This is an awfully combative post, Gene, and it makes a lot of assumptions.
I’ve never made any bones about the fact that I am an atheist, yet I went to see The Passion and quite enjoyed it. I also did, in fact, read the Bible about five years ago. I found many of the Psalms to be beautiful, most of the lessons in the New Testament to be very wise and the majority of the whole book to be conflicted hogwash.
I think most Christians (a very small minority of whom, I suspect, have actually read the entire Bible themselves) tend to focus on the parts of the Bible they want to believe while ignoring the conflicts (the dual lessons of "eye for an eye" and "turn the other cheek," for instance, are very confusing).
But that’s just me, and I tend to read things with a very literal mindset. I don’t need the "prize" of a loving, waiting father figure in after-life paradise to make me behave well in life, nor do I need the threat of being sent to hell to do the same. I behave (generally) well in life because that’s how I want others to treat me. I can see where Bible stories are useful in teaching life lessons and providing an overall framework for a good life, and I certainly have a lot of respect for that as I think I’ve demonstrated in my writing, but it just hasn’t ever been something I need personally. I see it as mythology. Useful for teaching lessons and illustrating morals, but not meant to be taken literally.
But I’ll take you up on your challenge Gene. I can’t come to your house and watch The Passion with you or sit down and read the Bible with you, but you can take me at my word when I tell you that I’ve already done those things. So now maybe you can go to see The Da Vinci Code. And maybe try to enjoy it. It isn’t meant to be an assault on Christianity, it is meant to be an entertaining story.
Is it historically accurate? There are some truths and a lot of holes. But who cares? Most intelligent people aren’t prone to getting their historical lessons from fictional novelists or Hollywood screenwriters anyway.
Rob - 09:05pm on 05/14/2006
Read Holy Blood, Holy Grail some years ago. It’s basically the same story, it seems, only it focuses on the Knights Templar instead of Opus Dei, but it seems to be based on the same concept: Christianity is based on a lie. No thanks. The fact that people are even asking about its historical accuracy tells you how effective propaganda can be. This is tabloid spirituality.
robert108 - 10:05pm on 05/14/2006
Christianity is based on a lie. No thanks. The fact that people are even asking about its historical accuracy tells you how effective propaganda can be. This is tabloid spirituality.
Not to be combative, but to people like I (and Rob as well I suspect), it all kind of looks like "tabloid spirituality" lacking in historical accuracy.
How do we know that it is not all based on a lie or at least some wishful thinking? The Book was written a few hundred years after all of the events supposedly took place. I, for one, wouldn’t be surprised if a majority of the history within it is simply made up.
likwidshoe - 10:05pm on 05/14/2006
I’ve seen hundreds of movies that were based on lies or simply just made up, such as what is very likely the core of The Da Vinci Code. That doesn’t mean I didn’t enjoy the movies though because movies are entertainment.
I did catch a History Channel (maybe it was on the National Geographic Channel) series on the Da Vinci Code and it was very interesting. How do we really know that Mary didn’t settle in France? At least that part of the entire story does make sense and that her identity would be kept hidden. Holy Blood, Holy Grail was featured in that show and it’s very interesting. I fail to see how the entire Da Vinci Code line is the assault on Christianity that some claim it is. I am hardly religious, but just hearing about the stories makes me that much more interested in Christianity.
So you don’t believe that. Fine, I don’t know that I do either as it is virtually impossible to know what happend nearly 2,000 years ago, but that won’t keep me from renting the movie when it comes out just to enjoy the movie at face value. Just lighten up, really. If this type of a movie doesn’t interest you, that’s good, but don’t choose not to see it simply because it’s based on lies. Can you name one movie that has actually been a carbon copy historical account of anything?
Oh, and by the way, who does the movie paint as evil to merit the comparison with movies from the Third Reich? Opus Dei? The Knights Templar? If we truly believe the core argument of the Da Vinci Code, there really is no villain.
Chad Evans - 10:05pm on 05/14/2006
I read the Bible cover to cover 7 times. I’ve read The DaVinci code. If you faith is so weak you can’t handle a fictional story, you’d better stay away from the movie. BTW, I’m a Buddhist.
Rick - 04:05am on 05/15/2006
Rob and Liq,
My combative tone comes from conversations I am having in real life. I am sick of the idea that I have no right to an opinion about DVC unless immersed in it.
Yet as a pretty devout Christian I am constantly bombarded with people’s uninformed opinions of Christianity and the Word of God from people who haven’t done what you have Rob.
I knew when I wrote this where you guys stood. I’ve been around this forum for a while. It certainly wasn’t and isn’t targeted.
I view this as a frontal attack on a foundational building block of western culture. The idea that there is a God, his Son Jesus came to earth and thru his death and reserection paid in full for the salvation of all mankind. Even as men who don’t accept it on a personal level you have to say that this appears to many as an attempt to undermine who we are as a people. IF this succeeds in undermining many people’s agnostic assent to the foundation of our culture is there a cultural price to pay? Think what happens if the foundational truths of our law, the 10 commandments were seen as 10 pretty good ideas, is there an impact?
I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the contrast between the muslims responce to the cartoons and the Christian responce to DaVinci will be seen. Certainly this is far more egregous than the cartoons (at least to me and my Ilk). So, yes I am a little testy on this.
Maybe I’ll go out and burn down a KFC this afternoon; right after my nap.
Gene Redlin - 04:05am on 05/15/2006
Both points of view have been represented well. Bravo.
The creator is proud of you all.
Mickey Moussaoui - 05:05am on 05/15/2006
Gene, I appreciate your points and realize that you aren’t directing your frustration at me.
I do wish you’d read the book/see the movie though. Not because it is anything special, but only so you’d see that it is most certainly not aimed at undermining Christianity...just a lot of the dogma that surrounds it. There is no denial of Christ or his teachings, but there is a great deal of undermining of Church ritual, etc. Given that there is a lot of church teachings (depending on which denomination you are, I suppose) that just aren’t historically accurate the fact that someone would write a book about it isn’t all that surprising.
I mean, Christ wasn’t really born on Christmas. His birth was celebrated in April before the Roman Catholic Church decided to move it to December 25th (by the modern calendar) to coincide with a popular pagan festival. The people who still celebrated in April were called April’s fools. And then there’s Easter. Even the name was taken from a Pagan God (Eoster) and much of the day’s symbology (the bunny and the eggs) is taken straight from pagan ritual. Does this mean there wasn’t a man named Jesus Christ who was born, rocked the world with teachings of wisdom and peace and then was persecuted by the Romans? Of course not. It just means that some of the mythology surrounding his life manufactured by the Church (mere mortals to Christ’s divinity, from your perspective, and we all know Christianity’s views on the imperfections and vanities of man) isn’t exactly based on fact.
The Da Vinci Code hits on this, even if it isn’t exactly 100% accurate in its own right.
My favorite and most trusted source for religious history (specifically Christian history) is Dr. Elaine Pagels and her many writings on the subject. I suggest you give her a read. Her books are both informative and entertaining.
Rob - 05:05am on 05/15/2006
I for one won’t go and see it. I’m at a point of my life where I don’t see many movies (that aren’t kid movies anyway). However I also won’t rent it to see at home.
I agree with Gene that it is an attack on the basic fundamentals of our society. I don’t think it matters if the writer of book intended that or not. What I see as unfortunate is that in our society there’s many people that will accept what the movie portrays as fact rather than "one point of view." I don’t include the folks in this discussion in that group.
I doubt I’ll burn down a KFC, but I may show up for Gene’s BBQ chicken. Hopefully what is learned from this is the rightness of our society that may condemn the movie but won’t wish violence on the moviemakers.
The Whistler - 06:05am on 05/15/2006
Rob,
Your response (Date of Jesus Birth and Lik’s “Bible written 300 years after Jesus”) is exactly the reason that this book is a bad thing.
Among the agnostic canon have come books of fiction like DaVinci that propound all kinds of crazy theories. Remember Howard Dean believed that Jonah built a fire in the belly of a whale to get out. THAT WAS A CARTOON HOWARD! People can’t (and chose not to) differentiate between fact and fiction. It’s not about my faith, I just am not going to put money in the pocket of people out to destroy the truth. I don’t contribute to Ben and Jerry’s True Majority either. Nor Moveon.org. Why support ignorance?
and:
Jesus was not born on Christmas, he was born on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles which falls sometime from the end of September into the first couple weeks of October. Since the Jewish calendar is different from ours and is seasonally movable the exact date is hard to discern. The April Fools thing is interesting but only historical speculation.
Jesus WAS crucified and rose again during Passover which is a moon based feast and it was in the third month. The fact that the date coincides with the ancient pagan fest from which the name Easter is drawn is incidental. If he had been crucified on the 4th of July it would have the same relationship and impact. Pure coincidence.
The New Testament as we know it today was completed by 95AD. John wrote the Revelation and it was the last book written. The idea that it was written 300 years later is part of the agnostic canon fueled by apostate professors like Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels. Look at this discussion of one of her books to see how far we have drifted.
To say her and Ehrman’s teaching and other fictional accounts have no effect is hiding our head in the sand. This is like believing in Alien Spaceships and Bigfoot in ND.
Sorry, I just don’t think having a PhD behind your name and being the head of a religion department carrys much weight.
Many of the goofy later writings which include the Mary Magdalene so called Gospel, the recently noted “Gospel” of Judas and hundreds of other books were written by a mystic non Christian sect called the GNOSTICS. They believed that knowledge led you to God. So they wrote these special revelations that supposedly were additional background. I could write one today and it would have as much relevance to the Canon of Scripture. That is where the word AGNOSTIC came from = I don’t know and I don’t want to know.
The canon was voted on at the Nicene Council in 300 AD. No body wrote any books then. They just said, what is real and what is bull crap. The 66 books (and a few apocryphal Catholic books were part of that screening). There was little dissent. The DaVinci Code says it was a conflict. It Wasn’t. More fiction interpreted as fact.
I just hate to see more goofy theology added to all the goofy theology which keeps good men like you and Lik from taking a hard look at the truths of the Word of God. I’m not trying to convert you as much as saying you have been deceived by this undercurrent of “Harmless Fiction” and speculation that has put you in a place of, well, how can I say this nicely, Ignorance.
There is some goofball who has a website up with all the supposed contradictions in the Bible. I have tried hard to see which of those could actually be construed as a contradiction. I fail to see it. So, if you insist that there are contradictions you will see contradictions. It takes faith to believe in contradictions. Equal and opposite faith, equal and opposite faith to believing the word of God is true. I don’t think Rob wants this to become a discussion on “religious” issues. But, My email is below. I will respond to anyone who wants to point out their favorite contradiction.
I have read them ALL and see none. So, There you are.
I think this has a lot of parallels to the NSA wiretapping data mining controversy that is currently in the news. To those convinced otherwise they have their apologists who will give them a great case of how this is evil and undermines our privacy, to the other side this is critical to our national security. Both have their Canons. New York Times on the left. And on the right the High Priest GWB. I’m in favor of the project. I therefore respect and endorse the data analysis. Those on the other side…..
This is an awfully combative post, Gene, and it makes a lot of assumptions.
I’ve never made any bones about the fact that I am an atheist, yet I went to see The Passion and quite enjoyed it. I also did, in fact, read the Bible about five years ago. I found many of the Psalms to be beautiful, most of the lessons in the New Testament to be very wise and the majority of the whole book to be conflicted hogwash.
I think most Christians (a very small minority of whom, I suspect, have actually read the entire Bible themselves) tend to focus on the parts of the Bible they want to believe while ignoring the conflicts (the dual lessons of "eye for an eye" and "turn the other cheek," for instance, are very confusing).
But that’s just me, and I tend to read things with a very literal mindset. I don’t need the "prize" of a loving, waiting father figure in after-life paradise to make me behave well in life, nor do I need the threat of being sent to hell to do the same. I behave (generally) well in life because that’s how I want others to treat me. I can see where Bible stories are useful in teaching life lessons and providing an overall framework for a good life, and I certainly have a lot of respect for that as I think I’ve demonstrated in my writing, but it just hasn’t ever been something I need personally. I see it as mythology. Useful for teaching lessons and illustrating morals, but not meant to be taken literally.
But I’ll take you up on your challenge Gene. I can’t come to your house and watch The Passion with you or sit down and read the Bible with you, but you can take me at my word when I tell you that I’ve already done those things. So now maybe you can go to see The Da Vinci Code. And maybe try to enjoy it. It isn’t meant to be an assault on Christianity, it is meant to be an entertaining story.
Is it historically accurate? There are some truths and a lot of holes. But who cares? Most intelligent people aren’t prone to getting their historical lessons from fictional novelists or Hollywood screenwriters anyway.
Read Holy Blood, Holy Grail some years ago. It’s basically the same story, it seems, only it focuses on the Knights Templar instead of Opus Dei, but it seems to be based on the same concept: Christianity is based on a lie. No thanks. The fact that people are even asking about its historical accuracy tells you how effective propaganda can be. This is tabloid spirituality.
Christianity is based on a lie. No thanks. The fact that people are even asking about its historical accuracy tells you how effective propaganda can be. This is tabloid spirituality.
Not to be combative, but to people like I (and Rob as well I suspect), it all kind of looks like "tabloid spirituality" lacking in historical accuracy.
How do we know that it is not all based on a lie or at least some wishful thinking? The Book was written a few hundred years after all of the events supposedly took place. I, for one, wouldn’t be surprised if a majority of the history within it is simply made up.
I’ve seen hundreds of movies that were based on lies or simply just made up, such as what is very likely the core of The Da Vinci Code. That doesn’t mean I didn’t enjoy the movies though because movies are entertainment.
I did catch a History Channel (maybe it was on the National Geographic Channel) series on the Da Vinci Code and it was very interesting. How do we really know that Mary didn’t settle in France? At least that part of the entire story does make sense and that her identity would be kept hidden. Holy Blood, Holy Grail was featured in that show and it’s very interesting. I fail to see how the entire Da Vinci Code line is the assault on Christianity that some claim it is. I am hardly religious, but just hearing about the stories makes me that much more interested in Christianity.
So you don’t believe that. Fine, I don’t know that I do either as it is virtually impossible to know what happend nearly 2,000 years ago, but that won’t keep me from renting the movie when it comes out just to enjoy the movie at face value. Just lighten up, really. If this type of a movie doesn’t interest you, that’s good, but don’t choose not to see it simply because it’s based on lies. Can you name one movie that has actually been a carbon copy historical account of anything?
Oh, and by the way, who does the movie paint as evil to merit the comparison with movies from the Third Reich? Opus Dei? The Knights Templar? If we truly believe the core argument of the Da Vinci Code, there really is no villain.
I read the Bible cover to cover 7 times. I’ve read The DaVinci code. If you faith is so weak you can’t handle a fictional story, you’d better stay away from the movie. BTW, I’m a Buddhist.
Rob and Liq,
My combative tone comes from conversations I am having in real life. I am sick of the idea that I have no right to an opinion about DVC unless immersed in it.
Yet as a pretty devout Christian I am constantly bombarded with people’s uninformed opinions of Christianity and the Word of God from people who haven’t done what you have Rob.
I knew when I wrote this where you guys stood. I’ve been around this forum for a while. It certainly wasn’t and isn’t targeted.
I view this as a frontal attack on a foundational building block of western culture. The idea that there is a God, his Son Jesus came to earth and thru his death and reserection paid in full for the salvation of all mankind. Even as men who don’t accept it on a personal level you have to say that this appears to many as an attempt to undermine who we are as a people. IF this succeeds in undermining many people’s agnostic assent to the foundation of our culture is there a cultural price to pay? Think what happens if the foundational truths of our law, the 10 commandments were seen as 10 pretty good ideas, is there an impact?
I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the contrast between the muslims responce to the cartoons and the Christian responce to DaVinci will be seen. Certainly this is far more egregous than the cartoons (at least to me and my Ilk). So, yes I am a little testy on this.
Maybe I’ll go out and burn down a KFC this afternoon; right after my nap.
Both points of view have been represented well. Bravo.
The creator is proud of you all.
Gene, I appreciate your points and realize that you aren’t directing your frustration at me.
I do wish you’d read the book/see the movie though. Not because it is anything special, but only so you’d see that it is most certainly not aimed at undermining Christianity...just a lot of the dogma that surrounds it. There is no denial of Christ or his teachings, but there is a great deal of undermining of Church ritual, etc. Given that there is a lot of church teachings (depending on which denomination you are, I suppose) that just aren’t historically accurate the fact that someone would write a book about it isn’t all that surprising.
I mean, Christ wasn’t really born on Christmas. His birth was celebrated in April before the Roman Catholic Church decided to move it to December 25th (by the modern calendar) to coincide with a popular pagan festival. The people who still celebrated in April were called April’s fools. And then there’s Easter. Even the name was taken from a Pagan God (Eoster) and much of the day’s symbology (the bunny and the eggs) is taken straight from pagan ritual. Does this mean there wasn’t a man named Jesus Christ who was born, rocked the world with teachings of wisdom and peace and then was persecuted by the Romans? Of course not. It just means that some of the mythology surrounding his life manufactured by the Church (mere mortals to Christ’s divinity, from your perspective, and we all know Christianity’s views on the imperfections and vanities of man) isn’t exactly based on fact.
The Da Vinci Code hits on this, even if it isn’t exactly 100% accurate in its own right.
My favorite and most trusted source for religious history (specifically Christian history) is Dr. Elaine Pagels and her many writings on the subject. I suggest you give her a read. Her books are both informative and entertaining.
I for one won’t go and see it. I’m at a point of my life where I don’t see many movies (that aren’t kid movies anyway). However I also won’t rent it to see at home.
I agree with Gene that it is an attack on the basic fundamentals of our society. I don’t think it matters if the writer of book intended that or not. What I see as unfortunate is that in our society there’s many people that will accept what the movie portrays as fact rather than "one point of view." I don’t include the folks in this discussion in that group.
I doubt I’ll burn down a KFC, but I may show up for Gene’s BBQ chicken. Hopefully what is learned from this is the rightness of our society that may condemn the movie but won’t wish violence on the moviemakers.
Rob,
Your response (Date of Jesus Birth and Lik’s “Bible written 300 years after Jesus”) is exactly the reason that this book is a bad thing.
Among the agnostic canon have come books of fiction like DaVinci that propound all kinds of crazy theories. Remember Howard Dean believed that Jonah built a fire in the belly of a whale to get out. THAT WAS A CARTOON HOWARD! People can’t (and chose not to) differentiate between fact and fiction. It’s not about my faith, I just am not going to put money in the pocket of people out to destroy the truth. I don’t contribute to Ben and Jerry’s True Majority either. Nor Moveon.org. Why support ignorance?
and:
Jesus was not born on Christmas, he was born on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles which falls sometime from the end of September into the first couple weeks of October. Since the Jewish calendar is different from ours and is seasonally movable the exact date is hard to discern. The April Fools thing is interesting but only historical speculation.
Jesus WAS crucified and rose again during Passover which is a moon based feast and it was in the third month. The fact that the date coincides with the ancient pagan fest from which the name Easter is drawn is incidental. If he had been crucified on the 4th of July it would have the same relationship and impact. Pure coincidence.
The New Testament as we know it today was completed by 95AD. John wrote the Revelation and it was the last book written. The idea that it was written 300 years later is part of the agnostic canon fueled by apostate professors like Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels. Look at this discussion of one of her books to see how far we have drifted.
To say her and Ehrman’s teaching and other fictional accounts have no effect is hiding our head in the sand. This is like believing in Alien Spaceships and Bigfoot in ND.
Sorry, I just don’t think having a PhD behind your name and being the head of a religion department carrys much weight.
Many of the goofy later writings which include the Mary Magdalene so called Gospel, the recently noted “Gospel” of Judas and hundreds of other books were written by a mystic non Christian sect called the GNOSTICS. They believed that knowledge led you to God. So they wrote these special revelations that supposedly were additional background. I could write one today and it would have as much relevance to the Canon of Scripture. That is where the word AGNOSTIC came from = I don’t know and I don’t want to know.
The canon was voted on at the Nicene Council in 300 AD. No body wrote any books then. They just said, what is real and what is bull crap. The 66 books (and a few apocryphal Catholic books were part of that screening). There was little dissent. The DaVinci Code says it was a conflict. It Wasn’t. More fiction interpreted as fact.
I just hate to see more goofy theology added to all the goofy theology which keeps good men like you and Lik from taking a hard look at the truths of the Word of God. I’m not trying to convert you as much as saying you have been deceived by this undercurrent of “Harmless Fiction” and speculation that has put you in a place of, well, how can I say this nicely, Ignorance.
There is some goofball who has a website up with all the supposed contradictions in the Bible. I have tried hard to see which of those could actually be construed as a contradiction. I fail to see it. So, if you insist that there are contradictions you will see contradictions. It takes faith to believe in contradictions. Equal and opposite faith, equal and opposite faith to believing the word of God is true. I don’t think Rob wants this to become a discussion on “religious” issues. But, My email is below. I will respond to anyone who wants to point out their favorite contradiction.
I have read them ALL and see none. So, There you are.
I think this has a lot of parallels to the NSA wiretapping data mining controversy that is currently in the news. To those convinced otherwise they have their apologists who will give them a great case of how this is evil and undermines our privacy, to the other side this is critical to our national security. Both have their Canons. New York Times on the left. And on the right the High Priest GWB. I’m in favor of the project. I therefore respect and endorse the data analysis. Those on the other side…..
It’s exactly the same.