The Da Vinci Code

Actually, it's just a pathetic piece of literature created to disillusion followers.

 

Well i tell you what, how about you come back and say that when you've read it yourself?

 

I found it to be a good bit of God's plan. Entertaining, parts of it were enlightening (not literally, but they had special meaning for me), and as a whole, just a good book. Moron troll's are also part of God's plan, and I find them every bit as entertaining as a good book. Thanks...

 

I think I might have gotten my Threads Crossed (?) but I suppose I meant to post this here:

Theres nothing wrong with reading a ficticious novel which runs fast and loose with the 'facts' it 'bases' itself on.

I have a little bit of a problem where (parts) of the story 'pretend' to be based on real locations and events when they are not.

Now.. it IS a Fictional Novel and the Author is not claiming anything a character says is actually 'Real'.
I guess it just worries me that simple-minded or confused people actually think there is real historical information in these 'made-up' conversations and statements.

i.e. A Character (named 'Teabing' I think) is portrayed as having expertise in Historical Christianity, saying (made up by Dan Brown):

“…The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven…The Bible is the product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.”

Some people (Like Amanda?) will mistakenly believe they are reading and actual 'Historical' view, or this is based on actual 'Research'.

-In reality, the comment by the character is something no serious researcher would ever make.
-In real life - there are so many problems with that comment that its not even good enough for a workable discussion.
-If Teabing was a 'Real' person trying to get into a comparitive religion course - he would be failed because of his obvious ignorance.

See the difference?

So ya.. its fun to imagine these were real people making statements based on some interesting alternate reality.. great.. but people should know its not real life too.

Here are some NON-Fiction resources on the Holy Grail Stories and Davinci Codemania:
Unreal Societies
http://www.alpheus.org/html/article...ichardson1.html
Amateur Theology
http://answers.org/issues/davincicode.html
Group Discussion on factual errors
http://www.lisashea.com/hobbies/art/davincicode.html

 

I'm not even going to bother.. if you can't see that the bible is the work of man (many diffrent men in fact), then there is no chance of reaching you... You're so stuck up your own ass with your view of the world, you're totally unprepared to accept that you're wrong.

I give up...

 

To be perfectly honest - I am convinced you are bluffing your way through this whole topic.
I dont believe you even know the 'basics' of the Bible or even how it was written, by who and how it comes to us.
[better google as fast as you can now Amanda]

This was pointed out by another member after you repeatedly attempted to 'explain' things about the Bible and exposed your ignorance.

As an example: You just pretended you could not be bothered (a sure sign of someone unprepared to get down to the details).
You also felt you were 'informing me' the Bible was "(many diffrent men in fact), "

Since its common knowledge to any Sunday School student there were numerous Authors (you may notice the books are named after them) - It tells me you are so new to the topic you actually felt that was some 'New information' to tell me.

Sorry but (so far) I think we have ourselves a 'Poser' here and her name is AmandaN

 

lol...............toon. that was deep......lol


lots of meat on those bones........not.

was there any substance in there i missed?

 

You missed it.
It was in the part where i listed reasons why Epistles, Records and Accounts do not meet the requirement to be defined as 'Myths'.

Keep in mind please.. "Myth' does not just mean "anyting I dont think is accurate"

Example: I dont not believe the Koran is divinely inspired.
Yet
This not make it 'Myth'

You dont just use the term 'Mythology' anywhere you want to define whatever you want.
[You can... but words become senseless if we just apply them to anything we feel like]

 

I admit, i'm not a biblical scollar, I don't know it inside out like you do, but I know what I've learn from my own research, and what both science and history has told us about the bible. Even several diffrent churches have admitted that the bible is not so much designed to be taken litterally, but rather as a guide..

Let me ask you something, who do YOU think wrote the bible? And how did it happen to come togther in the format we all know it today?

 

*wanders in*

IMHO, the "nonfiction" aspect of Brown's book was the only appealing one, and having already read HBHG I'd rather not waste my time.

There was a great article in Salon the other day regarding Brown's novel, the flap with Baigent & co., and the flawed theories at work in HBHG & the Da Vinci Code...
http://salon.com/books/feature/2004/12/29/da_vinci_code/index_np.html

 

I dont agree.
Science and History would not give you any good reason to believe the Bible is a Mythological book.

Well i know some Churches have 'Admitted' they should all commit group Suicide in Guana.
There are sections, in some books, which record 'Parables' which are 'allegories' intended to communicate some lesson.

This does not mean that the chapter beforehand which describes their travels and people they meet is an 'Allegory' about 'Walking and staying at places'.

I dont have to worry about what 'I think'.
Its without a doubt the most researched and studied historical documents in all of mans history.

I would need Jatom here to go through the endless amounts of research, archaological evidence, traditions, supporting literature and 'Cross Checking' that can go towards verifying the Bible IS what it says it IS.

What most people do not seem to realise is that it is not 1920 anymore and there have been astonishing finds in the field of research in the last 10 years alone.
For most of our history we would rely on complete Bibles (as they are now) from approx 300 - 500 AD

Now so many critics would insist there was all kinds of Corruption, losses, rewording etc in that 200 year inbetween.

Not so easy to do nowadays... ..whole books, pages and fragments are being discovered throughout Old Asia Minor and over and over again they are confirming the Bible was the same from 80AD to 350AD (the modern bible)

At other points it simply becomes far too difficult to believe that Paul didn't write his Epistles (and why would we try and prove otherwise) when more and more archaoelogical evidence keeps popping up pointing to Paul as the writer.

You end up having to make outrageous twists of logic, assumptions and wild speculation to make anything BUT the face value anything but the face value.

Of course, Christians differ from others in the sense we belive the Scriptures are Divinely Inspired.
This is a whole thread to itself but at least one reason why we believe that - The Authors themselves Say So in their Books.
Another reason.. we do not find 'factual errors' or 'contradictions' and we see agreement throughout these books.

So that is at least a few bits of reasoning why I believe beyond a reasonable doubt the Bible is divinely inspired and trustworthy.

 

Well, Brocktoon, it's been, uuumm, interesting, discussing this with you, but it's obvious that we're never going to agree... You've suggested some reading for me, and as soon as I have the time, I'm going to read it all. I've also suggested some reading for you, but you downright refuse to even look. Not only that, but you insult me, and spread lies about me (and god hates liars). So I give up...

 

Well here is a good solid example of a myth. The idea that you can engage in a discussion about faith without slandering whomever you are discussing the topic with is a very indisputable, irrefutable, unassailable, unquestionable MYTH.

Your ability to tell the truth about someone who differs in view from you is a definite MYTH. That is a fact. It is all written, and recorded right here. I don't like your style, it is childish, boorish, and unethical.

Good thing I am absolutely convinced that there is not a single member here who takes you seriously any more.

adios hombre

 

You know.. it really sets in that the word 'Myth' is already a useless word [thanks to it being used to describe ANYthing written in ancient times]

Im probably to blame as much as anyone since I repeatedly refer (albeit tongue-in-cheek) to Evolutionism as a 'Myth' - when really its just a stupid made-up story.

Enjoy Wikipedia's debate on this now impotent word:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mythology

Before that Asshead Joseph Campbell came along ruining shit by including EVERYthing under the Umbrella of 'Myth' in his Power of Myth series - Mythology USED TO refer to ancient fiction (intended to be fictional) but also intending to be Allegorical.

Mythology would have been an incorrect term to describe a story which, in itself, claimed to represent actual physical names, places and times.
Even if it had some elements of the Supernatural and may contain Parables.

In any case, The New Testament presents itself and claims to be real historical events and communications between real named people, actual places and at specific times.

By the current definition we might as call the War of 1812 a 'Myth'.
Well hey.. that does not mean its not true.
It just means it has allegorical meaning to some people.

 

You know.. it really sets in that the word 'Myth' is already a useless word [thanks to it being used to describe ANYthing written in ancient times]
.
As opposed to your view that only your faith is not myth and the majority of your fellow humans are too dumb to see they are following a myth. Oh for the good old days, huh, when myth was only used to describe anything pagan, heathen, heretical, basically all faiths other than Christian texts from ancient times, which are of course provable fact I think I'm starting to see your views.
.
Before that Asshead Joseph Campbell came along ruining shit by including EVERYthing under the Umbrella of 'Myth' in his Power of Myth series - Mythology USED TO refer to ancient fiction (intended to be fictional) but also intending to be Allegorical.
.
Yeah, all that non-Christian hooey, cuz only Christians are smart enough to see the real truth, and the rest of the faithful are too thick to see it.
.
In any case, The New Testament presents itself and claims to be real historical events and communications between real named people, actual places and at specific times.
.
Well that proves it.....unless I could find a novel that had real names, places and events in it. Well, I am too busy to look, but if anyone else can do the exhaustive search, and try to find even one example of a fictional work that has real names, places and events in it. I have a hunch there has got to be at least one.
.
By the current definition we might as call the War of 1812 a 'Myth'.
Well hey.. that does not mean its not true.
.
How about the Nov. 22/63 myth that a lone nutter L.H.O., singlehandedly killed the king, and there was no cover up, cuz that is just a bunch of conspiracy poppycock.

 

I'm sorry, but Epiphany and Brocktoon, you both lack the rationality needed to have this discussion... you try and pick up on the smallest thing and blow it out of all preportion, while you ignore the most important factors.

Faith can be a wonderful thing, and I'm glad that you both have it, but when you let your faith blind you to the truth that both science and history have taught us, you become dangerous.

I bet you're the sort of person, that if you was unlucky enough to catch cancer, you'd refuse the modern technology and drugs that could well save your life, instead choosing to pray to be cured... out of you, and the guys who accepted the treatment, I wonder who would survive?

Anyway, I'm going away for the weekend, but when I get back I'll check these posts and see if there is anything constructive and intellegent posted... if there is, i'll add my own views, otherwise I'm just going to let this thread die.

 

Heh, I already read this in the other two threads.

 

Just making sure all parties involved saw it - I didn't want you guys to think i was running off

 

Well um..im bringing this up again because i believe we can have even ground (err yeah right, cos thats been proven )

i just want to say that i think the da vinci code is an excellent book to inspire people, who were not aware of the topics it raised, to research and have the tools available to make their own opinion. it also allws ppl to spark interest in art history, symbology, codes, mathematics, religion and much more.... so what is wrong with that? i think it has achieved more in this way then in sparking a religious debate with people who already know where they stand and probably know enough about the subject matter before they read the book..
so for those of you who dont know anything of it: read it....and enjoy the fact that you're reading and learning

everything, whether wrong or right (as such as they are), has the ability to open your mind more and you will inevitabley learn.....

perhaps we needa book about how people like to bash other peoples opinions down to make their's more valuable to themselves...what would that teach you?

 

It does seem to be sparking interest in history.

I did have to chuckle watching the News pieces on the poor Tour Guides in France and Italy as they would bite their tongues and try and keep a polite tone of voice while American 'Davinci Coders' came to 'investigate' the 'Mysteries'.

Hehe.. One of the sites in Italy had even posted a 'warning sign' with some sort of 'Disclaimer' to Davinci-Coders (Dont recall the words but it basically stated they would be staying to historical topics only - NOT fictional books).

But ya.. many people who have no idea how the Bible came to us or how it was preserved through history will now be sparked to some interest.
Thats not all bad imo?