I guess that explains why he sent an angel to tell Mary about it instead of telling her himself. Like a buddy falling on a grenade. "Hey Mary, I talked to god, and he enjoyed last night, he really did. He's just not ready for a relationship right now, and you have Joseph. But he wants me to tell you that he'll always have that one night with you in his memory. Maybe he'll call you sometime if you're single again. And you're carrying his child. Gotta go!"
Thats such a man thing, have all of the fun and none of the responsibility!!
Bet Joseph was chuffed!!
Mary then had to spend the rest of her life saying 'no,really, I AM a virgin!!!'.
"It was an immaculate conception! Why don't you believe me?"
Joseph should be sainted for keeping it in his pants the rest of his life. Maybe he was really gay.
Why was Mary chosen, what was special about her?
If i were Joseph id be so peed off.Is he mentioned at all in the Bible after JC was born?
Why would God do that to a fellow geezer?
Joseph-'Your pregnant!!!!!!And you say he is going to grow into a miracle performing icon who will be worshipped by millions for thousands of years?!' WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!'
Mary-'Oh, did I forget to mention, he's not yours'.
It's a good thing there is no hell. We would be in soooooo much trouble.
"Life is just one thing after another and death is a cabaret."
- Frank Leibowitz
How could Joseph have been gay? He could not have acquired HIV.
A report today indicates that HIV's ancestry has been traced to Wild Chimps. This knocks into a cocked hat the gay community that the HIV virus was created in a laboratory by American scientists to decimate the gay community. It looks like the gays will have to find another scapegoat. It certainly can't be Joseph!
Gay baiting so soon? Really, Italgato, don't try to give yourself away so easily.
BernardR wrote:How could Joseph have been gay? He could not have acquired HIV.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If HIV was made in a lab to wipe out gays it has SERIOUSLY back fired as now, more straight people have HIV.
All people have to do is use condoms.
Lightwizard wrote:Gay baiting so soon? Really, Italgato, don't try to give yourself away so easily.
Italgato? I seem to remember that name.
Of course, this has something to do with this movie, which is why it is clearly trolling.
tin_sword_arthur wrote:It's a good thing there is no hell. We would be in soooooo much trouble.
Trust me, God has a sense of humor.
Consider the faces people make during sex.
As if May 24th:
Domestic: $97,176,624 38.9%
+ Foreign: $152,617,212 61.1%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
= Worldwide: $249,793,836
Projected budget: $125M with Tom Hanks getting a huge paycheck, and he has to be part of the audience draw, although the controversial subject matter and the popularity of the novel are the real hook.
Can't help figuring that Ron Howard will be satisfied with a financial success while not happy about the critical trouncing.
He and Sony will be sobbing all the way to the bank.
The great critic, Roger Ebert, is still correct when he said--"The plot is preposterous."
No one ever went broke relying on the basic stupidity of the American Public who, it has been reported, know the names of almost all the leading contestants in "American Idol" but can't name one Supreme Court Justice or find Iraq on a map.
Morons like that go to a movie like "Da Vinci Code"
BernardR wrote:The great critic, Roger Ebert, is still correct when he said--"The plot is preposterous."
No one ever went broke relying on the basic stupidity of the American Public who, it has been reported, know the names of almost all the leading contestants in "American Idol" but can't name one Supreme Court Justice or find Iraq on a map.
Morons like that go to a movie like "Da Vinci Code"
Morons like that also believe in God. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean it's not a good movie.
Roger Ebert did not like the plot. He said the plot was preposterous. Read his review!!!!
