He recounts that his vision came in the late 1920s when he was twenty-one or twenty-two, and that the words ringing in his ears from the one embodying infinite might were 'Down with the bluebloods' and 'Time to act'.
Date (happened)
between 1926 and 1929
unresolved
between 1926 and 1929
stated · preferred
before 1969
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [545875] belong to telling lecture nids [1828]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1969 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1969 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 24 November 1969
bound
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1969 to before 1969-11-24.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1828 (certain delivery 1969-11-24); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1969`, 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 1969-11-24 on nid 1828 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one.
before 20 March 1964
bound · probable
Why
Corrected telling-day upper bound after L7 delivery adjudication.
Reasoning
The passage presents the commission as a completed past experience. Node 1828's surviving non-refuted delivery claim is 1964-03-20 at probable confidence, so the event occurred before that telling day at no higher confidence.
between 1926 and 1929
estimated · probable
Why
M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 007)
Reasoning
The passage matches chronology 18065 (Infinite might commands young Neville to act, 1926..1929) and describes years of lectures and books before he began to apply; the text's 'absorbing' period precedes his 1929 embrace.
before 24 November 1969
bound · refuted
Why
Refutes the obsolete telling-day bound; append-only, original row remains.
Reasoning
This happened-date bound was derived solely from node 1828's 1969-11-24 delivery claim, which L7 adjudication refuted as a catalogue block error; the bound therefore inherits that refutation.
Told / reported
-
20 March 1964
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 1828 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 1828 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1964-3-20 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1969-11-24 refuted; 1964-3-20 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1969-11-24 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.
24 November 1969
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1828, 1969-11-24) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1964-3-20. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- A Confession of Faith ¶47 (So when I was commanded to go and tell the story of Christ, the words in my ears that were ringing from the one who embodied infinite might were the words “Time to act.”)
- God Only Acts and Is ¶22 (I had been absorbing, absorbing, absorbing all the psychological truth I could get by attending all the lectures, reading all the books, and going mad trying to adjust the conflicts with all the so-called different aspects of Truth.)