I am not going to post a new topic on this particular discussion until I have read or watched the 'Da Vinci Code'. It would seem uneducated to a struggling Christian like myself
The Da Vinci Code
i'm not sure what the point of creating this topic is, then. however, there's a discussion on it in the literature section. it's important to remember that dan brown (the author of the da vinci code, wrote it only as fiction, realizing that one of the best ways to make money is to attack christianity and create controversy about it.
It is just a fiction, nothing real! Don't believe everything you read! 
| patrick9480 wrote: |
| I am not going to post a new topic on this particular discussion until I have read or watched the 'Da Vinci Code'. It would seem uneducated to a struggling Christian like myself |
you posted a topic about not posting a topic about it?
umm spam?
Yeah, people are fascinated by it. The best way to sell a book is to pick at a religion, because the people who don't like the religion will get it, and the people who are that religion get it out of pure curiosity.
But it is fiction. It's not something to be so caught up in.
But it is fiction. It's not something to be so caught up in.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Yeah, people are fascinated by it. The best way to sell a book is to pick at a religion, because the people who don't like the religion will get it, and the people who are that religion get it out of pure curiosity.
But it is fiction. It's not something to be so caught up in. |
This is what bugs me the most about this subject...because it's not entirely fiction.
The way Dan Brown, and many good authors write is by getting facts, evidencial facts, and then placing a story around those facts. The only thing fiction is the plot\storyline, the holy grail facts, Jesus revelations and Opus Dei etc. are in fact not just the imagination of a clever man but the result of research of that clever man we know as Dan Brown.
I am a Christian. In no means am I against the book. The book proves at the very least that Jesus existed and in no way does it trouble me the fact that he is married etc.
I'm sick of all the fundementalist Christians who book bash the Da Vinci Code when it's purpouse was not to malign Christianity, but merely to back up the existance of some biblical facts.
And seriously, if your going to watch the movie, you might want to read the book first, that goes for all novels turned films.
Amen. 
Yes it is a 'fiction'.
But a fiction based on logic and research. quite convincing story.
whereas same cannot be said about biblcal stories. An ignorant person may inadvertantly put it in 'Fantacy Fiction' category.
But a fiction based on logic and research. quite convincing story.
whereas same cannot be said about biblcal stories. An ignorant person may inadvertantly put it in 'Fantacy Fiction' category.
| Ofinet wrote: | ||
This is what bugs me the most about this subject...because it's not entirely fiction. The way Dan Brown, and many good authors write is by getting facts, evidencial facts, and then placing a story around those facts. The only thing fiction is the plot\storyline, the holy grail facts, Jesus revelations and Opus Dei etc. are in fact not just the imagination of a clever man but the result of research of that clever man we know as Dan Brown. I am a Christian. In no means am I against the book. The book proves at the very least that Jesus existed and in no way does it trouble me the fact that he is married etc. I'm sick of all the fundementalist Christians who book bash the Da Vinci Code when it's purpouse was not to malign Christianity, but merely to back up the existance of some biblical facts. And seriously, if your going to watch the movie, you might want to read the book first, that goes for all novels turned films. |
Though it has biblical facts, it's not all true! Read the Bible if you want to know the whole truth, because it is the word of God so you can believe it!
I personally am not going to touch that book, Da Vinci Code, unless it is really necessary!
Dan Brown didn't live in those days when Jesus did, so for certain he didn't know as much as the deciples!
My closing comment to this is that The Da Vinci code is nothing but a fairytale making Jesus into a imperfect and using Him cheaply as a marketting product!
Its a book of historic fiction nothing more!
I am slowly beginning to realize that there are a lot of people out there who are just way to brainwashed by christianity. And I hate to tell you people out there, but no one really knows what happened truly with the stories of jesus and what not, because, well, no one was there. So no one can argue whether it is right or wrong, because there is no way to prove it regardless. (and for all you bible thumpers out there, and i say that lovingly cuz my sister is one, just so you know, a lot of what is in the bible was put in well after it was written to convert people from pagan beliefs to christianity).
may want to check out the Literature forum, there are a couple of threads on this book there.
it's a very good book, and i like all dan brown' s books, but we must understand that it's a fiction, of course some stuff is real but the thing about the Jesus's wedding, the opus dei and the "sang real", Da vinci's secret (no no no)
it's your choice to decide if U wanna trust that or not
it's your choice to decide if U wanna trust that or not
for those who say that it's only a fiction to make money ... it's better to see all the religions as a fiction for making power , you know churches ...
--------------
but beyond the little fiction in this book you can find out how the christian churches gain the power and stop the people from thinkin.
--------------
but beyond the little fiction in this book you can find out how the christian churches gain the power and stop the people from thinkin.
well i think peaple who read this book should be careful about the information that are given.
maybe don't believe that everything is true the way dan brown interpreted...
the book itself... but its for sure a book with a good amount of action and tension..
the books makes fun to read as other books dan brown wrote too...
but its always this way he interprete things..
maybe don't believe that everything is true the way dan brown interpreted...
the book itself... but its for sure a book with a good amount of action and tension..
the books makes fun to read as other books dan brown wrote too...
but its always this way he interprete things..
Ofinet
^^^
He pretty much said what i wanted to say about not being entirely fiction, the book itselft say that other than the actually story as where the character and whatnot revolves on their personal lifes is fiction, but everything else are studied facts, or theories; i guess you can call them that.
But that book really opened my eyes when it comes to the Roman Chatolic church, (This is my opinion and do not get pissed here, you may share yours but don't take this personal) that the church is like a big mafia. I mean there is historical evidence of the church killing people 'in the name of god' ofcourse. they burned and hanged women and called them witched, and they killied non believers.
Where does hypocresy stop, when they say that they do thing in the name of god, yet cloning comes and they say that we can't play god. i mean i know it isnt excatly the same but it revolves in the same ballpark.
just me.
^^^
He pretty much said what i wanted to say about not being entirely fiction, the book itselft say that other than the actually story as where the character and whatnot revolves on their personal lifes is fiction, but everything else are studied facts, or theories; i guess you can call them that.
But that book really opened my eyes when it comes to the Roman Chatolic church, (This is my opinion and do not get pissed here, you may share yours but don't take this personal) that the church is like a big mafia. I mean there is historical evidence of the church killing people 'in the name of god' ofcourse. they burned and hanged women and called them witched, and they killied non believers.
Where does hypocresy stop, when they say that they do thing in the name of god, yet cloning comes and they say that we can't play god. i mean i know it isnt excatly the same but it revolves in the same ballpark.
just me.
| patrick9480 wrote: |
| I am not going to post a new topic on this particular discussion until I have read or watched the 'Da Vinci Code'. It would seem uneducated to a struggling Christian like myself |
da vinci code is only a movie, fiction.
Dun let it affect ur faith!!!
| todabeat wrote: |
| Ofinet
^^^ He pretty much said what i wanted to say about not being entirely fiction, the book itselft say that other than the actually story as where the character and whatnot revolves on their personal lifes is fiction, but everything else are studied facts, or theories; i guess you can call them that. But that book really opened my eyes when it comes to the Roman Chatolic church, (This is my opinion and do not get pissed here, you may share yours but don't take this personal) that the church is like a big mafia. I mean there is historical evidence of the church killing people 'in the name of god' ofcourse. they burned and hanged women and called them witched, and they killied non believers. Where does hypocresy stop, when they say that they do thing in the name of god, yet cloning comes and they say that we can't play god. i mean i know it isnt excatly the same but it revolves in the same ballpark. just me. |
any good writer will blend fact with fiction by using current events, controversial subjects, historical figures, etc., the trick is to look at the body of the work as being fiction. It is good that this book has raised questions for you, I say this because if you have questions it shows the book made you think (not that weren't thinking before...you know what I mean). It raised many questions with me as well, but I have to temper my questions as I don't know exactly where the fact stops and the fiction begins. You are correct about the Catholic Church having a bad past, but many religions have things in thier past they are not particularly proud of. Keep in mind that when alot of the things you mentioned were being done by the Church, times were much simplier, and the general population was not as well educated as the majority of the populace is today. Many could not read or write, and most people were overtly superstious (spelling?). I am not condoning the past actions of the Church, simply trying to put things into perspective reletive to the time they happened.
Doing God's work and playing God are two vastly different things and IMHO can't really be compared to one another.
The Bible already knew beforehand that this type of stories will come out and as written:
2 Timothy 4
3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
So, it is really expected. We have the gospel of Judas, Da Vinci Code, Bible codes, Omega codes, and what have you? How many more will come out?
The Bible is the only source of truth.
2 Timothy 4
3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
So, it is really expected. We have the gospel of Judas, Da Vinci Code, Bible codes, Omega codes, and what have you? How many more will come out?
The Bible is the only source of truth.
| altec wrote: |
| The Bible already knew beforehand that this type of stories will come out and as written:
2 Timothy 4 3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. So, it is really expected. We have the gospel of Judas, Da Vinci Code, Bible codes, Omega codes, and what have you? How many more will come out? The Bible is the only source of truth. |
as long as there are people who seek entertainment, and in some cases controversy, this type of book will always sell. The success of the subject matter is readily apparent right here in these forums, we have multiple topics and threads with people of all faiths and belief structures talking about the same thing...this one book. Seems the marketing strategy of this particular subject is working very well indeed. It matters not if you believe what's in the book, we are still spreading the word of it's (the book itself) existence.
Did I ever bash the book? NO. Do I plan to? NO. It's a good book, but it's NOT FACT. Part fact doesn't really count. I mean, the most outrageous and seemingly pure fiction movies are based on fact, based on something. The Davinci Code does nothing to Christianity, and in my opinion, is the clever work of a man who knows how to get a book to sell. And he "based" his book on findings... but how much did he base it on? I highly doubt he took the stuff they found and just used it.
But whatever, only my opinion.
But whatever, only my opinion.
[Below is a spoiler. Quote or copy the text to read it.]
I think it's interesting that the Opus Dei are getting so het up about it... the book does portray them as shadowy and evil... INITIALLY. By the end of the book though, it clears them completely, and makes them out to be pretty much innocent of the things it first attributes to them.
[/spoiler]
By disputing it so harshly and speaking out so much, the church are making more and more people interested in read/seeing the Da Vinci Code. Not smart. Best just to ignore it completely, and if anyone asks, wave a hand and say it's a fun piece of fiction.
I have to say though, I'm not a real fan of Dan Brown. A great imagination when it comes to conspiracy theories, but it lets him down in actual writing - his characters are thin an often painfully stereotyped, and he has an unhealthy addiction to cliffhangers. Forces them in at the end of every chapter, whether or not they will fit.
I quite enjoyed the Da Vinci Code, but after reading Demons and Angels as well... his writing style really does start to wear thin. I won't be reading any more.
Last edited by Subsonic Sound on Thu May 11, 2006 3:34 am; edited 1 time in total
I think it's interesting that the Opus Dei are getting so het up about it... the book does portray them as shadowy and evil... INITIALLY. By the end of the book though, it clears them completely, and makes them out to be pretty much innocent of the things it first attributes to them.
[/spoiler]
By disputing it so harshly and speaking out so much, the church are making more and more people interested in read/seeing the Da Vinci Code. Not smart. Best just to ignore it completely, and if anyone asks, wave a hand and say it's a fun piece of fiction.
I have to say though, I'm not a real fan of Dan Brown. A great imagination when it comes to conspiracy theories, but it lets him down in actual writing - his characters are thin an often painfully stereotyped, and he has an unhealthy addiction to cliffhangers. Forces them in at the end of every chapter, whether or not they will fit.
I quite enjoyed the Da Vinci Code, but after reading Demons and Angels as well... his writing style really does start to wear thin. I won't be reading any more.
Last edited by Subsonic Sound on Thu May 11, 2006 3:34 am; edited 1 time in total
@Subsonic Sound
Outstanding!! If your going to post a spoiler that's the way to do it!! I hate it when people ruin a book/movie for me with a spoiler.
Very Cool
Outstanding!! If your going to post a spoiler that's the way to do it!! I hate it when people ruin a book/movie for me with a spoiler.
Very Cool
| altec wrote: |
| The Bible already knew beforehand that this type of stories will come out and as written:
2 Timothy 4 3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. |
The way i see the bible is like any type of literature today, it was written by man. There is nothing mystic about it. I am not trying to say that the bible isn't holy or whatever. But it's just a good writing as can any other human write fiction or non-fiction. Take Buddha for example. His teachings help people become better just like the bible.
for those who don't venture into the Literature forum all that much, I have posted a list of books relating to this topic in my thread there.
i reckon its overrated really. people get way too into it.
The Book was written in the typical who-done-it style with a theme almost everyone can relate to - either hating ti for blasphemy, or loving it for the reaction the haters give it. I personally enjoyed the book, but I was hoping the ending would have been a bit more climactic. The whole religious aspect of the book was meant to provide a backdrop for the scenario, not the other way around. Remember Indiana Jones? Those movies always had a religious theme. Discovering the Ark, Unearthing a temple, and then finding the Holy Grail. I wonder if people were just as upset over those as they are with the Da Vinci Code?
I always remeber this: If someone gets upset about a lie, how much of a lie is it really? If the book said God was a pickle, people would dismiss it because of the obvious nature of how wrong it must be. Now that it is discussing the potential difference between the Bible, its doctrine, and a new theory, well if it wasn't close to the truth (even remotely) no God-fearing person would care.
Kinda makes you wonder why this supposed "fiction" is upsetting so many devout followers of Christianity?...
I always remeber this: If someone gets upset about a lie, how much of a lie is it really? If the book said God was a pickle, people would dismiss it because of the obvious nature of how wrong it must be. Now that it is discussing the potential difference between the Bible, its doctrine, and a new theory, well if it wasn't close to the truth (even remotely) no God-fearing person would care.
Kinda makes you wonder why this supposed "fiction" is upsetting so many devout followers of Christianity?...
| Darkwind wrote: |
| The Book was written in the typical who-done-it style with a theme almost everyone can relate to - either hating ti for blasphemy, or loving it for the reaction the haters give it. I personally enjoyed the book, but I was hoping the ending would have been a bit more climactic. The whole religious aspect of the book was meant to provide a backdrop for the scenario, not the other way around. Remember Indiana Jones? Those movies always had a religious theme. Discovering the Ark, Unearthing a temple, and then finding the Holy Grail. I wonder if people were just as upset over those as they are with the Da Vinci Code?
I always remeber this: If someone gets upset about a lie, how much of a lie is it really? If the book said God was a pickle, people would dismiss it because of the obvious nature of how wrong it must be. Now that it is discussing the potential difference between the Bible, its doctrine, and a new theory, well if it wasn't close to the truth (even remotely) no God-fearing person would care. Kinda makes you wonder why this supposed "fiction" is upsetting so many devout followers of Christianity?... |
sweeeet...Kudos
*yeah...this is spam*
| Quote: |
| Though it has biblical facts, it's not all true! Read the Bible if you want to know the whole truth, because it is the word of God so you can believe it! |
"Knock knock" Whong! Your very own "argument"...
| Quote: |
| Dan Brown didn't live in those days when Jesus did, so for certain he didn't know as much as the deciples! |
is speaking against this. Think carefully and don't just repeat words you don't know, experience.
Don't believe what other people say, even he is calling himself god, proof it by yourself!
| Quote: |
| The way i see the bible is like any type of literature today, it was written by man. There is nothing mystic about it. I am not trying to say that the bible isn't holy or whatever. But it's just a good writing as can any other human write fiction or non-fiction. Take Buddha for example. His teachings help people become better just like the bible. |
... amen!
It very much amuses me that the pope and church have come against a book. Just because the book says Jesus was married, why should it change anything at all? Infact, personally, it has increased my respect for Jesus. He has given life to a woman who will never have got a decent life at all.
Anyways, the church was there before Jesus and it just adopted Jesus to continue its existance. I believe in what Jesus has said and nothing more or less.
Anyways, the church was there before Jesus and it just adopted Jesus to continue its existance. I believe in what Jesus has said and nothing more or less.
I was a huge fan of the book. I cannot wait to see the movie. I am sooooo excited. YEAY!
Obviously there is a lot of contriversy over this subject, but for me it comes down to one thing. The book made people question what they had been told thus far. Vrythramax touched on this. People to often follow whatever they are told without questioning things. These are the people who are like sheep, just being herded where ever someone else guides them. I prefer to be a free thinker. Questioning what people tell me, listening to as many sides as possible and then making my own decisions. I think this book made people question things and start looking for different explainations. If they go back to what they believed before - they will be stronger for it.
| vlnjodie wrote: |
| Obviously there is a lot of contriversy over this subject, but for me it comes down to one thing. The book made people question what they had been told thus far. Vrythramax touched on this. People to often follow whatever they are told without questioning things. These are the people who are like sheep, just being herded where ever someone else guides them. I prefer to be a free thinker. Questioning what people tell me, listening to as many sides as possible and then making my own decisions. I think this book made people question things and start looking for different explainations. If they go back to what they believed before - they will be stronger for it. |
I'm just another pathetic sheep following the rest of the herd....,bahhhhhh.
Bleating as usual. Maybe the the Princess can wake me up.
I've read the book months before the movie was shown, and i've got the chance to see it last night. What's fascinating about the book is that is showed the possibility of christians like me might be believing in the wrong story. Let's face it the Church in all its history isn't a goody goody institution... they have their share of lying, killing and deceit. And it is how they reached their state right now. Just to think of it, it is like a one big business, a company...
as said, it is not impossible that Dan Brown's fiction might have happened. We don't really know. Gospels were written by people, translated and converted to the needs of the church. I like to take it more of a history book. As for me, the word of god is not the bible itself... it is the message the the bible gives. Gospel is still a human work, nobody knows what influenced the writers of the gospel during their time.
as said, it is not impossible that Dan Brown's fiction might have happened. We don't really know. Gospels were written by people, translated and converted to the needs of the church. I like to take it more of a history book. As for me, the word of god is not the bible itself... it is the message the the bible gives. Gospel is still a human work, nobody knows what influenced the writers of the gospel during their time.
The only reason the Da Vinci Code has become so controversial is because so many people think its real. If no one thought it was real than no one would care and it woundn't be controversial.
I think everyone just thinks it's completely true. It may be "based on archeological facts", but that doesn't mean it's anywhere remotely close to the truth. I think people just went into a panic mode and hysteria swept everyone up. People didn't stop to think about it, they just assumed it was true.
Its just a load of crap. Yes its plausible that Jesus and Mary were married and had kids but theres no evidence for it ether way and many of things that the books states are "facts" are not.
fictie die op werkelijkheid wordt gebaseerd, maar is de bijbel ook geen fictie?
You say that it is fiction and therefore not real and it is just an attack on Christianity which is a religion built on a book written by mortal men hundreds of years after any of it really "happened". So where is the fiction? The bible or the Da Vinci Code? At least we can prove without a doubt that DaVinci existed, the same cannot be said for Jesus Christ.
People who get worked up over a modern fiction book based around challenging an older fiction book plainly have too much free time. Look at the world around you that you can plainly see and stop looking to the heavens for mystical purpose for you life. You purpose is clear, LIVE.
Ο αδύνατος που απασχολείται θα κοιτάξει πάντα στο μυστικό για τις απαντήσεις στα πράγματα που δεν μπορούν να βρούν την άνεση.
You say that it is fiction and therefore not real and it is just an attack on Christianity which is a religion built on a book written by mortal men hundreds of years after any of it really "happened". So where is the fiction? The bible or the Da Vinci Code? At least we can prove without a doubt that DaVinci existed, the same cannot be said for Jesus Christ.
People who get worked up over a modern fiction book based around challenging an older fiction book plainly have too much free time. Look at the world around you that you can plainly see and stop looking to the heavens for mystical purpose for you life. You purpose is clear, LIVE.
Ο αδύνατος που απασχολείται θα κοιτάξει πάντα στο μυστικό για τις απαντήσεις στα πράγματα που δεν μπορούν να βρούν την άνεση.
The problem is not everybody who goes to see the movie have the same level of critical thinking. There are a great majority of people all over the world who are still in the 'middle ages' level of reality. There are still a lot of people who believe in angels demons and mythical like beings. God to them is most likely an old bearded guy looking down on us from the clouds. A movie like this can not be constructive for them. Concepts presented in the movie can irreversably derail spiritual growth. If you are one of the fortunate, and you are able to separate truth from fiction, and still make rational descisions regarding your faith, then good for you. The vatican's disapproval of the movie is not for your sake, but for the sake of other people who do not have the same level of education and 'thinking' as you.
| NemoySpruce wrote: |
| The problem is not everybody who goes to see the movie have the same level of critical thinking. There are a great majority of people all over the world who are still in the 'middle ages' level of reality. There are still a lot of people who believe in angels demons and mythical like beings. God to them is most likely an old bearded guy looking down on us from the clouds. A movie like this can not be constructive for them. Concepts presented in the movie can irreversably derail spiritual growth. If you are one of the fortunate, and you are able to separate truth from fiction, and still make rational descisions regarding your faith, then good for you. The vatican's disapproval of the movie is not for your sake, but for the sake of other people who do not have the same level of education and 'thinking' as you. |
I am impressed that someone actually responded with a very well versed and thought out response. I agree and disagree on every level. I understand exactly what you are saying, but I also know that the Vatican could better serve people by teaching them the truth or at least teaching them something that would better serve them in life. Of all religious institutions Catholicism bears the most guilt for past trangressions against those that disagreed with their way of thinking.
Instead of worrying about "less educated" people why don't we educate them. I have faith in myself and in the actions that I choose to make, I do not place my faith in the mystical or in a a fictious book (The Bible).
Religion is best suited as a way of living but should not control people's lives, it should not govern them. It should inspire them to behave in certain ways but allow the freedom for people to make choices without fear of retribution. If a individual cannot find purpose without religion it is a sign of a far greater problem.
Its a movie and those who can see movies know movies are fiction. The problem is not third world country's, its here. People who are too willing to take a book too seriously and Christan's who are too easily offended.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Its a movie and those who can see movies know movies are fiction. The problem is not third world country's, its here. People who are too willing to take a book too seriously and Christan's who are too easily offended. |
It couldn't have been said any better. Hence the reason it was so outrageous when the Vatican asked the studio to put a disclaimer on the film. How idiotic is that? Do you see a disclaimer on the beginning of Harry Potter?
Frankly speaking I dont see any reason for christians to get offended.
In the book there is a disclaimer which clearly states that it is a work of fiction.
Also only says that Jesus wasnt a son of God but a normal human being - A Noble Human Being.
However, if you are Opus Dei member, you have reason to be upset. Unlike Jesus, Opus Dei is a current entity. It currently exists. And using them in such a negative manner was not needed. Dan Brown could have used any other name.
In the book there is a disclaimer which clearly states that it is a work of fiction.
Also only says that Jesus wasnt a son of God but a normal human being - A Noble Human Being.
However, if you are Opus Dei member, you have reason to be upset. Unlike Jesus, Opus Dei is a current entity. It currently exists. And using them in such a negative manner was not needed. Dan Brown could have used any other name.
i watched the movie but i haven't read it...And i think it wasn't a great movie,but i also agree with Da Vinci because all of prophets were humans and they were only transmitters...There should be only one God...
| patrick9480 wrote: |
| I am not going to post a new topic on this particular discussion until I have read or watched the 'Da Vinci Code'. It would seem uneducated to a struggling Christian like myself |
haha go watch it brother. debate and discuss over it. but do make sure that you get your information from reliable sources.
personally, i dont believe that da vinci code is a work of truth, but rather, it is a work of fiction. i've read halfway through, and it feels to me just like any other ordinary thriller, with a bit of religious stuff thrown in, that are not accurate anyway. just to name a few, the Prior of Scion, which was inaccurately depicted as a secretive catholic sect formed to protect the identity of the "true jesus" and His "line of descendents".
if you feel that your faith is challenged, you need to seek more discipleship to strengthen your faith. good luck bro...
I think both book and movie were good. They ask very good questions and raise good discussion. As long as both sides of the discussion allow for the possibility that they could be wrong, it makes for good dialogue. Otherwise it is just an arguement or at best fence building.
Dan (Brown) told his plan was to proof that the ideas on Marie were false but he became a believer he said.
He only says that to get people to buy his book.
| selim06 wrote: |
| i watched the movie but i haven't read it...And i think it wasn't a great movie,but i also agree with Da Vinci because all of prophets were humans and they were only transmitters...There should be only one God... |
there is only 1 God
I always hate it when Christians get angry at this book. It's a book. Not a history textbook. It's also interesting to note that the vatican got more riled up about this work of fiction than the MANY, MANY pieces of "non-fiction" that discount the existence or godliness of Jesus.
BTW I am a Christian myself and am planning on watching the movie for some good entertainment. 'Cause it's a movie. That's what it's for.
BTW I am a Christian myself and am planning on watching the movie for some good entertainment. 'Cause it's a movie. That's what it's for.
| IAMED_2 wrote: |
| I always hate it when Christians get angry at this book. It's a book. Not a history textbook. It's also interesting to note that the vatican got more riled up about this work of fiction than the MANY, MANY pieces of "non-fiction" that discount the existence or godliness of Jesus.
BTW I am a Christian myself and am planning on watching the movie for some good entertainment. 'Cause it's a movie. That's what it's for. |
I hear you! There was almost hysteria in my church over it, and I just calmly tried to explain to people that it was only a fictional story, not complete truth.
| Vrythramax wrote: | ||
there is only 1 God |
OK..But is it possible to be a God's son!!!If we accept that,everybody could ask if there was a God why we can't see?If we can se his son we can see the God also!!!God has no gender and we can't think such a creature because God is the creator!!!
The thing that I find amazing about this is, if it is just fiction, why is the Catholic church going mad about it? Surely if their faith is true, then they have nothing to worry about in this work of “fiction”
What irriates me most about the Da Vinci Code is that Dan Brown made so much money on issues that have already been written about by other Authors. From what i can tell there were two versions of chistianity gostic and modern day. Gostic portrayed Jesus as a more human figure and even went into details about his childhood which the bible almost completely misses out aside for short part about him debating with the temple priests and his mother stopping him. Basically the christian brance won in the end and chose which scriptures belonged in the bible. They the banned the gostic versions and detroyed them all except a few that were hidden away. I haven't got around to reading the da vinci code but have read the bible and other books about the knights templer, dead sea scroll and the holy grail being mary magelane.
He also made seem like fact alot that is mere speculations. For Instance that Mary Magelane fleed with her child france. There is old french legend that says she fleed to southern france but it was with an egyptian child not with her own. And as for the last supper is St Peter is actually ment to be Mary that why is she leanining away from jesus and where is Peter? Also one of the disiples on the far left also looks very feminine leonard does draw feminine males look at his painting of John the Baptist.
He also made seem like fact alot that is mere speculations. For Instance that Mary Magelane fleed with her child france. There is old french legend that says she fleed to southern france but it was with an egyptian child not with her own. And as for the last supper is St Peter is actually ment to be Mary that why is she leanining away from jesus and where is Peter? Also one of the disiples on the far left also looks very feminine leonard does draw feminine males look at his painting of John the Baptist.
Yes it is a fiction written by Dan Brown to scoop money. DaVinci Code can strengthen the faith of those Roman Catholic who are curious, like me..Ü
I only just now saw this:
I know it’s been a long time in need, but I am here now throwing icy cold water on your face.
Wake up! (I liked your write-up on the first page.)
~~~~~~~~~~
The only reason!? I can’t see that. There are very likely plenty of people who do not think it’s real, but who feel that their power may become (more) threatened because of what other people think. So that is also going to fuel the fire.
~~~~~~~~~~
Everyone!? Why do you say things that even you can’t possibly believe?
~~~~~~~~~~
No evidence!? I would implore you to study more on what it means to have evidence on anything. For example, anyone who believes that something is “plausible” is already making a judgment call related to evidence. Yes, it’s true that plausible is weaker than quite likely and weaker than proven, but it is stronger (in 1 direction) than implausible and stronger than unknown. Someone who has “no evidence” will not (logically) say something is “plausible”.
~~~~~~~~~~
Why!? Doesn’t it make sense that if people didn’t find value in paying “so much”, they wouldn’t pay “so much”? If people are free to pay or not pay for something, they will only pay for something that they value. (Compare that to situations of coerced payments -- e.g., government “services” paid for by forced taxes -- where people are not free to not pay; in these cases, they will definitely be paying “so much” for things of no/little/negative value.)
Do you truly begrudge someone an income (even an excellent income) for having worked to create something that people obviously highly value? I hope you at least more strongly begrudge people when their incomes have been stolen from people (e.g., government employees, mafia bosses and gophers, and petty thieves).
You mention “issues that have already been written about”. Many people who have seen baseball games keep going to more baseball games even when it’s been played by other players. Should those players not get paid? And many people who are interested in a subject enjoy reading as much as possible on that subject, even when “it’s already been written about by other Authors”. Do you begrudge those people’s freedom of enjoyment?
Or do you expect Dan Brown to have spent his time and effort on his work for free? Do you do all your work and give value to other people -- all for free? Or do you want Dan Brown to have made some money for his work, just not as much? If so, how is it that you feel qualified to figure out how much he should make?
Out of curiosity, do you have any concept of what the free market is? If so, do you not value that? If not, I’d like to invite you to read up on it. There are many freely available sources.
| Vrythramax wrote: |
| I'm just another pathetic sheep following the rest of the herd....,bahhhhhh.
Bleating as usual. Maybe the the Princess can wake me up. |
I know it’s been a long time in need, but I am here now throwing icy cold water on your face.
Wake up! (I liked your write-up on the first page.)
~~~~~~~~~~
| picsite wrote: |
| The only reason the Da Vinci Code has become so controversial is because so many people think its real. If no one thought it was real than no one would care and it woundn't be controversial. |
The only reason!? I can’t see that. There are very likely plenty of people who do not think it’s real, but who feel that their power may become (more) threatened because of what other people think. So that is also going to fuel the fire.
~~~~~~~~~~
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I think everyone just thinks it's completely true. |
Everyone!? Why do you say things that even you can’t possibly believe?
~~~~~~~~~~
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Its just a load of crap. Yes its plausible that Jesus and Mary were married and had kids but theres no evidence for it ether way |
No evidence!? I would implore you to study more on what it means to have evidence on anything. For example, anyone who believes that something is “plausible” is already making a judgment call related to evidence. Yes, it’s true that plausible is weaker than quite likely and weaker than proven, but it is stronger (in 1 direction) than implausible and stronger than unknown. Someone who has “no evidence” will not (logically) say something is “plausible”.
~~~~~~~~~~
| Rebzie wrote: |
| What irriates me most about the Da Vinci Code is that Dan Brown made so much money on issues that have already been written about by other Authors. |
Why!? Doesn’t it make sense that if people didn’t find value in paying “so much”, they wouldn’t pay “so much”? If people are free to pay or not pay for something, they will only pay for something that they value. (Compare that to situations of coerced payments -- e.g., government “services” paid for by forced taxes -- where people are not free to not pay; in these cases, they will definitely be paying “so much” for things of no/little/negative value.)
Do you truly begrudge someone an income (even an excellent income) for having worked to create something that people obviously highly value? I hope you at least more strongly begrudge people when their incomes have been stolen from people (e.g., government employees, mafia bosses and gophers, and petty thieves).
You mention “issues that have already been written about”. Many people who have seen baseball games keep going to more baseball games even when it’s been played by other players. Should those players not get paid? And many people who are interested in a subject enjoy reading as much as possible on that subject, even when “it’s already been written about by other Authors”. Do you begrudge those people’s freedom of enjoyment?
Or do you expect Dan Brown to have spent his time and effort on his work for free? Do you do all your work and give value to other people -- all for free? Or do you want Dan Brown to have made some money for his work, just not as much? If so, how is it that you feel qualified to figure out how much he should make?
Out of curiosity, do you have any concept of what the free market is? If so, do you not value that? If not, I’d like to invite you to read up on it. There are many freely available sources.
As a Christian I think that it is fine that a movie / book like this comes out. What it does is cause nominal Christians to define their beliefs and non-Christians to evaluate what they believe. In church history it was always in times of heresy that true doctrine was established to counter the heresy. So I think as long as people are caused to think critically, then thats a good thing.
| TwinkleCarnage wrote: |
| I am slowly beginning to realize that there are a lot of people out there who are just way to brainwashed by christianity. And I hate to tell you people out there, but no one really knows what happened truly with the stories of jesus and what not, because, well, no one was there. So no one can argue whether it is right or wrong, because there is no way to prove it regardless. (and for all you bible thumpers out there, and i say that lovingly cuz my sister is one, just so you know, a lot of what is in the bible was put in well after it was written to convert people from pagan beliefs to christianity). |
I think that a lot of people attack the bible without knowing the facts about it. In terms of the acuracy of Jesus life, the accounts (not storys) were written by first account eye witnesses who wrote what they saw. An anti-Christian Roman government at the time would not have allowed them to write something that was false and get away with it. The apostles were almost all killed for what they said and wrote, and psychologists tell us that no-one dies for what he knows is false. Above this the bible is the only ancient collection of writings with so many original manuscripts still available. Shakespeare is considered acurate, yet there are many many more origianl copies of the bible than Shakespeare!
All I am saying is that you need to examine the evidence carefully before making a judgement as to somethings validity. Study the bible and why it is such a unique book, and you may be surprised!
I Hated It! No really, I HATED IT. The makers of The Da Vinci Code have been saying for some time now that their film is not supposed to be taken all that seriously. It's not history, and it's not theology, director Ron Howard has said; instead, it's just a rollicking good bit of entertainment. And leading man Tom Hanks has said it's loaded "with all sorts of hooey and fun kind of scavenger-hunt-type nonsense," calling the story "a lot of fun."
If only they had taken their own advice. Dan Brown's novel may be the product of extremely sloppy historical study, but even many of the book's critics have admitted that it is a "page-turner," an exciting yarn that carries the reader off on a semi-clever, fast-paced ride. The film, on the other hand, is a dull and plodding bore, and it takes itself far, far too seriously.
If only they had taken their own advice. Dan Brown's novel may be the product of extremely sloppy historical study, but even many of the book's critics have admitted that it is a "page-turner," an exciting yarn that carries the reader off on a semi-clever, fast-paced ride. The film, on the other hand, is a dull and plodding bore, and it takes itself far, far too seriously.
| paulbarter wrote: | ||
I think that a lot of people attack the bible without knowing the facts about it. In terms of the acuracy of Jesus life, the accounts (not storys) were written by first account eye witnesses who wrote what they saw. An anti-Christian Roman government at the time would not have allowed them to write something that was false and get away with it. The apostles were almost all killed for what they said and wrote, and psychologists tell us that no-one dies for what he knows is false. Above this the bible is the only ancient collection of writings with so many original manuscripts still available. Shakespeare is considered acurate, yet there are many many more origianl copies of the bible than Shakespeare! All I am saying is that you need to examine the evidence carefully before making a judgement as to somethings validity. Study the bible and why it is such a unique book, and you may be surprised! |
gnostics were also killed for thier faith their texts show a more human jesus peronally i think there is alot missing in the bible which is a pitty if jesus did have a child is it so bad? In a patiarcaly sociaty having a female with an important role would nopt be accepted. The bible was put together well after jesus death and part could have been easily left out. Reading the new testement it seem a bit disjointed to me with alot of gaps.
A few notes :
1. The Da Vinci Code is just a novel. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has been written to make huge money, what achieved its purpose. However, it's not a scientifical book, so nobody who claims to be a 'rational' person should not base his opinions only on a novel.
2. I definitely agree that people should not believe everything they are told. I am only shocked that there are many, who discard the Bible, the ancient documents of the Church (those written actually before the Constantine) and the work of historicians done throughout the whole history since that times, and base their whole outlook on a book that has actually no references to any historical document about the times that it is dealing about.
3. The Da Vinci Code is full of mistakes, not only theological ones (theologians have a good fun looking up for them in all of the Dan Brown books), but also historical, and even those describing the pieces of art, that are said to be accurate. When I have some time, I'll put the accurate quotes from the book and from historical documents to show what I mean.
4. There is also one thing that surprises me... If we assume that the paintings of Da Vinci really hid a very secret message in his pictures, how the hell could we implicate that it had been actually that way? Imagine you had two reports, both of them written about the same event, but one of them written in 30-70 years after it happened, and by the eye witnesses, and the other about 1500 years later. Guess which one I would prefer to trust.
5. The first manuscripts of Gospels are proved to have been written in the first century after Christ. There is also evidence that in the second century after Christ, the whole Christian community accepted the four Gospels that we know nowadays, the rest were just inaccurate, or had not been written yet (some of the gnostic gospels had been written even after the year 300). So we cannot say that the bible was put together a long time after the Jesus death, as it has been done in not more than a hundred years' time.
Get ready, I'm completing the quotes from historical documents to support my views. The next tie I'll post them here. I'm afraid that those who claim The Da Vinci Code to contain the truth, don't have such opportunity...
1. The Da Vinci Code is just a novel. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has been written to make huge money, what achieved its purpose. However, it's not a scientifical book, so nobody who claims to be a 'rational' person should not base his opinions only on a novel.
2. I definitely agree that people should not believe everything they are told. I am only shocked that there are many, who discard the Bible, the ancient documents of the Church (those written actually before the Constantine) and the work of historicians done throughout the whole history since that times, and base their whole outlook on a book that has actually no references to any historical document about the times that it is dealing about.
3. The Da Vinci Code is full of mistakes, not only theological ones (theologians have a good fun looking up for them in all of the Dan Brown books
), but also historical, and even those describing the pieces of art, that are said to be accurate. When I have some time, I'll put the accurate quotes from the book and from historical documents to show what I mean.
4. There is also one thing that surprises me... If we assume that the paintings of Da Vinci really hid a very secret message in his pictures, how the hell could we implicate that it had been actually that way? Imagine you had two reports, both of them written about the same event, but one of them written in 30-70 years after it happened, and by the eye witnesses, and the other about 1500 years later. Guess which one I would prefer to trust.
5. The first manuscripts of Gospels are proved to have been written in the first century after Christ. There is also evidence that in the second century after Christ, the whole Christian community accepted the four Gospels that we know nowadays, the rest were just inaccurate, or had not been written yet (some of the gnostic gospels had been written even after the year 300). So we cannot say that the bible was put together a long time after the Jesus death, as it has been done in not more than a hundred years' time.
Get ready, I'm completing the quotes from historical documents to support my views
. The next tie I'll post them here. I'm afraid that those who claim The Da Vinci Code to contain the truth, don't have such opportunity...The Da Vinci Code is a fictitious story based on the fact of geography! Well researched places and locations but the story is complete fiction. There may be truth in the existence of organisationd o of the Priory of Zion and Opus Dei but their true nature is not of the descripyion in the book.
I'm a Christian and I loved the book because I can differentiate between truth and a lie. Great reading but not true otherwise the louvre would have been ripped up by now!!!
I'm a Christian and I loved the book because I can differentiate between truth and a lie. Great reading but not true otherwise the louvre would have been ripped up by now!!!
I have said it before and I will say it again....authors oft times mix fact with fiction in order to make the product more sellable (??).
One cannot pick a novel which it called fiction and expect to gleen any real truths from it. If you want truth (at least from the victorious standpaoint) pick up a history book. How about The History of The Irish Race by Seumas MacManus?
I have listed a group of historical novels in the literature section, on the Holy Grail, The Knights Templar, and more. While I am not saying these books are factual, but the are not just meant for entertainmment as Mr. Brown's book was. If anyone cares to look that is.
One cannot pick a novel which it called fiction and expect to gleen any real truths from it. If you want truth (at least from the victorious standpaoint) pick up a history book. How about The History of The Irish Race by Seumas MacManus?
I have listed a group of historical novels in the literature section, on the Holy Grail, The Knights Templar, and more. While I am not saying these books are factual, but the are not just meant for entertainmment as Mr. Brown's book was. If anyone cares to look that is.
Heh, where are all of those who stated that Dan Brown is the first one who did a true research about the origins of Christianity? I have prepared well, found a lot of quotes... and all of them just disappeared . I'm not going to discuss with myself.
One thing that surprises me about Da Vinci Code is the reaction of the most of the Church. It seems that they are afraid of the probable 'danger' that this book would make to a 'good Christian' and that's why they appeal not to read it. (Some people even claim that the Church has forbidden to read or watch Da Vinci Code, but that's not true). However, it is obvious that Da Vinci Code is just a novel, so nobody who thinks logically would take this as a serious source of information. And if one had any doubts about anything written there, he could search up for historical and scientifical sources, to clear out everything. (This is not that difficult as you may think.)
So this leads to a few pessimistic conclusions:
1. It seems that there are too many people who believe in everything they hear and look for pure sensation. People are too lazy to actually find out the historical sources - otherwise the Da Vinci Code would not be such a hit at all.
2. The Church consider most of the Christians as such dull people as I wrote above, that's why They appeal to avoid Da Vinci Code.
3. That of course leads to a 'mystery' and 'sensation' about this book, and I guess this was just the author's intention. That is how our Church makes Dan Brown have even more benefits from his piece of 'art'.
. I'm not going to discuss with myself.
One thing that surprises me about Da Vinci Code is the reaction of the most of the Church. It seems that they are afraid of the probable 'danger' that this book would make to a 'good Christian' and that's why they appeal not to read it. (Some people even claim that the Church has forbidden to read or watch Da Vinci Code, but that's not true). However, it is obvious that Da Vinci Code is just a novel, so nobody who thinks logically would take this as a serious source of information. And if one had any doubts about anything written there, he could search up for historical and scientifical sources, to clear out everything. (This is not that difficult as you may think.)
So this leads to a few pessimistic conclusions:
1. It seems that there are too many people who believe in everything they hear and look for pure sensation. People are too lazy to actually find out the historical sources - otherwise the Da Vinci Code would not be such a hit at all.
2. The Church consider most of the Christians as such dull people as I wrote above, that's why They appeal to avoid Da Vinci Code.
3. That of course leads to a 'mystery' and 'sensation' about this book, and I guess this was just the author's intention. That is how our Church makes Dan Brown have even more benefits from his piece of 'art'.
here ya go, since nobody wants to look for themselves:
http://www.frihost.com/forums/vp-297475.html#297475
some other examples that pre-date Mr. Browns work.....some trash certain notions, and others glorify them....it up to you the reader to decide.
http://www.frihost.com/forums/vp-297475.html#297475
some other examples that pre-date Mr. Browns work.....some trash certain notions, and others glorify them....it up to you the reader to decide.
I thought it was an outstanding book and it really made you think. The mystery and puzzles was quite interesting and makes you wonder because you know the catholic and other churches... but esp the catholic has WAY TOO MANY secrets and coverups and payoffs and etc.
and you know women do have a life and a brain (yes I am a guy and I am married and my wife is upstairs so I am not under threat LOL) so why do they not have a more active role. One has to assume because in that time it "wasnt her place" but he did an outstanding job to promote communication, bring out the paranoid catholics in the churches and just getting people to ask questions.
asking questions is not bad... it should help strengthen your beliefs and understanding. it is not trying to disprove the religion, it is trying to understand.
I can not believe churches, bishops and etc actually banned the book and I know in Ontario they went as far as to say if you read the book you will go to hell????
whatever.
and you know women do have a life and a brain (yes I am a guy and I am married and my wife is upstairs so I am not under threat LOL) so why do they not have a more active role. One has to assume because in that time it "wasnt her place" but he did an outstanding job to promote communication, bring out the paranoid catholics in the churches and just getting people to ask questions.
asking questions is not bad... it should help strengthen your beliefs and understanding. it is not trying to disprove the religion, it is trying to understand.
I can not believe churches, bishops and etc actually banned the book and I know in Ontario they went as far as to say if you read the book you will go to hell????
whatever.
 |