 | | Neat-o! —Dave Schuler
| | | | I don't exactly cling to the literal interpretation of scripture, but (URL) is still fascinating to me! Dave! (It's in OT.Debate because lots of religious discussions wind up here anyway...) (19 years ago, 6-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Neat-o! —John Neal
| | | | | (...) I was thinking: It's as if Andrew Lloyd Webber scripted Jesus Christ Superstar (a favorite of mine) from it. Ever since I heard JCS back in the 70's, I've thought that a Gospel account featuring Judas as a main character was pretty radical. (...) (19 years ago, 15-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Neat-o! —Dave Schuler
| | | | | (...) While you were gone it was like the sun didn't rise. Does that sound sincere? Wait, I'll try again... I read Holy Blood, Holy Grail by Baigent et al about 10 years ago, before The Da Vinci Code was even a gleam in Dan Brown's eye. I'll take a (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Neat-o! —John Neal
| | | | | (...) That was a very bad Freudian slip the day after Easter;-) (...) Ah, yes. And as we speak Baigent is trying to wrest millions from Brown in court WRT these 2 works. Having not read HBHG, I have to say that I found TJP wandering and rather (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Neat-o! —Dave Schuler
| | | | | (...) Yeah, afterwards I scolded myself for writing that, but the damage was already posted! (...) Ironically, their failed lawsuit would likewise have been more convincing if they'd admitted that HBHG was fiction, too. Instead, they continue to (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Neat-o! —John Neal
| | | | | (...) Take it easy on yourself, Dave! At least here you didn't use "scourged", or worse yet, that you flatulented yourself. JOHN (19 years ago, 18-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | |
