|
|
#1
04-27-2005, 10:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
If the NYT had covered the Main Event (no subscription required)
Very funny spoof by Catholic World News CAESAREA PHILIPPI (20 Kislev) Yesterday's surprise announcement that doctrinal hardliner Jesus of Nazareth had been anointed "Messiah" provoked mixed reactions in the diverse and sometimes fractious Israelite community, ranging from cautious disappointment to frank despair. 
|
|
#2
04-27-2005, 11:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
[ QUOTE ]
Very funny spoof by Catholic World News [/ QUOTE ] WTF?! Catholic World News. You seriously read something called Catholic World News? Are you some religious wacko or what? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] By the way smart guys don't believe in Jesus, Harry Potter, God or Russ Limbaugh. So stop making these useless post.
|
|
#3
04-27-2005, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
[ QUOTE ]
WTF?! Catholic World News. You seriously read something called Catholic World News? Are you some religious wacko or what? [/ QUOTE ] Yes I am a Roman Catholic person that reads something called the Catholic World News (among others). I can how this would shock a member of the Church of Secularism. [ QUOTE ] By the way smart guys don't believe in Jesus [/ QUOTE ] Newton, St Thomas Acquinas, C.S. Lewis, Leibnitz, to name a few. [ QUOTE ] Harry Potter [/ QUOTE ] Yeah. [ QUOTE ] God [/ QUOTE ] See my list above, and add Aristotle. [ QUOTE ] Russ Limbaugh [/ QUOTE ] If you mean Rush Limbaugh, I think most smart people and even most dumb people would agree that he exists.
|
|
#4
04-27-2005, 11:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
They wouldn't have referred to him as "Jesus." Their internal style manual says they must refer to all as "Mr. ____." [I've seen this in reference to Meat Loaf, who they called "Mr. Loaf."] So it would be, I guess, Mr. Christ.
|
|
#5
04-27-2005, 12:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
[ QUOTE ]
They wouldn't have referred to him as "Jesus." Their internal style manual says they must refer to all as "Mr. ____." [I've seen this in reference to Meat Loaf, who they called "Mr. Loaf."] So it would be, I guess, Mr. Christ. [/ QUOTE ] At least tell me you thought it was funny Andy. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#6
04-27-2005, 12:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
I think Christ as a Surname was not generally applied during Jesus's day so would the NYT have used Mr of Nazereth or Mr Son of Joseph?
|
|
#8
04-27-2005, 12:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If the NYT had covered Jesus in the Biblical times
[ QUOTE ]
I can how this would shock a member of the Church of Secularism. [/ QUOTE ] I have no idea what does a member of the Church of Secularism means. Anyway I believe in David Sklansky*, John Nash, John Von Neumann, Oscar Morgenstern etc.. And not guys like pope or Jesus. And yes I know that pope exists. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [ QUOTE ] If you mean Rush Limbaugh, I think most smart people and even most dumb people would agree that he exists. [/ QUOTE ] I agree that Rush Limbaugh exists. Smart guys know that Rush is full of sh*t. * = I know that Sklansky is Republican or at least semi-Republican.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
