FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


The Da Vinci Code - The Questions (SPOILERS MAY ABOUND)





Vrythramax
SPOILERS MAY ABOUND IN THIS THREAD SO IF YOU HAVE NOT READ THE BOOK OR ARE CURRENTLY READING IT....YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED*

My questions are many, and I will address them all as time and participation warrent. I am most interested in anyones thoughts on the possiblity of the existance of Christ's bloodline existing to this day and his relationship with Mary Magdeline. Maybe I am thinking too much as a "modern day" man, but it seems to me that a man who died tragically in his early 30's never knew the touch of a woman a bit hard to fathom. Given the state of birth control, religious implications, and technology in Christ's day and age...it seems (to me anyway) a high probablity that one (or possibly more) child could have resulted.
todabeat
One big thing. We don't have facts, you know evidence. We have stories, myths, legends whatever you want to call them.

I was having a conversation with a couple of buddies, and some of us came to the conlcusion,

Well, first of all, we pretty much know that Women are in the position that they are becuase of the church, they have alway degraded women. I mean for example. The original sin, Eva is pretty much 'guily' of us not beinig in eden. etc.

out conclusion is that the book say that there MAY be a book of Mary M. I mean what if Jesus loved this women so much, but he knew that NO ONE would EVER listen or follow a woman, and he was just her's "Spokesman' i guess we could say. I mean this is just on way of seeing things. It's just me. But what if the real son 'daugther of God' was Mary. And Jesus could have died on the corss for her. All that she had to do was stay silent.

MAN, i really wish that time travel was possible. I would have love to know the REAL truth
Vrythramax
you are sooo right todabeat...if only we could travel back in time to answer some questions...but that also opens us up to the possiblity that maybe we will have even more questions upon our return. Religion as a whole, and in this case I speak of all religions, are essentially based on faith....that in itself means we don't really know the anwers, but believe what is being said anyway.

Any thoughts on my original question? Do you think the bloodline has survived?
todabeat
That would automaticly make me a believer that Jesus was 'Married' or had to be with Mary M.

But yes, i do believe that there has to be someone out there decendent from Jesus Christ.
The Philosopher Princess
I suggest posters specify whether they’ve read the book or not, so that others can understand their comments in context. I have read the book.
~~~~~~~~~~
It is interesting to contemplate whether Jesus had children, and if there might be some of his bloodline alive today. Certainly, there was a high mortality rate, plagues, wars, and of course there would be plots to erase the bloodline, so in one sense it would seem almost miraculous for direct descendents of Jesus to be alive. In another sense, there are direct descendents of lots of people still alive.

One big question is: What does it matter in the real world? If somebody were directly descended from Jesus and Mary Magdalene, would that be any more relevant than somebody being directly descended (or not) from the Czars of Russia, Chief Sitting Bull, Abraham Lincoln, Moses, Osama bin Laden, or Eric the Red? In many ways, the answer would be No. But.....

If one had the proof that would blackmail the Roman church, that would have serious implications, and could be a source of wealth and power, as the book implied.

If a person, or group, had such powerful information would they ever release “the truth” to the public, and thereby cook the goose that was laying the golden eggs? It would seem more wise to keep hinting just enough to keep people interested and to keep the money and power flowing.

Then again, if there were a legitimate blood heir to the empire of Christendom, maybe taking over the riches and power of the religion would be a huge temptation. There are certainly a lot of angles to consider.
Vrythramax
hmmm...much of what you said has already been proven true, the Roman Catholic Curch will not stand for any blackmail....even to the point of committing murder [themselves] (IMHO). This book *suggests* that some of the great thinkers of our time were [possibly] descendants of the Christ...would that not also suggest that this bloodline has not only survived, but may well be a bit better than ours?
maxi2k6
I haven´t read the book, but I believe that many of the so called "truths" of catolisism may have very well srpung from an error (or interpretation) of the translation.
For example, extra marital sex was not prohibited at the time jesus was born, it would have been entirely acceptable for mary to have sex with joseph before they were married. I read that the real reason Jesus was raised as a sort of "bastard" (I don't remember the exact word now) is that he was suspected of being from another father, because apparently Joseph was not in town at the time.

It's impossible to know. And I doubt it would solve anything at this time.
The Philosopher Princess
One of my questions is why in the world did Teabing come out towards the end of the book showing his true colors? I felt like he could have accomplished everything he wanted without doing that. By coming out, he ruined his chances.
silentpark
For these who see too much in Dan Browns story. There are a few books that take comment to Dan Browns "facts" and the hystorical facts...

There is one very good i think, written by Marie-France Etchegoin and Frederic Lenoir (its originally france but I am sure there is an english version too).


Dan Brown uses the possibilities of using real facts, adding information or of saying that myths or legends are true and not legend or are not clear.

An interresting example is the "Prieuré de Sion", Dan Brown says the Prieuré de Sion excist and are not fiction. Thats true.
But the Prieuré de Sion for example were founded 1956, and it is a friendly society. (kind of a club of philately).

So be carefull with information you got from "The DaVinci Code".
thpn
I've read the book also. I will try not to push religion into this one, but the book is about Catholicism and how the leaders are trying to cover-up this story. So, I will tell you know that it has been said in Dan Brown's interview that the man said himself that the book was a novel and was not meant to be true. People, not knowing this fact, have started these large bombardments on the Catholic church about them hiding the truth from us and the top educational channels such as National Geographic and Discovery are running shows about how the book is based on fact. There is a book titled "Divinci Deception" that explains this and he goes through all the clues in the story of "The Davinci Code" just as the people on Discovery do and proves that what Brown says in his book is fiction and is only meant to be as a 'what if' story. On the very cover of his book itit says a novel.
Vrythramax
silentpark wrote:
for these who see too much in dan browns story, there are a few books that take comment to dan browns "facts" and the hystorical facts...

there is one very good i think, written by Marie-France Etchegoin and Frederic Lenoir (its originally france but i am sure there is an english version too)


dan brown uses the possibilities of using real facts, adds information or says that myths or legend are true and not legend or not clear.

An interresting example is the "Prieuré de Sion", dan brown says the Prieuré de Sion excist and are not fiction. Thats true.
But the Prieuré de Sion for example were founded 1956, and it is a friendly society. (kind of an club of philately).

so be carefull with information you got from "The da vinci code".

if you have more questions feel free to ask.. i'll try to say something to it Smile


ok...can you spell correctly?... I will argue with you on this topic....and I also think the church is off base. PM me.
The Philosopher Princess
thpn, you make good points. I’m sure you also realize that, though novels are not non-fiction, that does not mean that there aren’t necessarily some particularly interesting factual bases hidden within.

I once knew a journalist who had deep, dark, and dirty scoops on the corruption of a number of local politicians. While this reporter published some of these facts and helped to ruin a few political careers of some of the worst, there were many facts known that (1) needed more corroborating evidence to put into print, and/or (2) if published, could have hurt a number of innocent people. This reporter, who had learned of some horrible things that most people never learn, discussed with me their plan to set these factual things into a political novel.

The plan included purposes of exposing how behind-the-scenes very dirty politics “works” (actually, works against the constituents). Facts being told within a fictional setting wouldn’t be used as evidence in a court of justice, but can nevertheless teach real-life lessons.

I doubt you’d disagree with anything I’m saying. And we surely would also agree that anything asserted as true needs to be properly substantiated, whether the “truism” was originally in fiction or non-fiction.

I’m reminded of Primary Colors, which has amazing parallels to real-life people Hill & Billary Clinton (I changed the names to disguise the guilty parties)(Liar ).

By the way, the other book and shows that you mention sound fascinating too.
tidruG
thpn wrote:
I've read the book also. I will try not to push religion into this one, but the book is about Catholicism and how the leaders are trying to cover-up this story. So, I will tell you know that it has been said in Dan Brown's interview that the man said himself that the book was a novel and was not meant to be true. People, not knowing this fact, have started these large bombardments on the Catholic church about them hiding the truth from us and the top educational channels such as National Geographic and Discovery are running shows about how the book is based on fact. There is a book titled "Divinci Deception" that explains this and he goes through all the clues in the story of "The Davinci Code" just as the people on Discovery do and proves that what Brown says in his book is fiction and is only meant to be as a 'what if' story. On the very cover of his book itit says a novel.

Just having a sentence on the book's cover stating that it is wa work of fiction need not necessarily make it so. It could be a marketing ploy. The movie is set to release in India (or has probably released yesterday, unless I'm mistaken), but there were many protests from the Catholic community here who wanted the film to be banned, while film critics and other artists argues that this was a curb on freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

To solve matters diplomatically, the Catholic assocation and the Indian Censor Board reached an agreemend to release the movie, albeit with a statutory warning stating that the movie (and the book) are purely fictional. However, this probably was not conveyed to Dan Brown, and he probably either doesn't know that this is happening or there's nothing much that he can do about it. Consequentially, what he's written could be something he believes is the truth, and he's being forced to "admit" it's fiction. Also, you can imagine how many people among the upper echelons of power in the church would be angered by this, and how many firm, devout and fanatic Catholics would be angered by the book, possibly up to the point where someone would try to kill Mr.Brown. If I was in his shoes, I'd run a publicity campaign to tell everyone that the book is fictional.
Indyan
I mean if anyone believes what he reads in book which loudly screams *fiction* then he is a fool.
And also I dont agree with the decision of I&B Ministry. There was absolutely no need to review the film once it was passed by the censor board. Its setting a bad precedence.
Also the film hasnt been released yet. Sony already has a disclaimer. And it has refused to modify it and add a line that the christian organisations wanted ( I agree with sony's stand).
Mamsaac
when I read the DaVinci Code a few years ago, I must say I wasn't confused, but I did want some answers about it, so I bought a few related books on it. After reading possibly 7-8 books on the subject (some for and some against the book), I can say I don't believe in anything this book says.

While there was a small influence from paganism on catholicism, gnosticism (the davinci code is based in gnosticism) has exagerated that influence by saying that egyptian influence in christianism is almost absolute. Plus, the book states many myths and base lacking information as facts, which makes it a real problem.

For example, they mention that "millions of people died during the inquisition". I agree, inquisition is one of the biggest mistakes from the Church, but it wasn't million of people, but only a few thousand, and most of it weren't killed by the church, but by goverments and others by wars unrelated to religion (I believe there was an important war in germany or close to it, I don't really remember well that information). The church is supossed to have killed between 40-70 thousand people during the inquisition and we're talking about over a hundred years... which is still not nice, but prooves how the DaVinci Code lacks of trustworthy information.

Also, this novel takes information from other 2 books (mainly, it takes information from more books). From this 2 books, one is completely fictional and the other lacks of fundaments too. The list of "leaders" of the priorate of sion (sorry for grammar over here, I read the book in spanish) was made a few hundred years ago by a man. He confessed to have made that list fake, the person who helped him to make the list (the one that includes isaac newton and other intelligent folks) confessed too. They weren't interrogated by the church but by the goverment, after making a fraud to some rich people. In other words, all this information has no fundaments either.

I could keep going for hours, but I think that you don't want to read 100000 paragraphs on the subject.
todabeat
To what Mamsac said here on that it was the goverment that killed all of those people. Well wasn't the church goverment at that time? It's really a question. I am not a HUGE history person. (gettin there)
simpleHalakhah
Mamsaac wrote:
The church is supossed to have killed between 40-70 thousand people during the inquisition and we're talking about over a hundred years... which is still not nice, but prooves how the DaVinci Code lacks of trustworthy information.


The Inquisition started with the Albegensian Crusade to destroy Provence and Laungedoc; it lasted hundreds of years.
The Philosopher Princess
Indyan wrote:
I mean if anyone believes what he reads in book which loudly screams *fiction* then he is a fool.

I would say that anyone who believes that nothing that they read in books of fiction is true (whether they are loudly screaming or softly whispering) is a fool. Smile As always, verification of truth or falsity needs attention.
~~~~~~~~~~
thpn wrote:
the top educational channels such as National Geographic and Discovery are running shows about how the book is based on fact. There is a book titled "Divinci Deception" that explains this and he goes through all the clues in the story of "The Davinci Code" just as the people on Discovery do and proves that what Brown says in his book is fiction and is only meant to be as a 'what if' story.

I had the lucky chance (week before last) to see the Discovery Channel show you mentioned. It was very amusing to me how the narrator’s voice changed drastically from seriously foreboding to sarcastically dismissive when it switched from how the book’s components might be true to how they cannot be true. In other words, the show’s producers seemed to be saying that, after all of “this” evidence presented, none of it is true.

Not only am I very suspicious of their findings, especially given the nonobjective voice usage of the narrator, but they included very little in support of the components not being true. It was like the show’s first “half” supporting “the truth” took 9/10 of the show, while the second “half” against “the truth” took 1/10 of the show.
~~~~~~~~~~
Mamsaac wrote:
While there was a small influence from paganism on catholicism

I would recommend that you read up on lots more history of this subject. There was actually a very substantial influence of Paganism on Catholicism. In fact, Catholicism had a very purposeful goal of incorporating much of what was Pagan so as to grow their own religion (Catholicism) to being as large as possible.

In your research, you can start with the “regular” holidays that Catholics (and Protestants) observe; find out how they correspond to the original Pagan holidays. If you want to know the truth, don’t limit your research to what The Church tells you and wants you to believe. Smile
robdoar
[EDITED-IN NOTE from The Philosopher Princess: I added the quote tags. This text appears at http://forums.backpage.com/showthread.php?t=9827 and maybe elsewhere. Please do not post text not written by you, unless you properly quote it and give the source. In addition, it becomes boring for readers if no original comments are given with quoted text.]

Quote:
Quite a stir has been made about the fictional book and movie The DaVinci Code. Here are some of the claims made by the movie paired with historical facts.

DaVinci Code Facts & Fiction



Claim 1 - Constantine decided what books to include in the bible during the Council of Nicea 325 A.D. the rest of the books were gathered and burned. Constantine originated the idea of the divinity of Jesus - His followers did not consider him to be God at that time

FACT: There was a council in 325 primarily to consider the heresy of Arius - who stated Jesus was not God but God's first creation - the council condemned Arias and created the Nicean creed - which did not create but confirmed the deity of Jesus - the vote was not narrow as some suppose but was by a wide margin only 2 dissenters out of 300 bishops. The cannon of scripture was not a discussion at this time. Constantine did not interfere with the council's deliberations. The books we know now were already in circulation and in general acceptance among the churches long before nicea 325 a.d. Jesus was worshipped as God from the earliest days of Christianity. Peter acknowledged him as the Christ - "Whom say ye that I am... Thou art the Christ son of the living God" Matt 16:16

Thomas called Jesus "My Lord and My God - John 20:28. There is no question that the apostles were willing to die for what they believed to be true - That Jesus was God manifested in the flesh and commissioned them to take the gospel to the world. The divinity of Jesus was not a creation of the Emperor Constantine

Claim 2.) The Gnostic bible gives us additional and more reliable information about Jesus than the bible.


FACT: Even though a few of the books we now have were disputed at the time of the council of Nicea there was no effort made to exclude other books because they challenged the authority of the church. Other books not included in the bible at that time fell out of general usage because they were recognized as unreliable. The Gnostic Gospels were among this group they were not deliberately discredited or destroyed but they saw limited circulation because they were generally recognized to be inauthentic and considered far lessauthentic than the eye witness biblical accounts. The Gnostic gospels were written over 100 years after the events - no eye witness accounts and cannot be linked to any apostles who were with Jesus or who witnessed to his ministry.


3 criteria used to evaluate text in order to be included in the bible

1.) directly connected to an apostle

2.) orthodox no contradiction to old testament doctrine

3.) it had to be generally accepted by churches in the known world not just by one group (such as the gnostics)

The books of the bible meet that criteria, the Gnostic Gospels do not.

Claim 3.) Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had a daughter. Jesus must have been married because it is unusual for a rabbi not to be married.

FACT: Those who speculate about Jesus having a relationship with Mary Magdalene usually do so referring to The Gospel of Philip a (Gnostic Gospel) This gospel refers to Mary as being Jesus' companion ( in aramaic is translated spouse). Once again this account was written over 100 years after the fact and IS NOT an eye witness account. There is no indication in the bible or in history that Jesus was ever married - there is no evidence Jesus ever had a child. Numerous examples exist of adult males remaining unmarried.

As far as Davinci is concerned - In the picture of the Last Supper - The apostle John does look effeminate but this depiction was not unusual. Many pictures of Jesus, disciples and men of that time are depicted as having long hair and fair features.

Da Vinci's own notes say the figure in painting is the apostle John not Mary

Claim 4.) Jesus intended Mary Magdalene to lead the church after his resurrection. They worked to discredit Mary to begin a long line of male domination in the church

FACTS: Dan Brown and others use the Gnostic Gospels to prove the church is sexists and chauvinistic. However within these same "gospels" from Thomas to the gospel of Mary - women are not viewed in a positive light either these are the text he uses to say the church has suppressed the role of women. however 100 years ago pentacostles ordained women as ministers before women were even allowed to vote. The idea of Mary Magdalene being a prostitute began with the tradition in the 3rd and 4th Centuries that she was the "sinful woman" of Luke 7 and the woman taken in Adultery in John 7. Pope Gregory 1 mentioned this in a sermon in 589A.D. this was not a conserted effort to reduce her importance.

Claim 5.) The church covered up information about Jesus, Mary and their daughter and made a concerted effort to repress women through an organization called Opus Dei - .

FACT: Catholic organization Opus Dei - began in 1928 - by a spanish preist - members prodominately lay people. No proof whatsoever that the church has ever tried to supress women and keep them from obtaining their rightful place in Christ

Claim 6.) An ancient order called the Priory of Sion The knights Templar was founded in 1099 to protect the secret bloodline of Jesus and Mary Magdalene

FACTS - Priory of Sion - the name given to a club by a frenchman, Pierre Plantard, who started the club in the 1950s NOT 1099! sometime afterward he forged several documents and placed them int he french library - later people researching grail theories found the documents and accepted them as authentic and gave credibility to the claim that it was an old and secret organization. Plantard had done time in jail for fraud and embezzlement later testified under oath that the whole concept of the Priory of Sion was a hoax and a product of his own vivid imagination - inspite of his confession the deception lives on and has become a focal point of consipiracy and intrigue.

The claims of the DaVinci Code are fiction - there is NO evidence to support the claims made.
Related topics
De da vinci code
Dan brown
Don Brown - The Da Vinci Code FOR and AGAINST
The Da Vinci Code
Da Vinci Code
The Da vinci code
Da Vinci Code
Da Vinci Code
question about da vinci code (spoiler)
Da-vinci Code finally Released in India
First Rumblings Of A 'Da Vinci Code' Disappointment
De Da Vinci Code ('t boek)
The Da Vinci Code on DVD
Da Vinci Code
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Sports and Entertainment -> Literature

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.