of other people from PARC. Ada, Lady Lovelace. You seem to think history started 20 years ago.
|Chiew Lee 12/13/04 02:29:04 PM EST
how abt Richard Stevens ?
he deserved to be on the list. everything is based on TCP/IP.
|John Smith 12/13/04 09:11:27 AM EST
<>Where is Warnock?
|Jenda 12/13/04 07:19:56 AM EST
I wish these people at least fixed the bugs in their JavaScript. I get an error each time I submit some feedback. Guess they don't expect anyone to browse with JavaScript error popups turned on.
|Jenda 12/13/04 07:15:05 AM EST
Mr A said: Not only did they put Turing side by side with, say, "Ann Winblad: Former programmer, cofounder of Hummer Winblad Venture Partners" (???) -- he's not even getting the most votes!
That's obvious. Most CS professionals refuse to vote for anyone in this poll.
|Jenda 12/13/04 07:10:57 AM EST
anon babbled: Knuth, like a lot of these "top twenty", are just Ivory Tower academics with no real applications in industry.
Yep, sure. Noone ever used Tex. Noone used the algorithms from that when writing their own DTP software. And most importantly noone ever learned programming from his "programming bible".
You may be great in Quake, but you aparently know very little about programming and CS history. Back to the school boy!
|harshr 12/13/04 05:09:24 AM EST
>>>I would challenge Tim Berners-Lee's positin
It would be harsh to exclude Berners-lee just because HTML ain't perfect, IMO - without it we'd not be in a positin to be voting on these guys anyhow!
|HTMHell 12/13/04 03:36:06 AM EST
I would challenge Tim Berners-Lee's positin on this list since it is HTML that has also brought us the Browser Wars, and the subsequent HTML writer's hell of trying to get a page to display properly on all the popular browsers, and all versions thereof.
The name HTML - Hyper Text Markup Language, implies a rich set of features that don't exist in reality
|suggestion 12/13/04 03:03:48 AM EST
The list would be enhanced by the addition of Chuck Moore, inventor of the ForthLanguage (http://www.forth.com)
|kai jones 12/13/04 12:52:52 AM EST
In regard to your top twenty programmers, I am recommending Kjell
He designed and built the software platform himself and lately has
|Shenme 12/13/04 12:49:47 AM EST
Perhaps the only 'save' the publishers have is to promise an installment of "The Top-20 Software People We Wish We Didn't Think Of - And Why". Which of course would then somewhat expose whatever biases/prejudices/deadlines they had in coming up with this abortive list. No Larry Wall has me scratching my head. What were you scratching?
|Second that!! 12/12/04 05:38:03 PM EST
>>I'm not sure what defines a top person in the software
I'll second that. Seems that the idea stemmed from a remark about *living* "software people" whereas many of the suggestions here are of historical figures. There might be multiple lists needed to 'map' i-Technology properly/thoroughly
|Junks Jersey 12/12/04 05:34:53 PM EST
I'm not sure what defines a top person in the software world according to this list. Grady Booch defined UML, which is much loved and much hated, but I'd hardly call that a reason to be a top person. Miguel of Ximian fame is there, though I'm hard pressed to think of why. He's proven to be much more of a self-promoter and follower than a leader or innovator (Gnome, Mono).
Feels like there should be more people on here who aren't just well known, but are solving hard problems. Should writing a famous and influential piece of software 20 or 30 years ago count? (If so, where are Ken Iverson and Ivan Sutherland?) Should writing something that becames popular count, even if it isn't necessarily all that good or relevant these days?
|Toby 12/12/04 05:28:11 PM EST
No, Warnock belongs on technical merit. Many of the listed entrepreneurs aren't inventors, or at least, they keep it quiet. Certainly Warnock's invention has affected almost everyone. Certainly everyone who reads newspapers, or books, or uses a printer. PostScript is -still- underrated as a general purpose programming language, which also adds a dimension to Gosling's nomination, for his work on Sun NeWS.
|No $$$ at all 12/12/04 04:56:55 PM EST
>>Where is William Kahan (IEEE 754)? Adele Goldberg
But if the entrepreneurs are to be deleted, doesn't that mean Warnock has to go - he's CEO of Adobe, that exploits PostScript commercially?
|Toby 12/12/04 04:28:05 PM EST
Where is William Kahan (IEEE 754)? Adele Goldberg (Smalltalk-80)? John Warnock (PostScript)? Wirth (innumerable things)? I also second Dijkstra, Stephen Wolfram, Andy Hertzfeld. Delete most of the entrepreneurs. Knuth should appear twice.
|Update3 12/12/04 03:01:48 PM EST
Here's an update on the current top 20 rankings:
1 457 Torvalds
|Jenda 12/12/04 02:47:47 PM EST
A little biased aren't we? Inventor of Java this, inventor of Java that ... noone'd give a damn about Java if Sun did not pump $millions into the marketing. Including several peole from the Java camp and omitting Perl altogether is telling. Telling about the maker of the list.
|Objective C 12/12/04 02:32:25 PM EST
>>Where is the father of Objective-C? :: Brian Cox
I think you mean Brad Cox
|rwerezak 12/12/04 01:48:37 PM EST
How about Dr. Knuth?
Besides the "Art of Programming" and TeX, he pioneered the idea that
|Java=CoCreation 12/12/04 11:19:42 AM EST
>>Other than the great Alan Turing... What happened to <>>>other greats like Edsger Dijkstra, or John Backus? <>>>These are the real greats of software.
Compared to these, where does James Gosling rank here, is he Top 10 material - or Top 20? - and what about the others involved in the original Green project before their baby, Oak, became "Java" - folks like Patrick Naughton and Mike Sheridan, did they just disappear into technology history's forgotten corner?
|beelsebob 12/12/04 11:14:30 AM EST
Other than the great Alan Turing... What happened to other greats like Edsger Dijkstra, or John Backus? These are the real greats of software.
|Duty Editor 12/12/04 09:28:07 AM EST
>The blurbs are also careless. For example, Kernighan's<>
thanks for your feedback Jonadab...the problem is, like a good many folks, you seem to be under the misapprehension that Kernighan perhaps *wrote* C. Many make this same mistake, probably because he and Ritchie co-wrote the 'bible' of C, The C Programming Language. But C is all Ritchie's work.
Here's Dennis Ritchie on C:
"Early in the development of Unix, I added data types and new syntax to Thompson's B language, thus producing the new language C. C was the foundation for the portability of Unix, but it has become widely used in other contexts as well; much application and system development for computers of all sizes, from hand-held to supercomputer, uses it. There are unified U.S. and international standards for the language, and it is the basis for Stroustrup's work on its descendant C++."
And here's Brian Kernighan: the following is excerpt from an interview he gave:
Q: What was your part in the birth and destiny of the C language?
Thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming.
|FromTokyo 12/12/04 07:25:22 AM EST
I'm surprised no one mentioned Noam Chomsky.
|Jonadab the Unsightly One 12/12/04 06:47:17 AM EST
> how does any list of this type not include Bill Gates
The same way it doesn't include Donald Knuth or Larry Wall.
The blurbs are also careless. For example, Kernighan's
|m0rphin3 12/12/04 06:33:07 AM EST
Nygaard and Dahl? Why on earth aren't they on the list?
|erik_norgaard 12/12/04 05:21:07 AM EST
Edgar (Ted) Codd: Father of SQL and mathematician, published in the 70s his paper "A relational model of data for large Shared Data Banks": http://www.acm.org/classics/nov95/toc.html
SQL was then developed by Chamberlin and Ray Boyce. I see them all absent from the list.
|[email protected] 12/12/04 05:17:10 AM EST
Where is Donald Knuth? TeX guru!
|ynotds 12/12/04 05:14:52 AM EST
>>Alan Kay, Steve Wozniak, Bill Atkinson, Bud Tribble,<>
I was gonna mention half your list before I saw it.
Some of the guys from the initial Mac development team set a standard that may never have been matched for internalising a complex code base.
But the Mac's very survival owed a lot to Quark who have done more to get print content computerised than any, depite being a difficult company.
Wolfram too doesn't do much to endear himself to list makers, but if you actually look at his programming as a body of work, he has no peers.
Of course I agree with other popular suggestions like Knuth, Wall and Engelbart, so maybe they'd be better trying to go from 40 to 100 rather than 40 to 20.
Games aren't my department, but the genre has had enuf influence to include 20% games programmers, starting with Crowther and Woods.
|Kupek 12/12/04 05:13:43 AM EST
>>Alan Kay, Steve Wozniak, Bill Atkinson, Bud Tribble,<>
Richard Feynman? I have an enormous amount of respect for the man, but he was not a software person, or even anything close to a CS person.
|jcr 12/12/04 05:12:48 AM EST
Alan Kay, Steve Wozniak, Bill Atkinson, Bud Tribble, Avie Tevanian, Richard Feynman, John Warnock, Evans & Sutherland?
|ajayvb 12/12/04 05:10:32 AM EST
Vincent Cerf and Bob Kahn? The glue on which this Internet is built is the TCP/IP suite.
|abhorrent C 12/12/04 03:35:27 AM EST
Bjarne Stroustrup created the most hideous of languages, and is indirectly responsible for the tremendous amount of abhorrent software plaguing us today.
Yet, the author of the fine language that is Objective C, doesn't even make the list. Unbelievable.
C is a hundred times the language that C++ is, and it pains me to see these people shed in the same light.
|brfisher 12/12/04 03:29:35 AM EST
Not to mention windows (tiled), CSCW with video conference, hyperlink implementation (Vannevar Bush gave us the concept, ans later Ted Nelson advanced it), and probably most importantly an implementation that had as a goal the augmentation of human intelligence. Basically, all of our human-computer interaction can be seen in http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/1968Demo.html. But evidently the list have some other criteria for success, not sure what that might be.
|Khuffie 12/12/04 03:28:36 AM EST
Doug Engelbart? He may not have been that much of a programmer, but he gave us the mouse...
|tyrione 12/12/04 03:25:32 AM EST
Where is the father of Objective-C? :: Brian Cox
Without him NeXTSTEP would have not been. Tim Berner's Lee would have had one hell of a time developing the first WWW Browser.
All the advancements that people are wooing about in Linux, Java and IDE Development Tools were commonplace in NeXTSTEP and its development tools.
|listmaking advice 12/12/04 03:23:59 AM EST
Heh the Knoppix guy is a good example of flavor of the month. I notice this in sports lists too... half of the greatest players/teams/plays seem to have played or happened in the last 20 years.
A rule of thumb for every all time list maker should be: first construct the entire list ignoring everything that happened in the last ten years. Then make a list of recent additions, and figure out who should be removed from the original list to accomodate each one.
|Where's Serf 12/12/04 02:34:29 AM EST
Where's Vincent Serf? One of the *real* fathers of the Internet.
And what about the two Dartmouth profs who invented BASIC?
Should get Tim Bray and the other XML guy out of there. They did a lot of good work but XML was far from revolutionary - it was a pragmatic tailoring of SGML for the growing needs of the Web.
|andrew stuart 12/12/04 02:23:10 AM EST
Interesting article thank-you.
I am far from being a Microsoft (or any other sort of) bigot. For me IT is
It seems very odd to me not to have Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and Steve Jobs
|Esteban Gutierrez 12/12/04 12:51:19 AM EST
Even Miguel de Icaza has done an excellent job promoting open source software in Mexico. It is good to make clear that his proposal for eMexico project was rejected by the Mexican President Vicente Fox due to his commitment to Microsoft in many projects, like enciclomedia (a multimedia classroom project that relies heavily on encarta 2004) or the core of eMexico project.
|MHedman 12/11/04 11:08:54 PM EST
I would have liked to have seen Steve McConnell included - no other person has affected the software I write as positively as McConnell.
|Mr A 12/11/04 11:04:16 PM EST
This list is beyond ridiculous. Not only did they put Turing side by side with, say, "Ann Winblad: Former programmer, cofounder of Hummer Winblad Venture Partners" (???) -- he's not even getting the most votes!
I mean, how could anyone seriously put up a list that doesn't include Babbage, von Neumann, Church, etc. but which _does_ include Knopper, Ferguson and Gay? I know I am a complete dork for getting pissed off at something like this, but I can't help it. This list is an insult to ever programmer, living and dead.
|Reader 12/11/04 10:27:06 PM EST
Why E. F. Codd, who was father of relational database, is not on the list? RDBMS is one of the most important software in computing history. It has changed commerce and society forever.
|ashley 12/11/04 10:09:57 PM EST
I agree about Knuth and Wall. Without Knuth, the list is difficult to take seriously and there are a couple on there who have made a dramatically lesser impact on open source and the internet at large than Larry Wall has.
|nate 12/11/04 06:39:08 PM EST
Ah very lovely, the Python vs. Perl war begins again. All I'll say is that Larry Wall should obviously be on this list if Guido van Rossum is to be listed. :)
In his opening keynote at 20th Cloud Expo, Michael Maximilien, Research Scientist, Architect, and Engineer at IBM, will motivate why realizing the full potential of the cloud and social data requires artificial intelligence. By mixing Cloud Foundry and the rich set of Watson services, IBM's Bluemix is the best cloud operating system for enterprises today, providing rapid development and deployment of applications that can take advantage of the rich catalog of Watson services to help drive insigh...
May. 25, 2017 02:15 PM EDT Reads: 249
SYS-CON Events announced today that delaPlex will exhibit at SYS-CON's @CloudExpo, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. delaPlex pioneered Software Development as a Service (SDaaS), which provides scalable resources to build, test, and deploy software. It's a fast and more reliable way to develop a new product or expand your in-house team.
May. 25, 2017 02:15 PM EDT Reads: 4,929
SYS-CON Events announced today that Carbonite will exhibit at SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Carbonite protects your entire IT footprint with the right level of protection for each workload, ensuring lower costs and dependable solutions with DoubleTake and Evault.
May. 25, 2017 02:00 PM EDT Reads: 2,856
SYS-CON Events announced today that Progress, a global leader in application development, has been named "Bronze Sponsor" of SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Enterprises today are rapidly adopting the cloud, while continuing to retain business-critical/sensitive data inside the firewall. This is creating two separate data silos – one inside the firewall and the other outside the firewall. Cloud ISVs oft...
May. 25, 2017 01:30 PM EDT Reads: 3,627
DevOps at Cloud Expo – being held October 31 - November 2, 2017, at the Santa Clara Convention Center in Santa Clara, CA – announces that its Call for Papers is open. Born out of proven success in agile development, cloud computing, and process automation, DevOps is a macro trend you cannot afford to miss. From showcase success stories from early adopters and web-scale businesses, DevOps is expanding to organizations of all sizes, including the world's largest enterprises – and delivering real r...
May. 25, 2017 12:30 PM EDT Reads: 1,079
SYS-CON Events announced today that Outscale will exhibit at SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Outscale's technology makes an automated and adaptable Cloud available to businesses, supporting them in the most complex IT projects while controlling their operational aspects. You boost your IT infrastructure's reactivity, with request responses that only take a few seconds.
May. 25, 2017 12:30 PM EDT Reads: 785
As cloud adoption continues to transform business, today's global enterprises are challenged with managing a growing amount of information living outside of the data center. The rapid adoption of IoT and increasingly mobile workforce are exacerbating the problem. Ensuring secure data sharing and efficient backup poses capacity and bandwidth considerations as well as policy and regulatory compliance issues.
May. 25, 2017 12:30 PM EDT Reads: 4,919
SYS-CON Events announced today that Cloud Academy will exhibit at SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Cloud Academy is the industry's most innovative, vendor-neutral cloud technology training platform. Cloud Academy provides continuous learning solutions for individuals and enterprise teams for Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, and the most popular cloud computing technologies. Ge...
May. 25, 2017 12:30 PM EDT Reads: 6,696
The 21st International Cloud Expo has announced that its Call for Papers is open. Cloud Expo, to be held October 31 - November 2, 2017, at the Santa Clara Convention Center in Santa Clara, CA, brings together Cloud Computing, Big Data, Internet of Things, DevOps, Digital Transformation, Machine Learning and WebRTC to one location. With cloud computing driving a higher percentage of enterprise IT budgets every year, it becomes increasingly important to plant your flag in this fast-expanding busin...
May. 25, 2017 12:15 PM EDT Reads: 1,645
SYS-CON Events announced today that Interoute has been named "Bronze Sponsor" of SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Interoute is the owner operator of Europe's largest network and a global cloud services platform, which encompasses over 70,000 km of lit fiber, 15 data centers, 17 virtual data centers and 33 colocation centers, with connections to 195 additional partner data centers. Our full-service Unifie...
May. 25, 2017 12:00 PM EDT Reads: 5,339
With major technology companies and startups seriously embracing Cloud strategies, now is the perfect time to attend @CloudExpo | @ThingsExpo, June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY and October 31 - November 2, 2017, Santa Clara Convention Center, CA. Learn what is going on, contribute to the discussions, and ensure that your enterprise is on the right path to Digital Transformation.
May. 25, 2017 12:00 PM EDT Reads: 5,809
SYS-CON Events announced today that Progress, a global leader in application development, has been named "Bronze Sponsor" of SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. Enterprises today are rapidly adopting the cloud, while continuing to retain business-critical/sensitive data inside the firewall. This is creating two separate data silos – one inside the firewall and the other outside the firewall. Cloud ISVs ofte...
May. 25, 2017 11:45 AM EDT Reads: 3,183
SYS-CON Events announced today that delaPlex will exhibit at SYS-CON's @ThingsExpo, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. delaPlex pioneered Software Development as a Service (SDaaS), which provides scalable resources to build, test, and deploy software. It's a fast and more reliable way to develop a new product or expand your in-house team.
May. 25, 2017 11:15 AM EDT Reads: 4,331
SYS-CON Events announced today that Hitachi Data Systems, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hitachi LTD., will exhibit at SYS-CON's 20th International Cloud Expo®, which will take place on June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City. Hitachi Data Systems (HDS) will be featuring the Hitachi Content Platform (HCP) portfolio. This is the industry's only offering that allows organizations to bring together object storage, file sync and share, cloud storage gateways, and sophisticated search and...
May. 25, 2017 11:15 AM EDT Reads: 3,399
Existing Big Data solutions are mainly focused on the discovery and analysis of data. The solutions are scalable and highly available but tedious when swapping in and swapping out occurs in disarray and thrashing takes place. The resolution for thrashing through machine learning algorithms and support nomenclature is through simple techniques. Organizations that have been collecting large customer data are increasingly seeing the need to use the data for swapping in and out and thrashing occurs ...
May. 25, 2017 11:00 AM EDT Reads: 748
A strange thing is happening along the way to the Internet of Things, namely far too many devices to work with and manage. It has become clear that we'll need much higher efficiency user experiences that can allow us to more easily and scalably work with the thousands of devices that will soon be in each of our lives. Enter the conversational interface revolution, combining bots we can literally talk with, gesture to, and even direct with our thoughts, with embedded artificial intelligence, whic...
May. 25, 2017 10:30 AM EDT Reads: 5,246
Detecting internal user threats in the Big Data eco-system is challenging and cumbersome. Many organizations monitor internal usage of the Big Data eco-system using a set of alerts. This is not a scalable process given the increase in the number of alerts with the accelerating growth in data volume and user base. Organizations are increasingly leveraging machine learning to monitor only those data elements that are sensitive and critical, autonomously establish monitoring policies, and to detect...
May. 25, 2017 10:15 AM EDT Reads: 1,133
Internet of @ThingsExpo, taking place October 31 - November 2, 2017, at the Santa Clara Convention Center in Santa Clara, CA, is co-located with the 21st International Cloud Expo and will feature technical sessions from a rock star conference faculty and the leading industry players in the world. @ThingsExpo Silicon Valley Call for Papers is now open.
May. 25, 2017 10:00 AM EDT Reads: 1,074
DevOps is often described as a combination of technology and culture. Without both, DevOps isn't complete. However, applying the culture to outdated technology is a recipe for disaster; as response times grow and connections between teams are delayed by technology, the culture will die. A Nutanix Enterprise Cloud has many benefits that provide the needed base for a true DevOps paradigm.
May. 25, 2017 09:45 AM EDT Reads: 5,363
SYS-CON Events announced today that SoftLayer, an IBM Company, has been named "Gold Sponsor" of SYS-CON's 18th Cloud Expo, which will take place on June 7-9, 2016, at the Javits Center in New York, New York. SoftLayer, an IBM Company, provides cloud infrastructure as a service from a growing number of data centers and network points of presence around the world. SoftLayer's customers range from Web startups to global enterprises.
May. 25, 2017 08:30 AM EDT Reads: 7,590


text:
Event Details
Return to Events Calendar
Sorby NHS (Sheffield) - Dirtlow Rake, Hope Valley
25th March 2017, 10:30
Event Description:
Saturday 25th March 2017
A full-day meeting to record lichens on Dirtlow Rake, Hope. In addition to the lead spoil this disused lead rake has a variety of limestone habitats which should provide a wide range of lichens. Currently there are only a handful of records for this site.
Meet and park at 10.30 am at grid ref SK1554 8211. This is at the wide junction of Siggate (an unclassified road out of Castleton) and the 'green road' up from Pindale. It is best approached from the Market Place in Castleton.
Look on your OS Dark Peak map or put the grid reference into www.Streetmap.com to spot the meeting point.
see http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=415545&Y=382115&A=Y&Z=115
If anyone has transport difficulties from Sheffield, Joan Egan may be able to assist, please contact her on 0114 236 5002.
As usual people with all levels of experience are welcome. Strong footwear and waterproof clothing are recommended. Bring a hand-lens, lunch and drinks. Note: the location is exposed and at over 300m altitude so please do anticipate the possibility of cold conditions.
contact Steve Price, email@example.com


text:
Apart OVO8P-W White
Apart OVO8P-W White, Active speaker, 8" Woofer and 1" soft dome tweeter, 60 Watt, 40Hz - 20kHz, 2 Band EQ, XLR or RCA Input, dimensions 358 x 244 x 250mm, weight 8,95 Kg
Smart Navigator
- Apart Installation Loudspeakers for Walls at a glance
- display Installation Loudspeakers for Walls in price range 200 € - 300 €
- go to product group Installation Loudspeakers for Walls
- go to product group Installation Loudspeakers
- go to product group Loudspeakers
- go to product group PA Equipment
- show manufacturer details for Apart
- Apart PA Equipment at a glance
- printer friendly version of this page
Further Apart items
Offers include 20% British VAT and are valid as long as stocks last. Shipping costs to the U.K. are 10 EUR (approx. £7), free shipping on orders above 199 EUR. Please click here for international Shipping rates. We do not accept liability for typographical errors or inaccurate information of any kind. *RRP = manufacturer's / distributor's recommended retail price in Germany


text:
Short Prose Competition
Call for Submissions
24th Annual Short Prose Competition for Emerging Writers – $2,500 Prize
The Writers' Union of Canada is pleased to announce that submissions are being accepted until February 15, 2017, for the 24th Annual Short Prose Competition for Emerging Writers. The winning entry will be the best Canadian work of up to 2,500 words in the English language, fiction or non-fiction, written by an author who has published no more than one book.
$2,500 for the winning entry, and the entries of the winner and finalists will be submitted to three Canadian magazines.
Writers Eden Robinson, Amy Stuart, and Russell Wangersky will serve as the jury.
This competition is open to all Canadian citizens and permanent residents who have had no more than one book published (traditionally or self-published) in any genre and who are not currently under contract for a second book. Writers not yet published in book format are eligible. Original, unpublished (English language) fiction or nonfiction is eligible. Members of The Writers' Union of Canada are not eligible to enter the competition.
- Entries should be typed, double-spaced, in a clear twelve-point font, and the pages numbered on 8.5" x 11" paper, saved as either a Word document or PDF.
- Please type the name of entrant and the title of entry on each numbered page. This is not a blind competition.
- Multiple entries are accepted, $29 per entry.
- Submissions will be accepted online or by mail. Choose one method only.
Online Submissions
- Go to www.writersunion.submittable.com to fill out the application form and upload your entry.
- Payment will be made online on Submittable when uploading your entry, through PayPal or by credit card (VISA, MasterCard, or American Express).
- Online entries must be received electronically by 11:59 pm Pacific Time on February 15, 2017, to be eligible.
Mailed Submissions
- Include a cover letter with your name; citizenship; address; telephone number; email address; title of entry (indicate fiction or nonfiction); word count; number of pages of entry; and a declaration that the work is unpublished and you have not previously published more than one book and do not have a contract with a publisher for a second one.
- Make cheque or money order payable to The Writers' Union of Canada. Multiple entries can be submitted together and fees can be added and paid with one cheque or money order, $29 per entry.
- Mail entries to: SPC Competition, The Writers' Union of Canada, 460 Richmond Street West, Suite 600, Toronto, ON M5V 1Y1.
- Entries must be postmarked by February 15, 2017, to be eligible.
Results will be posted at www.writersunion.ca in May 2017.
Latest Winner
Read about the 2016 Award Winner
Previous Winners


text:
I stand corrected. Sacramento will deal with your failure to appear like this. You have to pay GC Services the amount they are owed and that will clear your license. Once you do that you will be able to go to DMV to get your license reissued.
Sacramento will NOT


text:
VETERANS' MEMORIALS, BOY SCOUTS, PUBLIC SEALS, AND OTHER PUBLIC EXPRESSIONS OF RELIGION PROTECTION ACT OF 2006 -- (Extensions of Remarks - September 28, 2006)
* Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I think this bill is unnecessary and unwise, and I cannot vote for it.
* Current law says that federal judges have discretion to require a state or local government to pay the attorneys' fees of individual citizens who win lawsuits challenging government actions that violate the Constitution.
* This bill would take away part of that discretion, by barring judges from making such awards in cases involving the Constitution's prohibition of the establishment of religion.
* Nothing in today's debate on the bill has convinced me that that so many judges have abused their discretion that Congress should limit it, or that the current law is broken and requires repair.
* And I am very concerned that the effect of this bill would be to weaken Americans' constitutional rights, as the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty has warned in a recent letter that says ``passage of H.R. 2679 would encourage elected officials to violate the Establishment Clause whenever they find it politically advantageous to do so. By limiting the remedies for a successful plaintiff, this measure would remove the threat that exists to ensure compliance with the Establishment Clause.''
* I think the Joint Committee is right--and that what they say about the Establishment Clause is just as true about the rest of the Bill of Rights.
* For example of where this might lead, consider the 2003 lawsuit against the school district in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
* In that case, the plaintiffs complained that a former student's right to free speech was abridged when school officials denied the student an opportunity to give her opinion of homosexuality at a school forum on diversity. The judge ruled they were right, and ordered the school district to pay damages, attorneys' fees and costs to the Thomas More Law Center, an Ann Arbor-based law firm organized to argue on behalf of Christians in religious freedom cases.
* I have no reason to think that was an abuse. I am glad that the law provides judges with the discretion to award attorneys' fees when people successfully defend their constitutional rights. This bill would limit that discretion unnecessarily, and so I cannot support it.


text:
Handcrafted Letters for Mom
Crafting Time:
- Varies
Skill Level:
- Intermediate
Project Courtesy of: Jo-Ann Fabric & Craft Stores
Additional Information
- 12" paper mache letters, 'MOM'
- 2 coordinating Home Decor fabrics of choice, 1/2 yd. each
- Knitting needles, size 13
- Sensations Angel Hair yarn, 1 skein each of 2 coordinating colors
- Crochet hook, size H
- Miniature clothespins
- Fabri-Tac glue
- Ruler
- Pencil
- Scissors
- Trace an outline of the letter "M" onto fabric of choice and add 1/2" extra seam allowance around all edges.
- Cut 4 pieces of fabric.
- To create fabric edges, cut two strips of coordinating fabric equal to the perimeter measurement plus 1" by 2-1/2" wide.
- Cover front and back surfaces of letters with cut fabric as shown. Use Fabri-Tac glue to adhere fabric seam allowances to sides of letters.
- Press under 1/2" on both long edges of strips.
- Use Fabri-Tac glue strip to apply all fabric edges of letters. Finish by folding under raw edge.
- Wrap yarn around "legs" of M's and secure ends with glue.
- Cast on 16 stitches.
- Knit 60 rows.
- Join ends.
- Wrap letter O, stitching together in back 5.
Optional: If paper mache letter shows through knitted piece, cover the O with scraps of fabric that match yarn color.
- Slightly overlap letters and glue together.
- With crochet hook, chain stitch one 3 yard chain of each of the yarn colors.
- Twist chains together and wrap around letters as desired. Hang photographs from chains with clothespins.
- Optional: Glue photos to trimmed cardstock for a framed effect.


text:
NJPW results for January 4, 2017
~ IWGP Heavy : Kazuchika Okada vs Kenny Omega
~ IWGP IC : Tetsuya Naito vs Hiroshi Tanahashi
~ NEVER Openweight : Katsuyori Shibata vs Hirooki Goto
~ IWGP Junior : KUSHIDA vs Hiromu Takahashi Continue reading
~ IWGP Heavy : Kazuchika Okada vs Kenny Omega
~ IWGP IC : Tetsuya Naito vs Hiroshi Tanahashi
~ NEVER Openweight : Katsuyori Shibata vs Hirooki Goto
~ IWGP Junior : KUSHIDA vs Hiromu Takahashi Continue reading →
[AJPW NEWS] The full event card was announced for the June 11 show.
In addition the previously announced main event of Shuji Ishikawa defending the Triple Crown belt against Jake Lee and Suwama taking on Kento Miyahara, it was also announced that the World Tag belts will be in defense. As the new champions in Kengo Mashimo and KAI takes on the former champions in Zeus and Bodyguard on the show. Mashimo refused to attend the press conference that was scheduled, but KAI spoke on his behalf and said Mashimo accepts the defense. Issues still exist between KAI and Mashimo, but the two have proven to be effective in initially capturing the belts. Though their first defense will be telling for sure if they can come together as a cohesive team.
In addition, TAJIRI makes his return to Japan as he is set to compete in a 6 man tag match along with Yutaka Yoshie and Minoru Tanaka to take on Jun Akiyama, Ultimo Dragon and Atsushi Maruyama. Having recently competed in WWE's cruiserweight division, TAJIRI is now free from his contract with them as he looks to take on new challengers at this stage in life. The first of which being Jun Akiyama. TAJIRI said there is still much for him to try and accomplish in Japan specifically, including even hinting a the possibility of trying for the Triple Crown belt.
Also Osamu Nishimura continues to carry the BANG! TV belt, which he captured in the USA from Dalton Drellich, as he aims to take on and give opportunities to any and all challengers. He will be taking on Rikiya Fudo from LAND'S END. Nishimura stated that he holds Dory Funk Jr. in high regard and aims to show nothing but the utmost respect and honor as he defends the belt.
Below is the updated event card…
All Japan Pro-Wrestling "2017 Dynamite Series", 6/11/2017 [Sun] 12:00 @ Korakuen Hall in Tokyo
() Takao Omori, Masanobu Fuchi & Ryoji Sai vs. Yohei Nakajima, Keisuke Okada & Fuminori Abe
() BANG! TV World Heavyweight Championship Match: [3rd Champion] Osamu Nishimura vs. [Challenger] Rikiya Fudo
~ 2nd title defense.
() Joe Doering, Atsushi Aoki & Hikaru Sato vs. Naoya Nomura, Yuma Aoyagi & Koji Iwamoto
() Jun Akiyama, Ultimo Dragon & Atsushi Maruyama vs. TAJIRI, Yutaka Yoshie & Minoru Tanaka
() World Tag Championship Match: [74th Champions] Kengo Mashimo & KAI vs. [Challengers] Zeus & The Bodyguard
~ 1st title defense.
() Special Single Match: Suwama vs. Kento Miyahara
() Triple Crown Heavyweight Championship Match: [56th Champion] Shuji Ishikawa vs. [Challenger] Jake Lee
~ 1st title defense.
AJPW Event Cards for May & June 2017
http://puroresuspirit.net/2017/04/ajpw-event-cards-for-may-june-2017/ ... See MoreSee Less
NJPW results for May 29, 2017
~ BOSJ Day 11
~ B BLOCK : Ryusuke Taguchi vs KUSHIDA - Volador Jr vs ACH - Yoshinobu Kanemaru vs BUSHI - Tiger Mask IV vs El Desperado
http://puroresuspirit.net/2017/05/njpw-results-for-may-29-2017/ ... See MoreSee Less
[NOAH NEWS] It was announced that the GHC Junior Heavyweight belt will be in defense on June 25 in Fukushima, as the newly crowned champion HAYATA will be putting the belt on the line against Taiji Ishimori.
The GHC Heavy belt will also be defended on the show, but that will not be for certain until the outcome of Nakajima and Yone whic is first set to take place on June 4. The challenger will also be determined on that show following the outcome of Kenoh versus Kotoge.
Also Kaito Kiyomiya was announced to miss the show on May 30 after suffering a laceration to his upper lip on the 5/28 show. That event card has changed and flows into the upcoming junior defense as well.
Pro Wrestling NOAH "GREAT VOYAGE 2017 in FUKUSHIMA ~ Fukushima Charity Show", 6/25/2017 [Sun] 15:00 @ Big Palette Fukushima
(-) GHC Junior Heavyweight Championship Match: [34th Champion] HAYATA vs. [Challenger] Taiji Ishimori
~ 1st title defense.
(-) GHC Heavyweight Championship Match: (to be announced)
NOAH Event Cards for May & June 2017
http://puroresuspirit.net/2017/05/noah-event-cards-for-may-june-2017/ ... See MoreSee Less
[New Japan Official Match] Shinsuke Nakamura vs. AJ Styles, for the IWGP Intercontinental Championship, from January 4, 2016. ... See MoreSee Less
【English commentary】Shinsuke Nakamura vs AJ Styles:NJPW Free Match
【English commentary】Shinsuke Nakamura vs AJ Styles IWGP Intercontinental Championship ( Jan 4, 2016) NJPW Free Match of the Week. ⭐Watch Free for a month(Ma...
OZ Academy Results for May 28, 2017
~Mayumi Ozaki, Maya Yukihi & Alex Lee vs Hiroyo Matsumoto, Tsubasa Kuragaki & Rina Yamashita
~Sonoko Kato vs Kaori Yoneyama
http://puroresuspirit.net/2017/05/oz-academy-results-for-may-28-2017/ ... See MoreSee Less