The Da Vinci Code

[Salv]

Really, the vicar in my home town won't leave my parents alone about me ... At least that was the case about 5 years ago. Apparently i'm already "burning in the fires of the Pit that is Bottomless".

I sympathise bk - I used to live next door to a born-again Christian who once told my wife, in all seriousness, that after speaking to me for just a few minutes he knew I could never be saved and that I was on the road to eternal damnation. Her reaction to this was a snort of disgust, and a withering stare that sent him scuttling back into his house. One more reason for making me glad I married her.

It is not the faith of Chrisitians they are worried about it is the perception of the religion by people who have no idea about it.
Fortunately this is a small tempest but the fact is that if some other religion were attacked you would have gotten this:

Regards,

J

Then I'm surprised that the opinion of non-believers is taken so seriously by the church.

Has "Christianity" been attacked though? The point of DVC is that one branch of the Christian faith covered up certain aspects of the life of Christ. This coverup was brutal, but the Catholic Church is fully capable of brutality when it deems it necessary - the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades spring immediately to mind. DVC is definitely not saying that Christ never existed, just that he was more human than previously thought. I've read far more insulting fiction about Christ than DVC, which caused little if any upset - Michael Moorcocks Behold The Man replaces a slow-witted and distinctly unholy Jesus Christ with a time taveller who sacrifices himself on the cross so that the Catholic church would still be founded.

Ultimately - what would be so terrible about Christ having a sexual relationship with Mary anyway?

 

[Feraud]

It is just fashionable now to attack any type of Chrisitianity.
If they tried to make a film showing Mohamed as a polygamous, pedophile who married a man then you would REALLY see protests. If a cartoon caused death threats then what would a movie do?[huh]

Regards,

J

Exactly. This answered my next question.
If society forces us to be politically correct, then why is Catholic bashing acceptable? Whether or not you like the book, film, or Catholics, one cannot sensibly argue the popularity of Brown's work is based on anything other than a conspiracy. A conspiracy which at it's logical conclusion posits the overturning many of years of dogma. Whether or not you agree with the dogma is irrelevent. The point is many people respect this dogma and shouldn't we treat Catholicism with the same kid gloves we do all other religions?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

But can one question dogma without being insulting? Yes. This is done all the time. That is, dogma within all religions. Otherwise, theology would not be the massive field that it is.

Is it correct to question dogma? I believe it's essential. But that's because i don't really believe in Absolute Truth.

Is the Pope infallible? I think not, but you can't be Catholic and agree with me. By its very nature, Catholic dogma is unchallengable, because it is put forth as Truth by the Pope. And the Pope is unquestionable. Herein lies the problem with discussing this topic.

The DVC could be construed as theology, i suppose (again ... very generous).

bk

 

[Salv]

Of course we know the answer is NO. It is just fashionable now to attack any type of Chrisitianity.
If they tried to make a film showing Mohamed as a polygamous, pedophile who married a man then you would REALLY see protests. If a cartoon caused death threats then what would a movie do?[huh]

Regards,

J

I missed this earlier, and it's a bit of a straw-man argument. DVC doesn't posit Christ as a "polygamous, pedophile who married a man" so why compare the reactions of Christians and Moslems in this way?

 

[jamespowers]

Then I'm surprised that the opinion of non-believers is taken so seriously by the church.?

The Church found out long ago that if you ignore non believers, you end up as entertainment in a Colisseum. They also learned from Germany. We know better now.

Has "Christianity" been attacked though? The point of DVC is that one branch of the Christian faith covered up certain aspects of the life of Christ. This coverup was brutal, but the Catholic Church is fully capable of brutality when it deems it necessary - the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades spring immediately to mind. DVC is definitely not saying that Christ never existed, just that he was more human than previously thought. I've read far more insulting fiction about Christ than DVC, which caused little if any upset - Michael Moorcocks Behold The Man replaces a slow-witted and distinctly unholy Jesus Christ with a time taveller who sacrifices himself on the cross so that the Catholic church would still be founded.

Has it been attacked? Where have you been that last thirty years? Under a rock? You mention a book that attacks God to a religion. Let's see, yes, that is an attack.
I really have to laugh at people who say this is not big deal and that if I understand their logic; those who have been critical of ‘The Da Vinci Code,’ and have asked for a disclaimer are worried about nothing but machete-wielding Muslims want to chop people’s heads off for publishing a non-obscene cartoon of Muhammad got the cartoon withdrawn and obtained an apology are free from criticism. Christianity under attack? I think so when others are given a pass for much worse.
The Inquisition is history but we are still held accountable for it while muslims run around threatening to bomb kill and maim if they are criticized. Can you say double standard?

Ultimately - what would be so terrible about Christ having a sexual relationship with Mary anyway?

Ultimately if I said you cheated on your wife and it wasn't true, would it be so terrible?:eusa_doh:

Regards to all,

J

 

[jamespowers]

I missed this earlier, and it's a bit of a straw-man argument. DVC doesn't posit Christ as a "polygamous, pedophile who married a man" so why compare the reactions of Christians and Moslems in this way?

Their reaction would be the same either way. So we can say that they would respond less fervently if you told them that Mohammed was just a man and nothing more? He was just another human who hoodwinked the public into believing in him? The reaction would be just as swift and much more threatening than asking for a measly disclaimer.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Feraud]

The DVC could be construed as theology, i suppose (again ... very generous).

bk

Probably very generous to assume that.

I am not against questioning dogma for intellectual purposes. That is another discussion which would definitely exclude the DaVinci Code material!

Brown's book & film are not about historical truths or suppressed truths regarding Christianity.
The work is a fictional conspiracy theory at the expense of a "safe" religion to critique.

Would we argue the potential intellectual benefits of a movie that presupposed the WWII Holocaust never happened? I seriously doubt it. We would all attack the blatant ignorance of the filmmakers. Now back to my original query, would Tom Hanks or Ron Howard be involved in such a project?...Hell no! That is my only point.

 

[jamespowers]

But can one question dogma without being insulting? Yes. This is done all the time. That is, dogma within all religions. Otherwise, theology would not be the massive field that it is.

Question Muslim dogma in a muslim country and see what happens to you.
Dogma is as it is. Believe it or not. [huh]

Regards to all,

J

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Anyone else got some reviews?

bk

 

[Feraud]

Forget DaVinci! Who is psyched to see X-Men III?
Do we need another thread for this...[huh]

 

[scotrace]

Easy to see why

it's a bestseller and had a big opening weekend.

Any other reviews?

 

[Salv]

The Church found out long ago that if you ignore non believers, you end up as entertainment in a Colisseum. They also learned from Germany. We know better now.

The Church also found out long ago that if you kill non-believers that's one less non-believer to worry about. Sounds pretty much what you believe Moslems to be doing nowadays.

Has it been attacked? Where have you been that last thirty years? Under a rock? You mention a book that attacks God to a religion. Let's see, yes, that is an attack.

In what way does it attack God? It puts forward the claim that Christ had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. How is that an attack? Is it because Catholics do not want the son of their deity, or should I say their deity in human form, to be thought of as in any way human? You're going to have to clarify your statements here and explain exactly how God is being attacked, because despite my Catholic upbringing (Mass twice a week until I decided I was in fact a non-believer, Catholic secondary school and taught by priests) I can't see how the book does that.

...but machete-wielding Muslims want to chop people’s heads off for publishing a non-obscene cartoon of Muhammad got the cartoon withdrawn and obtained an apology are free from criticism.

We obviously consume different news media if you think there was no criticism of the fanatics who threatened the newspaper publishers.

The Inquisition is history but we are still held accountable for it while muslims run around threatening to bomb kill and maim if they are criticized. Can you say double standard?

Can you say straw-man? What does one position have to do with the other?

Ultimately if I said you cheated on your wife and it wasn't true, would it be so terrible?:eusa_doh:

Your position depends on whether (a) Christ actually existed; and (b) whether he had a sexual relationship with Mary. I'll assume for the sake of argument that (a) is true, but you're going to have to prove that (b) is false.
Ultimately - why would I or my wife be worried about fiction?

Their reaction would be the same either way. So we can say that they would respond less fervently if you told them that Mohammed was just a man and nothing more? He was just another human who hoodwinked the public into believing in him? The reaction would be just as swift and much more threatening than asking for a measly disclaimer.

And, again, DVC is not making those claims about Christ.

 

[Feraud]

The semantic arguements of what constitutes an "attack on God" are truly pointless. Shouldn't we be able to recognize If someone tells you something offends them, then it does? It is an offense no matter how much intellectual doubletalk you can muster! I am not saying their taking offense is right, but it is there.

This constant dissection of words is totally reinforcing my perception that Catholic bashing is o.k. as long as it is cloaked in the guise of intellectual debate. This is not an intellectual or historical event, it is a work of fiction.

Let us allow Dan Brown to reap the fruits of his historical discourse. Me, I am going to utilize the historically sounds DaVinci diet, while doing the DaVinci shuffle. lol

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Forget DaVinci! Who is psyched to see X-Men III?

Me, i can't wait for MI3. Look great

bk

 

[Miss Neecerie]

This is not an intellectual or historical event, it is a work of fiction.

This is the most important Quote of this entire debate.

It's fiction, if you don't like what it says or what you beleive it says, there is nothing forcing you to read, go see..etc.

I understand that some people beleive in fictional tales as if they were factual, but that is not the author's fault.

 

[scotrace]

Me, i can't wait for MI3. Look great

bk

Glenn or Glenda - now there's a flick. :whistling

It's Valentino week on TCM. Djoo know them mewvies was silent?

 

[jamespowers]

The Church also found out long ago that if you kill non-believers that's one less non-believer to worry about. Sounds pretty much what you believe Moslems to be doing nowadays.

Sure and how many beheadings has the Church been at the head of lately? Sounds like excuse making to me. It always starts because some did something 400 years ago, someone today can do it. There was no excuse then and there is no excuse now.

In what way does it attack God? It puts forward the claim that Christ had a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene. How is that an attack? Is it because Catholics do not want the son of their deity, or should I say their deity in human form, to be thought of as in any way human? You're going to have to clarify your statements here and explain exactly how God is being attacked, because despite my Catholic upbringing (Mass twice a week until I decided I was in fact a non-believer, Catholic secondary school and taught by priests) I can't see how the book does that..

I can see you went to Catholic school to eat your lunch if you can't see the attacks. How many do you need? I will give you five:
1. Jesus and Mary Magdalene were man and wife.
2. The New Testament is false testimony.
3. There were 80 gospel accounts of Christ's life.
4. The Roman emperor Constantine gave us the New Testament.
5. The divinity of Jesus is an invention of fourth-century church leaders at the Council of Nicea.

We obviously consume different news media if you think there was no criticism of the fanatics who threatened the newspaper publishers..

Fanatics where have you been? They call them "freedom fighters" and "insurgents" not fanatics and terrorists. They cloak them in silly terms that make their crimes less reprehensible than they were. They censured the people jumping out of the Twin Towers, they won't show how Mr. Perl's life ended, geez, they even give them interviews like rock stars.

Can you say straw-man? What does one position have to do with the other?..

History is history. Taht is my point. You can't run from one and embrace the other. Can you say misdirection?

Your position depends on whether (a) Christ actually existed; and (b) whether he had a sexual relationship with Mary. I'll assume for the sake of argument that (a) is true, but you're going to have to prove that (b) is false.
Ultimately - why would I or my wife be worried about fiction??..

The onus of proof is upon the fiction writer not me. He is attacking that which is pre-existing. What you believe is what you believe I could care less about that. Believe what you want.

And, again, DVC is not making those claims about Christ.

You brought up this not me in your response. I am merely answering your Muslim concerns and how they compare with the reaction of Christians.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Salv]

The semantic arguements of what constitutes an "attack on God" are truly pointless. Shouldn't we be able to recognize If someone tells you something offends them, then it does? It is an offense no matter how much intellectual doubletalk you can muster! I am not saying their taking offense is right, but it is there.

This constant dissection of words is totally reinforcing my perception that Catholic bashing is o.k. as long as it is cloaked in the guise of intellectual debate. This is not an intellectual or historical event, it is a work of fiction.

It seems that this particular discussion revolves around whether God and the Catholic church are one and the same thing. If DVC is less than respectful towards the Catholic church this is taken as a direct assualt on God. But since the Jewish faith, the Islamic faith and the various non-Catholic Christian faiths all believe in the same God, but just worship him in different ways, then clearly they are not the same thing. What I'm trying to understand is why a book that challenges Catholic dogma is seen as an attack on the subject of that dogma.

Personally I'm offended by huge billboards outside churches that put forward Christian propaganda, but I'd never dream of trying to stop the churches from advertising in this way.

You brought up this not me in your response. I am merely answering your Muslim concerns and how they compare with the reaction of Christians.

We're never going to agree on the other stuff, but it was you that brought up the subject of Muslims and their reactions, not me.

 

[jamespowers]

We're never going to agree on the other stuff, but it was you that brought up the subject of Muslims and their reactions, not me.

We surely can agree to disagree.
The reaction was a response to your position that people were going way over the edge about a movie. In comparision, this is not way out on the edge is the point. :deadhorse

Regards to all,

J

 

[Jack Scorpion]

Seeing X3 at midnight of.