The Da Vinci Code

[[VI]ROosTEr]

I debated on putting this in the entertainment section, but felt it may provokr a more meaningful debate here. The book, as far as novels go, was entertaining, but I would like to hear comments on its content from others that have read it. I apologize if there is already a topic about this or, if I should have placed it in Entertainment, just go on and move or delete it.

[soul .gc]

I thought it was a great book, but it is fiction. He mixes some fact with lots of fiction to make it seem very convincing, probably why it is still on the bestseller list after being out for months.

[gOOters]

It was a pretty good read, Brown does a good job of making you open the next chapter.

[Bubblegum Bandit]

Haven't read it yet. I have a friend who calls himself a "recovering Catholic" who asked me to read an excerpt from it a few weeks ago and wanted to know what I thought about it.

 

Kinda funny you posted this today though, yesterday at church the first half of our sermon was on dispelling the myths that this excerpt from the book uses. It was interesting, if you would like to hear it I believe our church posts mp3 copies of the sermon each week. Flatirons Community Church is the name of it, I will have to find the website and grab you a link.

 

However, just a warning for some, the basis for dispelling the myths IS rooted in the bible, so those of you who don't take the bible as at least being historically correct will probably not get much out of listening to it.

 

Bub

 

Edit....ok, I found the page, however, at the time I'm posting it hasn't been updated for this week. The name of the sermon is "24 hours in the life of.....Part 2: A Remarkable Woman." Oh yeah, and it uses quick time.

 

Flatirons Community Church Message Page

[[VI]ROosTEr]

I thought it was a great book, but it is fiction. He mixes some fact with lots of fiction to make it seem very convincing, probably why it is still on the bestseller list after being out for months.

That is exactly what I said to my fiance. He also makes a lot of statements as fact when they are, in real life, suppositions or myths.

[jane]

Flatirons Community Church

i forget bubble, do you live in CO? if you do then wehn i get my lan party together(if you have BF1942) YOU SHOULD COME UP. iM IN FT COLLINS.....

[jane]

^^^^^bump^^^^^^ bubblegum do you live in CO?

[Bubblegum Bandit]

Yes I do Jane, Westminster, if you know the area this is redundant, but, North Denver.

 

CSU?

[jane]

ex UNC(dropped out for a better job)... ill be headed your way possibly this fall for the Denver Police Academy. Just thought id let you know. I'll PM you whenever we get our LAN party going, if you wanna join.

[duma]

He also makes a lot of statements as fact when they are, in real life, suppositions or myths.

 

I am curious to know what part you think are myths.

 

We had a simular discussion in a forum that I usually debate in. Perhaps if you could clarify what part you think is/are (a) myth(s), I might be able to give you some evidence.

 

All together though, I think it was a GREAT book.

[soul .gc]

I would like some evidence on Mary Magdalene being the Goddess' daughter please or some on The Mona Lisa actually being a portrait of Magdalene or that the Last Supper has her at Jesus' right hand.....

 

Those are the top ones...

 

Oh, and something about a mythical order created to protect the remains of Mary and all the papers hehe.

[duma]

I would like some evidence on Mary Magdalene being the Goddess' daughter please

 

Ah... I thought that is where you were making your issues with the book.

(btw, he never said she was the daughter of God. He said she was the wife of Jesus).

 

First off, I would like evidence that proves she was not.

 

You see, the issue at hand is a matter of faith. Unfortionatly, you can not dispute the fact she was, or was not, nor can I prove (with out a doubt) the same.

 

The Mona Lisa actually being a portrait of Magdalene

Again, this is a rather well documented hypothesis. Was the portrait of Magdalene? Would it really matter if it was? This is "just" a painting by an artist, and like most paintings, permits you to decide what it is about (unless the author tells you).

 

 

or that the Last Supper has her at Jesus' right hand.....

I have looked at the picture, and I can see where it looks like a women. BUT, again, this painting is no different than that of the above.

Edited April 6, 2004 by duma

[duma]

oh, and there are plenty of ppl who do suggest alot of the same of Magdalene. Here is just such an example: link.

Though again, it is just one person's idea... but a worthy perspective none the less.

Edited April 6, 2004 by duma

[soul .gc]

you said you could provide some evidence if we asked questions, so I did.

 

I did not expect any since the book is Fiction. If there was factual evidence for some of the stuff he has in there then it would be readily available.

 

I enjoyed the book as well but, like most fiction books and websites nowadays, it should not be taken as fact.

[duma]

you said you could provide some evidence if we asked questions, so I did.

Right. I did say I could provide evidence depending where the issue with the book was.

 

I did not expect any since the book is Fiction. If there was factual evidence for some of the stuff he has in there then it would be readily available.

 

Like any book of fiction, there are some facts, and yes, they are readily available.

 

The book describes the Catholic religion being built upon religions of the past.

 

Here is an example (with pictures):

 

a pagan Canaanite cultic pillar or "matstsebah" showing hands raised in praise to the sun disk. This was BEFORE the catholic religion.

 

Look closely, and you will see it is the SAME thing.

 

Further fact found in the book is the idea that alot of Catholics believe Jesus was born on Dec 25. There is no evidence of the day Jesus was born, however, there is a reason that Dec 25 was used. Pagan festivals in honor of the Roman God, Saturn, were celebrated during the month of December.

 

These Pagan symbols are even used to this day in Catholism. A perfect example is found in this link

[soul .gc]

Further fact found in the book is the idea that alot of Catholics believe Jesus was born on Dec 25. There is no evidence of the day Jesus was born, however, there is a reason that Dec 25 was used. Pagan festivals in honor of the Roman God, Saturn, were celebrated during the month of December.

 

They are wrong. It is pretty common knowledge that he was not born on that day but we use it to celebrate the day of his birth.

 

a pagan Canaanite cultic pillar or "matstsebah" showing hands raised in praise to the sun disk. This was BEFORE the catholic religion.

 

So praying to the Sun God is now the basis for Catholicism? I do not think anyone has said that there are not some pagan ties into modern religion, especially on the holidays that we use.

 

I checked the site quickly but he seems to stretch for a lot of points. Perhaps if you wish to continue this topic you should create a new thread since this is way off topic of the book now.

[duma]

They are wrong. It is pretty common knowledge that he was not born on that day but we use it to celebrate the day of his birth.

 

What part of it is wrong? You just agreed there is no known birth date. So, you have to wonder, why Dec. 25th?

 

So praying to the Sun God is now the basis for Catholicism?

 

Where did I say that?

 

I do not think anyone has said that there are not some pagan ties into modern religion, especially on the holidays that we use.

 

And that was (one of) the points in the book. That modern religion has a deep basis of that of previous religions; he further explains in the book the reason for such a phenomenon.

 

I checked the site quickly but he seems to stretch for a lot of points.

 

Of course this is from your own personal perspective.

 

Perhaps if you wish to continue this topic you should create a new thread since this is way off topic of the book now.

 

You asked for me to give evidence of facts of the book. I have provided such evidence, which has lead us to discuss those points. Perhaps if you wish to discuss those issues in further detail, you should create another thread.

 

 

edit: quotes were not working.

Edited April 6, 2004 by duma

[soul .gc]

What part of it is wrong? You just agreed there is no known birth date. So, you have to wonder, why Dec. 25th?

 

The people that believe it is the birthdate of Christ are wrong. This whole topic was covered in here not too long ago as well. I do not know one person that thinks the 25th is his Bday.

 

Where did I say that?

 

You infer that with your comments about Catholicism being based on prior religions and used the "sun god" as a prime example.

 

And that was (one of) the points in the book. That modern religion has a deep basis of that of previous religions

 

I agree it was one of the points but I disagree that a "deep basis" is the correct wording. There are some similarities between pagan religions and christianity though.

 

Of course this is from your own personal perspective.

 

Yes.

 

We also have things like this:

 

"Notice the letters SFS in the small sunburst blaze on the large close up of a Monstrance above? Each of the letters is a universal symbol for the number 6 in the pagan mysteries, so to the pagan it reads 666! The number 666 is also associated with what is called the "magic square of the sun". The practice of equating names and letters with numbers is called gematria."

 

So now the initials on the Pope's item is related back to the worship of the sun?

 

and this:

 

"So the Catholic Church describes itself officially in the new Vatican Catechism, council decrees, and papal encyclicals as engaged in the act of worshipping the Eucharist, which is also called adoration or veneration. Isn't it amazing how the Catholic Church justifies bowing down before images of the sun, as depicted by the monstrance and a round wafer, by claiming the bread has actually become God! God's commandment is cleverly made of no effect by the Traditions of men, by mixing error and truth."

 

He makes far-fetched claims that the Monstrance and Wafer are images of the sun. They are not, in fact he even says so earlier then seems to overlook it in his conclusion; ""During the baroque period, it took on a rayed form of a sun-monstrance with a circular window surrounded by a silver or gold frame with rays."". It took on a rayed form of a sun-monstrance, not the sun itself.

 

You asked for me to give evidence of facts of the book. I have provided such evidence, which has lead us to discuss those points. Perhaps if you wish to discuss those issues in further detail, you should create another thread.

 

No, I asked you to provide evidence for my questions which has not been done.

[dwEEziL]

Oh dear lord. It is the "Quote Wars: Attack of the Quotes"!!!!!

 

[soul .gc]

That is twice tonight you have made me LOL at home Dweez....stop it already!!

 

[duma]

ah.. ok, no quotes than.

 

I gave the example of the sun god to show that the rituals are simular, not to infer that he is praying to the sun god. But now we are just discussing semantics.

 

As far as Dec 25th goes, I was not here at the time to know that discussion had taken place. Although, my point to bring it up was to show that the church used that date for a reason, and attempt to at least make you (or anyone esle) wonder why. Again, I imagine you fellas have already covered that, and as you have said, it is OT.

 

"Deep Basis" I think is rather accurate. Though I can agree to disagree as we both seem to feel strongly in this area, and any further links I provide will more then likely be dismissed as a stretch. Yet this is the area you can agree on to a limit, and was the area I had thought you had chalked up to complete myth.

 

I also brought up the issue of previous religions because you said:

 

"If there was factual evidence for some of the stuff he has in there then it would be readily available."

 

Obviously I can not answer your question of the Mona Lisa, Last Super, or MM, because I am not the artist... and no one has ever been able to answer the same questions you have asked.... and yet the fact does remain that those ARE possiblities proposed by the public.

 

Even still, if all of the ideals of the books paintings were proven to be true, what difference would it make? It is simply a painting by an artist.

[dwEEziL]

duma, quotes are fine and often preferred to avoid misunderstandings. I was just trying to be funny to try an keep the mood light.

[duma]

duma, quotes are fine and often preferred to avoid misunderstandings.  I was just trying to be funny to try an keep the mood light.

ok. I just know that some ppl get angry when ppl quote them.

 

The mood was light though (IMO)... I never intend to make anyone angry, and I would stop if/when I did/do.... though I don't mind taking jabs when I am jabbed at... er, that is kind of contradicting. What I mean is, just short of name calling, I will stop.

 

Usually in debate ppl like to silence the competition with a quick jab that seems strong... it isn't really anger, just an attempt to silence their counterpart.

 

I like to debate, as it gives me another person's view. I just assume other ppl are capable of a discussion that isn't personal (until proven otherwise).

[dwEEziL]

Feel free man. We always enjoy another good debater in these forums. I think you will get along in here fine.

[soul .gc]

We do?

 

hahaha.....