Snivellus

My only point was that you should know the difference.
When the Judas idea was first presented in this thread, it seemed as though the writer did not know that it was controversial, and that the idea is a minority opinion, at best.

I strongly doubt that any Christian organization endorses the Judas-hero story. They ignore it or they get upset. I doubt that you will hear of anyone taking the official position that it this belief is an option.

I don't care what you all think about it.
I just felt that you should know what's up before you go rushing in, where angels fear to tread.

Whether or not it's a minority opinion, and who supports it and who doesn't is irrelevant to it's merits. If Jesus was supposed to die and Judas did something to help that out.
Making him out to be a villain is as absurd as hating Jews because "they killed Jesus."

An option? Are we living in Stalinist Russia and no one told me about it?

And what about The Davinci Code comment?

My only point was that you should know the difference.

Now I know you're crazy. And that you are not listening. Both.
Personally, I enjoyed tossing that theory around when I was a youngun.
I think it does have merit, and I wore it out.

The merits of the theory were not relevant to my point today.
Many people feel that the Pope's opinion is important.
Therefore, it is important.
Trample it if you like, but you should at least know that you are doing so.

That one is just plain stupid. Drivel. Fun, if it doesn't offend your religious beliefs, but mindless. If the premise were true, why would anyone cover it up at all, let alone go to such lengths? It would not have been a sin. The only blame anyone could throw around would be that he had a child when he knew he wouldn't be around to take care of it. In those days, that was not even considered a crime. It's nothing. Empty air. Just some guy having fun with a novel. Enjoy it if you can.

Maybe that's why I've had trouble getting through it. I own the paperback, but I just can't make myself care enough to read it.

Now, if you want an argument that is both offensive and has merit, try the one about Mary's younger kids. She had four sons who are named in the bible and at least two daughters. Toss that one out and watch 'em go balistic.

Know the difference between what?
Now I know you're crazy. And that you are not listening. Both.
Personally, I enjoyed tossing that theory around when I was a youngun.
I think it does have merit, and I wore it out.

The merits of the theory were not relevant to my point today.
Many people feel that the Pope's opinion is important.
Therefore, it is important.
Trample it if you like, but you should at least know that you are doing so.[/b][/quote]
So what if that's the opinion of the pope? I'm not talking to the pope am I? I'm talking to you. And since when is having a different opinion than someone else trampling their opinion?

That one is just plain stupid. Drivel. Fun, if it doesn't offend your religious beliefs, but mindless. If the premise were true, why would anyone cover it up at all, let alone go to such lengths? It would not have been a sin. The only blame anyone could throw around would be that he had a child when he knew he wouldn't be around to take care of it. In those days, that was not even considered a crime. It's nothing. Empty air. Just some guy having fun with a novel. Enjoy it if you can.[/b][/quote]
You try to give a front that it isn't a big deal to you, but it obviously is. You are saying that if Jesus had been married and had a child it wouldn't have made a difference, but if you really believed that, I don't think you'd need to call it "drivel," "mindless," "just plain stupid," "nothing," and "empty air."

As a matter of fact, I did enjoy it. I couldn't care less about the ideas it espouses, it's a good thriller and mystery. Period.
Why am I not surprised that you haven't actually read it?
How is that argument offensive? I've seen plenty of people talk about this subject before and not a one has come close to going ballistic.

You guys should move this to a new thread...read the rules again, people - no hijacking :P
Seriously.

There's a difference between thread drift and hijacking

Total hijack, Scrappy Steve...why so argumentative?
I just think that threads should stay on track...if this were my original thread, I'd be offended that it 'drifted' so off topic.

Seriously -- as founder of this thread, are you annoyed?

Ok, we drifted a little.
The Judas stuff was relevant.
Snivellus, Judas... there really was a connection there.
the Davinci Code and Mary's kids were a little drifty.

Do we care enough to continue elsewhere?
If not, then we don't care enough to continue.

Oh, what the hay... I still need the last word.
See you there. Shall I call it... can't spell it. I'll call it "the code."

My vote's in for Snape as a good guy, not a nice, cuddly, easy going,friend to small animals guy, but on the right side.
I still believe in you Snivillus!! (That's 'believe' with a small 'b'- I don't want to be accused of heresy. If I was thrown off a chat site would I be excommunicated? lol)

I'd still like to know more about Snape's role at Godric's Hollow. It seems to me that he's trying to pay back a prettty hefty amount of guilt but if he was involved in the Potters death, I'm not sure how that guilt works with the continued hate for James let alone the hatred of Harry. I don't get this

Maybe he doesn't really hate Harry, maybe this is just part of this "so called" plan. Snape could be pretending to hate Harry(which is hard to believe now that I think of it) so he doesn't seem suspisious to Voldemort, Ya kno.