Page history
October 12, 2025
→The essay engages in the logical fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion
+6
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized scale of established evidence that the Apostle John was Jewish
+228
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" shows a clear lack of falsification rigor, a key principle in sound inquiry (e.g., as emphasized by Karl Popper)
+1
→The essay engages in the logical fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion
+177
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized arguments that the Apostle John was Jewish in terms of their strength
-6
→The essay engages in the logical fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion
+377
→The essay engages in the logical fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion
+206
→The essay engages in the logical fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion
+51
→[https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNA%3D%3D_4512579b-6e87-4d02-881c-61dca6636b19]shows a clear lack of falsification rigor, a key principle in sound inquiry (e.g., as emphasized by Karl Popper)
-36
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" shows a clear lack of falsification rigor, a key principle in sound inquiry (e.g., as emphasized by Karl Popper)
+116
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" engages in the poor argumentation tactic of "elephant hurling"
+937
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" engages in the poor argumentation tactic of "elephant hurling"
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" engages in elephant hurling
+113
→The essay "Mystery: Was John a Samaritan" engages in elephant hurling
+489
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized arguments that the Apostle John was Jewish in terms of their strength
+77
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized arguments in terms of their strength
+33
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized arguments in terms of their strength
+177
→The essay assembles a bunch of Lilliputian-size poor arguments and some invalid arguments while ignoring the Gulliver-sized arguments in terms of their strength
+999
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+168
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+78
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+2
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
-3
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+4
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+61
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+1,705
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+74
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+636
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+1,014
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+630
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+2
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+22
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+45
Good points, but the primary hypothesis is that John (not Jesus) was a Samaritan.
+179
Cosmetic J was/is Y
+247
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+201
→The weight of evidence strongly favors the view that the Apostle John was Jewish. Also, why the position that John was a Samaritan is an exceedingly weak position
+245
October 11, 2025
April 18, 2025
December 31, 2024
→Point 32: Paul never mentioned "Samaritans", not even once. Perhaps he was unfamiliar with them, or simply considered them to be Gentiles. Did Paul know of John? {{bibleref|Romans|11|25-27}} is interesting in implying that Gentiles would help save
+353
→Point 32
+442
→Point 32
+2
→Point 32
+36
→Point 32
→Point 32
+567
→Point 32: Jesus came for group A, but group A rejected Him while different groups B, C, and D accepted him. John accepted Him. Therefore John is not in group A, but in groups B, C, or D.
+365