(I'm typing this in which to keep with all the secrecy regarding the book...)

Has anybody read the book or plan on seeing the movie? There is definetly some base to many of the claims that Dan Brown made in his Da Vinci Code. What do you think of all this?

P.S. I plan on seeing the movie and reading the book.....sometime.

(I'm typing this in which to keep with all the secrecy regarding the book...)

Has anybody read the book or plan on seeing the movie? There is definetly some base to many of the claims that Dan Brown made in his Da Vinci Code. What do you think of all this?

P.S. I plan on seeing the movie and reading the book.....sometime.



I have not read the book, but I do plan on seeing the movie.

Read the book and loved it. Can't wait to see the movie. Dan Brown's other books are pretty much the same formula though. As for the "facts" in DaVinci Code, most of them have been debunked. He makes many leaps of faith, but then again, it's fiction. Believable, but fiction none the less.

Whoa...SpeedyArizona's post seems to be gone at the moment but if it is about the movie coming out I am super excited (I was going to make a thread asking who was going to go see it but you beat me to it :p) I LOVED the book, and I don't even like to read. I started on a Sunday and called in sick Monday so I could finish it! All I did for those two days was READ READ READ. It had me hooked! I am interested in that kinda stuff so I LOVED IT.

What a load of crap! Brown goes way beyond a leap of faith in this book, he purposely distorts history and flat out makes things up. In his "facts" page Brown cleverly misleads readers about the accuracy of his data.

Yeah, it's fiction alright. Don't swallow any of it. Brown is laughing all the way to the bank!:bigroll:

What a load of crap! Brown goes way beyond a leap of faith in this book, he purposely distorts history and flat out makes things up. In his "facts" page Brown cleverly misleads readers about the accuracy of his data.

Yeah, it's fiction alright. Don't swallow any of it. Brown is laughing all the way to the bank!:bigroll:

:yeah: IT'S CALLED FALSE DOCTRINE!!!!!!! and Jesus warned us about stuff like that. i have not read the book nor am i going to see the movie. its trash and i am not going to waste my money on it. Speedy i cant see nothing there.

What a load of crap! Brown goes way beyond a leap of faith in this book, he purposely distorts history and flat out makes things up. In his "facts" page Brown cleverly misleads readers about the accuracy of his data.

Settle down there STS! It's a fiction book and is meant for entertainment. The accuracy of some of the facts are questionable, but many are right on the money. The Priory of Sion was a real organization to which Da Vinci belonged and Opus Dei is a functioning ultra-conservative Catholic group that just completed a $50,000,000 renovation of their headquaters in NYC.

Do I believe that Christ had a child with Mary Magdeline....no; do I believe that there is more to the whole Christ story than the church is leading us to believe...yes. Speculation and theories are always interesting, that's why the Da Vinci code is such a great selling book.

Speedy i cant see nothing there.

Run your cursor over it;).

Run your cursor over it;).

i figured that out after i posted and was like DUH... haha whew :rolleyes: :bonkers:.

It is a well written work of fiction and a good story to read. More than likely with the star power in the movie it will also be a big hit and probably a decent flick.

That said it should not be taken for anything more than a well written work of fiction. Almost every concept put forward in the work has been found baseless and simply an invention of a creative mind(s). IMO if it makes a person walk away going "Ok maybe I need to spend some time researching the real history of Christianity so I can truly understand more than what's given to me in a church on Sunday" that's great and it's done some good. But if one comes away from it believing the stuff Dan Brown made up in the book, that's a bad thing. I can read / watch Star Wars (or any fiction) and come away feeling some satisfaction from being entertained. But when I start believing it's real and not creative invention, that's a different issue altogether.

CIWS: Agreed 110%. I sincerely hope people will be able to tell the difference between fact and fiction here...

Judging by the hype around it though, I'm a little skeptical..

CIWS: Agreed 110%. I sincerely hope people will be able to tell the difference between fact and fiction here...

Judging by the hype around it though, I'm a little skeptical..

:yeah:
This is not a book for "history buffs" as the reviews on his own website (http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/reviews.html)claim. I would read it like I would Star Wars, Harrry Potter etc.

Settle down there STS! It's a fiction book and is meant for entertainment. The accuracy of some of the facts are questionable, but many are right on the money. The Priory of Sion was a real organization to which Da Vinci belonged and Opus Dei is a functioning ultra-conservative Catholic group that just completed a $50,000,000 renovation of their headquaters in NYC.

Do I believe that Christ had a child with Mary Magdeline....no; do I believe that there is more to the whole Christ story than the church is leading us to believe...yes. Speculation and theories are always interesting, that's why the Da Vinci code is such a great selling book.

YEAH THAT!!! :D Couldn't have said it better...

It is a well written work of fiction and a good story to read. More than likely with the star power in the movie it will also be a big hit and probably a decent flick.

That said it should not be taken for anything more than a well written work of fiction. Almost every concept put forward in the work has been found baseless and simply an invention of a creative mind(s). IMO if it makes a person walk away going "Ok maybe I need to spend some time researching the real history of Christianity so I can truly understand more than what's given to me in a church on Sunday" that's great and it's done some good. But if one comes away from it believing the stuff Dan Brown made up in the book, that's a bad thing. I can read / watch Star Wars (or any fiction) and come away feeling some satisfaction from being entertained. But when I start believing it's real and not creative invention, that's a different issue altogether.

well you have good logic but people will believe anything and everything. you should research and study the bible anyway. Star Wars is different from religion. but man i really draw the line at anyone saying Jesus and Mary Magdelene had a baby and all this that and the other. i cant stand that. i really cant. fiction i know, but its just wrong.

well you have good logic but people will believe anything and everything. you should research and study the bible anyway. Star Wars is different from religion. but man i really draw the line at anyone saying Jesus and Mary Magdelene had a baby and all this that and the other. i cant stand that. i really cant. fiction i know, but its just wrong.

Don't let it get to you too bad...again it is just fiction. You know what you believe and that is all that matters.

The DaVinci Code is good fiction, but lousy religion. However, it does appeal to people's natural curiosity about things greater than themselves. So, it could initiate or feed a person's quest in this area.

Don't let it get to you too bad...again it is just fiction. You know what you believe and that is all that matters.

its not that. its just wrong. i mean its not an attack on what i believe but its just what it is saying that is so wrong. it's not why Christ came to this earth and yes i know its fiction and i can take jokes and stuff like that but to me its just wrong.

The DaVinci Code is good fiction, but lousy religion. However, it does appeal to people's natural curiosity about things greater than themselves. So, it could initiate or feed a person's quest in this area.

so is scientology but people believe it.

so wait a minute...are we saying that Star Wars isnt real???????..........

so wait a minute...are we saying that Star Wars isnt real???????..........

im sorry Brett, Star Wars is not real. i just found out too :crybaby::rant2:. are you ok?

its not that. its just wrong. i mean its not an attack on what i believe but its just what it is saying that is so wrong. it's not why Christ came to this earth and yes i know its fiction and i can take jokes and stuff like that but to me its just wrong.

Christianity and especially Catholicism is the one area in America that is socially and culturally acceptable to attack. No other race or religion gets as much slander in the media.

Well hey if people are going to change their beliefs, or start believing in something just because they read it in a fiction book....then so be it lol....they aren't the brightest crayon on the box to begin with.

I really enjoyed reading it, and thought it was very intersting...everyone has a different story to tell and this was one of them. I am not really religious, but it didn't push me either way. It was just a good read period.

Well hey if people are going to change their beliefs, or start believing in something just because they read it in a fiction book....then so be it lol....they aren't the brightest crayon on the box to begin with.


:werd: :yeah:

well you have good logic but people will believe anything and everything.

I have issue with The Passion of the Christ too. Some of it was from the Gospels and some was from the Gospel according to Mel. What about the folks that see that flick and think some of what was shown was "true" ? Hollywood is usually not the vehicle by which the population should be informed/educated about most subjects. It's a methodology of entertainment. Now if someone sees a hollywood production and it gives them the desire to go research and inform themselves about a given subject, once again that's great. But if they allow it to be the sole source for knowledge, that's a mistake. But only each individual can make the choice to discover the truth outside of the theatre. If they chose not to, well we're back to LittleB's crayon analogy.

I, like most of us here, can understand and accept the book as fiction. It's the ones that don't understand this whom I'm worried about.

You're absolutely right when you say that they might not be the brightest crayons in the box...and maybe that's what worries me even more.

Either way, I won't bother seeing the movie, just for the fact that he tried so hard to pass his stuff off as fact. Ruins the movie in my opinion, kinda like the Blair Witch Project...it was good til I realized how hard they tried, then it was just stupid...

But hey, that's just my opinion :)

I, like most of us here, can understand and accept the book as fiction. It's the ones that don't understand this whom I'm worried about.

You're absolutely right when you say that they might not be the brightest crayons in the box...and maybe that's what worries me even more.

Either way, I won't bother seeing the movie, just for the fact that he tried so hard to pass his stuff off as fact. Ruins the movie in my opinion, kinda like the Blair Witch Project...it was good til I realized how hard they tried, then it was just stupid...

But hey, that's just my opinion :)

Why does it "worry" you? Just curious.

I didn't realize he was trying to pass it off as fact...where was this? I haven't seen anything on TV about it except for the trailor for the movie...so I guess I missed out on an interview you are talking about or something?

I did hear though that there is a Christian group that is writing, or already wrote, a book that is a guide to how you should take the book. It doesn't bash the book but I guess it just says that it is good to read it, it's interesting, and can teach you some things...but not to take it seriously etc.

Seems weird to have to write a book for that reason. You'd think people would already know that FICTION is FICTION :p

I, like most of us here, can understand and accept the book as fiction. It's the ones that don't understand this whom I'm worried about.

You're absolutely right when you say that they might not be the brightest crayons in the box...and maybe that's what worries me even more.

Either way, I won't bother seeing the movie, just for the fact that he tried so hard to pass his stuff off as fact. Ruins the movie in my opinion, kinda like the Blair Witch Project...it was good til I realized how hard they tried, then it was just stupid...

But hey, that's just my opinion :)

Well said.
It just says that anyone can say anything about everything, as long as it is entertaining.
I was told by a Hollywood screenwriter acquaintence that if you want to put a damper on the affect of this movie, go and see some other film on opening day. Hollywood measures success by opening box office sales. It's not about truth, it's about $$$

The book (and thus movie) is pure fiction.
End of story.

However, what proof does anyone have that the bible is real?
I'm not saying that to cause anyone offence, but I mean, seriously. If anyone ever questions the fact the answer is that you just have to have "faith". There is no proof whatsoever. None.

I notice those who strongly believe in the bible (and that's honestly fine with me, believe in whatever you want that's your right) tend to want no-one to dare question it and will not even hear any questions or other viewpoints on it. This I find intrigueing. Blindly believing in the bible is ok by them, but anyone who blindly believes in anything else that can't be proved (the book of Mormon or a cult or anything else) they consider silly?!

The double standards and "don't dare question it you have to just believe" that exist in almost all religions amaze me.

Why does it "worry" you? Just curious.

I didn't realize he was trying to pass it off as fact...where was this? I haven't seen anything on TV about it except for the trailor for the movie...so I guess I missed out on an interview you are talking about or something?

I did hear though that there is a Christian group that is writing, or already wrote, a book that is a guide to how you should take the book. It doesn't bash the book but I guess it just says that it is good to read it, it's interesting, and can teach you some things...but not to take it seriously etc.

I get worried cause I've spoken to several people, who are "usually" quite level-headed and logical, but for some reason they've taken the book as fact. Upon finishing the book they would make a statement along the lines of "Wow, I can't believe Jesus was married to Mary!" Once people start believing this, you can flush the very cornerstone of most religions down the tubes.

That, plus the fact that the book opens with (from Wikipedia): "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

Also from Wikipedia: "As widely noted in the media, there has been substantial confusion among readers about whether the book is factual." This alone suggests to me that someone sure is trying to pass this off as fact...

The book (and thus movie) is pure fiction.
End of story.

However, what proof does anyone have that the bible is real?
I'm not saying that to cause anyone offence, but I mean, seriously. If anyone ever questions the fact the answer is that you just have to have "faith". There is no proof whatsoever. None.

I notice those who strongly believe in the bible (and that's honestly fine with me, believe in whatever you want that's your right) tend to want no-one to dare question it and will not even hear any questions or other viewpoints on it. This I find intrigueing. Blindly believing in the bible is ok by them, but anyone who blindly believes in anything else that can't be proved (the book of Mormon or a cult or anything else) they consider silly?!

The double standards and "don't dare question it you have to just believe" that exist in almost all religions amaze me.

I also agree with this. There's way too many 'relgions' and 'religious people' who are waaaaay too closed-minded. To me, being religious should mean being open-minded..

Absolutely.

I've had close-ish contact with a lot of variations on the theme.

My mother was Church of England and my father was a Welsh baptist.
My first gf was an American Baptist.
My second gifrlfriend was a Catholic.
My third girlfriend was a Mormon (or rather strictly speaking, ex-Mormon).


I find everyone's viewpoints interesting, and I find several things about each of those religions that are really great, and I also have a problem with aspects of them all.

The book (and thus movie) is pure fiction.
End of story.

However, what proof does anyone have that the bible is real?
I'm not saying that to cause anyone offence, but I mean, seriously. If anyone ever questions the fact the answer is that you just have to have "faith". There is no proof whatsoever. None.

I notice those who strongly believe in the bible (and that's honestly fine with me, believe in whatever you want that's your right) tend to want no-one to dare question it and will not even hear any questions or other viewpoints on it. This I find intrigueing. Blindly believing in the bible is ok by them, but anyone who blindly believes in anything else that can't be proved (the book of Mormon or a cult or anything else) they consider silly?!

The double standards and "don't dare question it you have to just believe" that exist in almost all religions amaze me.

OK that's what I wanted to say, but didn't say it for fear of really setting someone off. I agree with this completely :yup:

Hehe,

I never have that fear.
I say what I think and I'm honest about it, I never say one thing and secretly think another just to fit in.

I respect everyone's point of view, so hopefully they will respect mine.
If they don't, they're just proving my point for me anyways which saves me a whole heap of typing...

<grin>

Hehe,

I never have that fear.
I say what I think and I'm honest about it, I never say one thing and secretly think another just to fit in.

I respect everyone's point of view, so hopefully they will respect mine.
If they don't, they're just proving my point for me anyways which saves me a whole heap of typing...

<grin>

Haha! I like that! I would never say anything to "fit in" but I will say something that is maybe less offensive (tone it down), or I won't say anything at all. It's just hard on here because you don't REALLY know anyone, so I would hate to really upset somebody. I think it is much easier to offend on here than in person because you aren't sure where the line is. With people you know in person, they can hear your tone of voice and see your body language etc., they know your intent. You can take things several different ways over the internet!

Absolutely!

It's so easy to write something while laughing and have the other person read it in a different frame of mind and get mad!
I remember being on MSN with my ex (no we didn't break up because of it, hehe!) and the conversation started going south real fast. So I called her up to clear things up. She got real embarassed when she realised she had completely misunderstood! If you've never spent any real time with a person, it's way worse though!

Absolutely!

It's so easy to write something while laughing and have the other person read it in a different frame of mind and get mad!
I remember being on MSN with my ex (no we didn't break up because of it, hehe!) and the conversation started going south real fast. So I called her up to clear things up. She got real embarassed when she realised she had completely misunderstood! If you've never spent any real time with a person, it's way worse though!

EXACTLY!! haha in person I definitely speak my mind...sometimes it's not such a good thing. I am working it on it actually-seriously lol.

With people you know in person, they can hear your tone of voice and see your body language etc., they know your intent. You can take things several different ways over the internet!

I can't believe you said that. I'm sooo damned offended by it !!!!


;)

I can't believe you said that. I'm sooo damned offended by it !!!!


;)

:thepan: SEE WHAT I MEAN?!?!? :histeric: :p

Ancient greek and roman myths do a very good job of explaining how things were created just like the bible. Before Christianity came along and deemed that these were "myths", they were fact in the minds of those people. I don't know that god exists and neither do any of you. You may say that you "believe" or "know" god exists, but you can't prove it to me or anyone.
I'm with hardrockcamaro, how do we know that the bible is real? How can you have multiple versions of the same book that say different things? The bible is controlled by the church and they can put whatever they want in there and the mindless masses take it as fact. Brainwashing and mind control...

Christianity and especially Catholicism is the one area in America that is socially and culturally acceptable to attack. No other race or religion gets as much slander in the media.
I agree...BUT i feel that more people allow it. Everyitme i turn on the TV i see God and Jesus being made fun of, I'm Muslim and it makes me mad because we also belive in God and Jesus was one of our most beloved prophets. Like the recent southpark episode they were going to make fun of the Prophet Muhammad and they did not, people started complaining they make fun of Jesus all the time...well 90% of the time ''christians'' are laughing at that stuff and dont say anyhting. Im sure if everyone got together that kind of thing would not be acceptable. The thing about those Muhammad cartoons is ...no matter how unreligious or how morally bad of a Muslim you are or how much you really dont care about the religion...NO MUSLIM EVER would let making fun of the Prophet slide, its jsut one of those things you will never in your life accept. It has become so normal in this country to make Jesus the butt of jokes and make fun of him that no one says anyhting when it happens. I do not agree with the violent protests that some Muslims did over the cartoons, but certain people did not understand why we were upset, they felt ''oh it was just a cartoon'' NO...we hold Prophet Muhammad of such high importance. An example would be if someone made fun of your mother...IT JUST DOESNT SLIDE. EVER.

Ancient greek and roman myths do a very good job of explaining how things were created just like the bible. Before Christianity came along and deemed that these were "myths", they were fact in the minds of those people. I don't know that god exists and neither do any of you. You may say that you "believe" or "know" god exists, but you can't prove it to me or anyone.
I'm with hardrockcamaro, how do we know that the bible is real? How can you have multiple versions of the same book that say different things? The bible is controlled by the church and they can put whatever they want in there and the mindless masses take it as fact. Brainwashing and mind control...

That's where my problem is. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to believe that there is a higher being, and that there is life after death, and a beautiful place called heaven etc. But when it comes to things like "He said let there be light" and all of the sudden there was a sun...I have a hard time fully believing in something. Now I hate to say that I have to see to believe but that is kind of how I am. Probably has to do with my age. I think the bible is a great thing, I think it teaches some great things (like the 10 commandments), I think everyone should try to live by those. The Bible though, is a story. Told by different people. How many times have you heard a story from one friend, and then heard it from another and it was completely different? Happens to me a lot, but then again some of my friends are a little crazy. ANYWAYS I think it's great, I think it is positive, I think it helps a lot of people get through life etc.. Maybe someday my views will change, but as of now I am pretty much an open book. I am not saying there is not a god, but I am not saying there is either.

I don't have a problem with people having Faith without hard proof. It is after all an integral part of a loving relationship. Hopefully a lot of us have faith our significant others (wives, husbands, girl/boyfriends,etc) are being honest with us in our relationships and not sleeping around. In them we place our trust and our faith. We don't have to hire people to follow them around or place a "wire" on them to prove our trust is justified. Instead we give them faith. Unless they do something to question that faith and or break the trust. Then it becomes a different situation.

Someone having a faith in their beliefs is fine, even if there is no concrete proof. But when that person wishes to persecute or condem someone else because they may not have the same faith as them, then that is when I have issue with it.

I don't have a problem with people having Faith without hard proof. It is after all an integral part of a loving relationship. Hopefully a lot of us have faith our significant others (wives, husbands, girl/boyfriends,etc) are being honest with us in our relationships and not sleeping around. In them we place our trust and our faith. We don't have to hire people to follow them around or place a "wire" on them to prove our trust is justified. Instead we give them faith. Unless they do something to question that faith and or break the trust. Then it becomes a different situation.

Someone having a faith in their beliefs is fine, even if there is no concrete proof. But when that person wishes to persecute or condem someone else because they may not have the same faith as them, then that is when I have issue with it.

Well said!

Someone having a faith in their beliefs is fine, even if there is no concrete proof. But when that person wishes to persecute or condem someone else because they may not have the same faith as them, then that is when I have issue with it.

Bingo...

But not everyone shares your point of view so do they not have the freedom to laugh at it? Your prophet is beloved to you, but to others who do not share your beliefs he is just another regular guy.
Enforcing your point of view that the prophet is beloved and because you feel that is so eveyone else must also respect him by not making fun would not be right, in my opinion. Just like they have no right to say he is no beloved and you must not treat him so. So because they don't share your point of view why should they not make fun of him as they would anyone else?
I'm talking about them making a joke here, not hatred type speech. That is not right. As hatred leads to incitement.
But if we say "they can't make fun of anyone, problem solved" that's a pretty sad world to live in in my mind.

It's a very difficult line to place, but I tend to stand where I think anyone should be able to say or do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's right to do the same.

Everyitme i turn on the TV i see God and Jesus being made fun of, I'm Muslim and it makes me mad because we also belive in God and Jesus was one of our most beloved prophets.

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. :)

My last post was in reply to Caddy Man btw.

CIWS: Fully agree with you.

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. :)

What Allah wills?
Or am I way off???

But not everyone shares your point of view so do they not have the freedom to laugh at it? Your prophet is beloved to you, but to others who do not share your beliefs he is just another regular guy.
Enforcing your point of view that the prophet is beloved and because you feel that is so eveyone else must also respect him by not making fun would not be right, in my opinion. Just like they have no right to say he is no beloved and you must not treat him so. So because they don't share your point of view why should they not make fun of him as they would anyone else?
I'm talking about them making a joke here, not hatred type speech. That is not right. As hatred leads to incitement.
But if we say "they can't make fun of anyone, problem solved" that's a pretty sad world to live in in my mind.

It's a very difficult line to place, but I tend to stand where I think anyone should be able to say or do whatever they want as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's right to do the same.

:yeah:

But not everyone shares your point of view so do they not have the freedom to laugh at it? Your prophet is beloved to you, but to others who do not share your beliefs he is just another regular guy.


It's about respect for one another. The issue with the cartoons wasn't because the Prophet was being made fun of, he was being disrespected and that there was a graphic respresentation being made of him. In the faith of Islam, in the Hadith, the Prophet forbid a likeness being reproduced of him because he never wanted people to worship his image or hold it as sacred. Now some of us can let certain things slide off of our shoulders and not take offense to them, others find certain things highly offensive. A black person being called (N word) by a white person in anger, A U.S. war veteran watching a protester burning an American flag, or as already mentioned someone making a serious insult against ones family / mother. If someone is committing an act for the purpose to offend another, that is wrong and we should try and respect other people and cultures. Fun is fun, but if you are truly hurting someone by committing an act, why continue to commit it ?


rough translation - May the peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be with you. :)

B- The bible is figurative, not literal. The parables are meant to teach you a lesson, they didn't actually happen! That's my problem, people say that all these things happen (Jonas and the whale, building the temple in 3 days, etc etc) when they are just stories made to teach us about life in general.

And I like those cartoons making fun of religous figures:worship:, they're fine with me.

It's about respect for one another. The issue with the cartoons wasn't because the Prophet was being made fun of, he was being disrespected and that there was a graphic respresentation being made of him. In the faith of Islam, in the Hadith, the Prophet forbid a likeness being reproduced of him because he never wanted people to worship his image or hold it as sacred.


But again, the faith of Islam says no likeness is to be made. But if you don't subscribe to that faith are you not allowed to draw a picture if you want to?


A black person being called (N word) by a white person in anger, A U.S. war veteran watching a protester burning an American flag, or as already mentioned someone making a serious insult against ones family / mother.


But that isn't making a joke (South Park) or offering a different perspective on something (DaVinci Code) that is hatred. A white person in anger calling a black person a n***** isn't meant as a joke, it's meant in hatred. A protester burning an american flag is doing so in hatred, not as a joke. That's the difference and I agree with you that acts of hatred are not right.


If someone is committing an act for the purpose to offend another, that is wrong and we should try and respect other people and cultures. Fun is fun, but if you are truly hurting someone by committing an act, why continue to commit it ?


But where do you draw the line? And more importantly, who decides, officially, where to draw the line. Whoever that person is would be enforcing their opinion on all. That can't be right.
That's the problem with humour. It's rare to find humour that does not offend someone somewhere. or laugh at anothers misfortune or whatever.


Flicking back to the DaVinci Code (in a desperate attempt to stay on topic) or any similar book/movie, if a religion catagorically says no-one (believers or not) must quesiton it, is that the final word? Even for those that do not follow that faith? And if they do question it and examine it and publish and thus contravene the "rules" of that religion is that wrong and thus they should be silenced?

I think that's dodgy territory.

Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh. :)
walaikum as sala'am wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu :wave:

CIWS pretty much nailed it on the head in his post as to why it is a problem. Sure it may not be out of hatred, but if it is offensive to a large group of peopel, is it really necessary to do it?

It's not necessary at all.

I think the best option (as everyone is offended by something) is for people who believe so stongly in the bible to perhaps not read or watch the DaVinci Code that way they will not be offended by it and those who do not believe so stongly can still do so. In my opinion everyone wins that way.

As for South Park, that programme was created purely to push limits and gain notoriety. The best marketing in the world really. If something gets such a status people tune in. Sad but true. People who stongly believe in religion, the enviroment, a certain political party or political viewpoint or whatever are foolish to watch a programme that they know does this sort of thing. They may be laughing themselves at one episode (and at someone else's expense) but find themselves the target in the next.



I still have a big problem with cencorship though. The idea of some central person or persons deciding what we can and can't say (and frankly, think) bothers me greatly. A sanitised world where anything that could offend anyone is not allowed scares me. To be honest, I don't even like the idea of majority rules when it comes to cencorship as the freedom of the individual is then ovelooked.



A really good movie, and I'm sorry, I forget it's name, is about a court case in the USA against a publisher called Paladin Press (if I remember correctly) is one of my favourites and it makes a good point. Freedom of speech is important and should be protected, but only up to a point. Incitement is not allowed.
I think that's actually a good "rule" considering how complex the issue is.

B- The bible is figurative, not literal. The parables are meant to teach you a lesson, they didn't actually happen! That's my problem, people say that all these things happen (Jonas and the whale, building the temple in 3 days, etc etc) when they are just stories made to teach us about life in general.

And I like those cartoons making fun of religous figures:worship:, they're fine with me.

That is how I see it, as being figurative, and meant to teach lessons...but Christians believe it IS literal....so that's where the problem is lol. I believe in what the bible teaches (with a few exceptions).

That is how I see it, as being figurative, and meant to teach lessons...but Christians believe it IS literal....so that's where the problem is lol. I believe in what the bible teaches (with a few exceptions).

The Bible is a collection written by different people. Some are wriitten stylistically and others historically. So it is a mixture of figurative, analogous and literal teachings. Most biblical scholars, even Christians, understand this. Others are confused about how to interpret its teachings. Sola Scriptura is a huge debate in itself.

The Bible is a collection written by different people. Some are wriitten stylistically and others historically. So it is a mixture of figurative, analogous and literal teachings. Most biblical scholars, even Christians, understand this. Others are confused about how to interpret its teachings. Sola Scriptura is a huge debate in itself.

The parts about Noah's Ark, parting the Red Sea, "Let there be light!" etc...are those believed to be true events that took place according to Christians? I was raised in Church and stopped going when I was about 13, and the way I was taught, they actually do believe all of those events took place. That is what I have a hard time with.

But again, the faith of Islam says no likeness is to be made. But if you don't subscribe to that faith are you not allowed to draw a picture if you want to?

If one is not a Muslim, then chances are they would not necessarily follow the sayings and examples of the Prophet (Hadith). As is the same with any religion / belief. So certainly you could draw likenesses of him if you wished. Just like a protestant Christian does not have to be circumcised or can consume pork. But if you were trying to respect other's beliefs you wouldn't invite a Jew or Muslim to dinner and serve only ham.


But where do you draw the line? And more importantly, who decides, officially, where to draw the line. Whoever that person is would be enforcing their opinion on all. That can't be right.
That's the problem with humour. It's rare to find humour that does not offend someone somewhere. or laugh at anothers misfortune or whatever.

This is very true. There's almost nothing a person can do that doesn't offend somebody, somewhere. There is (in my mind) also a proper way to respond to being offended, and becoming violent, destroying others property or the taking of life is not the way to answer it. I think most decent folks will cease being offensive to others if they truly see their actions are causing a real distress to someone else. If they do not they probably just wish to be mean or hateful.


Flicking back to the DaVinci Code (in a desperate attempt to stay on topic) or any similar book/movie, if a religion catagorically says no-one (believers or not) must quesiton it, is that the final word? Even for those that do not follow that faith? And if they do question it and examine it and publish and thus contravene the "rules" of that religion is that wrong and thus they should be silenced?
I think that's dodgy territory.

(personal opinion) You can only try and convey the tenants and beliefs of any faith to those who are willing to listen. If someone begins to question those things then let them ask the question(s) and try and find the answer they seek. If they find spiritual satisfaction elsewhere and not in the message you are bringing to them, then you must let them seek it elsewhere. To condem or confine them with only your faith serves no lasting positive purpose for you or them. They may one day return or stay gone forever, but that is not your call. We really only have to ability to change ourselves and live our lives by example.
If someone finds the Da Vinci code totally offensive, then do not read it or see the movie. But in doing so recognize it will also be very difficult to ever speak to anyone intelligently about it if you're not aware of it's contents or context. Personally I see the story as a fiction work written about a murder mystery and can enjoy it in that light. In the same way I can watch a movie like Apocalypse Now and not see it as a story about the Vietnam war, it's not. It simply takes place in that backdrop. :)

Wise words.

An example would be if someone made fun of your mother...IT JUST DOESNT SLIDE. EVER.

:yeah: i couldnt agree more!

I have issue with The Passion of the Christ too. Some of it was from the Gospels and some was from the Gospel according to Mel. What about the folks that see that flick and think some of what was shown was "true" ? Hollywood is usually not the vehicle by which the population should be informed/educated about most subjects. It's a methodology of entertainment. Now if someone sees a hollywood production and it gives them the desire to go research and inform themselves about a given subject, once again that's great. But if they allow it to be the sole source for knowledge, that's a mistake. But only each individual can make the choice to discover the truth outside of the theatre. If they chose not to, well we're back to LittleB's crayon analogy.

yes and i agree that it was dripping with hollywood. in reality though Christ's death was worse. He was beaten beyond recognition... i could still recognize Him in that movie. i wish i could have been around to see the real thing.

Hardrock- Christianity is not the oldest religion but it came out of Messianic Judiasm which i think (im not 100%) came from Hassidic Judiasm (or whatever Sandy is) which was the world's first religion.

The parts about Noah's Ark, parting the Red Sea, "Let there be light!" etc...are those believed to be true events that took place according to Christians? I was raised in Church and stopped going when I was about 13, and the way I was taught, they actually do believe all of those events took place. That is what I have a hard time with.

Jews and Muslims believe that too Meg. you see Jews, Muslims, and Christians believe in the same God, Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament. we still believe in Him. difference being Jews+Jesus= prophet, Christians+Jesus= Savior, Emmanuel (God with us etc.), Muslims+Jesus=prophet or beloved prophet (thanks Caddyman i didnt know that brother).

also Meg its called faith! we walk by faith everyday! things are hard to believe why? cause the world says it cant happen. Jesus rose from the dead. dont believe it? i can take you to the hill where they hung Him on the cross, i can take you to the tomb where they buried Him. some good news for you HE ISN'T THERE! everyone walks by faith. faith in their next breath, which is not promised to us. waking up tomorrow which is not promised to us. you have faith, you cant tell me you dont. you just have to have faith in things. quit looking at stuff from what the world says and look at things from God's point of view. human viewpoint < Divine viewpoint. faith in things you cant see is easy. do you believe you are made of atoms? scientists say we are made of atoms. they have never seen one though but they have faith. it's that easy. God can do whatever He so chooses, and if that means flooding this earth or raising the sea i believe it would be pretty easy for Him. its His, He made it. He does what He wants with it. just because we cant do it doesnt mean God can't. and i believe Caddyman and Sandy will agree with me on the matter of faith (even though we are three different religions we serve the same God).

Jews and Muslims believe that too Meg. you see Jews, Muslims, and Christians believe in the same God, Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament. we still believe in Him. difference being Jews+Jesus= prophet, Christians+Jesus= Savior, Emmanuel (God with us etc.), Muslims+Jesus=prophet or beloved prophet (thanks Caddyman i didnt know that brother).

Ahh thanks for the info, I didn't know that! :thumbsup:

Ahh thanks for the info, I didn't know that! :thumbsup:

read that again i added to it. yeah we all serve the God of the OT cause He is our creator.

faith in things you cant see is easy. do you believe you are made of atoms? scientists say we are made of atoms. they have never seen one though but they have faith. it's that easy.

This statement is no longer true, we have "seen" atomic particles, actually we've gotten down to Quarks (what atoms are made of). However it does speak to the idea that we had faith they did exist based on our observations and now we've have seen that proof.

Also if you didn't know it, the Quran speaks of Jesus (Isa) as born of a virgin, Mary, and carries the name Messiah. :)

This statement is no longer true, we have "seen" atomic particles, actually we've gotten down to Quarks (what atoms are made of). However it does speak to the idea that we had faith they did exist based on our observations and now we've have seen that proof.

Also if you didn't know it, the Quran speaks of Jesus (Isa) as born of a virgin, Mary, and carries the name Messiah. :)

ah, havent heard about that.

no i heard Caddyman refer to Jesus as a beloved prophet so i am going on that.

Jews and Muslims believe that too Meg. you see Jews, Muslims, and Christians believe in the same God, Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament. we still believe in Him. difference being Jews+Jesus= prophet, Christians+Jesus= Savior, Emmanuel (God with us etc.), Muslims+Jesus=prophet or beloved prophet (thanks Caddyman i didnt know that brother).

also Meg its called faith! we walk by faith everyday! things are hard to believe why? cause the world says it cant happen. Jesus rose from the dead. dont believe it? i can take you to the hill where they hung Him on the cross, i can take you to the tomb where they buried Him. some good news for you HE ISN'T THERE! everyone walks by faith. faith in their next breath, which is not promised to us. waking up tomorrow which is not promised to us. you have faith, you cant tell me you dont. you just have to have faith in things. quit looking at stuff from what the world says and look at things from God's point of view. human viewpoint < Divine viewpoint. faith in things you cant see is easy. do you believe you are made of atoms? scientists say we are made of atoms. they have never seen one though but they have faith. it's that easy. God can do whatever He so chooses, and if that means flooding this earth or raising the sea i believe it would be pretty easy for Him. its His, He made it. He does what He wants with it. just because we cant do it doesnt mean God can't. and i believe Caddyman and Sandy will agree with me on the matter of faith (even though we are three different religions we serve the same God).

I just always play devil's advocate to everything. I am always playing both sides. I am in the middle. Not saying there isn't a god just because I can't see him, but I am also not saying there is one. I am not "looking at stuff for what the world says" (it might be a good thing if I did because I am surrounded by religious people.) this is just how I tend to see things. If someone brings something up I am always thinking about other ways/possibilities etc.

They've actually theorized that many of the "miracles" can be explained by science.
Jesus walking on water:
1) Low tide sand bars that would look like he was walking on water from the viewpoint of the observer, but he would actually be walking on the sandbar.
2) Environmental data has shown that during the time that Jesus was said to have lived that the part of the world where he was said to have lived would have been in a small ice age. He could have been walking on ice flows and appeared to be walking on water.

The plagues:
A volcano might have erupted sending ash into the air and into the water systems. The water became contaminated and the frogs left the water and came onto land. The people who would have been working when the volcano erupted would have been the first born sons and therefore perished in the lava or been struck by falling debris. There are some others, but I can't remember them now.

Good discussion, drifted off topic, but it has brought up some interesting viewpoints and information.

The only thing that bothers me is people who use religion as a crutch and people who blindly follow a faith. Ask questions, get answers. Never accept what someone says as the truth.

Good discussion, drifted off topic, but it has brought up some interesting viewpoints and information.

The only thing that bothers me is people who use religion as a crutch and people who blindly follow a faith. Ask questions, get answers. Never accept what someone says as the truth.

Haha, yeah it's definitely interesting. I like talking about this kind of stuff but I rarely get to....

"God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension."



Simple as that. Any attempt to quantify the infinite will fail because it always continues right beyond the point where our ability to comprehend ends.

Many religions have tried to describe god or anthropomorphisize it.
God, by it's very nature, is beyond description. Giving "him" human form is pure arrogance.

Religion was originally about explaining complex ideas to primitive people. Like how we should live and treat one another for example. The overall ideas still hold true today, but the telling was meant for an earlier time.

"God is what mind becomes when it has passed beyond the scale of our comprehension."



Simple as that. Any attempt to quantify the infinite will fail because it always continues right beyond the point where our ability to comprehend ends.

Many religions have tried to describe god or anthropomorphisize it.
God, by it's very nature, is beyond description. Giving "him" human form is pure arrogance.

Religion was originally about explaining complex ideas to primitive people. Like how we should live and treat one another for example. The overall ideas still hold true today, but the telling was meant for an earlier time.

:nono:

Hardrock- Christianity is not the oldest religion but it came out of Messianic Judiasm which i think (im not 100%) came from Hassidic Judiasm (or whatever Sandy is) which was the world's first religion.

Most historical and religious scholars believe Hinduism is the world's oldest religion - its' earliest texts, known as the Vedas, date back to around 1600BC.

"Dating" a religion depends on how you define its' start - the birth of it's 'founder'? The first written records? The earliest archeological evidence?

Certainly, most of humankind 'worshipped' something even before we started writing it down and deifying founders or prophets. There is much archeological evidence that pre-historic peoples practiced forms of animism or shamanism that to them, were just as much a religion as what we would think of today.

Christianity is not the oldest religion but it came out of Messianic Judiasm which i think (im not 100%) came from Hassidic Judiasm (or whatever Sandy is) which was the world's first religion.





Hasidic Judaism is relatively young, being started in the 18th century by Rabbi Israel ben Eliezer, a mystical form of very orthodox practice. But it considers itself part of the Haredi movement which traces itself way back to Moses and the revealing of the Torah on Mt. Sinai. (roughly 1200-1300 B.C.E.)

Hasidic Judaism is relatively young, being started in the 18th century by Rabbi Israel ben Eliezer, a mystical form of very orthodox practice. But it considers itself part of the Haredi movement which traces itself way back to Moses and the revealing of the Torah on Mt. Sinai. (roughly 1200-1300 B.C.E.)

was that it? i cant remember my Jewish history (even though i am half well Hebrew). that might have been what i was thinking of, not Hassidic. whichever started with Moses. that being older than Hinduism is it not?

was that it? i cant remember my Jewish history (even though i am half well Hebrew). that might have been what i was thinking of, not Hassidic. whichever started with Moses. that being older than Hinduism is it not?

Like JimHare posted it depends upon the point at which one wishes to link the beginning to. Which although Abraham, Issac, and Jacob does precede the Vedas. I would see the begininng of the Jewish people as the Exodus out of Egypt and the revealing of the 10 Commandments and the Torah. It's at this time they gain a structure and laws on how God wished them to live their lives and took the lands around what is now Palestine to establish the Jewish homeland. All of that was post Vedas.

Actually, havent a number of science channels done work on the ideas brought up in the DaVinci code, and found that a few have possibilities? Especially when you view outside prophetic works? (I mean outside of the bible, but still recognized by churches as "real") Like the possibility of Mary Magdeline being friendly with Yeshua (The actual name of Jesus) ideas that J's followers included women, and that role change is a part of the reason the Romans killed him, etc.

Actually, havent a number of science channels done work on the ideas brought up in the DaVinci code, and found that a few have possibilities? Especially when you view outside prophetic works? (I mean outside of the bible, but still recognized by churches as "real") Like the possibility of Mary Magdeline being friendly with Yeshua (The actual name of Jesus) ideas that J's followers included women, and that role change is a part of the reason the Romans killed him, etc.


History, A&E, Discovery, and PBS have all done specials directly around the Da Vinci Code or related to the early christian writings that pre-date the assembly of the current Christian Bible. Most of what I've seen related to the Da Vinci Code basically chops most of it's ideas put forward to pieces as basic works of fantasy / fiction. However there are some early christian writings that leave some doubt as to the exact role of the Magdalene and her relationship with Eesho (the actual name of Jesus in Aramaic, which was the language they spoke. Yeshua is Hebrew, although Yeshu' could be close to an Aramaic dialect) As we know it today it would be Eesho M'sheekha, or Jesus the Christ. A couple of the early text that are usually referenced in this debate are both from the Nag Hammadi texts. The Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) which hasn't been fully recovered and The Gospel of Phillip. Both written anywhere from 100 to 200 years after the execution. Jesus was executed for the crime of sedition, but what the final reasons and / or triggers were that allowed that are still debated today.

I use the Hebrew name myself, he was Jewish, I'm kinda jewish, figure might as well. One of the other things I found interesting was the studies into his family. Essentially, it seems as though he was actually a younger son of Yoseph, with older siblings from that side of the family. It seems that the virgin Mary was actually a second wife. A lot of interesting stuff can be deduced when you use biblicial, sanctioned religious texts, and non-sanctioned religious texts. Part of the biggest idea behind the DaVinci Code, is to prod people into actually considering other sources of info, and to turn a logical and deductive eye towards religion. Far too many people are "bible thumpers" accepting only the bible, and no other ancient texts for any information. The thing I would like to know, is what Pope John Paul (actually a pretty liberal, and open minded religious leader) would have thought of the book. It was interesting to note how often he respected other religions and the diversity in humanity.

I would agree, if one can read the book(or see the movie) and come away with a curiosity about learning more reguarding the true history of the church(s) and actually the roughly 300 years between his execution and the first formations of a Chrisitan church, then that is a good thing IMO. But if the book/movie leads one to believe the fiction of it, that's unfortunate. There is a whole slew of early christian texts, of which only 27 were agreed upon and assembled into what is now called the New Testament and that didn't occur until appox. 368-400 C.E. (although is was triggered at Nicea in 325 C.E.). But again I personally feel if one wishes to read and study them they should also study the history of the time(s) they were written to help understand influences the authors would have had around them. If you're interested (or anyone else) a good online source for most of them can be found here.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

But beware, some of those texts are HERESY !!! and you will be tortured and burned at the stake or since you're part Hebrew, stoned to death for reading them. :D ;)

P.S. also check out http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/

The rules:
No profanity in subject lines, signatures or posted messages.
No discussion of religion, politics or sexual preference.




I'm suprised this conversation has been alowed to last this long.


Sorry folks, this has to go.