...with commentary by the astute, amusing, and sometimes confusing, Gnostic scholar -- PRev. (When I wrote my book, I borrowed passages from all four Gospels, and nobody can find the mysterious Q source because I've had it right here in my desk drawer, all along...) Wowee...now I can quote me, chapter and verse! =D
5-6: Vince referred to the 167 CE Luke as a "journalist". Perhaps this was to stir a feeling of camaraderie or kinship within my heart? But yes, I believe you have done a better job of summarizing lines 5 and 6 than I did -- thank you. (Yeah, that's what I meant -- what he said.)
7: nah, the skinny dipping part was purely Vince's idea:http://www.network54.com/Forum/272761/message/1281271584/You%27re+asking+a+hard+thing
(paragraph 5, I think)
9: yes, I see my mix up there -- Luke 167 is renamed "Theofoolus" to avoid confusing him with Luke, the physician friend of Paul. Theophilus 167 is Theophilus the Bishop of Antioch, Luke 167's employer -- NOT Theophilus ben Ananus, and NOT Mattathias ben Theophilus. And NOT the Academic, generic "Friend of God" Theophilus -- i.e. "Dear Occupant".
And I feel much better now about 15, since that you have explained that Luke my fellow journalist wasn't a big fat liar pretending to be Paul's close friend -- he was just a crappy plagiarist with no sense of continuity.