He speaks from his own experience of a memory image of the crucifixion returning, feeling again the vortices that nailed him to the body — not painful but sheer ecstasy.
Date (happened)
8 April 1960
conclusion · probable
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
All 3 claims agree on 1960-04-08: passage:532215; node:1175; passage:532215.
8 April 1960
estimated · probable · preferred
Reasoning
The six-vortex Crucifixion is the distinctive temple-splitting third act in Neville's repeatedly dated Four Mighty Acts sequence, established as 1960-04-08. Confidence is probable because this passage names the experience but does not repeat its calendar date.
before 1965
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [532215] belong to telling lecture nids [1175]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1965 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1965 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 13 December 1965
bound · doubtful
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1965 to before 1965-12-13.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1175 (certain delivery 1965-12-13); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1965`, an envelope over delivery YEARS computed without reading text. Its premise is that the fact is true by the time it is told; on that same premise the DAY of the telling is a strictly better upper bound. Nothing is re-decided — the bound is stated to the precision the evidence always supported. The delivery claim for 1965-12-13 on nid 1175 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one. || v1.1/l7/passage-inherit: lowered `certain` -> `doubtful`. This date was inherited from lecture node 1175, whose own 1965-12-13 delivery claim has been refuted, and no other node in the corpus holds that date live — so the only witness for this date is one the corpus has disproved. Lowered, never refuted (#2461 §1 rule (b)): what collapsed is the evidence for WHEN, not the event. This row was reached through a PASSAGE source, which every earlier rule-(b) pass was structurally blind to.
Told / reported
30 November 1965
conclusion · probable
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
1 claim, no conflict: 1965-11-30 (node:1175).
30 November 1965
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 1175 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 1175 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1965-11-30 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1964-11-27 refuted; 1964-11-27 refuted; 1965-12-13 refuted; 1965-11-30 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1965-12-13 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). 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.
13 December 1965
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1175, 1965-12-13) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1965-11-30. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Advent ¶51 (But I will tell you from experience it is the most ecstatic joy in the world. When you have a memory image and it comes in to almost a repetition, and you once again feel the vortices that nailed you to this body, it is sheer ecstasy.)
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 |
| 1965-11-30 [exact/probable/final] |
Advent |
The second? It’s mentioned in…whether the second death, the second resurrection, the second coming…if the drama took place, whenever it takes place is a second. That affirms it. The second is always affirmation, confirmation. As we’re told in the 41st of Genesis, if the dream repeats itself, it is fixed and no power can change it. So when Pharaoh’s dream repeated itself in the night with different symbols, Joseph said, “The Lord has fixed it and it will shortly come to pass”…if it repeats itself. So when the drama of Jesus Christ repeats itself in man—for his true return is when he repeats in… |
532215 |