The Da Vinci Code

Since seeing the thread on "What is a Christian" become so popular, i thought that I would try my luck on this and see what kind of responses it brought in.

The past two Sunday's my pastor has preached on the Da Vinci Code; both the book by Dan Brown and the upcoming movie staring Tom Hanks. The title of the sermon series was The Davinci Code: Fact or Fiction.

The pastor went on to say that the book is of course labeled as fiction, but on the inside, Dan Brown says that everything in the book is accurate. He also said in a telivised interview that if the book were changed to factual, what would be changed in it and he responded with nothing. He talks of the gnostic gospels, which are gospels plus the books of phillip and thomas, which are not included in the Bible. The pastor spoke out against these saying that they claimed absurd things and were simply not true.

All in all, the pastor stated that the Da Vinci Code plants seeds of doubt in many christians hearts about the truths of the Bible. Because the Da Vinci Code claims to be accurate, many people take it and believe it. It makes claims that Jesus was not divine and that he was married to Mary Magdalene.

I have not read the book, so I was wondering if I could get the input of any of you that have, and what you think about what the book says compared to what the Bible teaches.

I'm reserving my space for response. Read it. Have an opinion. Want to share. Don't have the time.

Chris

I'll tease with this. Anyone who says, as Brown does in his book, that Jesus' divinity wasn't applied to Him until after the Church deceided to do at at the Nicen Council doesn't hold up as non-fiction. Christ is who HE said He was and Paul and the apostles said it LONG before the Nicene Council!

Chris

I am a strong Christian, and do not believe the book is true by any means. But it is entertaining reading, just like many other fictional books are.

I am a strong Christian, and do not believe the book is true by any means. But it is entertaining reading, just like many other fictional books are.

I did a long post and then had a "database" problem. That's annoying.

Basically, the book's basic claim is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, they had kids, their blood line is the "Holy Grail" The Roman Church deleted that from history because it would have kept them from repressing women.

The "facts" are total hocum, and regardless of Brown's claims, he's just not dumb enough to think otherwise. He's selling books.

He's wrong on history; he's wrong on church history; he's wrong on art criticism; he's wrong on architecture and the description of places that still exist. In short, he made it all up. No scholar would take the material seriously enough to refute it. I heard a feminist art critic talk about the art descriptions -- she said, "I really wish it were true, but it's nonsense"

The book is a page turner. It's a cheap knock-off of Grisham. The movie will probably be a fun, "check your brain at the door" summer flick. Enjoy it for that. It's got no historical basis at all.

I did a long post and then had a "database" problem. That's annoying.

Basically, the book's basic claim is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, they had kids, their blood line is the "Holy Grail" The Roman Church deleted that from history because it would have kept them from repressing women.

The "facts" are total hocum, and regardless of Brown's claims, he's just not dumb enough to think otherwise. He's selling books.

He's wrong on history; he's wrong on church history; he's wrong on art criticism; he's wrong on architecture and the description of places that still exist. In short, he made it all up. No scholar would take the material seriously enough to refute it. I heard a feminist art critic talk about the art descriptions -- she said, "I really wish it were true, but it's nonsense"

The book is a page turner. It's a cheap knock-off of Grisham. The movie will probably be a fun, "check your brain at the door" summer flick. Enjoy it for that. It's got no historical basis at all.

NO
historical basis? comeon now. It is "based" upon history although there is alot of fabrication inbetween the history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechDawgMc

I did a long post and then had a "database" problem. That's annoying.

Basically, the book's basic claim is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, they had kids, their blood line is the "Holy Grail" The Roman Church deleted that from history because it would have kept them from repressing women.

The "facts" are total hocum, and regardless of Brown's claims, he's just not dumb enough to think otherwise. He's selling books.

He's wrong on history; he's wrong on church history; he's wrong on art criticism; he's wrong on architecture and the description of places that still exist. In short, he made it all up. No scholar would take the material seriously enough to refute it. I heard a feminist art critic talk about the art descriptions -- she said, "I really wish it were true, but it's nonsense"

The book is a page turner. It's a cheap knock-off of Grisham. The movie will probably be a fun, "check your brain at the door" summer flick. Enjoy it for that. It's got no historical basis at all.

---

steltz-

it mixes widely unaccepted history with an intriguing storyline and writen at a 7th grade level.

i read the book, i enjoyed it...it looks like a good movie...but his history is garbage. in the printing i read he even had dates incorrect (i heard this has been fixed in later printings).

he based the majority of his finding off of a book called "holy blood, holy grail" whose authors will not even claim to be true. they say they were simply putting forward a possible historical scenario...a hypothesis.

the thing that truly bothers me is the outright lies in the book (historical ones...not biblical ones): he says that it would have been outrageous for a jewish man (a rabbi no less) to be wifeless...FALSE!--john the baptist- no wife mentioned; paul- no wife. on top of that he claims that having a wife would in some way challenge Jesus divinity...HOW?--jews were allowed holy marriage, even if Jesus was married there is no reason this would challenge His divinity. AND on top of all that, the texts he references DO NOT SAY he and mary were married...if it were true (which i would like to reitterate i would have no problem with) i feel certain it would have slipped into one of these texts...there are a ton of them...i have a book called "the other bible" (nice title, huh?) with 7 different sets of texts contained in it and nowhere does it say what brown claims.

the book is a page turner. it's an interesting read. it's impressive that he was able to weave art history and a murder mystery. but it is not history and it loosely, loosely based on an extremely speculative "history."

All truths that are found begin with a hypothesis.

I'm not saying it is a perfectly written book or a senario. I am just saying don't desmiss the book as a bunch of lies and slander against the church. Take the book for what it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steltz

All truths that are found begin with a hypothesis.

I'm not saying it is a perfectly written book or a senario. I am just saying don't desmiss the book as a bunch of lies and slander against the church. Take the book for what it is.

---

i didn't dismiss it as a "bunch of lies and slander against the church" i said (paraphrased) "it's a bunch of inaccuracies and a slander against history." like i said earier...it CAN'T be a slanderf pn the church because even if it were all true (which is doubtful at best) it wouldn't change anything regarding Christ's divinity and that is the crux upon which his conspiracy lies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steltz

NO
historical basis? comeon now. It is "based" upon history although there is alot of fabrication inbetween the history.

---

Well, there was a person named Jesus, one named Mary Magdalene, one named DaVinci. Beyond that, he's pretty well making it up.

Actually, "historically" speaking even that is pushing it. One of my favorite lines is when he has his "historian" say something like "it is a proven historical fact that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene" I laughed out loud. It's really not a proven historical fact that Jesus existed, much less that something like that was true -- as Sik-m-boi noted, even the 3rd century gnostic texts he quotes don't actually say what he says they say.

I sometimes miss the old days of BB&B when I could think about a post overnight before posting and still had something to contribute. Now, if you don't jump right in, the topic is totally discussed and there is nothing new to add!

Brown doesn't say anything that other people haven't said before.

The fact is that it doesn't really matter what Brown says or what anyone else thinks about the book. I've personally experienced the divinity of Jesus in my own life and Brown's words on printed paper can't change that!

Chris

From my perspective, the only Christian group that has any problem with this novel is the "historic" Catholic Church. If you weren't aware of the political nature of the Church in the years before the Reformation, you might be shocked when you trace down some of the germs of truth present in the mass of material Brown presents (although even those facts are so overwhelmed by literary license and hokum that you might not notice they are accurate.)

But as y'all have said and as I told the Sunday School class I taught Sunday, if everything Brown alleged WERE true, it would make no difference in what most of us believe as Christians, in the objective case, and as y'all have said in the case of our faith it really makes no difference because that's an experiential relationship.

There was a very wide disagreement of the divinity of Jesus in the days of the Nicen Council. Many of those that disagreed later became Muslim due to the pursuit of Christians trying to run them down and burn them at the stake for heresy.

The early Roman church was far from good guys doing the Godly thing for the better part of 1500 years. I attribute much of our loss of early history to them. I guess we are fortunate enough that some had the forethought to hide some of the other works of the first and second century so we could find them at a later time. It has also been claimed that Christians destroyed the Library at Alexandria as well. All in the name of erasing everything but Christianity.

I am guessing that by the end of the week the Vatican will start threatening ex-communication if any Catholic goes to see the movie.

This book is a great FICTIONAL read, and will probably be an excellant movie. BTW, I am Catholic so I may have to sneek in to the movie (;.

There was a great documentary on the discovery channel (that bastion for conservative Christian thought) that pretty much disproved Brown's premise.

The way I view this movie and book is that even though it is false, if it gets people to "Seek the Truth" like it states, people will find God (because he is the Truth). Also, if it becomes water cooler talk at work or school and we (Christians) are knowledgeable and ready to explain why this is false and the Bible is true, then this can be turned into a way to connect and witness to people.

So do you guys not believe that DaVinci hid Mary in The Last Supper? It looks like a female, dressed in the same colors, yet opposite of Jesus, a distinct V or W to symbolize the female symbol or woman, the slashing of the neck by Peter along with the knife in the hand. Was it all pretty coincedental or was there something lost or covered up in History that DaVinci was trying to tell us?

What about the Templar Knights? Why did the Pope all of a sudden decide to start pursuing the knights for heresy after telling the King of France to blow it out of his rear for a long time before suddenly changing his mind? Did they know something? Why did they have to escape to England to dodge the inquisitors? What did they have or know that the Pope wanted? Why did they try and catch them in England when their fortunes were left? Why was it necessary for them to form a secret society for survival while there? Why do the Mason's still bear the same symbolism that resonates with the female male union?

Ever wonder why Catholics will not let Mason's become Catholic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

There was a great documentary on the discovery channel (that bastion for conservative Christian thought) that pretty much disproved Brown's premise.

---

...and one on the history channel...and one on the national geographic channel...and one on tlc. none of them found any evidence to directly support the theory but found plenty to refute it.

It's just a "fiction" book, loosely based on history.. It is one hypothesis of Christian history told in the form of a murder mystery. Take the book for what it is. The movie will be great I'm sure, even if it is half as good as the book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawgbitten

So do you guys not believe that DaVinci hid Mary in The Last Supper? It looks like a female, dressed in the same colors, yet opposite of Jesus, a distinct V or W to symbolize the female symbol or woman, the slashing of the neck by Peter along with the knife in the hand. Was it all pretty coincedental or was there something lost or covered up in History that DaVinci was trying to tell us?

What about the Templar Knights? Why did the Pope all of a sudden decide to start pursuing the knights for heresy after telling the King of France to blow it out of his rear for a long time before suddenly changing his mind? Did they know something? Why did they have to escape to England to dodge the inquisitors? What did they have or know that the Pope wanted? Why did they try and catch them in England when their fortunes were left? Why was it necessary for them to form a secret society for survival while there? Why do the Mason's still bear the same symbolism that resonates with the female male union?

---

1. john is almost always represented as an effeminate-looking young man. the figure in the "last supper" has no breasts and i can just as easily see the figure of a man as i could a woman. as far as the shape is concerned: yeah, i can see a V and an M but i see also an L an S another V, etc. if you're looking for it you can find it. question: how do you know it's peter represented with his hand at the controvesial figure's throat?--it's because peter is almost always represented as a gray-haired man with a bald head...just like john is almost always represented as an effeminate young man. if you say that that figure is mary i can just as easily say that the other is not peter. also, the colors you mentioned are also worn by the figure to the right of john/mary and most of that hafl of the table is wearing close to the same colors...it is possible that da vinci (who didnt' like to do frescos) just didnt' feel like mixing a different color or he mixed too much red and blue and didn't want to waste it (that statement has as much validity the "it looks like a woman"...being that it is complete conjecture).

2. the knights templar were the first (what we would call) bankers. the would loan money to travelers giving them coded promisory notes, which the traveler could redeem at any temple...they charged interest...they had a lot of money. with money comes power. the pope saw them as a threat and decided that he would claim they were pagans and have them rounded up and dealt with. pope didn't want to share power so he eliminated the threat.

3. as to the "male/female union" symbol in masonism: the free masons were originally stone masons...they use the square and the compass in their craft...it makes sense that it would be incorporated into their symbol. the fact that one points up and one down could be much more easily explained as the most pleasant-looking use of space. i know they are secretive and everything bu that doesn't mean everything associated with them has to have a deeper meaning.

I think there are way too many people getting uptight about the book and movie in the media. I am a catholic, born and raised, and I read the book. I couldn't put it down and normally I don't like to read much. I have read all of Dan Brown's books and enjoyed each of them.

I found a quote from his website that sums up what I think about the book:
"These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations. My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history." FAQ

I think Dan Brown brilliantly makes us think and delve into our faith more deeply. This book encouraged me to read more of the Bible, have discussions of faith with priests and friends and has allowed me to strengthen my faith as a result of exploring it. Alot of officials are viewing this as a challenge of faith and completely closing off their minds to a varying viewpoint.

BTW, if you think Da Vinci Code was bad, read Angels and Demons where the Pope's second in command is trying to organize an election of a new pope and re-energize the Roman Catholic faith.

1. http://images.search.yahoo.com/searc...1,319&ei=UTF-8

I see a lump of a breast in one photo. I see a necklace. I don't know if that was common for men or women to wear in those days, but something to consider. I also see a tear on the cheek. Who would cry first?

2. True they were. The King of France wanted the power and money. The Pope stood behind the Knights until Friday the 13th (can't remember the year). That is when the Pope declared them heretics and decided to go after them. The reason why is what we will never know. Most were jailed, burnt at the stake, while some got away. Those that got away ended up in Scottland. The Pope and King of France tried to get inquisitors into England to catch them. When the King of England finally relented and allowed a handful of inquisitors into the country, they captured very few of the Knights. By this time, the knights had set up shop with the Stone Masons forming a secret society. I don't know, but I just don't see why Stone Masons would have a need to Sever heads and limbs from bodies for exposing publically of one's secrets of the stone mason trade.. Pretty tough guild to be in I guess..??

3. Right.

db-

this is a full pic of the last supper.

look at Jesus' neck...he has the same type of trim the other figure does, there is also a disciple standing to the right with a similarly-designed neck-trim (but it blends more with his tunic...he is also, incidently, wearing similar colors). if that was what you are talking about, don't think it's a necklace...there is what i see as a crack in the plaster that goes across the figure's chest where one would expect a necklace to be, but it's line carries through into the figure's clothes at an angle that a chain would not take.

i see no breast so will just have to disagree there.

I found this article online that explains some of the problems with the book:
for the complete article follow this link...http://www.rbcdavincicode.org/

This novel, however, is more than a page-turning murder mystery. The Da Vinci Code is a conspiracy theory that leaves many readers wondering whether everything they have believed about Christ and the Bible is wrong.

The Da Vinci Code begins with a lengthy list of acknowledgments and then a "fact page" designed to leave the impression that the novel is based on careful research of little-known facts.

One of the book's main characters is Robert Langdon, a fictional Harvard professor of religious symbology. Claiming years of research, the professor maintains that for 1,700 years, the church has been covering up the real truth about Jesus. His views are later echoed by a fictional British royal historian referred to as Sir Leigh Teabing who says things like, "almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false" (The Da Vinci Code, p.235).

What many readers fail to keep in mind is that The Da Vinci Code is fiction. Worse yet, the story rests not on careful research, but on a documented fraud passed off as truth. The idea that Leonardo was a member of The Priory of Sion is based on a document proven by a French court of law to be a forgery and a hoax (The Truth Behind The Da Vinci Code by Richard Abanes, Harvest House Publishers, pp.48-57).

The Da Vinci Code's "alternative view of history" also falsely states that Jesus was not regarded as a God until the fourth century when the Roman emperor Constantine decided it was in his own political interests to unite the empire by giving Jesus "an impenetrable cloak of divinity" (The Da Vinci Code, p.233).

The ancient texts found at Nag Hammadi, however, were not "lost books of the Bible," as Teabing claims. They were the writings of a mystery religion known as Gnosticism. Gnostics viewed spirit as good and matter as evil. They denied the physical body and crucifixion of Jesus and emphasized a secret knowledge received only by those initiated into the religion. The early church rejected their teachings long before Constantine.

On the basis of such research, scholars assure us that our Bible is a highly reliable representation of the original manuscripts. In The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable, F. F. Bruce writes, "To sum up, we may quote the verdict of the late Sir Frederic Kenyon, a scholar whose authority to make pronouncements on ancient MSS was second to none: 'The interval then between the data of original composition and the earliest extant evidence become so small to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scripture have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established' "

I believe that one of the major problems with the novel is that people who do
not know any better, do not realize that the book is in fact fiction and not
reality. It also causes believeing christians to question the Bible.

Sometimes fiction is based on shreds of truth. Here are copies of the parchment that Plantard based his fictional Priory of Sion on.
http://www.ordotempli.org/parchment1.jpg
http://www.ordotempli.org/parchment2.jpg

The story goes that the priest who found these parchments hidden away behind an alter stone in his church suddenly became very wealthy after his visit to a Bishop. Supposedly, these parchments led him to clues and a significant discovery. It is theorized that the Church bought his silence leading to his sudden wealth. The church claims he was selling pentences.

Anyway, it all makes for a good conspiracy theory and best selling novel soon to be released movie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawgbitten

Sometimes fiction is based on shreds of truth. Here are copies of the parchment that Plantard based his fictional Priory of Sion on.
http://www.ordotempli.org/parchment1.jpg
http://www.ordotempli.org/parchment2.jpg

The story goes that the priest who found these parchments hidden away behind an alter stone in his church suddenly became very wealthy after his visit to a Bishop. Supposedly, these parchments led him to clues and a significant discovery. It is theorized that the Church bought his silence leading to his sudden wealth. The church claims he was selling pentences.

Anyway, it all makes for a good conspiracy theory and best selling novel soon to be released movie.

---

it does, except that there is no evidence the father berenger sauniere ever actually found these documents...but rennes-les-chateau, where he was preist, is one crazy church. he did get a lot of money suddenly and that has never been explained. after he died, his housekeeper, rather than allow the government to audit the church's financial records, burned them...she was supposedly supposed to reveal the secret at some specific time but had a debilitating stroke before that time came and could no longer speak.

the priory was real during the time of the templars but it was never what the "dossier secrets" claim it was. leonardo, newton, boticcelli were never members of it much less grand masters (not to say they were not members of another society).

the "history" in the book, to anybody willing to do honest study, will invalidtae itself. i do agree that overall this has been a benefit to the church, because it actually got christians to start thinking about what and why they believe. like i said earlier: it's not the stuff concerning the bible that bothers me about the book...it's the skewed histories that some take as fact and ignore scholars (secular and religious), who say, "but, that's not how it happened," in favor of a mystery novelist who carefully selected hypothetical histories to perpetuate as fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sik-m-boi

like i said earlier: it's not the stuff concerning the bible that bothers me about the book...it's the skewed histories that some take as fact .

---

one point that i have been trying to get across..nicely put

It has also been claimed that Christians destroyed the Library at Alexandria as well. All in the name of erasing everything but Christianity.

Well if you like fiction wound loosely through history read "Treasure" by Clive Clussler. It is about the Library and many of its documents final resting place. For those of you who don't know it's a Dirk Pitt/Numa novel, the recent movie Sahara is an adaptation of one of the books.

If you look at the history of the Templar's you find they morphed into bankers after a long period guarding the road to the holy land and the temple in Jerusalem. They were so desired by the Holy See at one point that they were given a charter above all but the Pope (sorry don't remember the specific document at the moment). The height of their wealth was only about 2 centuries before their demise.

The date was Friday October 13th, 1307. Pope Clement V and Philip IV of France issued secret orders that were to be opened (if I am not mistaken at dawn) on the 13th all over Europe.

They were accused of several vile crimes against the church and many were executed.

When the last grand master of the Templars ( Jacques de Molay) was burning on the stake he cursed Philip and Clement ( or so the legend/history goes) and asked them to join him in Hell within a year. Clement dies 1 month later and Philip 7.

Now the history teacher is done with his story and I would like you all to print this post and sell 40 million copies at $1.99 a piece.

I will then promptly donate half of that back to Tech and assume the task of finding a new AD and hiring a marketing staff etc.... as stipulated in my terms of donation.

Smile..... it burns more calories :)

Isn't that how Friday the 13th was labeled an unlucky day?

Yes.

somebody wants it banned in manila:

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...CI.xml&src=rss

sik-m-boi- you may be surprised but yes i actually read the Da Vinci Code...I like that the chapters were short so i could read alot and feel smart.lol.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluecrew

sik-m-boi- you may be surprised but yes i actually read the Da Vinci Code...I like that the chapters were short so i could read alot and feel smart.lol.:)

---

ha...i didn't believe you until you said that. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

just kidding with you. what did you think about it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atobulldog

BTW, if you think Da Vinci Code was bad, read Angels and Demons where the Pope's second in command is trying to organize an election of a new pope and re-energize the Roman Catholic faith.

---

Actually a prequil to The Da Vinci Code. I am currently reading The Da Vinci Code and have seen multiple references to Angles and Demons.

I liked it. But again, IT"S FICTION. Ment to be enjoyed as FICTION. Just like The Da Vinci Code.

Here's the plot: http://www.danbrown.com/novels/angels_demons/plot.html

http://www.danbrown.com/images/transparent.gifWhen world-renowned Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is summoned to a Swiss research facility to analyze a mysterious symbol -- seared into the chest of a murdered physicist -- he discovers evidence of the unimaginable: the resurgence of an ancient secret brotherhood known as the Illuminati... the most powerful underground organization ever to walk the earth.
http://www.danbrown.com/images/transparent.gifThe Illuminati has surfaced from the shadows to carry out the final phase of its legendary vendetta against its most hated enemy... the Catholic Church.
http://www.danbrown.com/images/transparent.gifLangdon's worst fears are confirmed on the eve of the Vatican's holy conclave, when a messenger of the Illuminati announces he has hidden an unstoppable time bomb at the very heart of Vatican City. With the countdown under way, Langdon jets to Rome to join forces with Vittoria Vetra, a beautiful and mysterious Italian scientist, to assist the Vatican in a desperate bid for survival.
http://www.danbrown.com/images/transparent.gifEmbarking on a frantic hunt through sealed crypts, dangerous catacombs, deserted cathedrals, and even to the heart of the most secretive vault on earth, Langdon and Vetra follow a 400-year old trail of ancient symbols that snakes across Rome toward the long-forgotten Illuminati lair... a secret location that contains the only hope for Vatican salvation.
http://www.danbrown.com/images/transparent.gifAn explosive international thriller, ANGELS & DEMONS careens from enlightening epiphanies to dark truths as the battle between science and religion turns to war...

Which is all FICTION!

I've been watching shows about the Code. It's amazing how off some of his "facts" are.

He is also supposed to be writing a new novel about George Washington being a Mason and all of the Masonic symbols in Washington. It seems to me like its along the same lines of National Treasure, the movie with Nicholas Cage that came out in 2002 I think.

I read and thoroughly enjoyed all of Dan Brown's novels and will read the next one if he every finishes it.

As long as it is approached in the proper context...it's a great read! Couldn't put it down!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenzie Leigh

As long as it is approached in the proper context...it's a great read! Couldn't put it down!

---

My only problem is the historical inaccuracy. One History professor likened it to a WWII novel where the Nazi's win and Churchill and FDR stand trial.

This book is as factual as every other conspiracy theory.

The way conspiracy theories work is you have a predetermined outcome and the start shaping facts around it. Sometimes you even have to bend them a little or leave a few facts out.

Ever read a case for President Bush ordering 9/11. Pretty complelling documentaries for it on the web at archive.org. It started with a hatred for the president and shaped into a case. What about man never landing on the moon... That one holds water... It started with a distrust for the American goverment from years of corruption. The C rock, no stars, etc... Do I even need to bring up the Kennedy assassination?

I put the Da Vinci Code in the same classification as these stories. The only difference is the purpose for their creation. Dan Browne did it to become a rich, rich man. He succeeded.

Perhaps the best analogy is the movie JFK. You ever shoot a can? The can flips back towards you. You ever take a bolt action .22 and just have fun with it? 3 shots takes a lot less than 5 seconds. But Oliver Stone ignored all of that to make a good movie.

The Da Vinci code is LOADED with the same kind of inconsistancies, omissions and half-truths. If your faith and your knowledge of religion is so limited that this book changes it, then perhaps it's time to spend some time reading or engaged in healthy debate. Most people who I talk to about the movie are really addressing a problem that needs to be faced by every Christian and that is the origins of our religion. Particularly the bad parts. Those with bones to pick on this subject will see what they want to see when they look at a fuzzy picture.

Good book though. I wasted a day of a trip because I started reading it on the plane and couldn't put it down when I got there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sik-m-boi

ha...i didn't believe you until you said that. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

just kidding with you. what did you think about it?

---

Actually couldnt put it down....Have to take whats in there with a grain of salt but like hwo they link it together. Might pick up Angels&Demons....Reading what is wrong with me.

Angels and Demons was better if you ask me!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluecrew

Actually couldnt put it down....Have to take whats in there with a grain of salt but like hwo they link it together. Might pick up Angels&Demons....Reading what is wrong with me.

---

Don't worry Fox, football will be back in the fall and you can shake off all those bad habits...like reading...and focus on what's important in life: The Dawgs and the Saints!!!!!

I haven't read Angels and Demons yet but he is such a great writer that I'm really looking forward to it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

I believe that one of the major problems with the novel is that people who do
not know any better, do not realize that the book is in fact fiction and not
reality. It also causes believeing christians to question the Bible.

---

What's really concerning is how easily christians are swayed from their faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Don't worry Fox, football will be back in the fall and you can shake off all those bad habits...like reading...and focus on what's important in life: The Dawgs and the Saints!!!!!

---

\

AMEN!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bossdawg

What's really concerning is how easily christians are swayed from their faith.

---

I'm not trying to sound rude, but if Christians - which I am one - are so easily swayed from their faith by a piece of fiction are they really heavily rooted in their beliefs? I read the book and it didn't change any of my beliefs...the whole time you read the book - like i said - if you approach it from the right view point (i'm going to read this piece of literature that i know is fiction and enjoy it but ignore every accusation against Christ) then it's a great read! Honestly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenzie Leigh

(i'm going to read this piece of literature that i know is fiction and enjoy it but ignore every accusation against Christ) then it's a great read! Honestly!

---

If you approach the novel from that standpoint, you woudnt be reading it at all because the whole novel is based on false accusations about Christ and the gospels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

If you approach the novel from that standpoint, you woudnt be reading it at all because the whole novel is based on false accusations about Christ and the gospels.

---

That's why they call it FICTION! :zstupid:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenzie Leigh

I'm not trying to sound rude, but if Christians - which I am one - are so easily swayed from their faith by a piece of fiction are they really heavily rooted in their beliefs? I read the book and it didn't change any of my beliefs...the whole time you read the book - like i said - if you approach it from the right view point (i'm going to read this piece of literature that i know is fiction and enjoy it but ignore every accusation against Christ) then it's a great read! Honestly!

---

Then I wasn't really talking about you then was I. If you haven't noticed, you are living in a time where Christian beliefs are more under attack than at any other time in history, and yes SOME CHRISTIANS are very easily found questioning what they believe.

SO not to sound RUDE, but if this is not you, then I wasn't talking to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DallasDog

Angels and Demons was better if you ask me!!

---

There's cursing with faint praise.

Angels and Demons has absolutely the most ludicrous plot sequence I've ever read in a book. Think through what happens in the 15 minutes that play a role in the end. There's no way they could happen in anything less than about an hour.

Brown is a page-turner writer, but I'd take Crichton on his worst day over him (and that's saying something) -- not to mention Clancy, MacLean, LeCarre, Higgins, Donaldson, Asimon, Niven, Herbert . . . it's just too long a list. Unless you read a lot, he's just too far down the list to be worth the trouble. I was really surprised by how weak the books were after hearing so much about them.

Here's the latest on this misguided flick.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060516/...a_vinci_code_2

'Da Vinci Code' Misses the Mark for Critics
By DAVID GERMAIN, AP Movie Writer Tue May 16, 6:52 PM ET


CANNES, France - "The Da Vinci Code" drew lukewarm praise, shrugs of indifference, some jeering laughter and a few derisive jabs Tuesday from arguably the world's toughest movie crowd: critics at the Cannes Film Festival.
The year's most anticipated movie, "The Da Vinci Code" was a generally faithful adaptation of Dan Brown's monster best seller, spinning a murder thriller that stems from a cover-up of secrets about Christianity's roots.
While readers worldwide devoured the novel, reaction from Cannes critics ranged from mild endorsement of its potboiler suspense to groans of ridicule over its heavy melodrama.
"It's a movie about whether the greatest story ever told is true or not, and it's not the greatest movie ever screened, is it?" said Baz Bamigboye, a film columnist for London's Daily Mail. "As a thriller, well," he continued, shrugging.
"Maybe the next day I'll forget about it," said Igor Soukmanov of Unistar Radio in Belarus. "But today for two hours it was good entertainment. ... As a Hollywood movie, it's a very nice picture."
Critics got their first look at "The Da Vinci Code" a day before its world premiere at Cannes on Wednesday, when it also debuts at theaters in France and some other countries. The film opens worldwide over the following two days, including the United States on Friday.
Directed by Ron Howard, the movie stars Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou as strangers hurled together on a frantic quest for the Holy Grail after a series of murders is committed.
The filmmakers add some twists and variations here and there, but the general thrust of the novel remains intact, including its theory that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene were married and had a child, which has prompted denouncements from many Christians.
The Cannes audience clearly grew restless as the movie dragged on to two and a half hours and spun a long sequence of anticlimactic revelations.
"I kept thinking of the Energizer Bunny, because it kept going and going and going, and not in a good way," said James Rocchi, a film critic for CBS 5 television in San Francisco and the online outlet Cinematical. "Ron Howard makes handsome films. He doesn't make bad ones, but he doesn't make great ones."
One especially melodramatic line uttered by Hanks drew prolonged laughter and some catcalls, and the audience continued to titter for much of the film's remainder.
Some people walked out during the movie's closing minutes, though there were fewer departures than many Cannes movies provoke among harsh critics. When the credits rolled, there were a few whistles and hisses, and there was none of the scattered applause even bad movies sometimes receive at Cannes.
Critics singled out co-star Ian McKellen, playing a wry Grail enthusiast who joins the search, as the movie's highlight, injecting hearty humor and delivering the most nuanced performance. Paul Bettany added a seething mix of tragic pathos and destructive zealousness as a monk assassin who carries out the slayings.
Bamigboye said all the actors were solid, but enthusiastically added, "I've got to tell you, Ian McKellen steals it. He slices all the crap away."

And yet more bad news.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/0....mxm43ky2.html

Critics cruxcify 'Da Vinci Code' in Cannes
May 16 8:42 PM US/Eastern


The most hotly-awaited movie of the year "The Da Vinci Code" failed to crack an audience of movie critics here at a sneak preview ahead of Wednesday's opening of the Cannes Film Festival.
Several whistles instead of applause were all that greeted the end of Ron Howard's 125-million-dollar film, and worse than that, the 2,000-strong audience even burst out laughing at the movie's key moment.
http://www.breitbart.com/images/2006...lt-245x143.jpg
"I didn't like it very much. I thought it was almost as bad as the book. Tom Hanks was a zombie, thank goodness for Ian McKellen. It was overplayed, there was too much music and it was much too grandiose," said Peter Brunette, critic for the US daily The Boston Globe.
The film version of Dan Brown's mega-best selling book premieres in Cannes on Wednesday before going on worldwide release on Friday. It stars Tom Hanks as symbologist Robert Langdon, called in after the curator of the Louvre is found murdered, his body splayed out covered in symbols.
Langdon and French police cryptologist Sophie Neveu, played by French actress Audrey Tautou, find themselves ensnared in a mystifying hunt to track down the murderer and solve a 2,000-year-old riddle.
The book has already sold some 50 million copies worldwide, been translated into 44 languages and spawned a spin-off tourist industry as well as whipping up a controversy. All ingredients to ensure that it will undoubtedly draw the crowds.
The greatest controversy has been stirred by the book's central theme that Jesus Christ married and had children whose descendants still survive today.
Thus book's detractors will no doubt be comforted to hear that when Hanks reveals who is supposedly the last surviving descendant of Jesus, the Cannes audience couldn't hold back their laughter.
"At the high point, there was laughter among the journalists. Not loud laughs, but a snicker and I think that says it all," said Gerson Da Cunha from The Times of India.
Other critics said the two and a half hour film was confusing to those who hadn't read the book.
"People were confused, there was no applause, just silence," said Margherita Ferrandino from the Italian television Rai 3.
"I have only read half the book, and then I got bored. It's terrible," she added.
"It was really disappointing. The dialogue was cheesy. The acting wasn't too bad, but the film is not as good as the book," added Lina Hamchaoui, from British radio IRN.
Despite being filmed against the backdrop of some of Paris' and London's most impressive and historic buildings -- Howard was even given unprecedented permission to film inside the Louvre -- the film fails to convince, becoming more of a drama-documentary with its overuse of historic flashbacks and other devices to tell the tale.
Hanks seems to get bogged down in the interminable dialogue, whereas Tautou, so brilliant in "Amelie", fails to make an impression.
British actor Sir Ian McKellan however received plaudits for his portrayal of Holy Grail expert Sir Leigh Teabing, playing his role with the right amount of wit and humour.
And Paul Bettany is suitably menacing as a self-flagellating albino monk on a mission to kill.
The film was due to open the 59th Cannes Film Festival later Wednesday, before the real competition gets underway on Thursday, with 20 films competing this year for the coveted Palme d'Or.

If the critics aren't impressed by it, I'll probably like it. For some reason, the critics and I never agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

That's why they call it FICTION! :zstupid:

---

Thanks, Liteman. My point exactly! If a person can't accept the book for the piece of fiction that it is then that person shouldn't read it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

That's why they call it FICTION! :zstupid:

---

LITEMAN...have you missed the whole point of this thread??? Yes, the book is called fiction...until you open it up and the author says that everything in the book is based on true occurances/documents...whatever. Thats pretty contradicting if you ask me. He also stated in an interview that if the book was made non fiction what would he change and he responded with nothing at all. So LITEMAN :dunce:, try reading the topics before posting next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenzie Leigh

Thanks, Liteman. My point exactly! If a person can't accept the book for the piece of fiction that it is then that person shouldn't read it.

---

Kenzie Leigh, once again, have you read the first post of this thread...it says yes, the book is fiction...but the author says in the first few pages that the book is based on historical facts....and even claimed that if the book was switched to non fiction he wouldnt change a thing...therefore, inferring the book is FACT!!!! Thanks have a great day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

LITEMAN...have you missed the whole point of this thread??? Yes, the book is called fiction...until you open it up and the author says that everything in the book is based on true occurances/documents...whatever. Thats pretty contradicting if you ask me. He also stated in an interview that if the book was made non fiction what would he change and he responded with nothing at all. So LITEMAN :dunce:, try reading the topics before posting next time.

---

He sold over 40 MILLION COPIES!
Why would he change a thing about the book!

AND IT IS FICTION! It was written as fiction. It is labled as fiction. And Dan Brown has never said it is fact. (or it would have been labled as NON FICTION) If you have a problem with the book or movie because it made YOU question YOUR Christian beliefs, I am sorry. Most of us aren't influenced that easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

Most of us aren't influenced that easily.

---

Forgive me for interrupting in the blue/red fued...which is incredibly annoying by the way. But, you've got to qualify that statement. 82,000,000 Americans claim to be Christians, I would venture to bet that a VERY large number of them are easily influenced. It is true that the brain of a Tech grad/student is in the top level in relation to the rest of society, so I can understand your statement. I have no problem with the book or the movie...you want capitalism, you gotta take the good and the bad. But, there are some "deceptive" parts of the book. It is fiction, but there is a section that is labled, "These are Facts." Truth is, it's about 20% fact. Anyway, I just thought I'd interject...go on with the chlorophyl!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

He sold over 40 MILLION COPIES!
Why would he change a thing about the book!

AND IT IS FICTION! It was written as fiction. It is labled as fiction. And Dan Brown has never said it is fact. (or it would have been labled as NON FICTION) If you have a problem with the book or movie because it made YOU question YOUR Christian beliefs, I am sorry. Most of us aren't influenced that easily.

---

LITEMAN, give it up. :icon_roll He didnt say he wouldnt change a thing about the book on terms of how popular it is. He said if the book was going to be fact, would there need to be any changes...and he said NO....THIS IMPLIES FACT. he would not change any aspects of the book if it was made fact...this means his current copy he claims is fact.....do you understand liteman, or do i need to expand in simpler terms??

And how do you know what Dan Brown has said?? Are yall personal friends?? And dont sit there behind your computer and say that this book caused me to question my faith...you dont know anything about my faith. And Most of us arent influenced that easily?? Well then why do some people believe what the DaVinci Code says...Why has it swayed many people in the nation...Why are so many Christian Proffessors and Christians with PHDs criticizing the book and movie saying that it is causing many in the nation to question their beliefs?? Maybe your faith is so great LITEMAN that you never have any doubts about anything. But i can garuntee you that other people do...Out of the millions of people that read the book, I can garuntee you that it swayed people's faith. But i guess that doesnt concern you so you really dont care about them right....Maybe we should be questioning your faith LITEMAN...:icon_roll :icon_roll :icon_roll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Forgive me for interrupting in the blue/red fued...which is incredibly annoying by the way. But, you've got to qualify that statement. 82,000,000 Americans claim to be Christians, I would venture to bet that a VERY large number of them are easily influenced. It is true that the brain of a Tech grad/student is in the top level in relation to the rest of society, so I can understand your statement. I have no problem with the book or the movie...you want capitalism, you gotta take the good and the bad. But, there are some "deceptive parts of the book". It is fiction, but there is a section that is labled, "These are Facts." Truth is, it's about 20% fact. Anyway, I just thought I'd interject...go on with the chlorophyl!

---

Great post, I agree with what you say, this is the point I am trying to get Liteman to see.....

As for your comment about the Blue and Red fued....Get a grip...I dont know who liteman is or even if he is with the red, the blue, the green ....whatever i dont care....maybe you are the one that wants to see everything as something between the blue and the red....this topic is definately not one of them....so maybe you should watch what you say....

You definately ruined a good post with that childish comment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

You definately ruined a good post with that childish comment

---

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Pot, here's the kettle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

LITEMAN, give it up. :icon_roll He didnt say he wouldnt change a thing about the book on terms of how popular it is. He said if the book was going to be fact, would there need to be any changes...and he said NO....THIS IMPLIES FACT. he would not change any aspects of the book if it was made fact...this means his current copy he claims is fact.....do you understand liteman, or do i need to expand in simpler terms??

And how do you know what Dan Brown has said?? Are yall personal friends?? And dont sit there behind your computer and say that this book caused me to question my faith...you dont know anything about my faith. And Most of us arent influenced that easily?? Well then why do some people believe what the DaVinci Code says...Why has it swayed many people in the nation...Why are so many Christian Proffessors and Christians with PHDs criticizing the book and movie saying that it is causing many in the nation to question their beliefs?? Maybe your faith is so great LITEMAN that you never have any doubts about anything. But i can garuntee you that other people do...Out of the millions of people that read the book, I can garuntee you that it swayed people's faith. But i guess that doesnt concern you so you really dont care about them right....Maybe we should be questioning your faith LITEMAN...:icon_roll :icon_roll :icon_roll

---

Ingorant people MAY have been "swayed' by this book of fiction. But I have never met anyone "swayed" by this book. Nor have I ever heard of anyone saying they have been "swayed" by this book. Just a bunch of people saying "other people" are being swayed. Who is this "many" who have been caused to "question their beliefs"? It's a bunch of BS.

I understand Johnnys point of "These are facts". But that is writiten IN a FICTIONAL book. So people with a brain should take it as fiction. As Steltz put it "It's just a "fiction" book, loosely based on history.. It is one hypothesis of Christian history told in the form of a murder mystery. Take the book for what it is."

No, I don't know Dan Brown. But he "selling" his book. Whatever he says must be taken as him "selling" his book. If he can get people talking about it he will sale more books. You say he has said he wouldn't change anything in the book to make it factual. Again, BS. The murder is false. It never happened. There for his book will never be non fiction, it can't be. And him saying that, is just another way to get people talking about his book.

I really don't care if you want to question my faith. Your personal attacks on this board are all I need to know about you.

And I am not part of any student group. Haven't been a student in 13 years. I do find it strange that the first person you attacked on this subject is a known member of the Blue though. I really hope you find a way to forgive the Blue for whatever they did to you. (that would be the Christian thing to do)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

I have not read the book, so I was wondering if I could get the input of any of you that have, and what you think about what the book says compared to what the Bible teaches.

---

Well obviously my posts don't make sense to you...you haven't read the book!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

Ingorant people MAY have been "swayed' by this book of fiction. But I have never met anyone "swayed" by this book. Nor have I ever heard of anyone saying they have been "swayed" by this book. Just a bunch of people saying "other people" are being swayed. Who is this "many" who have been caused to "question their beliefs"? It's a bunch of BS.

I understand Johnnys point of "These are facts". But that is writiten IN a FICTIONAL book. So people with a brain should take it as fiction. As Steltz put it "It's just a "fiction" book, loosely based on history.. It is one hypothesis of Christian history told in the form of a murder mystery. Take the book for what it is."

No, I don't know Dan Brown. But he "selling" his book. Whatever he says must be taken as him "selling" his book. If he can get people talking about it he will sale more books. You say he has said he wouldn't change anything in the book to make it factual. Again, BS. The murder is false. It never happened. There for his book will never be non fiction, it can't be. And him saying that, is just another way to get people talking about his book.

I really don't care if you want to question my faith. Your personal attacks on this board are all I need to know about you.

And I am not part of any student group. Haven't been a student in 13 years. I do find it strange that the first person you attacked on this subject is a known member of the Blue though. I really hope you find a way to forgive the Blue for whatever they did to you. (that would be the Christian thing to do)

---

I think that's a fair post. I think at times, those who are opposed to things like this book make it an even bigger seller than it would've been if they hadn't made such a big deal about it. It is a work of fiction and rational, thinking people should take it as such. Unfortunately, rational and thinking people aren't as abundant as they should be. I don't know what Brown's motive is, but with 45,000,000 sold, he's definitely raking it in.

PS: I did not mean to suggest that you were in the Blue or even necessarily in the fued. I was responding to your point at the same time I was aggrivated with the continual inflamatory posts by a select few.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

I really don't care if you want to question my faith. Your personal attacks on this board are all I need to know about you.

And I am not part of any student group. Haven't been a student in 13 years. I do find it strange that the first person you attacked on this subject is a known member of the Blue though. I really hope you find a way to forgive the Blue for whatever they did to you. (that would be the Christian thing to do)

---

Thank you so much! I hate that I can't even post on something that's completely not related to the blue without being attacked. I really found the book to be an intriguing read and i walked away from it just as strong in my beliefs as when I went into it. I don't understand all the hostility towards it or it's author. Whether or not Brown believes it is fact or fiction is irrelevant...he published it as fiction...thus it should be taken as so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

Great post, I agree with what you say, this is the point I am trying to get Liteman to see.....

As for your comment about the Blue and Red fued....Get a grip...I dont know who liteman is or even if he is with the red, the blue, the green ....whatever i dont care....maybe you are the one that wants to see everything as something between the blue and the red....this topic is definately not one of them....so maybe you should watch what you say....

You definately ruined a good post with that childish comment

---

I dont know Liteman or if he is in the Blue, but you have to be fair here THE RED. You come on here and lambast known members of the BLUE and act like a jackass. Dont be made when someone calls you out on it. We are all fans of Tech, so quit being an arsehole because you have a grudge against some members of the Blue.

As for the Da Vinci Code, it is a book of fiction. The questions it raises about Christianity have been answered. The claims it has against Christianity have been refuted. I might go see the movie just to see what the buzz is about, but I am not sure if I will. A book that is as historically inaccurate as it is with a writer that tries to pass it off as historically accurate loses a lot of respect in my book. He is just trying to create more buzz, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

Kenzie Leigh, once again, have you read the first post of this thread...it says yes, the book is fiction...but the author says in the first few pages that the book is based on historical facts....and even claimed that if the book was switched to non fiction he wouldnt change a thing...therefore, inferring the book is FACT!!!! Thanks have a great day.

---

My first question is how much is based on historical events? Anything can be "based" on historical facts. The term based implies they took the facts and changed to make things more entertaining. Happens all the time. Example= Pearl Harbor.

So if I write a great piece of fiction (let's just say about how cool Doc is) and then on the first few pages I say "this is all true" or something like that does that make the book non fiction? No because Doc isn't that cool.

Actually I have not read the book and have no plans to read the book but this debate reminds me of a book we read in my English class earlier this year. It is called The Things They Carried. It is a great piece of fiction and the author says many times over and over again that the book is fact...but it is still fiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

...But, there are some "deceptive" parts of the book. It is fiction, but there is a section that is labled, "These are Facts." Truth is, it's about 20% fact...

---

and that's being generous. i'm looking at a copy of the book right now on the facts page. first: it says the priory of sion was a secret organization founded in 1099--well, it was existing in that time but NOBODY knows the date of it's founding and it was not anymore secret than the templars them self were...it goes on to say that the dossiers secrets identifies prominent figures as members of it...only one problem: the dossier is fake, it was fabricated in the 20th century. second: some members opus dei do practice some corporal mortification but it is not a requirement for membership (one of my friends aunts is a member) and the level to which it is pratciced in the book is IN NO WAY encouraged by it's leadership...oh, and opus dei does not have any monks. pretty much the only valid statement he makes in the "facts" section involves the $47 million national headquarters in new york...it exists, but i don't know haow much it cost.

just thought i'd throw that out there. i hope this thread gets back on track.

as far as this book causing christians to question their beliefs: GOOD! and thank you mr. brown for causing, what i see as, a revitalization of christian study. so what if he did it by bending the truth or just making crap up, he has facilitated scholarly discussion among christians...and we can become better defenders of the faith by reading this. imo, every christian should read this book, because you can be sure that at some point you will have to answer a question (to a a doubting or non-christian friend) that starts with the phrase: "but the davinci code says..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sik-m-boi

and that's being generous.

---

Other interesting side notes...the vote at Nicea (sp?) wasn't technichally about Christ's divinity...the vote was whether or not Christ was co-eternal with the Father. My mom says those two things are the same, but I'm not convinced that they are. And the "close" vote spoke of in the book was 300-2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

Ingorant people MAY have been "swayed' by this book of fiction. But I have never met anyone "swayed" by this book. Nor have I ever heard of anyone saying they have been "swayed" by this book. Just a bunch of people saying "other people" are being swayed. Who is this "many" who have been caused to "question their beliefs"? It's a bunch of BS.

---

A lot of us just know by past experience that this can and probably will happen. Especially the Nintendo Generation, sorry guys, that believes anything that the various media/Hollywood sources put out there and yet still do not know where Florida is on a map. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

A lot of us just know by past experience that this can and probably will happen. Especially the Nintendo Generation, sorry guys, that believes anything that the various media/Hollywood sources put out there and yet still do not know where Florida is on a map. :o

---

I understand your point. I just used the words "ignorant" people instead on the Nintendo Generation. Because you know those people are in every generation.

Deffinition: ig·no·rant
adj. 1. Lacking education or knowledge. 2.Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge. 3.Unaware or uninformed.

ig·no·rance
n. The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed.
(according to http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ignorance)

I'm offended Tyler...nintendo generation is my older brother...we are proudly the playstation(II) generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I'm offended Tyler...nintendo generation is my older brother...we are proudly the playstation(II) generation.

---

Shoot! I thought when he said "Nintendo Generation" he was grouping all of us together.

Sorry Tyler, I am the Atari Generation. Maybe the Intelevision Generation. :bigcry:

sega genesis here (i like biblical terminology in my gaming systems). never had the ps2 or the nintendo. i am without a generation. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Other interesting side notes...the vote at Nicea (sp?) wasn't technichally about Christ's divinity...the vote was whether or not Christ was co-eternal with the Father. My mom says those two things are the same, but I'm not convinced that they are. And the "close" vote spoke of in the book was 300-2.

---

yeah, i knew about that one too, but it was not technically on the "fact" page. incidently, if you find a first edition of the book out there, you'll notice that the date specified for the council of nicea is incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

LITEMAN, give it up. :icon_roll He didnt say he wouldnt change a thing about the book on terms of how popular it is. He said if the book was going to be fact, would there need to be any changes...and he said NO....THIS IMPLIES FACT. he would not change any aspects of the book if it was made fact...this means his current copy he claims is fact.....do you understand liteman, or do i need to expand in simpler terms??

And how do you know what Dan Brown has said?? Are yall personal friends?? And dont sit there behind your computer and say that this book caused me to question my faith...you dont know anything about my faith. And Most of us arent influenced that easily?? Well then why do some people believe what the DaVinci Code says...Why has it swayed many people in the nation...Why are so many Christian Proffessors and Christians with PHDs criticizing the book and movie saying that it is causing many in the nation to question their beliefs?? Maybe your faith is so great LITEMAN that you never have any doubts about anything. But i can garuntee you that other people do...Out of the millions of people that read the book, I can garuntee you that it swayed people's faith. But i guess that doesnt concern you so you really dont care about them right....Maybe we should be questioning your faith LITEMAN...:icon_roll :icon_roll :icon_roll

---

The Red, I don't know you, but from the few posts I have read here and the other thread where you act like a peckerhead, I kind of guess that you might be a jackass? I have been wrong before, but you just strike me as such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dhussdawg

I dont know Liteman or if he is in the Blue, but you have to be fair here THE RED. You come on here and lambast known members of the BLUE and act like a jackass. Dont be made when someone calls you out on it. We are all fans of Tech, so quit being an arsehole because you have a grudge against some members of the Blue.

As for the Da Vinci Code, it is a book of fiction. The questions it raises about Christianity have been answered. The claims it has against Christianity have been refuted. I might go see the movie just to see what the buzz is about, but I am not sure if I will. A book that is as historically inaccurate as it is with a writer that tries to pass it off as historically accurate loses a lot of respect in my book. He is just trying to create more buzz, IMO.

---

Sorry, I see you have already pointed that out. Carry on.

Tyler, I never thought the DaVinci code would make a good movie either. It will probably be long and dull in many spots.

This guys says the Bible should have a disclaimer stating it is a work of fictionl.

http://newsbusters.org/node/5402

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

Sorry Tyler, I am the Atari Generation. Maybe the Intelevision Generation. :bigcry:

---

They had TV back then?? Wow... I'm impressed. :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juice752

So if I write a great piece of fiction (let's just say about how cool Doc is) and then on the first few pages I say "this is all true" or something like that does that make the book non fiction? No because Doc isn't that cool.

---

That would NOT be a fictional book... I am one hell of a cool guy. :icon_wink

And what happened to your part of our voting?? Are you changing your vote??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocMarvin362

And what happened to your part of our voting?? Are you changing your vote??

---

No. Sorry. I saw the quote and had to respond.

I actually think DaVinci will be a pretty good movie. Aside from the fact that Ron Howard generally makes good shows, the book is just about perfectly shallow enough to be a great fit for Hollywood. I intend to see it, and I think the church -- especially the Catholic church -- is making a tactical error in making a big deal of it (didn't anyone learn anything from Last Temptation?)

On the other argument, Brown has clearly stated that he believes the "back-story" to be true. I saw him in an interview say "I thought it was nonsense, but when I researched it I discovered that it was legitimately true." Now, I think he's lying to sell books -- he's really not that stupid. Still, it is what he has claimed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

I'm offended Tyler...nintendo generation is my older brother...we are proudly the playstation(II) generation.

---

:laugh: OK, I understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

Shoot! I thought when he said "Nintendo Generation" he was grouping all of us together.

Sorry Tyler, I am the Atari Generation. Maybe the Intelevision Generation. :bigcry:

---

I have an old Intelevision in the attic but I know not where the original pong game is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sik-m-boi

sega genesis here (i like biblical terminology in my gaming systems). never had the ps2 or the nintendo. i am without a generation. :D

---

That would be the Lost Generation. :icon_wink

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sik-m-boi

as far as this book causing christians to question their beliefs: GOOD! and thank you mr. brown for causing, what i see as, a revitalization of christian study. so what if he did it by bending the truth or just making crap up, he has facilitated scholarly discussion among christians...and we can become better defenders of the faith by reading this. imo, every christian should read this book, because you can be sure that at some point you will have to answer a question (to a a doubting or non-christian friend) that starts with the phrase: "but the davinci code says..."

---

nice post! very fair and level headed! i hadn't even considered it that way but i must say that a ton of my friends - including myself - didn't care about reading the book until all the fuss was raised about it. yes it made us think about our christian beliefs and made us even more thankful for the truth and we can't wait to see the movie...but we know it's fiction!

also, i don't know about anyone else but i couldn't care less if the "fact page" was true or not...it sets up a good background that helps a reader....not that all who are posting here are but regardless... a reader to get into the FICTIONAL novel and enjoy it!

I thought that everything that Tom Hanks is in, is based on a true story!

Wilson... was real.. right??

and what about BIG... that happened... IT HAD TO!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocMarvin362

I thought that everything that Tom Hanks is in, is based on a true story!

Wilson... was real.. right??

and what about BIG... that happened... IT HAD TO!

---

you mean it could be fake? say it ain't so...SAY IT AIN'T SO!! lol! Doc...you are that cool!

Yeah, the next movie he's doing is about a guy who works in the Shreveport Forensics lab. Something about how he gerts real rich and ends up dating an actress. LOL. It's based on a true story you know...

"T"

YEAAA BUDDY!!!! Is it......

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vaul...s/alyssa20.jpg

IMO-Brown is using this "fact page" as a set up for the book.

Kinda like "In a galaxy far far away..."
The writers uses that to set up his/her book/movie.

I think they both would suck if they started out "This is complete nonsence. Everything you read/see is totaly fictional. And none of what you see or read could have happened and it will never happen in the future...."

All GOOD fiction must be written as "it could happen". No matter how far fetched.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocMarvin362

YEAAA BUDDY!!!! Is it......

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vaul...s/alyssa20.jpg

---

Very cute! :shocked2: Who is that ?

precisely my point liteman! you always find a way to explain my point better than me! thanks! lol!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

IMO-Brown is using this "fact page" as a set up for the book.

Kinda like "In a galaxy far far away..."
The writers uses that to set up his/her book/movie.

I think they both would suck if they started out "This is complete nonsence. Everything you read/see is totaly fictional. And none of what you see or read could have happened and it will never happen in the future...."

All GOOD fiction must be written as "it could happen". No matter how far fetched.

---

Just for the sake of argument...cause it's not September yet...what do you think about his comment on a moring talk show that was something like this...When asked how much of the back-story is true, he replied, "All of it." This wasn't a set up in a book, this was a real interview about his real beliefs and that's what he said. I believe he's done some back-tracking since then, but the comment was made. I suppose it could be a marketing decision, but I'm just wondering what y'all think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnnylightnin

Just for the sake of argument...cause it's not September yet...what do you think about his comment on a moring talk show that was something like this...When asked how much of the back-story is true, he replied, "All of it." This wasn't a set up in a book, this was a real interview about his real beliefs and that's what he said. I believe he's done some back-tracking since then, but the comment was made. I suppose it could be a marketing decision, but I'm just wondering what y'all think.

---

I dont know whether to think Dan Brown really believes this stuff or if he is just doing it for the sake of selling the book. Either way, I think to people out there who do not know the truth that the four gospels teach, this book can be very misleading, especially when the author claims it to be fact.

You see, when people read a novel, most expect for some of the backgroud to be true, for the book to have a little truth in it so that it seems as if it could really happen. But in the Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown's facts are so screwed up that there is no truthful basis for the book. Example...the Titanic...The story of Jack and Rose probably did not happen, but everyone expects most of the other facts about the actual sinking to be somewhat acurate...the Titanic really did sink. However, in the Da Vinci code, what is fact?? Of course the murder mystery is fiction...but what about the factual background it is supposed to be based around?? There isnt one. This is what is very misleading to most readers (obviously not the ones on this board however).

Another thing, I have tried to point out Dan Brown's comment before in this thread ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

but the author says in the first few pages that the book is based on historical facts....and even claimed that if the book was switched to non fiction he wouldnt change a thing...therefore, inferring the book is FACT!!!!

---

And here is the response I got,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LITEMAN

AND IT IS FICTION! It was written as fiction. It is labled as fiction. And Dan Brown has never said it is fact. (or it would have been labled as NON FICTION).

---

Still sticking by that LITEMAN?

see i thought the entire book was fact and i wanted to read it before i went and saw the movie . . . but my view on it is there are somethings in life that cannot be proven and that they must be figured out some people just have that impluse to do it. My roommate has read it and the only thing she has said about this book is that it makes you think. But besides that i guess i'll either read it or i'll just watch the movie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE RED

Still sticking by that LITEMAN?

---

Yes. Until The Da Vinci Code is labled as "nonfiction" it will be fiction. Inferring something could be true in an interview is not, and never will be, making a fictional story true. The book is fiction and the "fact page" within that book is fiction. It is only there to set up the story line of the book to make it a better read.

And you really should read the book (not see the movie) before you make a judgement about it. Just remeber .....http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_29_13.gif.....it's not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocMarvin362

YEAAA BUDDY!!!! Is it......

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vaul...s/alyssa20.jpg

---

Yeah Doc... Why haven't you told us about her? :icon_wink

"T"

because he doesn't know her yet . . . only in a dream have they met . . . haha love ya doc