1
#311247
Robbie
That's not what "secular" means, Eisenstein.
10/16/2007 1:04:38 AM
#311287
nobody
even if he is a moron, you gotta love his attempt to find a loophole
10/16/2007 3:36:48 AM
#311322
Beast
*to the unreal soundclip*
M-M-M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL FAIL fail fail...
10/16/2007 5:31:03 AM
#311325
Freboy
Because first God wrote a whole bunch of texts, then he changed his mind and threw some away.
10/16/2007 5:35:07 AM
#311409
Didymous Thomas
You should get out more.
10/16/2007 8:57:31 AM
#311435
Caustic Gnostic
Secular =/= apocryphal.
I'm with Didymos here. We got some good first-century apocrypha here that'll knock your socks off.
10/16/2007 9:21:29 AM
#311453
Didymous Thomas
"The Dead Sea Scrolls [containing the Old Testament] "
I din' write no OT stuff, dude.
Read my blog.
10/16/2007 9:40:56 AM
#311476
anti-nonsense
Um. No. Sorry.
10/16/2007 10:09:19 AM
#1236899
ShyFoxie
The Koran is not a part of the Bible. Can I use it as a secular source?
12/22/2010 2:40:46 AM
#1237002
Canadiest
No it can't, the Bible is in books because it's the product of seperate scrolls, the DSS are just some of the oldest copies we have found.
And answer why, to this day there isn't a collected tome of the DSS? Because a lot of them were not used in the Bible, some of them are in the Gnostic but all of them have never been compiled and translated.
12/22/2010 6:14:33 AM
#1418146
Crimson Lizard
Buy a dictionary (I recommend Webster's) and USE IT!
6/30/2012 8:29:30 AM
#1443917
Ebon
That's not what "secular" means, idiot.
9/5/2012 3:56:51 PM
1