 | | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | (...) I agree with that assessment, but that still doesn't mean that you haven't put your own spin on things. Example (since that idiot reporter wanted to represent all of Lugnet with this particular episode): is there any part of the Bible that (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.build.ancient)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | (...) I'd agree with Bruce here, and also note that every other illustrated Bible also inserts its own spin/commentary in its illustrations. I think the BT rocks, but I disagree that the illustrations don't carry any commentary about the text or the (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.build.ancient)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred —Brendan Powell Smith
|
| | | | | | (...) I just wan't to be clear: when I wrote "I won't argue that" above, what I am NOT arguing or contesting is that illustrators like me can put a spin on things. So, Tim, to say you agree with Bruce on this issue is also to be in agreement with (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.build.ancient)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Request to divert non-Lego build discussions —Clark Stephens
|
| | | | (...) May I ask that non-Lego discussions be moved to the non-Lego area of Lugnet? (lugnet.off-topic.debate is usually a good choice). This thread diverged from discussion about building ancient creations a few posts ago. Thanks, Clark Curator (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.build.ancient)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Request to divert non-Lego build discussions —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) A number of the posts in this tree have had their FUT reset to off-topic.debate already, after I saw your post I went back and did most of the rest. (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.build.ancient)
|
| | | | |
