posted on March 17, 2005 01:08:34 PM new
bizzy, what facts is it based on? I think when I was discussing this book with maggie a while back I read in a review that what offends historians, is that many of the timelines are wrongly interpreted?
posted on March 17, 2005 01:10:48 PM new
linduh says, "Libra - So have I and it's my opinion that's why we don't get links to where their info comes from in the first place. Don't want us to even think that a 'person who studies different religions' and then calls himself a Christian is to be taken as 'gospel'""
So have you what?
linduh , why don't you relax and quit trying so hard to start a fight with winners and losers. Some posters are not using links because they are using their BRAINS and OPINIONS.
So sorry, that , as usual, YOU can't think or form an opinion without googling.
Now, can you explain this sentence (actually written in your own words, I think):
""Don't want us to even think that a 'person who studies different religions' and then calls himself a Christian is to be taken as 'gospel'."
posted on March 17, 2005 01:15:29 PM newSo have I and it's my opinion that's why we don't get links to where their info comes from in the first place. Don't want us to even think that a 'person who studies different religions' and then calls himself a Christian is to be taken as 'gospel'. Even he admits...not a Christian in the traditional sense of the word. Yea....make up your own form of Christianity.
Ahhh..Linda sees another conspiracy theory, this time it's the RT posters who are concealing links to hide the real truth...
Be my guest, educate yourself, read a book...
open your mind...what are you afraid of?
Simply type in http://www.danbrown.com and his Website will magically appear.. from there you can read all the Q&A and if you are still convinced that this man is really the anti-Christ.. may I suggest you email him personally and give him a piece of your mind... LOl
posted on March 17, 2005 01:19:56 PM new
See the insults fly. When someone comes in and posts their thought they are called names. Right crowfarm. You are the biggest name caller then maggie second.
Why can't a discussion be a discussion instead of insults.
posted on March 17, 2005 01:23:36 PM new
O GAWD, Wanda Whiner's back with the usual "avoid the issue" scheme of pouting about name-calling because she can't answer the questions.
posted on March 17, 2005 01:24:42 PM newIn fact an atheist doesn't believe in christanity so why would anyone write on christanity.
I don't think one has to necessarily believe in something to write about it. When creating a work of fiction, you can write about whatever you want. I don't believe in super powers, for instance, but I once wrote a short story about a little boy who was invincible (much in the way that Superman is invincible). The idea for the story came from a re-occurring dream I used to have as a child.
The ideas that Brown presents in his book are presented within the context of a fictional story. When I read the book, I gave the same weight to his theories I give to any fictional plot I read. Its clear that Brown researched some of the historical aspects of his book but it is equally clear that he draws his own conclusions from that research through his characters actions and thoughts. As a writer of fiction, I would expect him to do just that. The fact that some people are taking Brown's conclusions (presented in a fictional story) and elevating them to some kind of gospel is not Brown's fault.
I recently read "Night Fall" by Nelson DeMille. The book is a fictional story based on the real-life crash of TWA 800 (which you may remember is the 747 that crashed off of Long Island shortly after taking off in July 1996). DeMille clearly researched the disaster and much of what he wrote can be fact-checked with research. However, within the fictional story he wrote, he came to some conclusions as to the real reason the plane crashed - which differed greatly from the "official" explaination of the crash. The reader may or may not agree with it but in the end, its just a fictional story based on a real event.
To me, its the same thing with "The Divinci Code." Divinci certainly painted the works used in the book and there is some historical evidence which supports some of the theories used by Brown. But in the end, its just a fictional story based on some real world events. People who think it is more than that are too easily swayed by the written word and best ought to stay away from books like "Promises to Keep" by George Bernau which is a book about the shooting of JFK. In "Promises to Keep," Bernau wrote about the shooting of JFK in Dealy Plaza, however, JFK survives the the assassination attempt and the book goes on to tell the tale of the JFK administration in the years after Dealy Plaza.
posted on March 17, 2005 01:34:06 PM new
DBLF..Bad DBLF!! You haven't read the book yet!
May I suggest to all who have questions about what is or isn't written in this book..what is truth and what is fiction.. to read it...it won't corrupt your mind or change your religious beliefs...you won't go blind and the God won't strike you dead...I don't think anyone will be offended with what is written.. unless perhaps you are a card carrying member of Opus Dei, in which case you may feel the author was a tad harsh..
Read it as you would any other good mystery novel...relax... enjoy...
posted on March 17, 2005 01:47:52 PM new
Diane - What I am saying is that there were SEVERAL books/articles written to prove that what you preceive as FACTS....weren't accurate facts at all. Rather DB's own twist. If you'd like I can give you a couple of the reviews to discuss exactly where he was wrong.
But what really slays me is all of you denying that DB HAS presented this book as factual....even saying "It's ALL factual". Those words are straight from his own mouth...not someone's 'take' on it.
Imo, that is why so many have taken the time to take each 'historical' presentation DB presented in this book and proved it to be untrue.
And KD - I agree with Libra. This 'self pronounced Christian' has taken Catholic historical facts and twisted them. That's what's bothing the Vatican and other Christians. No suprise there are those who wouldn't be bothered by this, but in fact there are many who ARE bothered by it. That's life. Makes for great discussions....but because the Catholic church doesn't appreciate have it's own HISTORY twisted is VERY understandable.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 02:06:50 PM new
For GAWD'S SAKE linDUH!
What about the word "fiction" don't you understand ?????
Read something besides your own posts and just maybe you'll learn something NEW .
""HOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?
The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). 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.
BUT DOESN'T THE NOVEL'S "FACT" PAGE CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THIS NOVEL IS HISTORICAL FACT?
If you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist. The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader.
posted on March 17, 2005 02:12:59 PM newBut what really slays me is all of you denying that DB HAS presented this book as factual....even saying "It's ALL factual". Those words are straight from his own mouth...not someone's 'take' on it.
Linda.. you are either to stubborn to read, or just acting dumb.. I really can't understand what your problem is.. I have even provided you a link to his website where you can read his own words... What part of this do you not understand?? Why don't you read instead of opening your mouth and looking like a such a fool...
READ DAN BROWN'S WORDS
HOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?
....................................
The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals d
depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). 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.
BUT DOESN'T THE NOVEL'S "FACT" PAGE CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THIS NOVEL IS HISTORICAL FACT?
........................................
If you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist. The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader.
posted on March 17, 2005 02:17:25 PM new
fiset - I have already stated this but feel I need to do so again. Are you real familiar with Catholic history? And if so, did you not notice the 'twist' for lack of a better word on the supposedly historical facts that DB presented as facts in his book? Because there is a ton of Catholic's taking each point by point and showing where DB got his information from to begin with and it was from other writers information. Could that be why you took/take them to be historical facts, when others claim they aren't correct 'facts' at all?
--------------
Funny how no one here wants to address just WHY DB would be saying the same thing over and over in public interviews....stating it's all facts.
Appears to me like you're arguing the case against WHAT HE'S said....not against me.
Here's another quote from him:
May. 19, 2004
Unmasking Dan Brown: Some
Christians deem it necessary to debunk author's popular work of fiction
BY HELEN T. GRAY
Knight Ridder Newspapers
(KRT) -
Matt Lauer: How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?
Dan Brown: Absolutely all of it. Obviously Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art,
architecture, secret rituals, secret societies ... all of that is historical fact.
_"The Today Show," June 9, 2003
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 02:19:19 PM new
dbl: thanks! But you can now make that 8 goat kids. Our best doe just hit a triple and their all does!! ...this keeps up I may be in the dairy goat business instead of the wool trade....
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on March 17, 2005 02:22:12 PM new
Linda, please don't get the idea that all Catholics are opposed to Brown's ideas. I know priests who will privately admit that the church's view of history is "carefully crafted".
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on March 17, 2005 02:23:30 PM new
linDUH . your last post proved beyaond all doubt how stupid you are.
Thank you for once again proving my point:
""""Matt Lauer: How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?
Dan Brown: Absolutely all of it. Obviously Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art,
architecture, secret rituals, secret societies ... all of that is historical fact.
_"The Today Show," June 9, 2003 """
Sorry, linduh , that you don't have the comprehension skills of a box.
ALL fiction is BASED on reality and goes on from there.
posted on March 17, 2005 02:25:21 PM new
[i]A Christian is a follower of the historical Jesus as presented in the Bible. Christians hold to the essential teachings of the Bible. Alan Gomes writes that "'Central doctrines' of the Christian faith are those doctrines that make the Christian faith Christian and not something else.", and says, "The meaning of the expression "Christian faith" is not like a wax nose, which can be twisted to mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean."
Someone who, even though he claims to be a Christian, rejects orthodoxy in favor of heresy is a heretic - a person considered to be outside of the Christian faith[/i].
------------------
Fiction Presented As Fact
Though it is a fictional story, Brown claims - both in the book and in interviews - that it is based on fact. However, while Publishers Weekly says the book is "exhaustively researched," it includes so many erroneous statements that it prompted one reviewer to refer to the novel as an "atrociously researched mess."
The problem, it seems, is that some people have taken the story to be true. Indeed, Brown has encouraged this confusion by insisting upon the book's historical accuracy. Asked in an interview how much of the novel is based on fact, he replied: "All of it."
[...]
Brown has argued that historical arguments are themselves suspect because history is written "by those societies and belief systems that conquered and survived." This is a cop-out. It is disingenuous for Brown to present his book as factual and then hide behind questions like "how historically accurate is history itself?" He should stick to fiction.
posted on March 17, 2005 02:29:03 PM new
""The problem, it seems, is that some people have taken the story to be true."""
Well, isn't that just too bad....maybe they should be more self-reliant?
Maybe they shouldn't just go along like sheep......
MAYBE they should QUESTION what they read .
MAYBE they should learn the meaning of the word "fiction".......if they can.
posted on March 17, 2005 02:32:16 PM new
Why should a Catholic be concerned about the novel?
Although a work of fiction, the book claims to be meticulously researched, and it goes to great lengths to convey the impression that it is based on fact. It even has a "fact" page at the front of the book underscoring the claim of factuality for particular ideas within the book. As a result, many readers-both Catholic and non-Catholic-are taking the book's ideas seriously.
The problem is that many of the ideas that the book promotes are anything but fact, and they go directly to the heart of the Catholic faith. For example, the book promotes these ideas:
Jesus is not God; he was only a man.
Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
She is to be worshiped as a goddess.
Jesus got her pregnant, and the two had a daughter.
That daughter gave rise to a prominent family line that is still present in Europe today.
The Bible was put together by a pagan Roman emperor.
Jesus was viewed as a man and not as God until the fourth century, when he was deified by the emperor Constantine.
The Gospels have been edited to support the claims of later Christians.
In the original Gospels, Mary Magdalene rather than Peter was directed to establish the Church.
There is a secret society known as the Priory of Sion that still worships Mary Magdalene as a goddess and is trying to keep the truth alive.
The Catholic Church is aware of all this and has been fighting for centuries to keep it suppressed. It often has committed murder to do so.
The Catholic Church is willing to and often has assassinated the descendents of Christ to keep his bloodline from growing.
Catholics should be concerned about the book because it not only misrepresents their Church as a murderous institution but also implies that the Christian faith itself is utterly false.
Should other Christians be concerned about the book?
Definitely. Only some of the offensive claims of The Da Vinci Code pertain directly to the Catholic Church. The remainder strike at the Christian faith itself. If the book's claims were true, then all forms of Christianity would be false (except perhaps for Gnostic/feminist versions focusing on Mary Magdalene instead of Jesus).
posted on March 17, 2005 02:41:00 PM new
For those of us who have "actually read" this book...I believe that we can all say, it was worth the read.
For those who have decided not to read the book, but to use the selected reviews of others to form their opinions..I say, it's a pity..your loss..
I wouldn't assume to tell you what to post..or what not to post.. but I will say, I don't consider your posts and opinions valid or worthwhile.. since you are debating something you haven't even read. Sorry...come back when you have read the book and have something to contribute.
maggie I have never said no one should read this book. That's your mistaken 'take'. I've pointed out that many are under the FALSE impression, since the author, DB, has continually stated it's based on historical facts, that it's NOT. His 'facts' twist history for his own financial gain, at the expense of others belief systems.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 03:20:34 PM new Linda are you going to read the book and see what all this "hullabaloo" is about?
I wish you would.. I think you would enjoy it.
posted on March 17, 2005 03:22:12 PM new
I'm loving this thread
Linda quoed from somewhere:
Jesus is not God; he was only a man.
---Read the "Gospel of Mark" in any common Bible. Clearly He was just a regular guy until he was "Possessed" by the Holy Spirit (During his baptism- prior to that he did nothing special ad afterwards his family thought he had gone mad), The other, later Gospels increased and elaborated on this in many creative ways.
Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
---I'm not going to look up sources, by many scholars do in fact believe this. It depends on what you believe Jesus was. If he was a Man, then it was perfectly natural that he marry and have children. If he was God, and he knew his future as a certeinly, he would never have married.
She is to be worshiped as a goddess.
Jesus got her pregnant, and the two had a daughter.
That daughter gave rise to a prominent family line that is still present in Europe today.
--- Never heard these three before. They were probably made up for the book
The rest of these statements are completely historically true and fairly easy to prove.
The Bible was put together by a pagan Roman emperor.
Jesus was viewed as a man and not as God until the fourth century, when he was deified by the emperor Constantine.
The Gospels have been edited to support the claims of later Christians.
In the original Gospels, Mary Magdalene rather than Peter was directed to establish the Church.
There is a secret society known as the Priory of Sion that still worships Mary Magdalene as a goddess and is trying to keep the truth alive.
The Catholic Church is aware of all this and has been fighting for centuries to keep it suppressed. It often has committed murder to do so.
With the exception of the "married with children" part, nearly all of this statement is treatment is true. And I do consider myself a Christian. An EDUCATED one.
I'm not sure how or why anyone would choose to be a Christian without researching the secular history of the Church. There was a LOT of politics involved in making the Bible.
--------------------------------------
Replay Media - The best source for board games, card games and miniatures on the web! http://www.replaymedia.com
posted on March 17, 2005 03:33:27 PM new
linduh!!! Quick get over to the lighten up thread. There are people who have started to believe in leprechauns!
We need someone to PROVE they don't exist...HURRY.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 03:37:38 PM new
Great Post.. Replay..
Some of the posters on this thread bring a whole new meaning to the term "Blind Faith"...more like
Blind, Deaf, and Dumb..
posted on March 17, 2005 03:37:59 PM new
replay - Just as in ANY group...not all will agree on everything - as the profe already mentioned.
----------
And from USA Today...back when the book first came out:
crowfarm...it's NOT only 'republicans' nor conservatives that think the 'facts' in his book are incorrect...as one article from USAToday [from 2003] said:
Scholars and theologians, both conservative and liberal, dispute that. Some even say Brown is anti-Catholic. But Doubleday Publisher Stephen Rubin says "the accuracy questions have added to the celebrity of the book. People want to read it for themselves."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 03:50:13 PM new
Good try , linduh, but I never said that.
"""crowfarm...it's NOT only 'republicans' nor conservatives that think the 'facts' in his book are incorrect...as one article from USAToday [from 2003] said:
Scholars and theologians, both conservative and liberal, dispute that."""
