He states that he has himself appeared to individuals and to the twelve as the risen Lord is said to have done, and expects to be seen by many more before and after he departs this world, insisting he relates only his own experience.
Date (happened)
before 1959
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [529012] belong to telling lecture nids [1055]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1959 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1959 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 1971
bound · possible
Why
Corrects the phase4 L6a envelope on this event from before 1959 to before 1971.
Reasoning
Envelope recompute, arithmetic only. The phase4 L6a row on this event states its own rule: each telling lecture contributes MAX of its non-refuted delivery years, and the envelope is the MIN across telling lectures. Recomputed live over lecture nid(s) 1055 that row cites, MAX(non-refuted field_delivery_year) gives 1971, not the 1959 the row carries — the bound was below its own stated rule and therefore UNSAFE: it asserted the event did not happen in 12 year(s) where it may sit. Same premise, same evidence, no re-reading and no re-judgement; only the maximum was taken correctly. The L6a row stands beside this one (append-only). Ruling: #2235 delta 1, architect 378.
before 18 June 1971
bound · probable
Why
Supersedes nothing; the coarser year-level bounds from runs corpus v1 / phase4 L6a and v1.1/l4/phase4-envelope stand beside this per append-only.
Reasoning
The event is Neville's claim of ongoing/repeated appearances 'until I depart this world' and 'after I depart' -- a lifelong pattern with no single moment, so only an upper bound applies, never an exact date. The L4.5 hold on this event's envelope (npr 70290) was waiting for exactly this individual read: with the 1959 delivery claim now refuted and the 1971-06-18 claim the only surviving one on node 1055, the envelope tightens from year to day precision, held at probable to match the ceiling of the delivery claim it derives from.
Told / reported
18 June 1971
conclusion · probable
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
1 claim, no conflict: 1971-06-18 (node:1055).
18 June 1971
estimated · probable
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1055 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1055 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1971-6-18 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1959-5-10 refuted; 1971-6-18 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1959-05-10 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1959-05-10 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1055, 1959-5-10) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-6-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1055 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1055 delivery claims: 1959-5-10 doubtful; 1971-6-18 probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1055, 1959-5-10) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-6-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Who Paul Really Is ¶31 (You are told in Scripture that he appeared first to Peter. Well, I did. She isn’t called Peter here. Then to the twelve . . I did, then to five hundred. I have not heard from five hundred, but I am hearing from them.)
1 tellings, oldest first. A date in brackets shows how it is known; "circa", "after" and "possible" dates are rough.
| Date |
Lecture or book |
Telling |
Passage |
| 1971-06-18 [exact/probable/final] |
Who Paul Really Is |
So, she saw it, as many have seen it and many will see it until I depart this world. And then many will see it after I depart this world, for I know what I’m talking about. The whole story as told in the Scripture unfolded itself in me, and I am relating my own experience. I am not speculating; I am not theorizing. I am telling you exactly what happened to me. And if this lady witnessed what I’ve told you that I am, all well and good. You are told in Scripture that he appeared first to Peter. Well, I did. She isn’t called Peter here. Then to the twelve . . I did, then to five hundred. I have… |
529012 |