Neville challenges clergymen on television and radio over thirty years

In thirty years on the lecture platform, and repeatedly on TV and radio with clergymen, he has challenged them to say whether they have experienced Christ or been called Father, and they call it blasphemy.
Date (happened)
c. 1938
unresolved
  1. c. 1938 stated · preferred
    Source We Came Out from the Father and Return ¶25"for my thirty years on the platform", told in We Came Out From the Father and Return (nid 1362)
  2. between 1938 and 28 June 1968 stated · probable
    Source "During my thirty years on the platform", told in He Is My Resurrection (nid 2051)
  3. between 1938 and 28 June 1968 estimated · possible
    Source passage 552406 (lecture nid 2051), 'During my thirty years on the platform I have talked with them time and time again'
    Why Corrects the typing of the existing stated/probable claim on the same range from the same source; that row is left untouched.
    Reasoning This dates the span of Neville's recounted decades-long practice of disputing clergymen, not a single occurrence; the 1938 start is computed by subtracting the stated 'thirty years' from the lecture's own stated/certain delivery date 1968-06-28, so the claim is estimated rather than stated, and 'thirty years' is treated as a rounded figure, keeping confidence at possible.
Persons
Neville Goddard
Told / reported
  1. 28 June 1968 estimated
    Source We Came Out from the Father and Returnnid 1362 surviving delivery claim after refutation. All claims: 1968-6-2 refuted; 1968-6-28 certain (preferred)
    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 1362 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 1362 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1968-6-28 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1968-6-2 refuted; 1968-6-28 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1968-06-02 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`).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.
  2. 28 June 1968 stated
    Source He Is My Resurrection (nid 2051), telling 2051-5, told 1968-06-28
  3. 2 June 1968 stated · refuted
    Source We Came Out from the Father and ReturnWe Came Out From the Father and Return (nid 1362), telling 1362-8, told 1968-06-02
    Reasoning || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1362, 1968-6-2) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1968-6-28. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources

Source