Today I visited the dentist and saw "The Da Vinci Code", not in that order.
The film is good! Worth every penny as was the dentist
If you have read the book you will enjoy the movie even more because it is a very close interpretation.
If you have not read the book, then as a murder mystery, if is well above average.
It is a well researched, well scripted, well acted story with great archtectural views and I would like to see it again.
What, then, is the problem? The bit about Jesus being married is pure fiction. The bit about "descendents" of Jesus is pure fiction. The body of Mary Magdalene does not lie beneath the inverted pyramid in Paris. There are no sex scenes. There is no romance. There is no filthy language. There is no inducement to try drugs, or be a terrorist, or bomb the USA. What is the problem? Why is the part of the story, that is causing so called "religious groups", to close cinemas, ban the film and riot in the streets?
The answer is that, a part of the church that calls itself "catholic" has had to try to explain to others as well as it's own members why it condones and encourages self mutilation and murder in His name. The film has a Christian message, a subtle message, and you have to find it.
Take care,
Gordon.
The Da Vinci Code.
-
gordonartist
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:55 pm
The Da Vinci Code.
As someone who sees Christianity from outside it does look to me as if so-called Christianity has a lot more to do with the wants of Paul who used the limited popularity of one of many mystics of the region in order to further his own agenda.
Paul took the limited popularity of this particular mystic who had taken on the main stream religion of the region on the basis that the clerics had distorted it from its roots, and spun it in such a way that he presented it as being for all when the Gnostic teachings didn’t indicate that was the case.
Then the Roman emperor Constantine realising a good thing when he saw one and seeing so many of his troops were followers of Christianity realised that by giving them that to fight for rather than a by now unpopular Rome they would be much more motivated to go out and break skulls. He was right.
He continued this strategy by roping in the leading Christian cleric of Rome and together they concocted the Christian instruction book at the Conference of Nicea taking great care to include what THEY wanted and leaving out anything that might divert from the main theme.
Out of this conference came the title Pope, along with the organisation whereby the pope would be the head of the spiritual Roman org. chart and Constantine would be the head of the secular Roman org. chart with the two of them in cahoots to support each other. Although the Roman empire has long since decayed the Roman Church empire has remained alive and well in no small part by the horrendous control that successive Popes and the awful machinery of the Vatican has through its network of quasi-military priesthood has kept the Catholic believers in place and likewise has controlled European monarchs by threat of eternal damnation if they didn’t toe Rome’s line or by the threat of priest inspired insurrection if they didn’t take that hint.
Today with greater freedom to access information the cat is in danger of coming out of the bag. ANY thing that opens the eyes of Catholics must be smashed. The earth rotating around the sun, gospel of Barnabas, the story of Simon the Mage, the few Gnostic gospels that remain, the fear the Dead Sea Scrolls raised, the very credible stories that Jesus didn’t die on the cross but fled BACK to India (!) all these things get suppressed big time by the Vatican.
Of course they are up in arms about the DaVinci code. Not because it’s factually correct but because it makes people THINK and in so doing they might discover that what they took as absolute certainty ----- isn’t so at all.
It isn’t that there aren’t many good and very decent people in the Catholic Church, it’s that it’s built on political garbage.
The DaVinci code opens the door that the Catholic church in particular are terrified that people may not just look through but walk through.
Paul took the limited popularity of this particular mystic who had taken on the main stream religion of the region on the basis that the clerics had distorted it from its roots, and spun it in such a way that he presented it as being for all when the Gnostic teachings didn’t indicate that was the case.
Then the Roman emperor Constantine realising a good thing when he saw one and seeing so many of his troops were followers of Christianity realised that by giving them that to fight for rather than a by now unpopular Rome they would be much more motivated to go out and break skulls. He was right.
He continued this strategy by roping in the leading Christian cleric of Rome and together they concocted the Christian instruction book at the Conference of Nicea taking great care to include what THEY wanted and leaving out anything that might divert from the main theme.
Out of this conference came the title Pope, along with the organisation whereby the pope would be the head of the spiritual Roman org. chart and Constantine would be the head of the secular Roman org. chart with the two of them in cahoots to support each other. Although the Roman empire has long since decayed the Roman Church empire has remained alive and well in no small part by the horrendous control that successive Popes and the awful machinery of the Vatican has through its network of quasi-military priesthood has kept the Catholic believers in place and likewise has controlled European monarchs by threat of eternal damnation if they didn’t toe Rome’s line or by the threat of priest inspired insurrection if they didn’t take that hint.
Today with greater freedom to access information the cat is in danger of coming out of the bag. ANY thing that opens the eyes of Catholics must be smashed. The earth rotating around the sun, gospel of Barnabas, the story of Simon the Mage, the few Gnostic gospels that remain, the fear the Dead Sea Scrolls raised, the very credible stories that Jesus didn’t die on the cross but fled BACK to India (!) all these things get suppressed big time by the Vatican.
Of course they are up in arms about the DaVinci code. Not because it’s factually correct but because it makes people THINK and in so doing they might discover that what they took as absolute certainty ----- isn’t so at all.
It isn’t that there aren’t many good and very decent people in the Catholic Church, it’s that it’s built on political garbage.
The DaVinci code opens the door that the Catholic church in particular are terrified that people may not just look through but walk through.
-
gordonartist
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:55 pm
The Da Vinci Code.
As a Christian and dedicated to His universal [catholic] church, my reaction to the "da Vinci Code" is this.
I am fascinated at the scholarship and research that has gone into this work of fiction.
I am pleased at the challenge to my faith. The film and book, challenged my belief and faith. Parts of them both have reinforced my faith.
I express delight that those who call themselves Christian can read the book and see the film and be stronger for the experience.
I also believe that those of the true "catholic" Christian faith will condemn the activities of those who condone and approve of self mutilation, brain washing and deprivation of liberty, freedom and life, in the name of His church. It is time to challenge those religious fanatics who assume that anything done in His name is acceptable, even mass murder and invasion and terrorism.
I hope that, I am on His side and dare not say that He is on my side.
With respects.
Gordon.
I am fascinated at the scholarship and research that has gone into this work of fiction.
I am pleased at the challenge to my faith. The film and book, challenged my belief and faith. Parts of them both have reinforced my faith.
I express delight that those who call themselves Christian can read the book and see the film and be stronger for the experience.
I also believe that those of the true "catholic" Christian faith will condemn the activities of those who condone and approve of self mutilation, brain washing and deprivation of liberty, freedom and life, in the name of His church. It is time to challenge those religious fanatics who assume that anything done in His name is acceptable, even mass murder and invasion and terrorism.
I hope that, I am on His side and dare not say that He is on my side.
With respects.
Gordon.
The Da Vinci Code.
First of all, Dan Brown did not come up with the ideas in his book "The DaVinci Code". He did come up with a clever way to string together Michael Baigent's many books, mostly based on "The Holy Blood, The Holy Grail". Instead of sueing Mr. Brown, Mr. Baigent should have written him a thank you letter for being able to employ a better writing style which is readable by the general public. Having read a number of Mr. Baigent's books I have to admit that making it through his literary style to glean the interesting bits of information can be likened to looking for a needle in a haystack. I have, however, taken great interest in some of the information Mr. Baigent presents.
A discussion of Brown's book should not be an analysis of his research as that belongs to Baigent (who makes this research available for public use by claiming it is non-fiction). Brown's use of plot devices and his ability to string bits of information into a fun adventure story are entirely to his credit. I expect the "Code" will be the only fictional work of his I will enjoy unless he comes across another researcher as inept at presenting his life's work as Baigent is...and gets another free piggyback ride.
Unfortunately for Baigent, public awareness arising from a fictional work causes distortion of the "facts" that Baigent has worked very hard to uncover. A discussion of "facts" regarding this work should be based on Baigent's own books, which are presented as non-fiction.
A discussion of Brown's book should not be an analysis of his research as that belongs to Baigent (who makes this research available for public use by claiming it is non-fiction). Brown's use of plot devices and his ability to string bits of information into a fun adventure story are entirely to his credit. I expect the "Code" will be the only fictional work of his I will enjoy unless he comes across another researcher as inept at presenting his life's work as Baigent is...and gets another free piggyback ride.
Unfortunately for Baigent, public awareness arising from a fictional work causes distortion of the "facts" that Baigent has worked very hard to uncover. A discussion of "facts" regarding this work should be based on Baigent's own books, which are presented as non-fiction.
The Da Vinci Code.
koan wrote: First of all, Dan Brown did not come up with the ideas in his book "The DaVinci Code". He did come up with a clever way to string together Michael Baigent's many books, mostly based on "The Holy Blood, The Holy Grail". Instead of sueing Mr. Brown, Mr. Baigent should have written him a thank you letter for being able to employ a better writing style which is readable by the general public. Having read a number of Mr. Baigent's books I have to admit that making it through his literary style to glean the interesting bits of information can be likened to looking for a needle in a haystack. I have, however, taken great interest in some of the information Mr. Baigent presents.
A discussion of Brown's book should not be an analysis of his research as that belongs to Baigent (who makes this research available for public use by claiming it is non-fiction). Brown's use of plot devices and his ability to string bits of information into a fun adventure story are entirely to his credit. I expect the "Code" will be the only fictional work of his I will enjoy unless he comes across another researcher as inept at presenting his life's work as Baigent is...and gets another free piggyback ride.
Unfortunately for Baigent, public awareness arising from a fictional work causes distortion of the "facts" that Baigent has worked very hard to uncover. A discussion of "facts" regarding this work should be based on Baigent's own books, which are presented as non-fiction.
Baigent rather blew it when he sued dan Brown for plagiarism. If his book was historically accurate as he claimed he can hardly complian of someone bases a fictional work round historical events.
Religious groups object to anything that makes their followers think on the grounds that those who can think for themselves tend not to follow blindly.
A discussion of Brown's book should not be an analysis of his research as that belongs to Baigent (who makes this research available for public use by claiming it is non-fiction). Brown's use of plot devices and his ability to string bits of information into a fun adventure story are entirely to his credit. I expect the "Code" will be the only fictional work of his I will enjoy unless he comes across another researcher as inept at presenting his life's work as Baigent is...and gets another free piggyback ride.
Unfortunately for Baigent, public awareness arising from a fictional work causes distortion of the "facts" that Baigent has worked very hard to uncover. A discussion of "facts" regarding this work should be based on Baigent's own books, which are presented as non-fiction.
Baigent rather blew it when he sued dan Brown for plagiarism. If his book was historically accurate as he claimed he can hardly complian of someone bases a fictional work round historical events.
Religious groups object to anything that makes their followers think on the grounds that those who can think for themselves tend not to follow blindly.
The Da Vinci Code.
gmc wrote: Baigent rather blew it when he sued dan Brown for plagiarism. If his book was historically accurate as he claimed he can hardly complian of someone bases a fictional work round historical events.
...
It can't well be called "free publicity" for his new book. I agree he made a huge mistake...though not so much as his refusal to hire a ghostwriter.
...
It can't well be called "free publicity" for his new book. I agree he made a huge mistake...though not so much as his refusal to hire a ghostwriter.
The Da Vinci Code.
But Christianity incorporates many aspects of Pagan religion...what did you want? Credit? :sneaky: 
The Da Vinci Code.
see? I tried using smilies and everything...I'm just woefully misunderstood. I was hoping to make you laugh!
The Da Vinci Code.
*koan bows and smiles at a fellow pagan
The Da Vinci Code.
though my avatar sits skyclad I prefer to stay warm
The Da Vinci Code.
While we're here, though. I would be interested in talking about Baigent's "discoveries". Since Brown brought them to the world's attention, why not let them live in this thread? Anyone read the Jesus Papers? I loaned my copy out so I don't have it before me to reference. But it can be summarized in a non spoiler kind of way.
The Da Vinci Code.
As a start: The Jesus Papers refer to documents Baigent has laid eyes on that potentially hold significant meaning towards reinterpretation of parts of Christianity (certain branches but not all) The more important thing that is revealed, in my mind, is proof that the Vatican has been confiscating and destroying historical documents. Until the end of the book I chose to believe that they might confiscate them but would not be able to actually destroy parts of history. Unfortunately that does not seem the case. Of all the things said in there this was the most dramatic revelation IMO. The so called Jesus Papers are still in existence but many others have disappeared.
-
Uncle Kram
- Posts: 5991
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:34 pm
The Da Vinci Code.
I saw the film 2 days ago and am now eagerly awaiting the follow-up, "I Know What You Did Last Supper"
THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN PUN
-
suzycreamcheese
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:47 am
The Da Vinci Code.
Uncle Kram wrote: I saw the film 2 days ago and am now eagerly awaiting the follow-up, "I Know What You Did Last Supper"
:wah:
:wah: