DID YOU MISS ME?
I GUESS NOT!
ATTENTION! THIS IS A RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING:
Are we endeavoring to create an equality between an omission and a negation?I'm no good with msPaint. How good are you with
Statement Analysis, Spreadsheets, and
Truth Tables?
Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
Factually, by the process of pure
Statement Analysis, I can say that Matthew 28:1
affirms “Mary Magdalene”
AND “the other Mary”.
P: Mary Magdalene
Q: the other Mary
P ^ QBut if I declared that Matthew 28:1 contains a negation of Salome, there would be no text in that verse with which to make the “conclusion”. It would be an Unvalidated Claim. The same applies to the rest.Mark 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
P: Mary Magdalene
Q: “Mary the mother of James” (If this is NOT “the other Mary”, then another variable can be assigned. It's not going to make any difference.)
R: Salome
P ^ Q ^ RLuke 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.
P: Mary Magdalene
Q: “Mary the mother of James”
S: Joanna
T: and other women
P ^ Q ^ S ^ TJohn 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
P: Mary Magdalene
Therefore, working with the assumption that all Scripture is true, we have:
P ^ Q ^ R ^ S ^ TThis is a series of
Logical Conjunctions, and generates the following
Truth Table: P
Mary Q T
Magdalene the other R S And other P ^ Q P ^ Q ^ R P ^ Q ^ S ^ T
John 20:1 Mary Salome Joanna women Matt 28:1 Mar 16:1 Luk 24:10 P ^ Q ^ R ^ S ^ TTRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE VALIDTRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE
TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE
If Matt 28:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of R ^ S ^ T, which it does
NOT.If Mark 16:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of S ^ T, which it does
NOT.If Luke 24:10 were contrary, it would contain a negation of R, which it does
NOT.If John 20:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of Q ^ R ^ S ^ T,
which it does NOT.