wrote:
>
> Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>
> > Matthew 4:5,6,7
>
> #1 Jesus? It's not really JESUS you're quoting here, is it. You're
> quoting 'Matthew". "Matthew" telling the story of how Jesus went into
> the desert ALONE, and had a chat with the magical supernatural debil.
>
> "Matthew" Chapter 4 1
> Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted
> by the Devil.
> 2 And after He had fasted 40 days and 40 nights, He was hungry.
> 3 Then THE TEMPTER approached Him and SAID, "If You are the Son of God,
> tell these stones to become bread."
> 4 But HE ANSWERED, "It is written: Man must not live on bread alone,
> but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."
> 5 Then THE DEVIL took Him to the holy city, had Him stand on the
> pinnacle of the temple,
> 6 and SAID to Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For
> it is written: He will give His angels orders concerning you, and,
> they will support you with their hands, so that you will not strike
> your foot against a stone. "
> 7 JESUS TOLD HIM, "It is also written: You must not tempt the Lord your
> God."
> . . . etc. etc.
>
> Let me get this right. Jesus goes to the desert ... alone. And
> "Matthew" reports Jesus' chat with the debil . . . word for word. Is
> that your theory?
>
> I'm just wondering, how do you imagine "Matthew" was able to quote the
> debil and Jesus here? Was "Matthew" there - with Jesus ALONE in the
> desert - do you imagine? Were they alone together?
>
> On what grounds do you distinguish this story from other impossible
> ancient legends?
>
> -----------------------
> #2 Do you know the first ancient Christian to mention the Gospel of
> "Matthew"? Or the year, roughly, when "Matthew" was first mentioned?
>
> -------------------------
> #3 Are you aware there is no evidence the G of "Matthew" was known to
> the early Fathers? His gospel is not mentioned, not cited, not quoted,
> by Ignatius, Polycarp, 1 Clement, Marcion, or Justin?
>
> On what EVIDENCE do you believe the gospel of "Matthew" existed before
> the middle of the second century?

All asked and answered a few months back:

http://tinyurl.com/9f32o

Would be more than happy to "glow" and chat about this and other things
like cardiology, diabetes and nutrition that interest those following
this thread here during the next on-line chat (12/08/05):

http://tinyurl.com/cpayh

For those who are put off by the signature, my advance apologies for
how the LORD has reshaped me:

http://tinyurl.com/bgfqt

In Christ's love always,

Andrew
http://tinyurl.com/b6xwk

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> All asked and answered a few months back:

LOL. "Answered" in the sense that you replied -- generally that you
didn't know the actual factual answers. And didn't care. I was
hoping you'd matured beyond flat-Earth superstition to a reasoned [to
the extent you are capable of that] analysis of the facts.

My mistake.

DH

On 2 Dec 2005 07:40:43 -0800, wrote:

>
>Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
>
>> All asked and answered a few months back:
>
>LOL. "Answered" in the sense that you replied -- generally that you
>didn't know the actual factual answers. And didn't care. I was
>hoping you'd matured beyond flat-Earth superstition to a reasoned [to
>the extent you are capable of that] analysis of the facts.
>
>My mistake.

This is a psychopath, a liar and a kook. You'll never get anything out
of him. Eventually he'll cease to be funny.

>DH