by William Penwell 42 Replies latest social current
Seems like the Catholic Church does not want you to see the "Da Vinci Code". I mean if they don't want anyone to see the movie they would be better not to say anything.
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/15/cardinal.davinci.reut/index.html
Will
I just started reading the book last night. I have no expectations other than it's fiction, and I'll let it go at that.
The book is fiction. However, it has its roots deeply inbedded in fact. Once people begin to doubt that Christ Jesus, whoever he was, was the son of God....well, religion will lose even more members.
Jesus was an ordinary man. The Roman Catholic Church has hidden this fact for centuries, and murdered any opposers to their way of thinking, just as a cult would symbolically murder by shunning any one that doubted its doctrines.
It's all about control. And in the end, it all boils down to money and power....that's all.
The Da Vinci code is a fun read, and that's all. But it's a 'fun read' that could start people thinking, and thinking is dangerous to ANY organised religion.
I'd like to see the movie but think the whole conspiracy is a sham . It is historical tho , it's what some people actually believed . I don't believe that jesus married mary magdelene or that there is a blood line . I think the point of jesus ministry is that he was willing to accept anybody that believed as family . He did create the first man so therefore can be given credit for being the father of all mankind.That's why he is called ,"eternal father".
"This is a shocking and worrying cultural phenomenon that reflects, on the one hand, the ignorance of millions of people and, on the other, the voluptuous pleasure the media take in promoting products that have nothing to do with the truth," the French-born cardinal, 75, told the Paris radio station.
I think this statement is rather hypocritical coming from the Catholic Church.
Will
Once people begin to doubt that Christ Jesus, whoever he was, was the son of God....well, religion will lose even more members.Jesus was an ordinary man.
On the one hand you are uncertain as to the identity of Jesus ("whoever he was") and yet you also state with certainty that he "was an ordinary man". Which is it? And if he was an ordinary man, where is the proof of that statement?
The Roman Catholic Church has hidden this fact for centuries
The Roman Catholic Church didn't really come onto the scene until around four hundred years after the time of Jesus. What "coverup" could they possible have. It all boils down to faith, neither side can 'prove' otherwise.
The Da Vinci Code was a really enjoyable book. One area that was especially thought provoking was the discussion on early Christianity and how the Bible canon was finally agreed on. The fact that there are all sorts of writings out there from that time, some with really different descriptions of what happened, is important.
The Catholic church and the fundamentalists are all up in arms about it – and with good reason!
There is a huge amount of conjecture in the book, but some of the history is pretty dead on. Really looking forward to seeing the movie. If you read the book, try to get your hands on the illustrated version.
And, I have to say, I totally believe that's a woman sitting next to Jesus in Da Vinci's Last Supper. There is no way it looks like an effeminate young man. It's a woman for sure.
S4
The Da Vinci Code was a great murder mystery, until you reach the Leagh Teabing character's entrance into the book. Then the errors come fast & furious.
The book is fiction. However, it has its roots deeply inbedded in fact.
What roots would that be, Gill? The "fact" that Opus Dei is allegded to have monks, when it doesn't because it is a lay organization?
Perhaps, the "fact" that the Nicean Creed was signed off by 214 of 216 attending bishops (hardly a "close vote" as Brown fantasizes)?
Perhaps the "fact" that according the the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, a woman must become a man in order to attain salvation (Gospel of Thomas vs. 114)?
Or this "fact." That Constantine was a pagan? This despite the overwhelming evidence that deathbed baptisms were the norm at that time.
Perhaps the "fact" that Jesus was married. Something both Darrell Bock & John Dominc Crossan, conservative and liberal respectively, admit that there is NO evidence for!
I can go on and on in showing error after error in this book. Though it won't solve the real problem, and that is the failure of the Church to teach doctrine and its history to its parishiners.
Now, these and other "facts" were exposed in a cursory study of the book, I wonder what "facts" would be turned up with a thorough gleaning of the book?
And, I have to say, I totally believe that's a woman sitting next to Jesus in Da Vinci's Last Supper. There is no way it looks like an effeminate young man. It's a woman for sure.
SO Seeker, if that is Mary Magadalene and not John, please tell me where John is in that painting? Is he under the table? Did he leave the room for a "bathroom break?" I have a hard time believing that Leonardo would omit the Apostle John just to have Mary Magdalene in the Last Supper.
There isn't one item in the DaVinci Code that I had not heard or read before. So far, pretty much the same with the prequel Angels and Demons. But it is an interesting and fun read. There are some glaring technical errors, and the dialogue is rather hokey, but I set myself to enjoy the books as entertainment, and I was entertained.
Surprisingly a book that goes along with the DC book is Mists of Avalon, which touches Joseph of Armitrea (or whatever) living on Avalon and built the first christian church there of wattle and daub.
There is also a good explaination to a "virgin birth" in Mists. A virgin who gets with child at the rites of Beltane, Midsummer, Samhaim, or Midwinter festivals, or during other rites, are considered to have been impregnated by the god, as the woman is the goddess. Mary, a virgin girl of about 14 could well have taken part in a similar essene ritual.
