23 November 03
Sangreal
I just galloped through Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code, a nonstop-paced thriller that starts with a contemporary murder in the Louvre that quickly leads into the mysteries of the Holy Grail. Brown has taken an actual set of conspiracy theories and has repackaged these in terms of a best-selling thriller. Whatever be the truthfulness of these tales of long-standing secret societies, the heterodoxies they attest to are enthralling, and make for a compelling read.
Previous: Bees: A Secret Life Next: Ablatives On The Rebound
Would welcome any hints of direction for someone who is a complete novice but awestruck by the potential of what is portrayed here.
Brown’s New Age theology and Postmodern idealogies come off preachy. He has an obvious dislike for the military and traditional Christianity, as well as a radical feminist perspective. The author is transparent, and like his main character, Langdon, an arrogrant elitist.
mint read, reading ref books and rune signs.
This can only enhance human spirituality.
well educated open-minded society-let’s begin to act like it and make some coherent,viable changes in the way we think and live our lives. The royal crapper isn’t as far away as one might think.
“The Da Vinci Code” is a thriller that deals with cracking a code. The beginning is promising: A person who is keeping an important secret – the director of the Louvre Museum – discovers that he has only moments left to live. The secret cannot be revealed to just anyone, and the dying man has to create a code quickly that will be understood only by the person for whom it is intended.
The rest of the book is less successful.
The novel moves rapidly from cliche to cliche, is full of logical and psychological improbabilities and culminates in a saccharine denouement. The business with codes is quite disappointing. The initial message is supposed to be understood only by the murder victim’s cryptologist niece. Therefore it includes the following sophisticated elements: The dying man strips and lies down with his arms and legs stretched out inside a circle, like Leonardo Da Vinci’s famous “Vitruvian Man” (the clue: Leonardo). He writes down numbers from the Fibonacci series (in which each number is the sum of the two preceding numbers, a series that even a mathematical ignoramus like me would identify immediately). These numbers will turn out to be the code to a safe in a Swiss bank. There are also two sentences in the message that need to be read with changes in the letters.
When the beautiful, daring niece and her partner, an equally handsome and daring American professor (who is also an expert on religious symbols) solve this difficult riddle, they discover another riddle that is equally difficult: another sentence that needs to be read with changes in the letters! Later on this becomes even more complicated and mysterious. The two, for example, have to decipher something that is written – you aren’t going to believe this – in mirror writing! Brilliant. Or at least this is what the characters think. The remaining mysteries in the book are just as brilliant.
It seems that the reason for the success of this book is neither the sophistication of the riddles in it, nor the very modest quality of the writing. What thrills many of the readers is its pretension to a revealing and daring interpretation of authentic materials from Christian history and the Christian religion. “The Da Vinci Code” purports to reveal a Catholic conspiracy and show us its underpinnings.
The author does not, of course, claim that his book is not a novel, but he does say that the novel is based on genuine materials that at least give rise to questions. According to Brown, in early Christianity there was a continuation of the cult of the Great Mother, a cult of femininity that existed alongside the cult of masculinity. Femininity was symbolized by Mary Magdalene, Jesus’ spouse and the mother of his children. Jesus was a prophet and teacher who, among other things, brought this message of Yin and Yang to his followers.
These facts were repressed and concealed by the church establishment, especially since the days of Constantine. This pagan emperor became a Christian for political reasons, and at the Council of Nicea succeeded in transforming Jesus into a god and concealing Mary Magdalene. Since then femininity has gone underground. Mary Magdalene’s remains and the secret documents that tell the real story were found on the Temple Mount when Jerusalem was conquered in the First Crusade.
Coded paintings
In 1099 the Priory of Sion was established and the aim of this order was to keep the secret. It set up an internal military branch called the Poor Knights of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon, or the Templars. The order flourished until 1307, when many of its members were arrested at the initiative of the French king, Phillip the Fair, and Pope Clement V. In 1312 the order was disbanded by the papacy, but the secret treasure was saved. It had been transferred well before then to the members of the Priory of Sion, who kept it underground and acted to plant secret hints in the culture about the concealed truth. Among the heads of the order were Isaac Newton (a Protestant), Sandro Botticelli (a Catholic penitent), Victor Hugo (a republican atheist), Leonardo Da Vinci and Jean Cocteau.
Da Vinci’s paintings are sophisticated codes. The “Mona Lisa,” for example, is no less than an androgynous self-portrait. More importantly, in the painting of the Last Supper in Milan, the secret is revealed almost entirely. Even though the ceremony that is depicted is ostensibly the moment of the establishment of the rite of the mass and the consecration of the Grail (which the Catholic tradition identifies as the sacred chalice), there is no special chalice on the table. Next to Christ is a woman – his honorable lady wife Mary Magdalene – whose womb is the sacred goblet that carries within it the living blood of Jesus. The two form the letter M, which indicates matrimonium (marriage) or Mary Magdalene’s name. The descendants of our Yin and the Yang end up in France in the Merovingian royal dynasty and they live in wealth and happiness to this very day.
What is correct in this tale? Hardly anything. Brown’s main contentions are taken from a series of forgeries that were concocted in France in the 1930s and 1940s by a group of believers in esoteric doctrines, extreme leftists, anti-Semites and supporters of Petain. This nonsense later garnered publicity and was circulated in a number of books, the best-known of which is “Holy Blood, Holy Grail,” which was published in the 1980s and was hugely successful. All of these forgeries (about the Priory of Sion and the spurious list of its heads) were exposed long ago, including the dossiers secrets, which Brown mentions as authentic documents from the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris. The national library in Paris, like the Jewish National and University Library in Jerusalem and the Library of Congress, does hold such documents. It is not responsible for their contents or quality.
What are the facts? In the ancient world of Christ’s time there was no cult of a primary female deity. There were various female deities that were popular to one extent or another. Christianity, like Judaism, did choose a male deity, but in fact it did not try to repress the female. In the four Gospels (which are the earliest evidence of the life of Christ and not something that was forced on Christianity by Constantine) there is no central female figure. Mary, mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and Martha play marginal though positive roles. In later periods, Gnostic cults tried to give a central role to Mary Magdalene as the spiritual partner of Christ – the idea that Jesus would have sexual relations would shock any cult member more than it would shock a Catholic Christian.
The Great Mother cult
The church did indeed reject these ideas, but it never tried to repress femininity. On the contrary. Instead of a penitent spouse, the woman chosen was the virgin mother, “she who was born without sin,” the great “intermediary,” the “Queen of Heaven,” the “mother of God.” Mary mother of God attracted such an intensive cult that sometimes she even overshadowed her divine son. Most cathedrals (built by the bishops of cities and not by the Templars) are dedicated to her, as are hymns of praise, prayers and visions.
Catholic theology went very far, and very daringly, in the direction of the cult of the Great Mother, the mother of God. The church was not free of prejudices that were common in that period. Women were sinners and foolish, but on the spiritual plane, the church behaved very respectfully toward women. There were and there are many female saints and mystics who garnered and are still garnering respect and worship. The church authorities have never said that Mary Magdalene was a whore (this is a popular conception, in fact). She continues to be considered a key and important saint who politely gave center stage to a figure more important than she.
During Constantine’s time, Christianity was not a religion on the rise, but a persecuted cult whose very existence was in danger. At the Council of Nicea it was not decided that Jesus was divine – this is already hinted at in the New Testament and has been accepted by most Christians since the beginnings of Christianity. It was decided at the Council to reject the Arian position, according to which the Father preceded the Son. The results of the vote were not balanced, as Brown says, but were determined by a vast majority against the Arians.
There was never a secret order called the Priory of Sion. The Templar order was established in 1119 in Jerusalem; it was a military order that had no esoteric or special spiritual pretension, and with the conquest of the Holy Land by the Muslims it devoted itself to money matters. What aroused the envy of the French was not any secret doctrine but rather the order’s enormous wealth. The confessions that were extorted from the Templars in the first show trial in history (mainly a French rather than a papal production) were wicked: acts of sodomy, conversion to Islam, sorcery and Satan-worship. There was nothing said about any mother cult, great or small.
There is no evidence that the order continued to exist in any way. This legend cropped up in the 19th century, when the Freemasons were enchanted by the order’s connection to Solomon’s Temple, a connection that the Freemasons also claimed.
The “Mona Lisa” is not a self- portrait. She is a real woman, the wife of Francesco da Giocondo. The painting of the Last Supper (which incidentally is not a fresco, but rather a tempera painting on stone) does not depict the moment of the blessing of the wine, but the moment when Jesus announces that one of his disciples will betray him. This is the reason the painting does not stress the goblet. This is not unusual in paintings of the period. The figure to Christ’s right is his beloved disciple John. He is always depicted as a handsome youth with long hair. He is not a woman, and it is difficult to believe that the Dominican friars for whom the picture was painted and the thousands of clerics who looked at it would have accepted such a scandalous departure from the norm.
The claim that the descendents of Jesus married into the Merovingian royal dynasty is based on a figure called Giselle de Razes who married King Dagobert II in the 7th century. Giselle de Razes never existed, but was invented in the 20th century.
What more can be said? That this is only a sample of the nonsense that appears in the book. All this does not stop “The Da Vinci Code” from being a huge best-seller in the United States. Why? God (or the Godess) knows.
Aviad Kleinberg is a professor of history at Tel Aviv University.
Copyright Haaretz Daily, 2003.
(For more information on how ideas about the Priory of Sion were mostly misconceptions, check up this website http://www.anzwers.org/free/posmis/)
take it or leave it, this is no “forgery” or “conspiracy” of the 1940’s, its fact.
The first three people caliming Jesus wasn’t in his sepulchre were women!
The striking news that a man
the second actually, because Lazarus had already had that experiencedefeated death was given by Women. Not exactly what u would expect from a scheme to repress femininity.When the gosphels had been written – some years after the facts had happened- there were a lot of witnesses still wondering back and forth. They wouldn’t have accepted lies in the writings.
The Gulf Area was a Christian Region untill the 4th Century, can u find some of them over there right now?
Maybe the powerfull Church didn’t care its people being slaughtered.
Mr Brown made a great job: poor book good money!
Keep searching the truth people, keep searching.
By the way u could find some of the weapons of mass destruction while in the search, probably hidden by the Vatican.
:)
that Dan Brown is “anti-military” – Sorry I must have missed that. And you further write that ‘The DaVinic Code’ is preachy and it’s main character was an “arrogant elitist”. Again Michael, I miss your interpretation – but you must have your reasons. One, I’m sure, is fear, like all good Catholics should be. I think you might want to reread this book. There is a great deal of information to be gained and a whole new world to explore – why just stop at Catholicism.
Do you really think that the Christ would really relish everything that has happened in his good name since his death? All I can say is good luck watching Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion of the Christ’ – if in fact you choose to see it.
One More thing Michael, you should use the internet to look up some of the things in this book, i.e., the Priory of Sion, Mary Magdalene and the Holy Grail, etc. I think you’ve missed the whole point.
You’re not a misogynist are you?
You just did exactly what you claim Brown did, stated a bunch of crap and expect people to believe you because you say so. Claiming that the Priory of Sion never existed is like saying that we never really landed on the moon, or the Holocaust never really happened. You seem to be scared or you are regergitating a bunch of lies that some freightened Catholic Frof. told you. They existed, and they still exist. But you go on and tell people they don’t. That probably serves their purpose better for now anyway. As for your coments on Da Vinci’s paintings; I think you have purposely left your blindfold on. You just stated what any art history book would tell you. Open your eyes, do some real research. If you can look at “the last supper” and tell me that you honestly believe that that is John then you don’t want to see the truth. You are a loyal soldier to the cause of the perpetuation of lies that has gone on for over a thousand years. Just know this, the truth is out there, so when you start stating lies in places that people that know the truth have access to, you are bound to have your bluff called. Smear Campains are only effective for so long before the hunger for truth overruns them. Keep searching young JuHah.
I am also a feminist who has always distrusted the male-dominated hierarctical church. Let us face the truth. The original books may well have been divinely guided, but the translations have always been done with a political agenda. Why do you think we have the King James version?
Let us face another hard truth. Anyone can put anything out on the internet. No one should rely on research done strictly there.
I think that if Mr. Brown’s book does nothing more than make you look at your own religion with new eyes he has accomplished something. I tell my youth group all the time, it is okay to question your religion as long as it does not shake your faith. I don’t find that my faith is shaken by the idea that Christ might have been married to Mary M., (although my minister turns absolutely purple at the idea) I hope that as my youth group reads this they will feel the same.
However, this is a work of fiction. Check the back, he did not list any references. He cleverly mixed truth (Opus Dei, PHI, and two ambigously gendered paintings) with conspiracy theory. And isn’t that bluring of the lines what makes great fiction?
Don’t let it shake your faith.
Got to go. Langdon and Sophie are trying to get out of Paris and I’m holding my breath.
All Arinelle did was copy and paste an article from Haaretz. Relax. And please don’t bring the Holocaust into this. That was just ridiculous.
The Da Vinci Code is a fun book with plenty of accurate facts to make it interesting. However, the book is purely fictional. The Da Vinci code contains a lot of interesting dots incorrectly connected for entertainment value. This book was meant to provide amusement for the reader and profit for the publisher. It was highly successful at accomplishing both. The Da Vinci Code however is not a historical reference or a work of propaganda. Nor should it be taken as such.
The best book I have ever read…the ideas it shows agree with my ideas, so thank you, Dan Brown for finding out that there are people who walks for the same way…Great reading!!
From Spain (so sorry for my English)
For entertainment, ANGELS AND DEMONS, another Brown novel, was also quite good, although didn’t have the same religious perspective.
However, far more important than the way he presents the story, is the facts that he provides the reader.
I want to know if anyone has heard if the pyramid inverse that DB talks about in the book really holds the relics that the Templars guarded?
“What a sad sad sad thing!!! A fictional book written by a mortal man and people are ready to make it fact and base their beliefs on it”
Was she referring to the DaVinci Code or the Bible ?
– those looking for a summary of every conceivable CT and for the ultimate WOW factor should read the “fictional” : Children of the Matrix
– Sue – good call on Mel Gibson : his production company ICON are well know for covertly flirting with many of the well known conspiracy themes
Second, this was the only De Vince painting commissioned by the Vatican. It was not among many others as Brown indicated.
There are many other errors. Look for them your self.
Terry
I am a christian in serious question of my faith since Sept. 11. I know my bible very well. There are glaring inconsistancies in it. I also have questioned from the time I was young why is there no documentation of more than 20 years of Christ life. How do you answer your questions of faith, but through personal research. Dan Brown has made me research my questions (some of which will never be answered). However, Mr. Browns claims are backed up with documented evidence. He didn’t originate any, I REPEAT, ANY!!!! of the claims. They are theories that have been around for many years. Are they true? Who’s to say. Did he intertwine some of these theories to make money? Yes, the Da Vinci Code is a book of fiction. Does that discredit his claims…. Absolutely, unequivically NO! Believe as you will, but don’t belittle others for feeling different. Research the topics, find out what’s out there… Make up your own mind. Don’t let anyone….ANYONE….tell you how to, or what to believe. THat is your decision.
I just wanted to say that I am really imressed with your post. An open mind is a beautiful thing. Right-on man!
If you are interested, you should pick up the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls. I have read them both and they supply interesting facts as to that era and the variety of perspectives that were abound.
Some things to keep in mind is that paganism was being put on the defense at that time, so appropriate measures by the pagans were needed to appropriate faith and followers. I agree that albeit, the Catholic Church has neglected the role of the female throughout history, they have a stringent and conservative method of preserving history. Do some research on that and you will see. That being said, like all history, whoever was in power, dominated and wrote the history books. Whatever you believe in, if it works in helping you have faith, than its the real thing. Just look at this world and what actually exists in it. If God was defineable it wouldn’t be God.
Hmmm…sounds like THE bestselling book of all time…
Y CREO QUE ES LA IGLESIA.
DAN BROWN HA HECHO UN TRABAJO ESTUPENDO Y ACCESIBLE,PERO SE HA DEJADO VARIAS COSAS QHE A LA GENTE INTERESARIAN .HA LLEGADO LA ERA DE QUE LOS VASALLOS NOS REBELEMOS CONTRA LA HIJA DE PEDRO,ESPERO Q UE ESTE ASUSTADA.
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/davinci/index-ctc.html
and
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/davinci/
its really funny and keeps your brain working!
I read it, loved it. One thing I loved the most about this book is the objectivity about our history. In previous posts certain of you keep mentioning this book is fiction. Well of course it is!! the story is purely fiction not the Data within the story.
One who is a hardcore Christian will trash, spit on, throw tomatoes, Etc at this book because if this is to be true, he would have to accept that he has been fooled and for some people the truth is hard to take or even unbearable. How would you feel if someone came along and proved that youre an ignorant . I myself if someone proves me wrong can take it and admit it. But unfortunately I have lived long enough to know that very few people are capable of it. It is too hard on them. Its like they are saying to themselves I cant be that stupid, no, I refuse. Not that I think that people are stupid, but many use that word on themselves. What I mean is Im not the one saying that.
About the Data: What is being revealed in the story is actual data. Not more and not less truth then the gospels, the bible, new testament, etc
As much as we cannot truly authenticate the data in this book, as much as we cannot authenticate the data in the ancient gospel scrolls use to invent the Christianity religion.
There is no doubt that in the time of history described as the time after Jesus Christ that there were powerful people with great influence which was driven by the fear that people were forced to feel, came out one day and decided what and whom Jesus Christ was and to take their word for it.
One of my ways is: If I cant have the proof I dont take it as truth instead I might consider it as probability .
All of the old religions fail at proving anything of their GODs conception. And the theories suggested of the Priory of Sion secrets of the royal bloodline decedents of Jesus Christ, I wouldnt be surprised at all compared to too hard to believe stories of walking on water, giving sight back to the blind and resurrection. Because that is al they are stories.
About the book: What amazed me the most is the genius of the author. First is story is about one of the greatest quested subject in history offering actual objective data. Within the story there is puzzles to solve, cryptographic personal ciphers of one of is characters that drive other characters into a quest for more puzzles with a final goal and with a secret society with a secret truth to reveal.
And yet once one as read the book, with enormous probability he/she is driven to search the web for DATA on actual subjects in the book which is proven is in this very forum. Make one want to read between the lines of what one has found on the net. Opens your mind.
Conclusion:
1-Catch the interest of the reader- seeks knowledge about the data in the book afterwards.
2-Decipher- Tries to read between the lines of data found.
3-There is a possibility that the author(Artist) is a member of the priory of sion trying to pass on the SECRET. Opens your mind.
However, the prose, layout and characterisation are really only suitable for a childrens’ book. Come on all of you who thought it was well written. Get a life and read something truly well written. I’d be happy to supply a book list.
Kate. Teacher, London.
Those elements are those of a person with great personal power which can be very threatening to those who have power because of their political status and “MONEY” who refuse to live life without having controlled others for their own gain and purposes. Who have the power to threaten people into their system. To characters like Jesus, no need for Money or threats but for politicians their only way to power is THREAT + MONEY” Which would explain the Big Deceitful lie about Jesus being the SON OF GOD. They used Jesus personal power against the people in those days to shape their Population Controlling System.
They used it to make Rules. They did that once he was DEAD.
And I say this only in the case if Jesus really existed because as I said before, the bible story is just that… A STORY.
A great example of personal power is Gandhi. He didn’t have money or an army. But still he was very capable. And he was KILLED.
It always has been about POWER. Power to control others to have an explicit life filled with more then others, to create a great virtual scale amongst people.
As long as human beings wont let go of their little personal selfish need to control others just to be privileged on top of others, the human civilization will keep going in the wrong direction and to the worst of situations.
That is a probability that could describe JESUS message.
I am, personally, sceptical on what is told to me as dan brown puts it, it is another version of the story, rather than the absolute truth (which we’ll never know!)and as others have said, it is your interpretation of the “facts” that is an issue. I was fascinated by the last Supper by Da Vinci and had to look at it for myself and it is true that it does look like a woman, an M, a dagger in mid air, but like poetry, Da Vinci works has to interpreted by each person and a different meaning can be attributed by different peopel and different experiences.
He is much like Michael Crichton in fusing theories and cultures into a gripping and engrossing book and I agree again with one of the postees that it is the theory that it fascinating rather than the tale, Ie Timeline (not the film, which is no reflection of the book and its underpinning theories).
=Maybe its just me, I don’t know, But I always thought that is exactly how one could describe the bible.
To Isabel: You need to make sure you’ve understood before you can make a comment or state an opinion. The hand that is supposed to have no owner is the one holding the dagger not the one mimicking cutting Magdalene’s throat.
Dan Brown’s book is, as many of you have said, a work of fiction. So, I have to wonder why you are so offended by it that you feel you must slander it as if the author has committed some obscene mutation of the truth. A “truth”
by the waythat you can not look me in the eye and swear by.If people enjoyed the book…thats wonderful. I certainly did. If it opens some eyes and allows people to entertain a different theory, then even better. Why insult them or try to make them believe what you believe? Is it so horrible that someone expresses a different opinion from you? Does it hurt so much that you can’t let it be? Sure, express your point of view, by all means, but DO NOT insult those who do not see it the same way.
I for one have never heard even a whisper of the theories expressed in Dan Brown’s book until I read it. I learned something new. I am not a religious person, but these theories allow me to look at Christianity in a whole different light….a more believable light. If you tell me Jesus was a mortal man of Earth with a family, I can except that. If, however, you tell me Jesus is the divine son of God…..well…its a little harder to believe. Can you blame me?
I may be slandered for saying that. And thats exactly whats wrong with humanity and exactly why we don’t know the TRUTH.
However, there is a glaring absurdity in the book’s premise:
The Priory of Sion celebrates the “sacred feminine”. It requires the “Grand Master” to participate- regularly- in a sex ritual- with a WOMAN. And yet- the Grand Master that this book is based on (Da Vinci) was openly- a HOMOSEXUAL. I don’t understand this.
My advice to all the people out there who loved this book- The theories are great- but your time might be better spent if you just recognize them for hat they are- extremely well-presented conspiracy theories! Grassy Knoll anyone?
PS: Go read Dan Brown’s “Angels and Demons”. I’ll admit that he is a great story-teller- but the books are written along extremely similar lines. (I read that one first)One more and he runs the risk of becoming extremely predictable.
And that is not just a pity, but a major worldwide problem.
If someone tells you to go jump from a bridge for greatest good of humanity, will you?
Well no one as to answer that because I already know the answer. NO. So why do some people swallow so easily stories of a SON OF GOD that came here to save US from our SINS who suffered and died for US. Please refer to the above. Who ever said we needed to saved?... Who ever said we had sins?... aside of slaves needing to be freed from certain selfish evil venomous snakes sorry excuse for human beings. We were doing just fine to a certain level. Humans are not perfect and we will never be. Our best bet is BALANCE. Not to good but yet not to evil. It is the middle that can be our only perfect ness. And if you look around you everyday when you walk the streets, when you take the bus or the train, when youre at work you will see that the world is seriously filled with unbalanced therefore pulling us in to the vicious circle of that unbalanced affecting the way we think, the way we do things, not knowing ourselves, searching ourselves, etc
The results are the seriously screwed up civilization we have become.
I could go on and on but I think I said enough for some to get the BIG picture.
I would not recommend this novel to anyone.
Eleanor
I challenge you to do some research of your own. You will find that Dan Brown is not “working hard to put doupt in many Christions minds”. He is merely presenting a story that contains many recent, and some not so recent discoveries. The events of the story are fictional, but the ideas that are presented have been researched by many different authors, historians, and archiologists. It is this research that Dan Brown used while writing this book. You mentioned his “skepticism” in your post. It was actually his wife that originally told him about these theories and he was completely skeptical about THEM. He was positive that once he started researching, he would be able to rule them out easily. but after an enormous amount of research he found that he had become a believer too. If you watch any of the interviews done on TV with Brown, you will see that he is the first to say that “the story and its charactors are completely fiction, but the theories and ideas presented in it are based on historical fact.” Those are his own words. Obviously those are the facts as he sees them and we can’t know exactly what happened in a lot of cases, but you would be surprised at how much of it is not a secret. All you have to do is look for it and a lot of what happened will jump at you. For instance, it is no secret, but it also not widely known at all that Jesus wasn’t referred to as the son of God until almost 400 years after his death. And that was decided by a vote among a council of priests and the “son of God” side barely won the vote. I’m quite sure that if there were internet posts around the 4th century AD that someone would have written the same thing you just did, but about Constantine’s new version of the bible. Modern day Christianity, especially Catholicism, has put its Faith on a Roman Emperor who, on his deathbed, took the side of the team he thought was going to win the “game”. I’m starting to ramble so I’ll wrap this up. I’m not saying that it is bad to have faith. I believe whole-heartily in a power greater than myself. It is just that some of us are getting tired of being lied to. The very fact that you and others are this threatened by the ideas presented in Brown’s book, lends weight to them. Some part of you must see the plausibility in them, or you wouldn’t give them the energy that you have. An open mind is the best virtue a human can have. Thinking for one’s self is not a measure of weakness. When you think you KNOW, you stop learning. Keep searching, and don’t be threatened by open minds. Have a good one.
Strong people are those who belong to their own selves (e.g. “is own man, her own woman”) that can think for themselves and not think what others want them to think. To not believe what others want them to believe.
99% of religious believers adopted the beliefs of another and not their own. Now to me that’s weak. The 1 % COULD be true believers.
Its all a big illusion.
I feel that people are always searching for a conspiracy theory. I found the book very entertaining and some things to people are true, just as the bible is true to others. I do continue to seek, however this book was just someone’s creativeness pouring out and just non-fiction.
p.s. There are so many followers now-a-days.
You should do some travelling. Maybe you should travel and do your own research instead of viewing them through the internet or someone else’s words.
Eleanor
It is really sad when you start believing in a novel. Some things may be true, but come on open your mind.
Eleanor
I didn’t want to start an arguement with what I was saying. But again you have made a judgement that has no basis. I have done quite a bit of my own research. I don’t do much research on the internet because anybody can put anything they want on it. I typically use the internet as a tool to search data-bases. Other than that my research is done in Libraries, at locations, and through talking to people. My grandfather is a Past Grand Master of the Masons, a Past Potentate of the Nile Temple, and the current Grand Master of the Knights Templar. He is also a Pasture in the Methodist Church. I have been to Italy, Greece, France, Great Britain, Scottland, Irland, Egypt, Mexico, Peru, and Japan. You claim to have an open mind but you closed it before you started writing and made an unjustified judgement of someone you never met and know nothing about. With regaurds to what you said to Don. The Bible is a novel! It was written by men almost four centuries after the death of Jesus, and was commissioned and approved by a Roman Emperer on his death-bed who wasn’t even Christian.
-I want you to know that I am looking at this as a discussion not an arguement, so I apologize if I am coming off as hostile. That is not my intent.
You are right. I probably sounded that I was judging you, however I see so many people wanting to believe in something other than the New Testament’s because there is much hatred with people that are believers (it is not cool to be Christian). I apologize if I sounded like I was judging you.
Aquaintances of mine sometimes want so badly to not believe that there is a God and this novel would be reason enough to throw there arms in the air and give this book full credit of what is out there. I am sure that there are many unexplained things out there. To be honest with you, unless you see them with your eyes or explore them yourself (what is truth and what is not).
This is why when we listen to reporters or commentators of a game, we only get their perspective. Do you know what I am saying?
Only you have the ability to put your faith in what you really believe. I come from a place where religion and the occult are about 50/50, so you better believe that I had done much research only to always come back to the bible. I am proud to be a Christian and fully believe in it. I am also an artist.
Eleanor
p.s. Thanks for your time.
You see, you’re taking things out of proportion. I totally believe in GOD, just not the way described by any existing religion. Religious organizations have negative purposes. Positive for them but negative for US. Oh yeah they come out looking good with their used car sales man communication skills. But sorry I’m to wise of a man and I see right trough them. So if your proud to be Christian no problem, that is your choice. And as a good person I do respect that. But as for you, the things you say if they were more direct would probably come out like this: “What kind of ignorant are you?... who put those stupid thoughts in your mind…”. Only you say it more politely. Anyway, I’m not looking for a fight. So Peace & Love to you Eleanor. ;o)
Understand what you are saying! However, not all religious organizations have negative purposes. I assume you are speaking mostly of the Catholic church. This is your opinion and that is fine. I am not saying that you are ignorant. All that I am saying is that there are so many things out there that try to sway people. We live in troubling times and this is something that people will have to decide on their own. I am not above anything or anyone, because I am human.
eleanor
As someone who believes in Jesus Christ I have no problems dealing with the theory of him being married and having children.
That doesnt’t change who He is to me.
A friend who has always been there for me and my saviour.
like mewho have ever only been told one story and were oblivious that there could be a choice, will undoubtedly see the ideas in this book as almost liberating.I have had a problem with religion my whole life and its not the fault of any particular faith, it is because of the men that hold the power of that faith in their hands and use it for …well….evil. I believe religion is a tremendously beautiful and powerful force, unfortunately mankind are more likely to corrupt it’s beauty and abuse it’s power then anything else. You have to go with the odds: War in the name of God; Genocide in the name of God; terrorism in the name of God. I could go on, but I won’t. Everyday, it becomes harder to be content with even being a human being. I respect all of you that can have so much faith in your religion in the face of mankind’s evil. But understand that some of us rely on something else and we don’t need to be told we’re ignorant and that is why we don’t have a faith…we do….its just not the same as yours. We may not have a house of worship, we may not have a symbol, but we have faith…in something. Maybe each other.
What bothers me is, Why do people take it for gospel? For Christ’s sake? It’s just a fictional novel! Thats all that it claims to be! Yes there exists, or existed a Priory of Sion, & yes there exists an opus Dei! So What! Yes The early church altered the Bible “actualy they wrote the Bible” So What! My point here is simply this Believe what you will! That alone is the only thing that will bring you peace. The Holy Grail is symbolic of a Soul-Searching quest that we all must make. Only once you have found your “Holy-Grail”! will you be at peace with your-self & know the truth “as seen in your eyes”. That my friends is the Holy-Grail.
Just my .02 :-)
Frank
From what I have learned over the years about women in general is not a pretty sight let me tell you. I have experienced that Women can be has much violent and even more vicious then Men. So the real truth about all of this is neither Men nor Woman should be ruling anything. I wouldn’t trust a woman to rule anything and that not spoken from a Mens point of view, but spoken from a humans point of view. Sorry! ;-)
And dont even try to turn this into a male chauvinist comment because it simply isnt.
Its based on facts proven to me by women all over. I for one do not swallow or tolerate those falls accusations anymore. They are constantly used everyday to derive attention from the truth.
I know very few women who actually are truly mature and intelligent enough to be a true and real woman and they are often accused from feminist women to be either Stupid, fools or even traitors to the woman cause. Well all I can say is that they know how to treat their Men and their Men know how to return the same treatment. Those women become their Mens sacred feminine. And hint, hint they are mostly unavailable.
So would there be less WARS if women would be at the heads of countries?... not at all.
Weather it is a Man seeking to control the world or a Woman, it all comes down to the same.
Its not about which of the two sexes is better, its about both sexes being better to and with each other.
So no Wars of the sexes in here please!
Sincerely
Don-Andrew
Grey mass stimulating or what!
If you are on the hunt for more “truths” please read
“The Hiram Key”
You`ll see more of the same conspiracys but all the facts to go with them, check it out.
My husband read it 3 years ago,and every few minutes it brought out a wow, he, as I read “the Da Vinci code” last week and he is now re-reading the hiram Key, while i wait!!! Funnily enough we had the Jehovah witnesses come to the door, whom we enjoy talking to as the whole subject regardless of your stand point is fascinating, well the smirk on his face as he opened the door with the davinci code and hiram key fresh in his mind was a picture! They laughed nervously for a while then said ” you are just trying to confuse us!”and left :)
On another matter:
Posted by: Don-Andrew at April 5, 2004 05:34 PM
So the real truth about all of this is neither Men nor Woman should be ruling anything. I wouldn’t trust a woman to rule anything and that not spoken from a Mens point of view, but spoken from a humans point of view.
And dont even try to turn this into a male chauvinist comment because it simply isnt.
Its based on facts proven to me by women all over. I for one do not swallow or tolerate those falls accusations anymore. They are constantly used everyday to derive attention from the truth.
I know very few women who actually are truly mature and intelligent enough to be a true and real woman and they are often accused from feminist women to be either Stupid, fools or even traitors to the woman cause. Well all I can say is that they know how to treat their Men and their Men know how to return the same treatment. Those women become their Mens sacred feminine. And hint, hint they are mostly unavailable.
Errmm, ever thought it might be you?
Errmm, ever thought it might be you?
Haha! Assumptions assumptions!... another common thing women do!
No darling Im referring to experiences such as seen it on the news, seen it in situations that many friends trough out the years have had. All different men and different moment in life. All around me and others. Oh! And lets not forget hidden camera TV shows. Those are absolutely refreshing when youre standing there seeing the horrific display of women beating up toddlers with those big wooden cooking spoons!... cmon seriously!
And is the meaning behind ever think it might be you? does that mean that women have more justification on their violent actions then men do?
Are you saying that women always have a reason(trigger) that justifies their violence against men and men dont?
Well that says a lot about you
Cant blame you for thinking I was referring to myself having reread what I wrote. But, its OK, I dont get affected by that kind of misunderstanding.
Anyway this thread is about a very good book, end of discussion.
Don-Andrew
I can’t believe so many people or so surprised by what this book had to offer in both story and ideas.
Yes, it’s thrilling and exciting, but still…
It basicaly is a thriller wrapped around the knowledge found in books like these:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0316042757/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-6900781-9203048#reader-link
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0440136482/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-6900781-9203048#reader-link
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0684848910/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-6900781-9203048#reader-link
These are just a couple I read to give you an idea of what I’m talking about. Books like these have been around since the 1980’s (!). The story Dan wrote, although quite entertaining, is far from original, and there are far more interesting details to this (his)story if you’re willing to turn a few more pages then this page turner offers. ;-)
Take care,
Emil Korngold
Errmm, ever thought it might be you?
Posted by: Don-Andrew at April 7, 2004 09:10 PM
Haha! Assumptions assumptions!... another common thing women do.
Bless, I do apologise didnt realise, although i should have done after what you wrote, that you might not read it as it was meant.
Have you ever THOUGHT it was you, you see only if you have considered the possibilty then you can make a true statement, which is still only
true to you.
Im glad youre not affected by me misunderstanding misleading text, just deeply affected by women I fear.
Why so defensive?... oh yeah, youre a woman ;)
Ya know, all Im pointing out is we Men & Women are the same. We do have differences, thanks the gods but to try reverse psychology every time a Men points out the bad about Women that Women tend to point out about Men trying to evade the fact that they are at the same time and on the same level just has bad & just as good, is just immature.
Please dont get me wrong, I do not have a problem with Women I have a problem with Women who keep trying to make Men look really bad or like monsters or the big bad wolf, etc when Women are not even any better.
Just like in all Men we have are black sheeps and so do Women.
So for someone like STEVE to make statements that their would be less Wars if Women would be kind of ruling the world and CLAIRE stating that STEVE hit it right on the nail
(which is totally UNTRUE) I just felt it necessary to jump in and clarify a few things which are true.
So believe me when I say that I am sorry if I somehow hurt your poor little female pride.
But the truth kind of hurt sometimes. That just the way it is.
But thank you for your interest on the subject. Peace
Sincerely
Don-Andrew ;)
It’s difficult to take your argument seriously when you can’t even spell or use proper grammar. How did you manage to read the book?
Don’t you have something better to do little girl?
I don’t pretend to be either perfect or an expert in spelling or typing, so I do not get embarrassed by that kind of (trying to knock down someone argument with how he/she writes) immature comments.
Sorry ;)
But nice try, better luck next time!
Don-Andrew
How can you live your life not believing in anything? If anything, this book does point out that Jesus existed, but maybe you just dont get it. Whether he was single or married, he still died on the cross for us. This book only explains to us that Jesus & Mary of Magdela were married. I only see the science in the proportion theory of Leonard Da Vinci man.
Anonymous
I have just finished the book – awesome awesome awesome read for anyone who loves conspiracy with timeless mysteries. That is what they shall always remain. Plain and simple.
This book is fiction! Its not proof of anything; some fantasy-prone persons ought to be careful reading such material. I for one, was definetely spell-bound with all the “what-ifs” and “google” moments in the book. Everyone please find your own “truth” regarding religon and faith which ought not to be confused with science and its rigors of proof.
I am so amazed over such a response over this book, if wasn’t over religon then it would have been pretty boring and predictable. Dan Brown knows exactly how to push our buttons. I can’t wait to read his other books!
Best Wishes,
Try researching the Dead Sea Scrolls, and particularly the Vatican’s attempts to repress information since 1945. Leading academics from all Abrahamic faiths provide evidence that is in stark contrast to the belief of Catholics.
If you dont have time to research try Graham Yallops novel summarising popular findings.
Other than that i am convinced this is a Ghost writer. Great story of psuedo fact, alternative history.
If you’d learn more about the Catholic Church you’d not think it so secretive and domineering. It is only secretive to those who just show up at church on sunday and go through the motions. The more I know about the Church, the more I love it – in spite of it’s faults.
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/archives/byauthor/navaratnarajaram/cacity2000.html
http://altreligion.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apollonius.net%2Fforeword.html
A number of you are saying similear things, but the majority still claim a belief in a ‘divine entity’ or what the masons would call a ‘supreme being’. I personally hold absolutely no belief in a god or creator, and more importantly i suppose, i do not believe in the soul.
For me this book has invoked a new motivation to seek knowledge with which to develop my argument against organised religion (possibly with the exception of buddism).
In my eyes feel free to feel the faint warm flicker of ‘something more’ within you, but open your eyes to the falsity of organised religion and its patchwork of lies and deception. Every puppet has its seams.
Ultimatly i give you an example. The egyption religion lasted for 5000 years. When was the last time you heard of someone going to see their grandfather mummified and buried in a tomb in preperation for his next life. So far christianity and it offsprings have been around 2000 years, it wont last.
Cheers =)
I dont know if anybody else saw it the way i did…but i think the message is about the balance between the male and female like ying and yang. It is also about the balance that nature has created to survive . If one force becomes stronger or weaker than the other….the balance is lost and there is chaos. The fact is none can exist without the other. So this is all i take from this book and i enjoyed reading it…it certainly opened up my mind….i take the rest of the theories and riddles as pure entertainment. They may or may not be the truth…
FYI, It is not only the Catholic church that believes that Christ died for our sins, it is all Christians in general so get your story straight. Not to mention the fact that since it sounds like you are a non-believer, then you should’nt even believe that a bad place exists at all. Besides, all human beings whether leaders in a church or our country are sinners just as you and I, so maybe you should do your research as well instead of bagging on me #1.
P.S. Not all history books are the right ones to read either. So don’t act too highly of yourself.
P.S.S. All places on earth are hypocritical. Your work place, neighbors, friends, etc. But that’s what makes us unique. We are not perfect like Jesus is. That is why he died for us. He also believes in you and loves you, whether you would like to recognize him or not.
Who’s claiming Jesus did not die for us, all I am saying is that it was his choice and no one can be or should be blamed. What I am saying based on an overwhelming amount of evidence is that the Catholic church is responsible for more death and destruction than any other organization that has every existed, all in the name of GOD. They have led people believe that the only way to salvation is through them and they have sensored or distorted almost everything in their way to maintain there self proclaimed holiness. Yes, others have murdered in the name of their god’s and not all in self-defense from the Roman Catholic Church, but all others combined do not total up to the destructive path of this group. You tell people to learn more about this church and that is exactly what I was told and what I did, and the more I researched the more I found out. Now you get upset because I state the facts I discovered. All I can say is if this conversation took place just a short time ago in history; I would be in fear of my life and not even the purchase of indulgence could save my hide. Anyway, I’m sorry you feel I’m bagging on you it is not my intention, but you should be more open to other opinions. p.s you don’t need any church to know jesus or to talk to god – he is their for all of us – free of charge – anywhere, anytime, anyplace.
I am not trying to take the beauty of of life by making people feel bad. I don’t do that. I am the kind of person that nobody would ever think is Christian. A lot of my friends are atheist, and I never proclaim that I am better than they are. You don’t know who I am, and I get really tired of people bashing the Catholic Church. If people feel comfortable with their own beliefs then they should stop persecuting the people that feel comfortable with being Catholic. It’s not your business. And you don’t need to reiterate that Constantine was commissioned his new bible. Also, before you begin giving me a “history” lesson I have read what many others believe including the Quaran.
Have a beautiful life. That was a pretty harsh statement to just keep my comments restricted to Catholic chat rooms. I am for freedom of speech.
You can say what you want, but just live your life without judgement that’s all. My religion may not be the right one, and who’s to say any religion is right. I know in my heart that Jesus is my savior and that is all I need. You are expressing your opinions quite strongly, just as I am expressing mine so please don’t be rude just because you do not believe the same things that I believe.
me2
Have a great life!
You state that your grandfather is a Past Grand Master of the Masons, a Past Potentate of the Nile Temple, and the current Grand Master of the Knights Templar. Through my research I am begining to believe that the Masons may actually date back further than a lot of people think and that it is just possible that the Prior de sion is more recent and their history is somehow being inserted over the Masons. I’m beginning to believe that the list of names given in the dossier secrets as past Grand Masters of P.S. are in actuality names of former Mason Grand Masters. I’m certain that Sir Isic Newton was a Mason and I’m finding evidences that Leonardo da Vinci was also. Could it be this is the secret society that holds the key to the Templars secrets. This would certainly fill in some gaps in the puzzle. If you know of some resources I can use to find out more, please let me know or if you know I’m heading in the wrong direction please tell me so I don’t waste my time chasing my tail…...thanks…jim
1.) The statement was not harsh. If all you want to hear or believe is one point of view than you do not belong here. It will only upset you.
2.) You are the one telling people to learn more about your church. That I have done. You don’t like what I discovered so I’m rude.
3.) I believe pretty much the same thing you do. I just don’t believe anyone needs to go through any 3rd party to get there. That is: God is Life, Life is nothing without love, love is the only true way to happiness and that there is only one sin and that is hate.
All this has been told to me and it didn’t come from any church. What you know in your heart is love and that is the right path, follow it…..love you
The exact relationship between the Masons and the Priory of Sion is a topic of much debate. A lot of what the actual debate is about is which came first, the Knights Templar or the Free Masons. The majority of the research I have done points to the former. The nine original Knights Templar were formed to be the Priory’s military arm. The masons came after the original Nights Templar expanded into the hundreds. They were a blend of Knights Templar, Cathars, alchemists, hermeticists, and actual Priory members. With the way that these societies are structured, it is quite possible that before say, Leonardo was the Grand Master of the Priory, he could have been the Grand Master of the Masons (my grandfather got an excellerated route to being Grand Master of the Knights Templar as a result of having been the Grand Master of the Masons etc.). The research I have done puts the origin of the Priory of Sion dating back to the 11th century. My grandfather believes this as well and he confirmed Leonardo’s involvement with the Priory without any knoledge of Dan Brown’s book. I also know that he knows a lot more than what he has told me, but I can understand why. I hope any of this has answered your questions. I strongly recamend you read the book “The Templar Revelation”. There are a lot of answers there. Keep searching, and good luck!
“The DaVinci Code” Is a Fictional Story?... NO S-H-I-T!
Realy you shouldn’t be shooting off you mouth like that when you display a lack of intelligence such as yours. :p
Maybe before assuming that eveyone else is an idiot an think that the story in the book is not fictional aside the facts within it you ask.
DaVinci Code was a great read. Enjoyed it immensely. I look forward to learning more.
I would strongly recommend to eveyone that they read John Shelby Spong. He’s written many books. His most recent ones are: “Why Christianity Must Change or Die” and “A New Christianity for a New World”. A great to place to start is an early book of his “This Hewbrew Lord”.
I was brought up a Catholic but no longer attend Church. The language of the church no longer reaches me. In contrast, Spong speaks a language which I find meaningful and freeing. I think he would also be of interest to people who are non-Christians but are interested in history and Brown’s book.
Spong is a serious scholar and former Episcopalian Bishop of Newark. You’ve probably seen him on TV. He writes beautifully. He writes for Christians in exile, i.e. those who have lost interest in the mainstream church.
Spong has a deep understanding of the Jewish culture, and uses that to help him read and interpret the Bible (New Testament). I learnt a huge amount from reading Spong. For example, a key point he demonstrates is that the bible was never meant to be read literally: no virgin birth, no miracles, no physical resurrection. He also explains the Jewish writing traditions that underlie the way the bible is written, for example writing in midrash. I’ll leave it at that.
Best wishes to you all.
Take it or leave it, this book has piqued the interest of a population sick of lies and manipulation. It doesn’t take an iconology expert to understand the inherent meaning in that.
V
Gregg Braden
(Sir) Laurence Gardener
Graham Hancock
William Henry
Council of Nycea (Nicea)
and do watch “Stigmata” as recommended (way) above.
Does no one wonder why the Vatican has a locked library that even some of their own priests and translators cannot get into? And why divide up documents to be transalted among the priests from the Jesuit, Dominican and Franciscans? Because certain documents are so sensitve they say? Ummmmm if there is nothing to hide what could be the problem? And who exactly decided that the Fatima revelations were to be a secret? Remember why priests who could marry no longer can, why Catholics all over the world are starving while the Vatican maintains all it’s jeweled opulence…and fat bank accounts. They have their own negotiable currency and their own zip code for heaven’s sake (no pun intended)! It is indeed a beautiful place and the Christed Jesus is definiteley my number one ‘dude’ and so He is to the Popes, etc, so they say. So I still just cannot figure out why the statues of the popes dwarfed the representation of Jesus and were bejeweled so heavily while the Christ figure was plain as a slice of Wonder Bread. Oh, and the Cistine Chapel has naked people painted all over the ceiling but yet body shame still persists in The Church; if you are dressed in shorts or a woman wearing a summer top baring her shoulders you will not be admitted into the property. Jesus had an intention for his ‘church’ and it has been thwarted time and time again. And now millions have been duped out of their true spiritual inheritence. But blessed be that there are those who continue to research tirelessly and also those that are priests and ministers who do know this information and share it with a loving heart. Churches and “The Church” at large may find it is of benefit to consider the gospels they decided to hide from the people. This before Christian citizens of the world decide for themselves that The Church will not hold the data and documents back from them any longer. The Church will fall under the weight of its own resistance to what is good and right if it does not repent, itself. Or are the Powers That Be in there the only perfect people in the world?
Oh, and please feel free not to limit your research to the names and movies listed above. And those that might be angered by any if this please realize that what is presented in The Davinci Code and the like is based on actual physical documents that are in the hands of scholars and research facilities and musems as we write in the here and now. None of it will do anything less than renew and solidify faith. if you allow your hearts to see what is really there. Do not be afraid to consider that if there were no priests or ministers in the world you could still find yourself in a heavelny existence at some point. Each of us exists by the grace of a spark of Divine Light within. Do you think God is as limited and judgemental as man and that (S)he is so much so that they would ever create a being that would have to depend on self-appointed (man appointed) individuals as the one and only path to God and Enlightenment? The experience of God and The Christ freqency is subjective and not dependent on any one earth bound individual or group of individuals or church. These aspects are meant to assist us not rule us. How hopeless and frightneing it would all be if that weren’t so.
It occurred to me at around the age of 12 – 13, in looking around at different religions and seeing the differences in the beliefs that religion is not God made. I could never for example figure out why, if Christ was the Savior, did the Catholics have to go through an intermediary (The Virgin Mother) in order to talk to Him, when the rest of us could just pray to Jesus? That by the way would also be about the same time I quit going to church and started searching my heart for my belief system.
It would surprise me not one iota to find that we have been duped, for centuries in the name of God. Men fight wars in the name of God, molest children in the name of God, murder in the name of God, rape, pillage and steal in the name of God. Why in heavens name would anybody in their right mind NOT believe that a tremendous HOAX could’ve been pertetrated on mankind, by persons who wanted that power.
God, I believe had little to do with the creation of religion as we know it today. And I frankly believe that God is absolutely horrified at the things we do in His name
For those of you who can’t conceive that this could actually happen, wake up and smell the coffee. Quit blindly believing things people told you you would go to hell for if you didn’t believe them.
Every person on earth, has the light and energy of God, in them. Find that light within yourselves, and it won’t make any difference to you if man perpetrated a hoax on us, or not.
You poor lost souls believing a best seller. Why don’t you also believe terminator that’s a good movie it must be true.
Dan Brown’s riveting book is simply another link in a chain of enlightenment. Think of it as another droplet of truth released by the Universe. Keep your minds open and your hearts true to yourselves and watch what can happen.
http://home.earthlink.net/~d0/TheJesusScroll/
Someone made the remark that people should believe their Bibles. From an academic standpoint this is an extremely difficult thing to do. The Bible known by English speakers is a tanslation and, as a result, has many errors. Just one, as an example, is the reference to a camel passing through the eye of a needle. The word used in the original does not translate as `camel’ but as `hawser’, which is a very thick rope. It would, therefore, be extremely difficult to pass a hawser through the eye of a needle.
If you are interested in a whole new perspective on Adam and Eve, then consider th following. In 1973 it was found that female chemistry is the norm for human life (yet this resounding fact has caused hardly a ripple in social or scientific life). This means that, right up to the last moments of birth, prior to the cord being cut, the body chemistry of a baby which may have developed as a male can revert to female. The condition for this to occur is that the mother must be experiencing some condition that will make her brain believe that her life is seriously threatened (i.e., traumatic). This is where `Nature’ steps in. The prime directive for all living things is survival – but not necessarily of the individual so much as of the species. What, in the final analysis, is needed for the survival of the human race? The answer is – many women. Hence, the body chemistry of the baby (if not already female) will revert to female. On this basis, Adam would have to have been made from Eve’s rib.
If you are intrigued by such snippets of information, here is another for you. Look up the word `parthenogenesis’. You will find that it refers to the ability of eggs to reproduce without the involvement of male fertilization. Obviously this relates to species where it is necessary for the ovum to be fertilized by the male. In the human species, parthenogenesis would result in an exact copy of the mother – another female. If Mary’s conception of Jesus had been a truly virginal experience then Jesus would have had to have been a woman and an exact copy of Mary.
There is no need for conspiracy theories when there is far more to enthrall us in what might be termed the `real’ world (but that’s a whole other issue).
A last word. Did you know that, unlike your other senses which are attached by nerves to your brain, your eyes are actually modified brain cells – they are PART of your brain. Isn’t life fascinating – far more so than fiction.
http://www.alpheus.org/html/articles/esoteric_history/richardson1.html.
Back then they had no knowledge of mathematics, chemistry, electromagnetism, quantum mechanics, relativity, etc. They even feared witches and were-wolves as some still do today.
Today we have more religions to choose from than one can count. Which of these, if any, express the true TRUTH?
Lighten up folks. The bottom line really is ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’. Its not any more complicated than that. The bonus is, that living your life this way doesn’t require the backing of any supposed message inspired by ‘Devine Intervention’.
Just do it.
I also have to say that some of the things mentionned by Brown struck a cord in me. As if realizing that some of my physical/intellectual experiences had been given a voice.
Having been raised catholic I was taught that being human was not enough, all my life I should aspire to my eternal future being with GOD and THE SON OF GOD. The human experience was negated. In the past few years I have the realization that there is a beauty and ultimate reason for me to experience my humanity: That is the only reason why I am alive. What a wonderful example to see Jesus Christ as a human, as an example of humanity.
The place of feminity in worship as a positive force as a creative force is also important for me. It is undeniable that christianity and many other religions have put women in a secondary subservient place. Things are changing slowly, but there are times when orthodoxy resurfaces and the pendulum swings back hundreds of years.
I would love nothing more than a big earth shattering revelation to put women back at the core of many religions, but I sense that slow change will probably be more effective in the long run.
Finally I found the talk of Hieros Gamos quite fascinating. I think we could all benefit of viewing the sexual union as a sacred rite. The act of touching GOD. And not a simple sport or something vile, nor something one should be ashamed of.
I found Paulo Coehlo’s work interesting on some of these subjects and would suggest: “I set by the river piedras and cried” for the feminine presence in Catholic religion, “11 minutes” for thoughts on the sacred union, and “veronika decides to die” for thoughts on the human experience.
There actually might be something like Sangreal that gives the key to power!?
I am still not through the book, but I will probably reread it, very enticing, very good writing, what a theory!
The place of the feminine in the Hindu religion in my country India is exactly as described in the book. In most of our houses, we have the pentagram which is framed and hung on a archway to bring prosperity and keep away ill-will and bad luck. I have one in my house. In our religion, the feminine form or the goddess is venerated at a much higher plan the male. I come from an ancestral background where it was matriarchal society where women used to head the entire clan. It still is prevalent.
As with Christianity or any other religion, this book has just brought into the open the fact the actual facts have long since been adulterated for personal benefits by monarchs.
The best thing to come out of this book and such interactions that it actually tempts our inherent craving for more information and learning.
Saji
We can surmise, search and concede to accept, but it’s all lost in the mists of time.
Whatever your faith is, believe in it, that’s what faith is all about.
However, the whole Mary Magdalene story is too easy. It is too well known. Perhaps it is a story that is intended to lead everyone away from the real “secrets”, if there are any.
At the same time, so what if the story proves that christianity is a deceptive religion? What does that really prove in the long run? And even if there are modern-day descendents of Mary, what possible difference would that make? It isn’t as if they can just suddenly takeover the world. All in all, the Mary stories are interesting, but nothing more.
What no one know, I think, is what comes next for all of us? If there is some type of life force in each of us that continues afer death, what really happens to that life force? Religions can speculate all they want and provide their own version of dogma, but in the end none of them can really prove what happens. As I near the end of my own life I am curious, of course, but apparently I’ll just have to wait and find out like everyone else who has passed from this life.
You should check out “The Templar Revelation”, “The Dead Sea Scrolls”, “The Coptic Scrolls”, “Holy Blood, Holy Grail”, “The Sign and the Seal”, and anything to do with the Roman Emperer Constantine (~320 a.d.). Also, you should look up any ancient Egyptian mythology having to do with Isis and Horus. I would encourage you to be warry of on-line research because anybody can post anything they want on-line. I recommend “the Templar Revelation” as a good starting point. Dan Brown used this non-fiction book and its authors for a good amount of his research. Hope you find what you are looking for, no matter what that might be.
Jake
Loved the book though, Dan Brown gave new topics of interest to talk about at work! And gives me something new to look up in the library.
Just like to share some info about the matriarchal religion. Even before the Greek mythology female were superior to male. They hold the key to ceation. They have the ability to give birth. Male role during those times are unknown. Thats why people mostly worship female dieties. Later the role of male are being recognized as part of the creation. and they slowly gain position in priesthood and ruler (e.g. kings). of course kings during those times are short lived. I won’t described on how they are being used after their term, all i can say is that they’re being used as a fertilizer. Of course after a while some king got wise and use a substitute and slowly the male rise up and having a definitive role. They started to make a patriarchal religion and slowly merge it with the matriarchal one. ever wonder why Zeus have many wives? The greek slowly marries their god to the goddesses in order to make their religion acceptable. in time the gods have taken over the femal deities. and thats the stat of the patriarchal religion.
Well, what amazes me most right next to the book itself is how many people respond to this log regarding it has been opened on November last.
Now about the book. The story certainly is not much more than a frame to the theories / version of history Dan chose to publish. I don’t take his ideas for a fact just because they would nicely fit into christian history taking out the rationally improbable and replacing it with more down-to-earth suggestions.
Still, I have to admit, that this more realistic version of Christ’s life and achievments is motivating to search for sources and information on this topic.
While the book seems to encourage further research by the reader, I like the ending very much (having finished the book yesterday night at 2a.m. the impression is still very fresh) and the way it circumvents no, I won’t tell it here, those of you who read it, will understand.
Considering the theories the book is popularising, I don’t take them for facts neither do I think they are complete lies and I regard the ‘modern’ bible in very much the same way.
The old testament is not only a religious book but also a history book and a guide to successful societies in the early days of civilisation as well. Many stories are proven to base on real incidents – including the Flood. Religious ideas are providing a frame for the facts – and to a certain extend I like these ideas and believe in them.
One could be angry about the way the bible modifications influenced the church’s and our ancestors’ view of the world – but that doesn’t change the past and will do little help to the future.
Now, I am going to google and ‘wiki’ for more on the subject of the holy bloodline. Still I think it would be far more useful to just take the basic ideas of the grail legend (-> men and women are equal -> respect nature etc. – in a nutshell: show some reason) and add them to the guidelines my christian/european/oldworld/western – whatever-upbringing makes me follow.
Those who stick to books and legends without a little thinking on their own are dangerous in my eyes.
Now just a little note about Dan’s writing style. I quite often felt a bit bored as the obvious (account number, orb on the knights tomb, Sophie’s family etc)takes a bit too long to be discovered by the story’s main players. Then again, my suspicions were fundamentally shaken i.e. on who is the teacher or what Fache’s role is.
Also, the way Sophie and Robert eventually develop an emotional relationship apperas a bit made up to me.
I may not share the exact cultural background with Dan and his fellow Americans, but I found it a bit strange when he stated that right hand drive is only found in England (what about Ireland, the rest of the UK, Malta, Oz etc.?). The way Dan depicted the French Police was also a bit strange. At least I had no idea, that a french policemen can command the british local police so easily. France and Britain are two completely souvereign countries unlike the states of the US-federation.
And… is it really that hard for Americans to drive cars on manual gear?
i can’t stop looking up information, and i now want to go to Frace, and to the Louvre!
Relions, opioum of societies.
Religions, opiom of societies.
If all within Da vinci code was really true, why would the church not even try to keep it from being published in all the countries it has been; like it has done with so many movies and other literary works?
Also, Da Vinci Code contains absolutely no bibliography; once again suggesting the lack of veracity.
The work is, in my opinion, incredibly intriguing and fascinating for a good weekends read. Mr. Browns ability to make his observations and those of others seem connected is however nothing but the talent of an excellent novelist and perspicuous observer. There is definitely facts involved, but they are not necesserally interrelated, as Mr. suggests, exposing the expected perspective of a person dedicated to the symbols created by humanity .. the conspiracy can Not be assumed to be true. One who believes in what Mr. Brown says throughout the novel exposes his/her gullible character. Still, it is always valid and fun to investigate; but for your own sake, dont take your expectations too high.
Note from Brazil.
If you read this please contact me. sintheta73@hotmail.com
No one’s asking anyone to believe anything, not even Mr.Brown. He just put a few clues in a commercial work and let his readers do the rest. People have read this book and loved it aswell as hated it. But who cares. The point is that it made you feel something. It made people find this site and express their opinions. I mean, if you are one of those who thought the book was complete rubbish, why are you here? why didn’t you just throw it away and forget about it? You can hate Dan Brown all you want, but he did you all a favour.
It doesn’t matter if he’s feeding us lies or facts….he gave us something to question. The Church…one of the most powerful and influential organisations in the world. The human race has never been okay with sitting back and excepting what we’re fed but for some reason, the church has this power over some people because it involves God. Thats not good enough for me.
In a Walt Whitman poem he begs of us to question everything – question authority, question your teachers, question your church. Today, I have to ask myself, “What do I know from my own personal experiences and what do I know (believe) because I read it somewhere, or someone taught it to me or I simply heard it?” My personal experiences are always closer to the truth than anything that comes from outside of me.
I did not choose to be a gay man, only I did choose to live as one. I could live a lie or live honestly. I chose to live honestly and have paid the price extracted from those unwilling or too afraid to question their beliefs.
Pain caused me to question my own and by doing so I set myself free.
Our hearts do not lie. Please please do not follow blindly anyone or anything. QUESTION EVERYTHING!
I’ve read Dan Brown’s book maybe 7 or 8 times now. It’s an enjoyable read and I like thinking about the possibilities if just one iota of what he wrote happens to be the truth.
I believe in God. I believe that Jesus was a wise man, A MORTAL MAN, who was maybe a little more in touch with the right and wrong, yin and yang, of things than the average person of his day.
I’m neither Christian nor Jew, Muslim nor Hindu, Krishna nor Buddhist; I simply believe in God. I thank Mr. Brown for giving me something to think about; I’ve wondered for a long time about the lack of female leadership in most religious sects. It seems peculiar to me that women seem to be specifically excluded or in the minority in many faiths.
Historically, women who practice a faith outside of the recognized faiths have been persecuted and outcast for their beliefs. Can anyone tell me how many MEN were executed in Salem, Massachusetts in the 1600’s? To paraphrase “The DaVinci Code”, history is written by the winners, who seem to think that worshipping nature (or for that matter, worshipping anything outside of the “approved” religions) is a punishable offense.
Jews have also been historically persecuted BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, among others, for following the same basic “rules” as the rest of the world, but stopping short of declaring Jesus the son of God.
Think about it, folks. It’s like saying “as long as you believe exactly as I do, I have no quarrel with you.” Our diversity is what makes us unique, and differences are celebrated, until it comes to matters of religion. So, I ask you, what makes you think you’re right? How can you have faith when there are so many dissenting opinions? Who are you to tell me I’m wrong? Because you have a larger army? Because I’m against violence?
Think with your heads AND your hearts. Follow your instincts. Do the research, if you’re so inclined. Do NOT presume to preach to me and tell me I’m wrong without proof. Come to me when you find it and I’ll be happy to discuss it, but until then, celebrate our differences. Open your eyes, learn a little tolerance for others.
One more question: why would such a work of fiction be responded to with at least two books refuting the ideas presented within?
Maybe Mr. Brown has written a work of fiction that’s a little too close to truth.
And another thing thats been bothering me, many of you are blaming christianity for the world’s problems. Please stop trying to past the blame to religion when it is mankind that you should find fault. Find me in the bible where it says to wage the crusades, or any of the other attrocities done by mankind.
And another thing, which is equally bothering is how so many of you hold to the point that the winners right history. That may be so, but does that mean they lied? It’s a possibility but that doesnt make it true. In that case maybe Adolf Hitler wasn’t that bad of a guy just misundersttod, I feel cheated now that the winners of the war have kept this from us…cmon people use some logic here.
P.S. I by no means condone the actions of Hitler
Satan is the father of lies and this book is lying to you! Be careful your immortal soul is in jepardy.
I’m sorry but are you serious? I hope you realise that what you have written is laughable in this modern day and age. The work of the devil? Our souls are in jeopardy? It takes one to know one huh?
Lost souls. I’d say you’re a bit lost. Most of the people that have written something here are intelligent human beings who can think for themselves and you’re telling them that their souls are in jeopardy. If this book is the work of the devil, then so was creation of the human race…because I’ve never known a more evil force than us.
Way towards the top of these comments, Michelle said this, refering to the DaVinci Code, but others, like myself, think it could very well apply to the Bible as well.
I read this entire book yesterday, and maybe I’m just being an impressionable teenager, but while reading it, occasionally I forgot that these conversations and occurences didn’t really happen, that it was just a story, very well based on well researched facts, and found many of the ideas in it altogether convincing. My parents are both scientists, and I’ve grown up never going to Church, and as such, I’ve never believed in God, just believing in things I’ve learned while reading. I’ve found that by not believing in one supreme deity makes me somewhat more open-minded, because many things that are considered taboo are that way because of religion. The last book I read that made such an impressionable philosophical argument to me was Phillip Pullman’s The Amber Spyglass. It is clearly not in the same category as The DaVinci Code, but there were interesting ideas there as well.
But what I find hard to believe is that so many people find it easier to believe that Jesus’s mother was a virgin than the idea that he was possibly married.
Another note is that this book made me regret my lack of appreciation for the art that I saw when I visited the Louvre myself a few years ago.
Here’s to Dan Brown and the way he provoked much thought!
L.
The sign of a great storyteller is one who is going to make you stop and think….”hhhmmmm….I wonder can it be true?” They not only make you think about it, but make you feel like you have invested a part of yourself and can walk away being a better person for listening and coming up with your own conclusions on the moral of the story.
This is in response to VJ’s question on February 14th about whether or not the pyramid inverse actually exists in Paris. I was wondering the same thing. Yes, it does. Just Google pyramid inverse, and you will find a picture of it under the heading “Buildings.” Just as in the book, it does not touch the floor, and there is a small wooden pyramid underneath it. The photographer’s explanation is that the small wooden pyramid is to prevent people from walking underneath the point of the pyramid inverse. That sounds like a very reasonable explanation to me.
What can I say? Dan Brown is genius.
What can I say? Dan Brown is genius.
But the book is nice to read and ties up old legends. A better novel in my view on issues like this is Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pedulum.
People who like the Da Vinci Code, will be thrilled by Eco’s conclusion as well!
Conclusion: An avarage book when it comes to the style of writing but with an excellent plot..read it!!!
The part that impressionate me more was the revelation about the DaVinci code: the real meaning about ‘Last Supper’.
The world after all isn’t dark… The Man is a real man and his wonderfull love to all mankind was reflected thru the eyes of a Woman and his bloodline.
After all the End of Days is already my passed.
Simple and beatifull.
Thanks DB
“Depth & Details: A Reader’s Guide to Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code”
AND
(my personal favourite!!):
“Fact and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code”
Steve Kellmeyer
However, I did find it an interesting read and was moved to check some of the references within it (It seems likely that most of the posters ended up here on such a quest).
Personally, I don’t think the book is well written. I found the style rather cliched and simplistic, rather like a Hollywood script (I’m sure it will make a great film).
I also noticed the parallels between this and Umberto Eco’s much superior works (as Peter states above)
I might read another one of his books if I get stuck without a decent read on holiday again.
I was also put off by Browns loose play with bilateral judicial procedures and the geography of France and Paris.
Page 67 The U.S. Government intervenes regularly on behalf of Americans arrested in Paris and has them shipped back to the U.S. for slaps on the wrists?!?!?!? Hardly.
Page 86 If only Langdon can get to the embassy, then hell be protected from French law. This is a ludicrous and silly idea.
Page 147 This mad dash from the Louvre to the embassy is so wrong it must be intentional. Down Rue de Rivoli, up the Champs-Elysees, past the Hotel de Crillon, into Paris tree-line diplomatic neighborhood, then arriving at a sealed-off Avenue Gabriel. Get a map of Paris and youll see how off this is. I beg someone to take me to Paris tree-lined diplomatic neighborhood.
Page 150 Vacation chateau in Normandy, north of Paris near Creully. Look at a map. Normandy is west of Paris, as is Creully.
What is my point? These are sloppy errors that could have easily been verified and corrected. If Brown was so off on these simple things, how off is on his more mysterious and complicated conspiracy theory that spans centuries?
What is my point? These are sloppy errors that could have easily been verified and corrected. If Brown was so off on these simple things, how off is on his more mysterious and complicated conspiracy theory that spans centuries? [End Quote}
OK so you’re saying if Browns knowlegde of France is terrible or he has been to layzy to check to make sure he get’s it correctly, means he doesn’t know a thing?... that he’s a complete moron?...
If I make a typo error whyle writing this very message, which there probably will be, does that make my opinion less creditable then that of someone with a message with no typo errors?
OK well… take my advise… stick to your kindergarden daily activities and let the Adults talk about those subjects which are to much for your little brain to consume ;)
Am I saying Brown knows nothing? Certainly not. He clearly knows a lot. Am I saying that Brown is a complete moron? Again, no.
Just found it odd that he missed so badly on some things that are so obvious and didn’t seem to add any significance to the story. I only pointed to a few (geography is not Brown’s strength). I ask why and what does it mean about his overall effort? I suspect other knowledgable people would raise similar questions about his historical conspiracy theory (The Catholic Church conspires to “keep women down” and Muslims and Buddhists fall in line like good soldiers?!?!?!? I suspect male domination has its roots in things far more ancient than the Catholic Church.)
Sorry to raise doubts about your new-found religion.
Gotta go now, recess is almost over and snack time is just around the corner. :)
The intriguing wordplay and symbolism is fascinating. The novel is really addictive with its breathtaking speed. I read it late into the night, and then dreamt that I was in the book!
However, the ending has overtones of a potboiler Hindi film. It is just too well-rounded. It also glosses over the entire moral dilemma between revealing the location of the grail and keeping it secret.
It is also possible to see a colonial discourse with a lot of stereotypes in the novel. You know – white male rich academic, exotic beautiful intelligent female and so on. They are easy to spot once you know they are there.
In spite of this, the novel is a perfectly plotted popular thriller. It leaves one aghast at the biggest deception in the history of religion. It also brings to public notice the tantalisingly complex character of Leonardo Da Vinci. One can only wonder at the immense talent and creativity of the man!!!
All in all, a definite future classic…..it deserves its place in the limelight.
Hardly the act of one who was an enemy of the Catholic Church and who guarded a secret which could destroy it.Unlike the four guardians of the secret in Brown’s novel who were prepared to allow themselds to be killed rather than reveal the “secret”
Again in relation to the painting of Mona Lisa, Vasari tells us that Mona Lisa was the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. The painting was worked on for four years and then he left it still unfinished. Vasari has this to say ;”Altogether this picture was painted in a manner to make the most confident artist-no matter who- despaier and lose heart. Leonardo also made use of this device: while he was painting Mona Lisa, who was a very beautiful woman, he employed singers and musicians or jesters to keep her full of merriment and so chase away the melancholy that painters usually give to portraits. As a result, in this painting of Leonardo’s there was a smile so pleasing that it seemed divine rather than human; and those who saw it were amazed to find that it was as alive as the original.
Lastly we are told that Leonardo painted a female into his Last supper. Perhaps a description given by Vasari of Leonardo’s servant , a Milanese called Salai might shed some light. “It was in Milan that Leonardo took for his servant a Milanese called Salai, a very attractive youth of unusual grace and looks, with very beautiful hair which he wore curled in ringlets and which delighted his master.” Sound familiar?Is it inconcievable that Leonardo painted him into his picture, or someone like him.
Brown in his novel does not do justice to Leonardo’s final faith in Christ, the saviour of mankind. How much less is he authentic in his interpetation of the life and times of Christ and the early church.
Hardly the act of one who was an enemy of the Catholic Church and who guarded a secret which could destroy it.Unlike the four guardians of the secret in Brown’s novel who were prepared to allow themselds to be killed rather than reveal the “secret”
Again in relation to the painting of Mona Lisa, Vasari tells us that Mona Lisa was the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. The painting was worked on for four years and then he left it still unfinished. Vasari has this to say ;”Altogether this picture was painted in a manner to make the most confident artist-no matter who- despaier and lose heart. Leonardo also made use of this device: while he was painting Mona Lisa, who was a very beautiful woman, he employed singers and musicians or jesters to keep her full of merriment and so chase away the melancholy that painters usually give to portraits. As a result, in this painting of Leonardo’s there was a smile so pleasing that it seemed divine rather than human; and those who saw it were amazed to find that it was as alive as the original.
Lastly we are told that Leonardo painted a female into his Last supper. Perhaps a description given by Vasari of Leonardo’s servant , a Milanese called Salai might shed some light. “It was in Milan that Leonardo took for his servant a Milanese called Salai, a very attractive youth of unusual grace and looks, with very beautiful hair which he wore curled in ringlets and which delighted his master.” Sound familiar?Is it inconcievable that Leonardo painted him into his picture, or someone like him.
Brown in his novel does not do justice to Leonardo’s final faith in Christ, the saviour of mankind. How much less is he authentic in his interpetation of the life and times of Christ and the early church.
Hardly the act of one who was an enemy of the Catholic Church and who guarded a secret which could destroy it.Unlike the four guardians of the secret in Brown’s novel who were prepared to allow themselds to be killed rather than reveal the “secret”
Again in relation to the painting of Mona Lisa, Vasari tells us that Mona Lisa was the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. The painting was worked on for four years and then he left it still unfinished. Vasari has this to say ;”Altogether this picture was painted in a manner to make the most confident artist-no matter who- despaier and lose heart. Leonardo also made use of this device: while he was painting Mona Lisa, who was a very beautiful woman, he employed singers and musicians or jesters to keep her full of merriment and so chase away the melancholy that painters usually give to portraits. As a result, in this painting of Leonardo’s there was a smile so pleasing that it seemed divine rather than human; and those who saw it were amazed to find that it was as alive as the original.
Lastly we are told that Leonardo painted a female into his Last supper. Perhaps a description given by Vasari of Leonardo’s servant , a Milanese called Salai might shed some light. “It was in Milan that Leonardo took for his servant a Milanese called Salai, a very attractive youth of unusual grace and looks, with very beautiful hair which he wore curled in ringlets and which delighted his master.” Sound familiar?Is it inconcievable that Leonardo painted him into his picture, or someone like him.
Brown in his novel does not do justice to Leonardo’s final faith in Christ, the saviour of mankind. How much less is he authentic in his interpetation of the life and times of Christ and the early church.
I think any educated man would find it impossible to believe such a riduculous idea of a “son of god” or any type of organised religion any how, obviously as everyone is born an athesist your religion( if you have one) is taught, more often then not depending on when and where you were born. Jesus mortality however is much more impressive. His divinity simply controlled the masses. Jesus, divine, this isn’t interesing to me, but if the man was mortal surely this magnifies his greatness in what he achieved.
He made us consider and think for ourselves.
P.S.: do look up links mentioned in the book, I’ve done so and found increadibly interesting articles!
He made us consider and think for ourselves.
P.S.: do look up links mentioned in the book, I’ve done so and found increadibly interesting articles!
You need to do some more research my friend. I’ve said it before, the theories presented in the book did not originate with Dan Brown. And how can you base your arguement on a biography written by someone who was 8 when Da Vinci died?? That person simply wrote what all the common history books would tell you. Do some real resarch!
An avid and eclectic reader, i have found over the years and from many diverse sources, references to the “Church” and how it has destroyed virtually anything that doesn’t fit with its’ beliefs and doctines, which includes people, and has rewritten history to suit its needs. Virtually means, that the Vatican library does have the most complete collection on the planet of early documents. That is a fact. Another fact: the bible which so many rely on today is pretty far removed from the original. So, handed down from God…that’s pretty hard to swallow. There is too much historical fact that directly contradicts what “religions” tell us.
So, in short, The “truth” does lie somewhere in between. Brown has done his homework as well as taken some literary license so no matter what, it’s gotta make you ask questions.
Is it time to know the “truth”. probably not. Man has an inate need to have answers that he can grab onto about origon, purpose and the like. Unfortunatly “religion” has and does provde that. For now.
PS – I’m sorry if the text has some mistakes but I’m portuguese, not english!
I find it strange that Christians can have so much faith in something they have not a shred of evidence to prove it exists, i.e. God.
Jesus was not the son of God, but he must have been a great man to inspire so many followers. It’s time some people stopped scoffing at other religions and practised the religion of being good people
I invite you to visit this very well documented site:
http://www.priory-of-sion.com/
But it’s not because the priory of sion is an hoax that the templar and their holy grail (from French Sang Real, Royal Blood) doesn’t exists…
I really get the impression that an awful lot of people are desperate to believe in this fun fairy tale – to the point that they imagine most or all of Mr Brown’s claims are undisputed facts. After all, why do people get so snuffy when a Catholic or other Christian posts to this forum with the mild suggestion that maybe Mr Brown isn’t invariably reliable?
Why are so many so desperate to believe that a silly novel is THE TRUTH? What’s at stake here anyway?
“For reasons unknown to the people at Rosslyn (the chapel and the town use historically variant spellings), many of the new tourists seem not only inclined to take The Da Vinci Code literally, but also to have read it without proper attention to detail.
It does not in fact place the Grail in the chapel, but in another secret location that the hero visits. (A hint for Grail-hunters concerned about buying plane tickets to the correct European city: Read the epilogue).
[...]
Hannah Storie, a co-worker, said she was frequently asked about the alleged Star of David sign in the chapel floor, which Brown describes as being a crucial clue to the Grail’s whereabouts. Perhaps, persistent visitors insist, it is concealed under a carpet.
Nope, Simon Beattie said. It is not under the floor, and not by the door. “We tell them that the book is a work of fiction, meaning that it isn’t true,” he said.”
So much for all the architectural details being accurate…
Carla, for links to more information on this and related subjects, check out the forum on my website www.davincisecrets.com I’ve listed some of the better sites I’ve found. Happy hunting.
By the way, anyone else heard that they’re going to make The DaVinci Code into a film? I personally think that the book he wrote before this one, Angels & Demons, would translate to film better…seems to be more action packed, and the end scene over the Vatican is an action star’s dream. Check it out.
I’d like to point out that for those who are arguing over this, DB pointed out that it is all about choice and not dictatorship, therefore if this is something we choose to believe in and research, then let it be. Alternatively if you still have strong faith in the Catholic or Christian church and believe in what you have been raised on, then that is your choice too.
All I know is that this has provided a fascinating alternative. Although yes it is a fictional novel, the story has used facts drawn from historical archives. As with most fictional novels that draw on real life events.
even sufi singers rotatin round n round in prayer are supposed to reach a mental orgasm thru which they achieve spirituality…ofcourse this is a different trance…
so i guess ive given some more fodder for all researchers:) bbye
Buona lettura a tutti.
The most ‘novel’ thing so far is the idea that before ‘the church’ ruined it all society was a wonderful harmony between the sexes and with mother earth. As if ‘the church invented patriarchy!
I’m also hoping that some clarity will emerge as to which ‘church’ is in view here – the Roman Catholic church as such didn’t even exist before 1054.
Then there are the throwaway lines – 5 million witches burned or otherwise murdered. If only one was burned that is a terrible indictment on Christianity. But numbers were no where near the millions.
I think that Dan Brown has a hidden message for us on page 224, “You’re a Harvard historian, for God’s sake, not a pop schlockmeister looking for a quick buck”. Mmm.
The most ‘novel’ thing so far is the idea that before ‘the church’ ruined it all society was a wonderful harmony between the sexes and with mother earth. As if ‘the church invented patriarchy!
I’m also hoping that some clarity will emerge as to which ‘church’ is in view here – the Roman Catholic church as such didn’t even exist before 1054.
Then there are the throwaway lines – 5 million witches burned or otherwise murdered. If only one was burned that is a terrible indictment on Christianity. But numbers were no where near the millions.
I think that Dan Brown has a hidden message for us on page 224, “You’re a Harvard historian, for God’s sake, not a pop schlockmeister looking for a quick buck”. Mmm.
There may be holes in Dan Brown’s presentation of the theory. Show me a hole in the actual “theory” and I will fill it for you (or at least point you to a source that can).
Matthew-
That 5 million was over a 300 year period.
Do you have any data that backs up your claim that this didn’t occur? Also, the theory is not that the world was a “wonderful harmony between the sexes and with mother earth”, and the Church ruined it. The Beliefs that Jesus and Mary were trying to perpetuate existed along side many other more dominant beliefs at the time. What the Church did “ruin” was what Jesus AND MARY’s church (and message) was supposed to be.
But I am very sure that the Bible is a fiction created by the roman-catholic church through times.
I am also very sure that the political struggle in Israel at the time of Jesus was very complicated due to the roman appearence.
I read “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” by Michael Baignet some years ago. Now I read “The Da Vinci Code” by Dan Brown.
And their theories seems much more logical than anything else I’ve ever read before.
If you talk about belief/faith I would give much more credit to the above mentioned authors/scientists than an old book produced to gain power and control the masses.
But even though we accept their theories it amazes me that there must be even more ‘hidden’/unknown history behind it all we do not know of yet.
But maybe these facts will see the day of light before ‘the church’ destroys all evidence.
And I can’t help smiling a bit when I think about how a political struggle two thousand years ago still have so much influence on our modern world.
Dan, you are the best.
I do some research on the web (because is the only way here in my country) and ive found some really good pages that tells a different story about “the ascension”, “the wedding of cana”, the true about Joseph of Arimathea and some other things. Definitly the book has opened another door to me, and i hope i keep finding interesting things.
please if you have a good page post it, i will like to know more.
Jake, you challenged William to point out even one hole in Mr Brown’s theory. Here’s a few – I will look forward to reading your explanation!
-Brown’s account of the Council of Nicaea is a fabrication as far as numbers, motivation and content of the discussions is concerned. He does get the city right.
-There are plenty of references in Christian writings prior to Nicaea that affirm belief in Christ’s divinity. Very few Christians (except for groups like the Ebionites) would have called Jesus a mortal prophet even before Nicaea. The Gnostic Christians are no exception; one of their pet beliefs was that Jesus wasn’t a human being at all – His human appearance was merely a phantom.
-There is not a single ancient reference – not one – that describes Jesus and Mary Magdalene as husband and wife. The only thing that comes close is the gnostic “Gospel of Philip”, written between CE200 and CE300 (i.e., 150 to 200 years after Jesus and 100 to 200 years after the four canonical gospels). Philip calls Mary the “companion” of Jesus, which is ambiguous. Once you have read that single late, ambiguous reference, which exists (as far as I know) in only the one damaged Nag Hammadi manuscript, you have exhausted the “evidence” for Brown’s claim. The weight of all other ancient testimony is against the claim.
-Leonardo didn’t produce hundreds of works for the Vatican. He produced one. Only sixteen other works of his are even extant.
-You want evidence against the “5 million witches” claim? Check out “The Burning Times” at http://wicca.timerift.net/burning.html. It is certainly not sympathetic to the Catholic Church but it dismisses such ludicrously inflated numbers.
-The claim that Krishna was greeted with gold, frankincense and myrrh is pure fabrication – the Hindu texts say nothing of the kind. Read them yourself.
-Mithras wasn’t buried in a rock tomb and he didn’t arise three days later; the Mithras stories never even claim that he died! Again, pure invention. (Cf. Manfred Clauss, “The Roman Cult of Mithras”, a standard text in Mithraic studies).
I’ll be happy to provide dozens more holes in Brown’ theory once I peruse your explanation of these.
Bonne journee a tous!
Are you claiming the church has never covered up or suppressed anything? Does it really matter how many witches were burned? Wouldn’t one be enough?
Does it really matter how many works Leonardo may have been commissioned with? The fact that he hid his true beliefs in just one, as my discovery proves (see www.davincisecrets.com ), is enough to make the theory that there are secrets out there yet to be uncovered plausible. The truth is, it’s a theory that’s out there and if just one person considers it a possibility, by definition (an opinion that may or may not be true) it is a theory.
Jim, thank you for your reply. You are right that some of the details I mentioned are relatively trivial for one reason or another, and I don’t wish to belabour my point by dwelling on those. My main reason for raising the more petty issues of accuracy is Mr Brown’s infamous opening claim of factual accuracy in everything touching “artworks, architecture, documents and secret rituals”. Has Mr Brown withdrawn or modified this strong claim? I am not aware that he has. Is the claim true? Certainly not. It is for that reason that the numerous mistakes about trivial stuff (like the number of works Leonardo actually produced) actually is of some importance. Just look at how many people on this site alone have stated that the novel has “opened their eyes”. If a novel is having that kind of impact, it is not petty to point out that the emperor has no clothes.
Now, as to the claim that the Church is suppressing the truth or has suppressed the truth; a couple of my points do speak to that issue. Mr Brown’s presentation of the Magdalene conspiracy theory depends completely on the existence of evidence in Nag Hammadi and the Dead Sea Scrolls for the alternative views of the Magdalene. Now, there is no suppression here; anybody can go to the local library and consult translations of the actual texts. The Dead Sea Scrolls say nothing whatever about Jesus (a major gaffe on Mr Brown’s part; five minutes’ research would have shown him his error); the Nag Hammadi texts do not claim what Mr Brown says they do.
For the Church to be suppressing something there has to be something to suppress. I have yet to see any evidence that there is anything more to Da Vinci than smoke and mirrors.
Best wishes!
The reason I think so many people are claiming the book “opened their eyes” is because the book entices them to look deeper and ask questions. It’s not Dan Brown’s fault that when people start looking deeper, the more questions they begin asking. The truth is, when you look into the history of the church you find such a pattern of suppression, corruption and deceit to the extant that you begin to realize that anything could be possible. Just because there is no apparent evidence of a claim, could just mean the suppression was very successful. There are countless examples of the churches capability of practically whipping from the face of the earth all that it deemed contrary to its cause. The reason there is so little written information left of alternative views is due to their tenaciousness. Who knows how much has vanished completely without a trace. The fact that only some tidbits may have survived the destruction isnt reason to say theres nothing there, its reason to look deeper, ask more questions.
People like Leonardo didnt just risk their life to perpetuate their secret belief that Jesus and Mary were married just for the sake of it. They had to have been handed down this information via other sources and truly believed in it. Whether their source was by word of mouth, underground stream or text that survived the book burnings, we may never know, but the fact that remnants do remain, merits further investigation. There is more to Mary Magdalene, despite Dans book, and information continues to surface to that effect. Others have written books about her without nearly the fuss TDC has created, but then again, those books were not thriller murder mysteries with a mass mainstream appeal. Dan hasnt created this wave, he only accelerated it, it was going to come ashore with or without him, he was just in the right place at the right time to take advantage of the good surf$$$$ You cant blame him for that.
The truth is something that will always be argued by many for as long as we will know. The time I have spent looking for the truth on this particular subject has brought me to this site to see the bigger picture.
None of us are content with the end of our lives or for the triumph of a man made evil.
Truth will always prevail over any evil and it makes no difference what we think.
No religion is correct because there are too many legends and too many facts that paint amazingly vivid stories of good and evil, but missed in there purest form.
The essence of good and evil begins in ones head based on your ideals of what is right and what is wrong. Building on those thoughts brings those ideas to life and these are then introduced the world. Billions of leaking taps all over the world. Some are fountains of life, some of death.
We should be able to see it quite clearly, we wade through it everyday.
The truth will set you free one day, then all your answers will be of no consequence but yourself. Love your family and change yourself first. The world will go on.
My apologies for once again taking up space on this forum! I am very pleased that this discussion is taking place, thank you for letting me take part.
Jim, in your most recent message you state:
“when you look into the history of the church you find [...] a pattern of suppression, corruption and deceit…”.
Will you provide a couple of examples, with details please?
Thanks!
“When you look into the history of the church you find [...] a pattern of suppression, corruption and deceit…
Will you provide a couple of examples, with details please?”
Book banning and burnings = suppression.
Witch and Heretic burning, selling of indulgences = corruption.
Unjustly labeling a person a whore = deceit.
Just a few things that come to mind.
Have Catholics, including bishops and Popes, done terrible things? Certainly. Have Catholics, including bishops and Popes, done glorious things, sometimes directly in the face of the terrible things? Certainly. Just like every other assembly of human beings on earth.
What I am still waiting for is concrete evidence of a concerted plot to conceal evidence of an alternative Jesus. What evidence? How has it been suppressed?
very knowledgeble & thought provokig..
Really, nice work, hope you keep finding things.
;) sorry if my english is not to good ;)
In anycase, thanks again and don’t worry about your English, it’s your thoughts that count. Keep sharing them.
This theory has been running for 20+ years, and yet no reputable/credible historian supports it. And u can’t really use Columbus as an example because that was a completely different period in which history was not written in the same way…and please don’t make me explain historiography.
Historian – one who specializes in the study and interpretation of the record of human societies.
Interpretation being the key word here.
There are plenty of historians that are beginning to re-interpret these records. As we all know, as history itself has proven, quite often when new evidence is discovered or new techniques are developed, interpretations have changed. Even after hundreds of years, that being my point with CC. Historiography has nothing to do with it. They are not looking at the way interpretations have changed over time, they are looking at the available evidence in a new light.
You seem to be of the opinion that if a handful of people you consider experts in the field consider their interpretation to be proof positive, then everyone else should consider it as fact and be done with it.
Seems Dan Brown doesnt know about Orthodox church, shizm etc. I am atheist, but cannot stop wonder how Catholic and Orthodox Churches survived on Balcans during 500 years of Otoman rule(if islam is so “devilish” as many tend to believe nowadays).Personaly, I believe that present “presenting” of islam as “The Big Enemy” is one of the last efforts of The Church to postpone giving some “real answers” to the believers.I see Browns book as an effort to help people analyse by themselves what is realy going on in our world today, to answer themselves why Africa is so fucked up,why blacks are “such problem”,why some muslims are at war and some are not,why USA is perpetualy at war,and why “GORE-TEX” is so expensive.:-)
Because of the novel’s claim to contain elements of historical truth within its fictional framework, many have viewed The Da Vinci Code as a genuine expos of orthodox Christianity’s past. As a result, the book has attracted a generally negative response from the Christian community, as well as from historians dismayed by the way Dan Brown has in their view distortedand in some cases fabricatedhistory. Criticisms cover:
The claim that prior to AD 325, Christ was considered no more than a “mortal prophet” by his followers, and that it was only as a consequence of Emperor Constantine’s politicking and a close vote at the First Council of Nicaea that Christianity came to view him as divine: This has been debunked with extensive reference to the Bible and Church Fathers by various authors. (See this example (http://www.envoymagazine.com/PlanetEnvoy/Review-DaVinci-part2-Full.htm#Full), or Olson and Meisel (2004), who refer to The Church in Crisis: A History of the General Councils, 3251870 (1964) by Philip Hughes.) At the Council, the central question was if Christ and God were one, or whether instead Christ was a created being, inferior to the Father (see Arianism).
The claim that Mary Magdalene was of the tribe of Benjamin: This is unsupported by any historical evidence. The fact that Magdala was located in northern Israel, whereas the tribe of Benjamin resided in the south, weighs against it;
The idea that the purported marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene would create a “potent political union”: According to the Gospels, Jesus clearly stated that his kingdom “is not of this world”; if, on the other hand, Jesus was merely a “mortal prophet” seeking to establish only a political kingdom, he failed;
The assertion that “the sacred feminine” has been suppressed by Christianity: In Roman Catholicism, for example, Mary (of Nazareth), the mother of Jesus, is specially venerated as the “Mother of God,” the “Queen of Heaven,” the spiritual mother of all mankind, and is believed to be free of sin. (It is hypothesized that Mary’s Virginal nature does not accord with Brown’s ideals.)
The allegation that five million women were burned by the Church as witches: Olson and Miesel (2004), referring to information at www.gendercide.org (http://www.gendercide.org/case_witchhunts.html), state that the most reliable current estimatesincluding those not executed at the Church’s recommendation, not killed by burning, and not femalerange from 30,000 to 50,000.
The assertion that the original Olympics were held in honour of Aphrodite: they were celebrated for Zeus Olympias.
The theory that Gothic architecture was designed by the Templars to record the secret of the sacred feminine: historians note that Templars were not involved with cathedrals of the time, which were generally commissioned by European bishops.
The depiction of the Templars as builders, guild-founders and secret-bearers: Templar historians point to abundant evidence that Templars did not themselves engage in building projects or found guilds for masons, and that they were largely illiterate men unlikely to know “sacred geometry,” purportedly handed down from the pyramids’ builders.
The portrayal of the Priory of Sion as an ancient organisation: While the Priory is a genuine organisation claiming to have been the Templars’ driving force, most historians suspect it originated in the aftermath of World War II, on the grounds that it registered with the French government in 1956, and only became widely-known in 1962 (see Pierre Plantard).
The suggestion that all churches used by the Templars were built round, and that roundness was considered an insult by the Church: Some churches used by the Templars were not round, and those that were round were so in tribute to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
The contention that the Mona Lisa was painted as a self-portrait: Art historians are almost unanimous in holding the painting to be of a real woman, Madonna Lisa, wife of Francesco di Bartolomeo del Giocondo.
The depiction of Opus Dei as a monastic order. In fact it is a personal prelature with primarily lay membership. There are no monks in Opus Dei.
Mary Magdalene is said to have been labelled a whore; in fact, there is no correlation between the whore that Christ saves from being stoned to death and Magdalene whatsoever.
Envoy magazine is the award winning bi-monthly journal of Catholic apologetics and evangelization, edited by Patrick Madrid The Holy Father’s call for a “New Evangelization” requires that the Catholic laity be not only knowledgeable about the Faith, but also prepared to explain it intelligently, defend it charitably, and share it effectively. Envoy. is an instrument at the service of the local and universal Church to accomplish this task.
The article at http://www.gendercide.org/case_witchhunts.html is by Jenny Gibbons for a follow up read:
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/
Jenny Gibbons, says the Christian church is not to blame for the witch deathsall of European society was to blame. No one had clean hands. Those are two different points. Why a supposed witch and Pagan feels the need to flatter the Church, is for her to answer but here she shows she is trying too hard to be nice to the Church. Even when the Church was directly involved in these judicial murders, as in the Inquisition, it turned the victim over to the secular authorities for execution of the sentence. The Church was most careful never to be seen with dirty hands in the sense of actually murdering the victims, however dirty they were. They devised the scheme for the very purpose of seeming spotless. Gibbons correctly says: “The Church helped created the stereotypes and religious intolerance that led to the witch hunts.” Christian Catholics unleashed the hounds of fear and prejudice onto the witches by stirring up witch hatred. They could placidly then drink claret while the secular courts of Europe killed the witches, leaving the Church spotless as ever. The pope says he is sorry for the deaths. It is impossible to apologize for such vile and monstrous crimes. Those who think an apology suffices have not got the scale and horror of the crimes into their heads.
“The contention that the Mona Lisa was painted as a self-portrait: Art historians are almost unanimous in holding the painting to be of a real woman, Madonna Lisa, wife of Francesco di Bartolomeo del Giocondo.”
see www.lillian.com
THE MORPHING OF MONA
A Computer Detective solves the mystery of the identity of the “Real” Mona Lisa
New picture processing techniques are coupled with morphing algorithms, reflectography, ultrasonic imaging, holography, digital radiography and traditional x-ray to reveal a “hidden” Mona Lisa. Morphing demonstrates the creative-decision making steps Leonardo made in starting with the Isabella, Duchess of Aragon, the first model, and the changes he made using his own features to finally realize the celebrated face we know today. A mini-documentary reveals the step-by-step of the unraveling of the mystery.
Jake can best fill you in on the Templar stuff.
http://www.asn-ibk.ac.at/bildung/faecher/geschichte/maike/monalisa/g_eng/382.htm
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/m/mo/mona_lisa.html
while that all may be true, it does not mean that the information stated is false. Can you argue against any of the points made. And even if you could, there are still to many facts that go against this conspiracy theory.
my point only being that just because the information is posted on “Wikipedia” doesn’t make it true. The examples I list are arguements against those points and they are being made by reputable and credible people. It seems to me that if you have a bias towards one theory or another people tend to stop researching once they run across information that supports there bias. I’ve looked at both sides and have come to the conclusion there’s more here than what has been reported. All am saying is don’t rule anything out just because some so-called-expert has made their interpretation, maybe they have a bias or maybe they simply missed something. They’ve been wrong before.
“there are still to many facts that go against this conspiracy theory.”
I have yet to see any concrete evidence that would rule anything out. I’ve read a lot of interpretations and opinions that seem to make good sense for one arguement or the other, but I have seen very little in the way of hard facts that leave no doubt. Yes, Dan Brown’s book is loaded with fiction, that does not mean some of the underlying themes don’t contain some spec of truth. Like I said before, people like Leonardo da Vinci didn’t just risk their lives to perpetuate this story just for the thrill of it, they certainly had to believe in it.
Bloodline of the Holy Grail and Genesis of the Grail Kings, both of these are by Laurence Gardiner, are good places to start.
That’s not a very clear statement. I’m interested to know how much of the theory you beleive.
Jim: “Like I said before, people like Leonardo da Vinci didn’t just risk their lives to perpetuate this story just for the thrill of it, they certainly had to believe in it.”
Like it’s been said before, people like matthew,mark,luke and john, didn’t just risk their lives to perpetuate this story just for the thrill of it, they certainly had to beleive in it.
good article
Is “their story” as we know it, the complete un-adulterated truth? Are their stories first hand knowledge or taken from oral tradition or influenced by Paul or Peter? What concrete evidence is there? Much of Matthew and Lukes work is based on, and even copied from Mark. It’s fairly clear that Matthew and Luke embellished on Marks work. Who authored of the Gospel of John? Why do the Gospel’s contradict each other in many instances? There is much on-going debate on all these issues.
“I’m interested to know how much of the theory you believe.”
Charly, to tell the truth, I’m not 100% certain of anything. I do believe that Mary Magdalene had a far greater role than what has been reported and that her role has been suppressed by a male dominated society. I believe there is a good chance that she is “the beloved disciple” and most likely the author of The Fourth Gospel. I am 90% certain that the true teachings of Jesus have been polluted and corrupted by people for their own self-interest and political agenda’s. As for the theory that Mary and Jesus were married and possibly had a child, I don’t think there is any evidence to back up this claim, but I do think they were very close. I do believe that others down through the centuries have for one reason or another, held this belief to be true. It’s for that reason alone that I think the whole theory warrants more investigation.
here you can find some of the contradictions I was referring to.
http://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/bible/ressur.shtml
and these just deal with the resurrection.
“Those who do attempt a reconciliation of the narratives usually rely on a principle known as ‘reconciliation by omission’. This principle states that if a particular passage fails to mention a specific event, it should not be assumed that the writer is explicitly arguing that the event did not take place. For example, a number of apologists have tried to reconcile the Synoptic gospels with John by assuming that Christ first appeared to the women, with Mary absent, and then to Mary alone after the disciples had visited the tomb.
The problem with this theory, from a logical point of view, is that it explains too much. By simply assuming that unspecified events have indeed taken place, it is possible to harmonize any divergent narratives, no matter what ‘holy book’ they may be taken from.”
What you have to understand though, is that these unspecifeid events are irrelevant, and are not needed at all.
Then why bring them up? – I’ve shown you some contradictions; now show me some reconciliations. Then I can show you some more contradictions and you can attempt to reconcile those, it can go on and on, as it has for ages. Anybody who wants to believe it all adds up, is going to see it the way they want to see it. The fact that it is still widely debated only strengthens the position that there are contradictions. Some people will never see beyond what theyve been taught and they will always find a way to “reconcile” (in their own mind) anything that contradicts their beliefs. That’s what happens when you base the truth on your faith as opposed to basing your faith on the truth. There may be more to the story and if the story you believe in is true, then those of us digging into it should ultimately end up in the same place, regardless of what some work of fiction claims. The truth always wins out in the end.
If you would like to discuss this further please visit me in Windsor caslte… I only use Robby as a pen name…I’m actually 9th in line for the throne of England.
Woh, you sounded a bit tick there. But you brought up a good point when you said
“Some people will never see beyond what theyve been taught and they will always find a way to “reconcile” (in their own mind) anything that contradicts their beliefs.”
First of all it’s all people, and perhaps excludes about a dozen on earth. If I am governed by that principle, do you believe yourself to be different. Why do you think so many love this book, If I did not believe in God and Jesus etc…, and I found a book which SEEMED to have a convincible argument against it, I would love it.
And as a general reply to the posts condemning the doctrines of the bible, which I must say do personally offend me. Do not mistakenly identify the catholic church as the bible. Sure the catholic church is one of the most evil organizations…ever… but what they have done is not from the Bible. In my view the Bible is still the most unrivaled book in the history of man.
Also as a reply to those who are condemning the Bible as a book to sway the masses. Sway the masses to do what, if they actually followed what the Bible said, it wouldn’t be such a bad thing, well would it? And speaking of a book that sways the masses, what do you think the Da Vinci code is a perfect example of.
p.s.=sorry for taking so long to reply back Jim.
Scholars are still debating over how much of it is the actual recording of historical events or parables or a combination of both. I am of the belief that the later is more likely the case and that we need to take a closer look into the origins of its content, after all the Bible was not just plopped down from heaven as some folks seem to believe. Every last word in it was conceived, compiled, edited, translated, and interpreted by man. That being the case, how are you so certain everything it contains is the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I just loved the DaVinci Code.
I am not a christian, I believe in something called Wicca (nature religion where among other things you worship the sun (the god) and the moon (the goddess). I could never abide with the atrocities that the christians committed during the crusades (the same thing happened in scandinavia aswell, (I live in sweden) allthough not on such grand a scale).
Dan Brown has succeeded in his “quest” with this book, to get people to THINK and not just take everything at face value, this thread is proof of that. One thing I feel is very interesting is that no-one questioned the bible (the worlds first fictional book) written 2000 years ago, and just accepted it as truth. But when Dan Brown writes this masterpiece (he is right up there with Signore DaVinci) then all of a sudden people starts screaming that it is only fiction, it’s not true. Is the bible true? Or could it just be that Dan Brown is onto something here.
I really don’t care if the Sangreal is damaging or gloryfying to the church. I only like it because of the historical aspect. I have always been interested in the Medieval times and of course the Arthur Saga (fiction or Truth?) and this has just spurred my interest even further aswell as given me additional venues of research.
Jim, after i said that i also said that this was not from the teachings of the bible. I understand if you can find fault in the roman catholic church but understand so much of what they have done is from perverting scripture to meet there own ends. Once again please don’t make the mistake of identifying God with some man-made Empire.
Jim: “if there were no ambiguity or points of contradiction then everyone would be heading down the same path and no one would be questioning any of it”
In the bible itself does it not say “I know that after my going away oppresive wolves will enter among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away disciples after themselves.” Acts 20:29,30
From this it is clear that there would be many different divisions. Here is another scripture to think about Matthew 7:13-23. Once again it is very clear that there would be divisions. Also to the example of the tree producing fruit, doesn’t paint a nice picture for Constantine.
P.S.= Sorry if I sounding like I was preaching to much, just love discussing biblical history and religions.
I’m not the one confusing God with an Empire, organization, textbook or anything else for that matter. I know God and God is none of these things.
“after my going away oppresive wolves will enter among you “
How soon after?
Let’s not forget Paul.
And glen you should have kept on reading to verse 37 where it clearly states that it was Paul himself that had just said these things.(i.e. opressive wolves will enter among you….)
Jim, I have been looking at the references of the beloved disciple in the bible as well, and places such as John 13:23, and John 19:27 refer to the beloved disciple as a male.
Also here is a very interseting article which I believe is from the publication of WatchTower’s of Jehovah Witnesses’, which i will copy and paste on next post.
Is Peter the rock on which Christ built his church? What are the keys that Jesus gave to Peter? Were the keys handed down to successors? Did Peter claim to be the first pope? Did he act like a pope? Here are the answers form Gods own Word.
HONEST-HEARTED persons do not object to an examination of the popes titles Vicar of Jesus Christ and Successor of St.Peter, Prince of the Apostles. Are they Scriptural? Priests refer any inquirer to Jesus words at Matthew 16:18, 19 in the Catholic Douay Bible: I say to thee: That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Does this mean, as the Roman Catholic Church claims, that Jesus appointed Peter the head of his church and the first pope?
To understand what Jesus meant it is well to examine, with the benefit of an accurate, modern translation of the Bible, Jesus words and their context. One day, while Jesus and his apostles were in the neighborhood of Caesarea Philippi, he asked them: Who are men saying the Son of man is? The various answers people gave were wrong. So Jesus asked his apostles: You, though, who do you say I am? Simon Peter was quick with an answer: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. To this Jesus replied: I say to you, You are Peter [Petros, a stone, in the masculine gender], and on this rock-mass [Greek, petra, a rock-mass, in the feminine gender] I will build my congregation.Matt. 16:13-18, NW.
What readily becomes apparent is this: the rock on which Christ built his church is not the same original Greek word that Jesus used when he referred to Peter. Petros, the name Jesus gave Peter, is in the masculine gender and means a movable stone, a piece of rock; but petra, the rock on which the church is built, is in the feminine gender and means a rock-mass. If Jesus had meant for Peter to be the head of his church he would have said the obvious: You are Petros and on this Petros I will build my church. But Jesus never said that! Nor did he say: You, Peter, will build my church. Rather, Jesus said: I will build my church. Who, then, is this petra, the rock-mass, upon which Christ builds his church?
THE ROCK-MASS IDENTIFIED
To make sure of all things, as the Bible says we must, it is vital to search the Scriptures to find out how Peter himself understood Jesus words. Did Peter really think he was the petra, the rock-mass foundation? On the contrary! He understood that foundation to be Christ himself: Then Peter, filled with holy spirit, said to them: ... in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you impaled but whom God raised up from the dead, by this one does this man stand here sound in front of you. This is the stone which was treated by you builders as of no account that has become chief cornerstone.1Thess. 5:21; Acts 4:8-12, NW.
If Peter was the rock on which the church was built, he certainly would have known it; and if he knew it he would have made that powerfully clear in his own epistles. But even in his own writings Peter never calls himself pope or speaks of himself as the head of the church. Rather, he identifies Christ as the rock-mass foundation: Coming to him as to a living stone, rejected, it is true, by men, but chosen, precious, with God, you yourselves also as living stones are being built up a spiritual house for the purpose of a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. ... It is to you, therefore, that he is precious, because you are believers; but to those not believing, the identical stone that the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone, and a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.1Pet. 2:4-8, NW.
Peter recognized himself as only one of the living stones that make up the Christian church. True, being an apostle of Jesus Christ, Peter was in the foundation of the Christian church: The wall of the city also had twelve foundation stones, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. But no Bible writer names Peter as the head of the church. Not a literal building, the church is a spiritual temple made up of 144,000 living stones, who form the bride of Christ, the Christian congregation. That Christ is the head of the congregation the Bible provides abundant testimony. Declared the apostle Paul concerning Christ: He is the head of the body, the congregation. And again: You have been built up upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone.Rev. 21:14; Col. 1:18; Eph. 2:20, NW.
If there was any doubt remaining as to the identity of the rock-mass, it would be utterly shattered by the apostles words at 1Corinthians 10:4 (NW), which make unmistakably clear the identity of petra, the rock-mass: They used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass which followed them, and that rock-mass [Greek, petra] meant the Christ.
So when Jesus spoke those words at Matthew 16:18, he meant that he himself, the one who had just been identified by Peter as the Messiah, was the rockmass foundation on which the Christian congregation would be built.
When did the doctrine that Peter is the head of the church and that he supposedly has successors begin? It was established in the Roman Catholic Church in the Nicene Creed, A.D. 325 and 381. But the pure, uncorrupted Christians living in the days of the apostles never knew such a doctrine. Indeed, up till the fourth century professed Christians did not hold to such a teaching. When the Austrian Roman Catholic bishop Joseph Strossmayer made his speech before the college of cardinals in 1870, the time when the dogma of the infallibility of the pope was discussed, he made that point clear:
Of all the doctors of Christian antiquity St.Augustine occupies one of the first places for knowledge and holiness. Listen then to what he writes on his second treatise on the first epistle to St.John: What do the words mean, I will build my church on this rock? On this faith, on that which said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. In his treatise on St.John we find this most significant phraseOn this rock which thou hast confessed I will build my church, since Christ was the rock. The great bishop believed so little that the church was built on St.Peter that he said to the people in his thirteenth sermon, Thou art Peter, and on this rock (petra) which thou hast confessed, on this rock which thou hast known, saying, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God, I will build my churchupon Myself, who am the son of the living God: I will build it on Me, and not Me on thee. That which St.Augustine thought upon this celebrated passage was the opinion of all Christendom in his time [about 400A.D.].
KEYS OF THE KINGDOM
What, though, of the keys that Jesus gave to Peter? Do they prove that Peter was the first pope? To answer we need to know what the keys were. A key is used Scripturally to represent the privilege of unlocking hidden truths. For example, the scribes and Pharisees were duty-bound to explain the truths of Gods Word to the people, but they failed to do this; even worse, they took away from the people the opportunity to understand. So Jesus said of those religious leaders: Woe to you who are versed in the Law, because you took away the key of knowledge. The keys that Jesus gave Peter, then, are not literal, but they symbolize or represent the unlocking of the knowledge of opportunity of entering into the kingdom of heaven.Luke 11:52, NW.
The knowledge that Christ was to have a heavenly kingdom and that 144,000 from among mankind would reign with him in his kingdom was for long a secret. But at Pentecost, A.D. 33, God through Christ used Peter to unlock the meaning of the sacred secret to the Jewish believers. Thus Peter, being directed by heaven, unlocked the meaning of the sacred secret which was concealed from the past systems of things and from the past generations.Col. 1:26, NW.
For three and a half years the apostles preached the gospel to the Jews exclusively. Then the time came for Peter to use the second key. This was A.D. 36. Heaven directed Peter to go to the home of the Roman soldier Cornelius, a Gentile, to explain the good news. Cornelius and his family believed. And to the surprise of the Jewish Christians Gods holy spirit was poured out on non-Jewish believers: While Peter was yet speaking about these matters the holy spirit fell upon all those hearing the word. And the faithful ones that had come with Peter who were of those circumcised were amazed, because the free gift of the holy spirit was being poured out also upon people of the nations. And the sacred secret had vital meaning for people of the nations for the first time. For now the door of opportunity to enter into the heavenly kingdom was open to people of any nation. In other generations this secret was not made known to the sons of men as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by spirit, namely, that people of the nations should be joint heirs and fellow members of the body and partakers with us of the promise in union with Christ Jesus through the good news.Acts 10:44, 45; Eph. 3:5, 6, NW.
So Peter was blessed with the privilege of unlocking the door of opportunity into the heavenly kingdom, first to the Jews and then to the non-Jews. Said Peter: Brothers, you well know that from early days God made the choice among you that through my mouth people of the nations should hear the word of the good news and believe.Acts 15:7, NW.
Notice Peters words: God made the choice among you. Always God through Christ directed matters. Never did Peter have the prerogative to teach whatever he felt was right to teach. Heaven directed all of Peters moves. Said Jesus: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatever you may bind on earth will have been bound in the heavens, and whatever you may loose on earth will have been loosed in the heavens. Peter had the power to teach only what was already loosed in heaven by Christ. In other words, Peter was not to formulate any teaching of his own, but must wait for Christ to loose it in heaven. So Peters receiving of the keys never gave him absolute supremacy over the church in the matter of teaching.Matt. 16:19, NW.
Moreover, once Peter used the keys, there was no further use for them.
NO RESEMBLANCE TO ANY POPE
If Peter had been the first pope, would he not have known it? Yet never once did he call himself Supreme Pontiff or pope. Nowhere in his writings did he claim supremacy, infallibility or the right to have a successor. On subjects so important as this it is unthinkable that Peter would remain silent.
If Peter was the vicar of Jesus Christ, how is it that he never acted like a pope? Peter never established himself in a sumptuous residence. He never hired a small army of soldiers to guard him. He never dressed in clothes drastically different from his brothers. He never had himself carried about by his brothers on a papal chair similar to one used by Egyptian kings. Why did he never act like a pope? Because he obeyed Jesus command: Do not call anyone your father on earth, for One is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ.Matt. 23:9, 10, NW.
Peter had ample opportunity to act as the leader of the Roman Catholic Church does, but he never did. When Peter used the second key and brought Jehovahs way of salvation to Cornelius, the Bible account says: As Peter entered, Cornelius met him, fell down at his feet and did obeisance to him. But Peter lifted him up, saying: Rise; I myself am also a man. (Acts 10:25, 26, NW) Did Peter extend a ring to the prostrate Cornelius? No, Peter lifted Cornelius up, saying: Rise; I myself am also a man. Who ever heard of a pope lifting up a man prostrate before him, admitting his own comparative unimportance and equality with other men?
And where is the resemblance in the matter of simony? Simon the magician tried to bribe Peter into giving him the privilege of conferring the holy spirit on anyone he wished. Peter refused. Yet the popes are notorious for accepting and offering bribes. Alexander VI, in 1492, gained the papacy by bribery. When the reformer Savonarola made a list of this popes crimes, the pope tried to silence him by holding out a cardinals hat! Pope Benedict IX sold his popehood to Gregory VI. Julius II, says The Catholic Encyclopedia, did not hesitate to employ bribery to gain the papal crown. Though ostensibly opposed to simony, popes have resorted to it so often that in the matter of papal elections alone The Encyclopdia Britannica (ninth edition under Conclave) says: A study of the history of the Papal conclaves leaves the student with the conviction that no election untainted by simony has ever yet been made, while in a great number of instances the simony practiced in the conclave has been of the grossest, most shameless, and most overt kind. Peter acted most unpopelike when he refused Simons bribe: May your silver perish with you, because you thought through money to get possession of the free gift of God.Acts 8:9-24, NW.
If Peter was the first pope, how is it that Jesus did not choose one that could set the proper example for future popes? For popes are not allowed to experience the marital state; yet Peter was married. Both Mark and Luke spoke of Simons mother-in-law. And the apostle Paul wrote: We have authority to lead about a sister as a wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the Lords brothers and Cephas [Peter], do we not? But popes do not have this authority.Mark 1:30; Luke 4:38; 1Cor. 9:5, NW.
If Peter was an infallible pope, how is it that he showed up so many times to be in error? Just a few moments after Christ spoke the words of Matthew 16:18, Peter appeared far from infallible; and Jesus had to rebuke him, saying: Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumblingblock to me. Would Christ address the infallible head of his church with terms such as Satan and stumblingblock? Time and again Peter showed he was not infallible. Once he lost faith while walking on water, and sank. Once he used his sword when he should not have. He even denied knowing Jesus. And after Christs death he still did not understand that Christ must be raised from the dead. Later Peter slipped into a wrong practice and had to be corrected by the apostle Paul.Matt. 16:22, 23; 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 18:10, 11; Gal. 2:11, NW.
NOT PRINCE OF THE APOSTLES
The pope is called Successor to St.Peter, Prince of the Apostles. But the Bible does not give the slightest trace that he was prince of the apostles. On the contrary, it gives abundant evidence that he was just one of the apostles and not the chief one. At Galatians 2:9 (NW) Paul writes of James and Cephas [Peter] and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars. Yet he puts James first. Would Paul have slighted the prince of the apostles by putting his name second in his list, if Peter was really chief of apostles? At a meeting in Jerusalem Peter made a speech but it was James who presided and made the decisions. If Peter was chief apostle it is unthinkable that he would have allowed James to preside over a most important meeting.Acts 15:13-19, NW.
Finally, the last living apostle was John, not Peter. This would not be the logical arrangement if Peter was a pope. And here is something thought-arousing: The Catholic Encyclopedia lists four popes as succeeding Peter, St.Linus, St.Anacletus I, St.Clement I and St.Evaristus, the last of whom reigned about A.D. 99. Now the apostle John lived until about A.D. 100 or later. Yet John, in his writings, never once mentioned the name of any of these popes or even the fact that any pope existed. Why the silence on such extremely vital matters? Stranger yet is the fact that four popes supposedly succeeded Peter during the life span of the apostle John. Yet, if there was to be a successor, John, the beloved disciple of Jesus and apostle of the Lamb and one of the twelve foundation stones, would be the most logical choice.
What conclusion must we come to, then? That Peter never had a successor. That Peter was merely one of the apostles, one of the twelve foundation stones and not the chief cornerstone or rock mass upon which the congregation is built. That Peter used the keys of the kingdom and that the keys cannot be used again or passed on to another. That Peter was not prince of the apostles. That Peter never acted like a pope. That the rock on which Christ builds his congregation is Christ himself. Thus in the error-destroying light of Gods Word lies exposed one of the most colossal hoaxes of all time. Peter was not the first pope.
Who is John?
http://www.magdalene.org/fourthgospel.htm
As for Peter not acting like a complete power-crazed moron, going around saying: I am the Pope, all bow to ME!. Did not Jesus preach humility and judge yourself before judging others?
I missed this part: Why did he never act like a pope? Because he obeyed Jesus command: Do not call anyone your father on earth, for One is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ.Matt. 23:9, 10, NW.
Disregard my post :P
Deflection through redirection? You never know.
hmmmmm perhaps, but you(glen) and jim are yet to answer how Paul or Peter could be described as oppressive wolves.
I have found myself wanting to believe it thus I must put the brakes on and be empirical….as much as is possible.
I have always had a deep mistrust of religions as man made and proscriptive. I am therefore very concerned not to be sucked in by whatever fervour I now may find surrounding this topic.
Mr Brown you certainly have done what all good art ought to do….pose questions
John Barton Bedford UK
In my opinion, the true teachings of Jesus may have been subjected to alterations soon after his death as people added their own spin, jockeying for position. Nothing appears to have been written down until much later (a good 20 to 30 years later to say the least). Then very little, if any, of what has been written can be positively without question be attributed to the actual first hand eyewitnesses of the events as they unfolded (of course Charly, you will debate this point). If the teachings were past on orally to that point there is a reasonable chance that some exaggerating and embellishing took place. This would account for various versions and contractions in the Bible. When Paul did come along, he spent very little time with any of the original disciples and pretty much seemed to make-it-up as he went along (sorry I don’t believe any of his story). Why would Jesus spend so much effort in choosing the 12 and teaching them the way, just to have Paul take a leading role?
I think Glen may be right in that Paul may have used certain language as “fear tactics” to direct people towards his vision of where the new religion should head. If this can be deemed the work of an oppressive wolf, all depends on his motives I guess.
Charly, I respect your efforts to defend what you believe is the final “word”, but why keep asking me to defend my opinions as opposed to simply offering up proof positive that your views are undisputable? If you can’t, then I don’t think you’re going to convince anyone here to stop asking questions.
Jesus said, “Recognize what is in your sight, and that which is hidden from you will become plain to you. For there is nothing hidden which will not become manifest.” The Gospel of Thomas
“as people added their own spin, jockeying for position.”
For what position?, so that they could be persecuted and all martyred? What sense is there in that?
“Nothing appears to have been written down until much later (a good 20 to 30 years later to say the least)....of course Charly, you will debate this point”
Jim, your starting to get to know me too well. Ancient Historical writings which are written 20 to 30 years later, of course assuming these are the earliest records which will be found, is much better than the majority of historical records, which are written decades to hundreds of years later. It is funny, that these documents are usually not debated but the Bible is. I’ll give you some examples if you want.
“Charly, I respect your efforts to defend what you believe is the final “word”, but why keep asking me to defend my opinions as opposed to simply offering up proof positive that your views are undisputable?”
The only way to prove something is to disprove the other view, and as well and just importantly prove your own. As to my views being “undisputable”, I do not believe I have ever made such a claim, and if I did I retract the statement. And the points which I make that are disputable, I welcome critism so that I may perfect them.
More interestingingly though is that you criticize the four gospels for being written 20-30 years after the event, yet where is your criticm for all the gnostic writings which were written waaaaaaaaaaay after (one of the main reasons I do not support the beloved dicsiple theory because to much of the case requires the unreliable gnostic writings). Would the four gospels not be more reliable?
“I don’t think you’re going to convince anyone here to stop asking questions.”
Never my intention.
—-
Charly out—-Jim, without the exaggerations, and with the contradictions and no external verifiable historical references, is it not fair to say that the theory is not valid? You yourself do not even believe it, when I had asked you a while ago.
“The only problem with that is if you use this same criteria on the book you are using as evidence to support your argument (the Bible) and apply this same rules, you would also then have to dismiss it.”
Yeah sure…problem is Jim, the bible has tons and tons of external verifiable historical references and those things which can be seen as contradictions can easily be debated against. Oh and please tell me where you see exaggerations.
“So what it all boils down to is this, the only proof you have to persuade people to dismiss Dan Browns theory is your firm believe that everything the Bible says is fact”
THE BIBLE!!THE BIBLE!!! forget the bible, look at other historical records. Hmmm how can u dismiss Brown;s theory. Well how bout Brown getting just about everything wrong, for example completely wrong description of the council of niceae(necesary for his case), using documents which noone has ever seen, half of them made up, incorrectly understanding mother goddess worship, and a million other things. You don’t need to go near the Bible to disprove Dan’s Theory.
“So what I cant figure out is, if youre so willing to believe the earth is flat and is the center of the universe and that Noah was able to fit some 10 million plus (times 2) species on a 450 foot boat (and feed and clean up after them all for 40 days)”
Im sorry did I say that the Earth was flat….No, and I don’t believe the Bible says that either…tsk,tsk, once again you identify God and the Bible with the Roman Catholic Church..I thought you said you were above that. And interestingly concerning the shape of the earth you may like this;
——
as far back as 500B.C., a Greek scholar, Pythagoras, asserted that the earth was round. Pythagoras lived about 540 to 500B.C.E. Much earlier, however, the Hebrew prophet Isaiah, of the eighth century B.C.E., indicated that the earth was spherical. He wrote: There is One [Jehovah God] who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers. (Isa. 40:22) The Hebrew word here rendered circle also may be translated sphere. (A Concordance of the Hebrew and Chaldee Scriptures, by B. Davidson) Interestingly, regarding circle in this verse, the Scoffeld Reference Bible says in a marginal note: A remarkable reference to the sphericity of the earth. Moffatts translation reads: He sits over the round earth, and the Catholic Douay Version says here: It is he that sitteth upon the globe of the earth. Of course, the inspired Word of earths Creator would properly indicate that the earth was round, though the ancients in general thought it was flat.——-[God] is stretching out the north over the empty place, hanging the earth upon nothing. (Job 26:7) Another scriputre you may like, just in case you accuse me of believing the earth rests on the shoulders of four elephants on a turtle’s shell.
AS to earth being the centre of the universe…Did I ever say that…No, did the bible ever say that…No, the Roman Catholic church did, and once again jim you are making the same mistakes.
Response to Noah and the Ark
ARK
1.Noahs ark was the provision by which forefathers of all mankind survived the global Deluge of 2370-2369B.C.E. (See DELUGE; NOAH No. 1.) Detailed instructions were given to Noah by Jehovah as to its size, shape, design for light and ventilation, and materials to be used for its construction.Ge 6:14-16.
Design and Size. The ark (Heb., tevah; Gr., kibotos) was a rectangular chestlike vessel presumably having square corners and a flat bottom. It needed no rounded bottom or sharp bow to cut rapidly through the water; it required no steering; its only functions were to be watertight and to stay afloat. A vessel so shaped is very stable, cannot be easily capsized, and contains about one third more storage space than ships of conventional design. There was a door provided in the side of the ark for loading and unloading the cargo.
In size the ark was 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. Conservatively calculating the cubit as 44.5 cm (17.5 in.) (some think the ancient cubit was nearer 56 or 61 cm), the ark measured 133.5 m by 22.3 m by 13.4 m (437 ft 6 in. 72 ft 11 in. 43 ft 9 in.), less than half the length of the ocean liner Queen Elizabeth 2. This proportion of length to width (6 to 1) is used by modern naval architects. This gave the ark approximately 40,000 cu m (1,400,000 cu ft) in gross volume. It is estimated that such a vessel would have a displacement nearly equal to that of the mighty 269-m (883 ft) Titanic of this 20th century. No cargo vessel of ancient times even slightly resembled the ark in its colossal size. Internally strengthened by adding two floors, the three decks thus provided gave a total of about 8,900 sq m (96,000 sq ft) of space.
Ample Carrying Capacity. The passenger list of the ark was quite impressive. Besides Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives, living creatures of every sort of flesh, two of each, were to be taken aboard. Male and female they will be. Of the flying creatures according to their kinds and of the domestic animals according to their kinds, of all moving animals of the ground according to their kinds, two of each will go in there to you to preserve them alive. Of the clean beasts and fowls, seven of each kind were to be taken. A great quantity and variety of food for all these creatures, to last for more than a year, also had to be stowed away.Ge 6:18-21; 7:2,3.
The kinds of animals selected had reference to the clear-cut and unalterable boundaries or limits set by the Creator, within which boundaries creatures are capable of breeding according to their kinds. It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family kindsthe horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to kind established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 kinds of mammals, 74 kinds of birds, and 10 kinds of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 kinds of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird kinds were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few kinds following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankindshort, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skinall of whom sprang from the one family of Noah.
These estimates may seem too restrictive to some, especially since such sources as The Encyclopedia Americana indicate that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals. (1977, Vol. 1, pp. 859-873) However, over 60 percent of these are insects. Breaking these figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside the ark, and only 5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises, which would have also remained outside the ark. Other researchers estimate that there are only about 290 species of land mammals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats. (The Deluge Story in Stone, by B.C. Nelson, 1949, p. 156; The Flood in the Light of the Bible, Geology, and Archaeology, by A.M. Rehwinkel, 1957, p.69) So, even if estimates are based on these expanded figures, the ark could easily have accommodated a pair of all these animals.
And with your little faith and truth lecture I thought we had already cleared that up. It seems Jim that you have the ignorance/arrogance to believe that this only applies to religous people. Can you honestly say your are not conditioned by the same thing? You were brought up and conditioned to believe something and you Jim will unwaveringly support it till the day you die. Can you say that you have an open mind, is the possibility of a Creator even an option for you?...it isn’t. If Jesus came to your house ressurected your dead grandma and your pet dog fluffy, you’d still be a skeptic, your faith has already been programmed in. So please stop using your hypocritical statement.
And if believing in God is a leap of faith, what do you call the theory of evolution(more of a hypothesis really, it’s just that weak)... please just try to debate this.
So jim theres a reason we going around and around, it’s because as much as you like to deny it, we both base truth on faith(not universal as smaller issues are different)
And to end with style and be a bit poetic I give you this quote.
We are walking by faith, not by sight.2CORINTHIANS 5:7.
As far as being open minded, I try and look at every point of view and formulate my thoughts on what to me is the most logical answer. Yes if Jesus were to come to my house and perform the miracles you speak of, it would difinately change my opinion on a lot of things, that is providing all my neighbors weren’t already performing the same miracles.
I am sorry if my searching for the truth bothers you so, but you wont catch me going to any bible study chat sites and trying to convince anybody my beliefs are right, to each his own. And you are right, I do not believe all of the fiction Dan Brown uses in his story, but I do believe some of it rings true or at least creates a more logical picture than the Bible does. As far as Noah goes I was wrong, it was 150 or more days he had to care for the millions of kinds of species and all this at a ripe old age of 600 plus years of age. Sorry Charly, but if you do believe everything the Bible tells you, I have some land in south Florida for sale.
[God] is stretching out the north over the empty place, hanging the earth upon nothing. (Job 26:7) Another scriputre you may like, just in case you accuse me of believing the earth rests on the shoulders of four elephants on a turtle’s shell.” Interesting, maybe not four elephants but I guess pillars are reasonable “which shaketh the earth out of her place and the pillars thereof tremble.” (Job 9:6)
Charly, Dans theory is that Jesus was married and had a child, and that descendants of this union still exist to this day. So without using the Bible as a reference, why dont you reveal the evidence you have that can prove beyond any doubt that this theory is invalid.
Youre right, I certainly can not debate evolution with you. Of course you could not believe in evolution when you believe the world is only some 6000 years old. Besides its been debated to death (see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html).
I’m just wondering why it would be such a problem if life were to have evolved after it was created, then the bible scholars could simply re-interpret some antient Hebrew word so as the Bible has really said it all along, it was just mis-translated. Then there would be no need for debate.
In my opinion, Dan Brown did something that quite a number of art historians did not have the guts (or the balls) to do, which is put the truth out in the open and let everyone decide for themselves what they want to believe. I’m sure Mr Brown’s intention for writing this book was not to create a new Bible but simply to point out that there are other facts that have been kept secret to us for so many years. The choice is yours at the end of the day. You can either spend months and years on end doing research after you read the book, like most of us are doing since the book was published, or you could continue living your life with your beliefs. BUT NO ONE has the right to come up to us and say that we are doing wrong and that we are letting a book influence our lives. Live and let live.
I am presuming the book may touch on the Holy Bloodline of Christ.
From what I am assuming the storyline may be set in France as well.
I just wanted to recommend looking into the *real* “Rennes Le Chateau” mystery for people interested in this sort of thing. I guess it might discuss this in the book already.
Rennes Le Chateau is a French village that had hidden documents that the Church paid a fortune for in late 1800’s. The church of Mary Magdelene there is quite unusual and beautiful. It apparently has codes and messages in the church itself that lead to a treasure. Thousands of people go to this village each year in the hopes of finding a treasure there. This treasure is believed to be part of many things. Arc of Covenant, Grail etc.. Templar treasure.
My point is Jesus, divine or mortal, is followed for the “way” he showed to the world…for his teachings. Whether he chose St.Peter or Mary Magdalene to spread his word is secondary.
Now that people no longer fear being put to death, the only scare tactic the church has left is to convince people the only way to avoid eternal damnation is receive through them and them alone eternal salvation. Thats what they have for sale and if youre not buying it, they’re going out of business. It is their very real fear that Dan Browns book is going to make people think twice before putting their hard earned cash in the offering plate each week that scares the church more than theyre willing to admit. This is a major concern for the Vatican; their whole survival depends on the trickle up process. Image if all this money that is pouring into the churches each week, instead of being used to support and expand this empire, went to helping the poor or into research for curing diseases. It would be great for society, but it would devastate the holy empire. This is the sole reason so many church groups are doing everything in their power to discredit Dans book. To them it is more than just a work of fiction; it makes people stop and think. It doesnt really matter if it is true or not, anything that causes people question their faith and look a little deeper into the teachings and practices of the church, can be very detrimental to their bottom line.
I believe mankind has existed for 6000 years not the earth.
“The only difference being you feel the only path to him is via scripture. I on the other hand believe we only need to follow what we know in our hearts is right and God will find us”
And is that wrong? Is following your heart a sufficent justice for mankind? If I in my heart believe that abortion is right and you say that it is wrong because this is what you believe in your heart, which one of us is right?
The heart is more treacherous than anything else and is desperate.” Jer. 17:9
He that is trusting in his own heart is stupid, but he that is walking in wisdom is the one that will escape. Prov. 28:26
Jim, what kind of a cruel God would leave billions on Earth and leave them with no guidance???? We do not believe in almost the same God at all, mine has not forsaken me.
“I fully agree with Fin (26/03/04) on his reply to Michelle (21/01/04). That is exactly what the bible is. I’d also like to add to Michelle’s comment about FREE WILL. If a newly born child is born and by the age of 2 weeks is given 6 shots or morphine every day because he’s sick, whose free will is THAT?? So what you are stating is that all the hunger and sickness and diseases we have in the world are free will ?? Please….”
Marcelle I do not think you know the proper meaing of the word free will. Hunger and sickness can be traced back to the free will of individuals. As to your baby illiteration, it is the free will of the individual who shot the baby up with morphine. I don’t see what you are trying to say.
“After all, we all know that there are so many things in life that the we don’t know about and that are kept secret from us….by the governments, and yes, even by the Church…you have to accept the fact Charly whether you like it or not.”
Is there someone else on this post under the name of charly??????????????????????????????Of course secrets are kept from us!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh and by the way if any way comes up to tell you that they don’t believe in God because there is to much suffering in the world, it is your duty to tell the following: In a world in which you ask for no suffering, you also ask for no free-will (read Brave New World and all those utopia books), and in reality are asking for immediate death. If God stopped everyone before they did something wrong there would not be one person living on this earth today. So therefore freewill is one of the greatest gifts that we have. And by the way in the bible there are 2 clear scriptures which I know of that mark Satan as the god(note how there is no capital G) of the earth.
Doesn’t the Bible say God created earth on the third day and man three days later? Sorry if I was off by a few days.
“And is that wrong? Is following your heart a sufficent justice for mankind? If I in my heart believe that abortion is right and you say that it is wrong because this is what you believe in your heart, which one of us is right?”
Scripture doesn’t answer these questions. If you believe in your heart that abortion is right, who is to judge you but God, certainly not me. To me life is sacred, The bible has more death and destruction in it then any other book ever written.
“Jim, what kind of a cruel God would leave billions on Earth and leave them with no guidance???? We do not believe in almost the same God at all, mine has not forsaken me.”
Look at where all the years of “written” guidance has led. God has left clear guidance, just because its not in mans handwriting does not mean it can’t be read. Its time to start listening with our hearts, not our eyes and ears. If God is everthing we believe, why do you think God needs a pen and paper to make his word known?
Similarly, religious fundamentalists today distort the Bible when they insist that the earth was created in six 24-hour days. (Genesis 1:3-31) Such a view agrees neither with science nor with the Bible. In the Bible, as in everyday speech, the word day is a flexible term, expressing units of time of varying lengths. At Genesis 2:4, all six creative days are referred to as one all-embracing day. The Hebrew word translated day in the Bible can simply mean a long time.6 So, there is no Biblical reason to insist that the days of creation were 24 hours each. By teaching otherwise, fundamentalists misrepresent the Bible.See also 2Peter 3:8.
DAY IN THE SCRIPTURES
Clearly this ever-living Creator, Jehovah God, would view time differently from the way we mere mortals do, with our lifespan of seventy or eighty years. Does not a young child view time differently from the way a person well along in years views it? To a child twelve months might seem to be a very long time, but to an elderly person the years just seem to fly by. How much differently, then, must the Ancient of Days view time from the way we mortals do! Obviously, when Jehovah in his Word speaks of a day or days, we should not conclude that he always means days of twenty-four hours. He may be referring to such and he may not.
Thus we find that the Hebrew word for day, yohm, is used in a variety of ways in the Bible. In the very account of creation we have day used to refer to three different periods of time. Day is used to refer to the daylight hours, as when we read: God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. It is used to refer to both day and night, as when we read: There came to be evening and there came to be morning, a first day. And day is also used to refer to the entire time period involved in creation of the heavens and the earth: This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.Gen. 1:5; 2:4.
Then again, on more than one occasion Jehovah God used a day to represent a year. This he did in connection with the Israelites in the wilderness and with his prophet Ezekiel. His Word says: A day for a year, a day for a year, you will answer for your errors. A day for a year, a day for a year, is what I have given you. (Num. 14:34; Ezek. 4:6) Likewise in regard to Daniels prophecy that foretold the coming of the Messiah at the end of sixty-nine weeks. The Messiah came, not at the end of sixty-nine literal weeks, or 483 days, but at the end of 483 years. (See The Watchtower, 1966, p. 379.)
Not only one year, but even a thousand years are at times represented as one day in Gods Word. As the prophet Moses mused: For a thousand years are in your eyes but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch during the night. The apostle Peter expresses it even stronger: Let this one fact not be escaping your notice, beloved ones, that one day [Greek, hemera] is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.Ps. 90:4; 2Pet. 3:8.
Yes, in the Christian Greek Scriptures day is also used to refer to other periods of time, not just to twenty-four hours. For example, Jesus on one occasion said: Abraham your father rejoiced greatly in the prospect of seeing my day, and he saw it and rejoiced. Likewise we read of such expressions by his followers as Christs day, Jehovahs day, and the great day of God the Almighty. Surely none of these are meant to be limited to just twenty-four hours. (John 8:56; Phil. 2:16; 1Thess. 5:2; Rev. 16:14) The foregoing makes it clear that a day from Gods viewpoint is not necessarily limited to twenty-four hours.
TWENTY-FOUR HOURS IN LENGTH?
However, many in Christendom, in particular the so-called Fundamentalists, insist that the days of creation mentioned in Genesis, chapter one, were just twenty-four hours long. Of course, since Jehovah God, the Creator, is all-wise as well as all-powerful, he could well have created all things mentioned in the account of creation in six twenty-four-hour days. But from such evidence as that found in the rocks of the earth and by astronomers telescopes, it does not seem that he did so.
Concerning these days of creation A Religious Encyclopdia by Schaff says: The days of creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of twenty-four hours. Similarly Delitzsch says in his New Commentary on Genesis: Days of God are intended, with Him a thousand years are but as a day when that is past, Ps. 90:4 … The days of creation are, according to the meaning of Holy Scripture itself, not days of four and twenty hours, but aeons … For this earthly and human measurement of time cannot apply to the first three days.
Some do not even care to consider seriously the length of the days of creation. Typical of such are the editors of Harpers Bible Dictionary, who state: It is futile and unnecessary to try to reconcile the Genesis Creation account with modern science. And The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible (1962) speaks of the creation account as mythological.
Jesus Christ, however, credited the Genesis account with being factual, for he quoted that Genesis account as authoritative, saying: Did you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh? The apostle Paul was of the same mind, for he said that God made out of one man every nation of men and that Adam was formed first, then Eve. So it is to our interest, and not at all futile, to concern ourselves with just how long the days of creation were.Matt. 19:4, 5; Acts 17:26; 1Tim. 2:13.
But before considering the length of these days of creation it seems well to clear up a common misunderstanding. That misunderstanding is that the earth itself was created during the six days of creation. The Bible record indicates that the universe, the starry heavens, as well as this planet earth, were created before the first of earths creative days began.
Thus Genesis 1:1 tells of the creation of the starry heavens as well as this planet earth, and says: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. When this beginning took place, the Bible does not say. It is not until later in the Bible that we read of what God created on the first day. The six creative days, therefore, involve the creative acts of God in preparing the already-existing earth for human habitation, and not the creation of the earth itself. There is nothing in the Genesis account, then, to contradict the scientific conclusions of modern scientists that the material universe, including the earth, may be many thousands of millions of years old.
Then, how are we to understand the words of the Fourth Commandment, about God making the heavens and the earth during six days? (Ex. 20:11) It helps us when we understand that, just as Bible writers used the term day in more than one sense, so they also used the terms heavens and earth in more than one sense. Thus at times the atmosphere in which the birds fly is referred to as the heavens. (Jer. 4:25) This atmospheric expanse or heavens was made on the second day of the creative week. Also, it was not until the third day that dry land appeared. So it can be said that the earth, meaning the dry land, also was made during the creative week, but this not meaning that the earth, the globe or planet itself, was created then.Gen. 1:6-10, 13.
LENGTH OF THE CREATIVE DAYS
Just how long, then, were these days of creation? The Bible gives us a clue as to the length of the seventh day. Since these days were all part of one week, it would be reasonable to conclude that all these days were of the same length.
As regards the length of the seventh day it is indeed of interest that the Bible says nothing about an evening and a morning, a beginning and an end to the seventh day as in the case of the other six days. This is a meaningful omission. The record simply states: God proceeded to bless the seventh day and make it sacred, because on it he has been resting from all his work.Gen. 2:3.
The only logical conclusion that we can reach is that the seventh day has continued right on. Does the Bible support this conclusion? Yes, it most certainly does, for it speaks of Jehovah God as still resting thousands of years after creation. Thus at Psalm 95:8-11, we read that Jehovah said to the Israelites in the wilderness that they would not enter into his rest because of the hardness of their hearts. This shows that God had been resting from works of the sort described in Genesis chapters one and two from the creation of Eve to that time, more than 2,500 years.
The psalmist David, some 400 years later, at Psalm 95:8-11 speaks of entering into Gods rest in his day. And then more than a thousand years after Davids time the writer of Hebrews speaks of Jehovah God as still resting in his day. He counsels Christians not to be like the Israelites in the wilderness who failed to enter into Gods rest, but that they should do their utmost to enter into that rest, Jehovahs rest. In this connection he says that there remains a sabbath resting for the people of God. And as the words of the apostle Paul are applicable to Christians today, it follows that Jehovah has been enjoying his sabbath or rest from physical creation almost six thousand years now.Heb. 4:9, 11.
This accounts for 6,000 years. Is that the length of the seventh day? No, because we read that God proceeded to bless the seventh day and make it sacred. Its outcome must be very good, and that is not true of present world conditions; so the day must still be continuing. Actually these six thousand years have been, as it were, mans workweek, in which he labored by the sweat of his face. But he will get rest during the coming thousand-year reign of Christ, which Bible chronology and fulfillment of Bible prophecy show is to begin very soon.Gen. 2:3.
The seventh one thousand years of the seventh day will thus in itself be a sabbath. During it Satan and his demons will be bound. Christ and his anointed followers will rule with him as kings and priests. With what result? That all Gods enemies will be put beneath Christs feet. By means of this sabbath the seventh day will truly be sacred, for it will cause righteousness to flourish.1Cor. 15:24-28; Rev. 20:1-6; Psalm 72.
Thus we find the seventh day of the creative week to be seven thousand years long.
“Scripture doesn’t answer these questions. If you believe in your heart that abortion is right, who is to judge you but God, certainly not me. To me life is sacred..”
Perhaps I didn’t choose a very good example here, and i thought the two scriptures provided would have cleared it up. Your view point is leaning to close to anarchism, and doesn’t really make sense. And I to believe life is sacred, I was only choosing a fictional example, note the “if”’s in the sentence.
“The bible has more death and destruction in it then any other book ever written.”
Not to sure what you mean by that?????
“God has left clear guidance, just because its not in mans handwriting does not mean it can’t be read. Its time to start listening with our hearts, not our eyes and ears.”
God has left clear guidance???? where??? our hearts????, your sets and morals are from the Bible and tons of other writings of the human race, not from your heart. You are trying to reason that we all have the same set of morals and ethics built in to us at birth, which it isnt. The point of the abortion example was to show you without guidance, who is to say what is right and wrong. I now feel inclined to repeat the two scriptures which you may have missed.:
The heart is more treacherous than anything else and is desperate.” Jer. 17:9
He that is trusting in his own heart is stupid, but he that is walking in wisdom is the one that will escape. Prov. 28:26
“why do you think God needs a pen and paper to make his word known?”
Men aren’t wise and loving enough to reach him without it.
Charly, the Bible was written for man, if man believes a day is a 24 hour period then that is what the Bible reflects. If you can re-interpret any word, phrase or number to reflect anything you want, all you’re left with is a meaningless piece of crap. With your logic we could interpret Alice In Wonderland as the koran. Get off the crack Charly.
“You are trying to reason that we all have the same set of morals and ethics built in to us at birth, which it isnt.”
If you believe God is life and that life is sacred and use that as your guide everything else falls into place. There have been plenty of cultures down through history and still to this day, that knew/know nothing of the Bible. Do you seriously think that if the Bible was never written their world would have come to an end? How did civilizations survive before? How do the ones survive that know nothing of it? Yes, men are wise enough and loving enough to reach God without it, they just have to try and see through all the crap people like yourself keep shoveling in their face.
ym combined with ‘light’ and ‘darkness’, would have signified ‘and it was a day of light and darkness’. This could be ambiguous because of the symbolic use of ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ elsewhere in the Old Testament. However, ym with ‘evening and morning’, especially with a number preceding it, can never be ambiguous.
eth (‘time’) combined with ‘day’ and ‘night’ as in Jeremiah 33:20 and Zechariah 14:7 could have been ambiguous. Likewise eth combined with ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ (a theoretical construction). If any of these forms had been used, the length of the ‘days’ of creation would have been widely open for debate. However, God chose not to use any of these.
Professor James Barr, professor of Hebrew at Oxford University agrees that the words used in Genesis 1 refer to ‘a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience’, and he says that he knows of no professor of Hebrew at any leading university who would say otherwise.
The Bible is God’s message to mankind and as such it makes authoritative statements about reality. If one removes any portion of the Bible from the realm of reality, God may still be communicating truth to us, but the reader can never be sure that he understands it as the author intended. Furthermore, if God’s communication to us is outside our realm of reality, then we cannot know whether any account in the Bible means what the words actually say or whether it means something entirely different, beyond our understanding. For example, if we apply this criterion to the accounts of the resurrection of Jesus, perhaps the words could mean that Jesus did not rise from the dead physically, but in a way beyond our comprehension. When these sorts of wordgames are played with the Bible, the Bible loses its authority, we lose the divine perspective on reality, and Christianity loses its lifechanging power
“I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness.”
Charly quotes part of JER 17:9 The heart is more treacherous than anything else and is desperate.”
I find it interesting how Charly only picks out parts to support his aguement as apposed to the entire passage of which is a question.
JER 17:9
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”
and God answers
JER 17:10
“I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.”
This seems to contradict Charly claim that salvation can only be obtained via scripture.
JER 17:5
“Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.”
PROV 3:5
“Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.”
but Charly quotes PROV 28:26 “He that is trusting in his own heart is stupid, but he that is walking in wisdom is the one that will escape.
So are we stupid for trusting in the Lord with all thine heart????
PROV 4:23
Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.
this seems to make more sense.
You don’t need to go near the Bible to disprove Dan’s Theory.
Charly, Dans theory is that Jesus was married and had a child, and that descendants of this union still exist to this day. So without using the Bible as a reference, why dont you reveal the evidence you have that can prove beyond any doubt that this theory is invalid.
Posted by: glen at November 20, 2004 08:18 AM
Not to sure what you mean by that?????
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
oh, that death and destruction.
wow…lol…what a joke…who’s the idiot that made this site? After reading genesis I had to stop..wines about animal abuse, and says the destruction of sinners is wrong? messed up.
can engage som many different ppl and I think mr.Browns reasons for success is that he chose a topic that relly touches all ppls lifes, we are all
looking for answers and there is no doubt we have been mislead by religious authorities during centuries but this is also my point: the Truth is
ultimately in ourselfs,we are bound 2 be mislead if we are blind, this is the time for humanitys birth,
when we are forced 2 take the ultimate responsibility of ourselfs and our actions down on
a personal level,This hurts but what what birth is
without pain?
http://www.crisismagazine.com/september2003/feature1.htm
http://www.beliefnet.com/index/index_10126.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/144/story_14476_1.html
http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2003/nov7.html
http://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/books/05/19/books.davinci.code.ap/
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/?adate=7/29/2003
http://altreligion.about.com/library/bl_davincicode.htm
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0319/p11s01-bogn.html
http://www.denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2004/0200/0202.php
http://www.leaderu.com/popculture/dismantlingdavinci.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/144/story_14496_1.html
http://www.explorefaith.org/daVinci/1.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/135/story_13520_1.html
http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&s=379
http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7358
http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7593
http://www.leaderu.com/focus/davincicode.html
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/d50aa.html
http://www.ignatius.com/books/davincihoax/thefacts/default.htm
http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/sightings/archive_2003/0924.shtml
http://www.danbrown.com/index.html
http://www.leaderu.com/theology/wasjesusmarried.html
Happy hunting!
Dan Brown is a horrible writer.
I’ve had a copy of the Da Vinci Code in my possession for almost a year now and finally got around to reading it. From almost the beginning I was disapponted, but plowed through it hoping it would improve. It did not.
A rather pedestrian writer, Mr. Brown’s central characters appear to me little more than caricatures. They seem to be little more than convenient ways to get to the next ‘ahah! I’ve got it!’, because his style of prose seldom paints them in vivid terms. Langdon and Sophie seem to step right out of the movie ‘National Treasure’, but unfortunately there is no ‘Riley Poole’ (Justin Bartha) equivalent to relieve the monotony with well placed quips; they are bland and wooden.
The book’s central theme is intriguing, and quite possibly the only thing that kept me reading it. The story itself unfolds rather like a pop-up book, with plot twists that are often telegraphed so ham-fistedly it’s unclear where the suspense is supposed to build. When I read that a character’s situation would be changed soon, I almost laughed aloud, because it was the second time the author had communicated to the the reader that this character’s situation was going to change. Mr. Brown, I thoguht, don’t tell me, SHOW me.
The riddles were little better. Often, I found myself waiting for the main characters to catch up. (Let’s play a little word association game, shall we? Isaac Newton… there. Wasn’t that easy?) Frequently I felt like the characters in the book were solving the puzzles printed beside the comics in a local newspaper; the plot had about that much urgency to it.
The book’s popularity to me is baffling, but I’m willing to go out on a limb and propose three reasons for it’s popularity:
1. Everyone loves a conspiracy, and this one purports to reveal a lulu of one. What’s the Kennedy assassination when you hold it up to the character assassination on a global, nay, deific scale?
2. The theory also hits hard at the Catholic church and Christianity in general. Even with disaffection in the ranks the church, it’s still the 800 pound gorilla in the west. When you’re on top, you take your shots.
3. Lastly, my most cynical observation: I think the book is popular because it makes people feel smart. A good many mysteries and suspense novels tantalize the reader, but Dan Brown hands the reader a bone at almost every turn, handing out ‘ah-HAH!’s for finishing a chapter the way some schools reward students just for showing up.
I can’t say I’d recommend the book to anyone, with its plodding style, poor pacing and unsatisfying conclusion. I am looking forward to the movie, because the book’s flaws can be ameliorated, if not exised altogether, by a movie with good direction and strong acting… and Ron Howard and Tom Hanks, respectively, fit those bills.
I’ll pass on ‘Angels and Demons’, thanks ;-).
What the hell are you talking about? What does “I thoguht” mean? How can anyone criticize somebody unless they can do better themselves? If Dan Brown wrote a book in a style you would enjoy, he may attract a few pompous-ass readers and that’s it. Dan wrote a book that could be enjoyed by the masses and you have to give him credit for knowing his audience, as the 10m+ sales confirm. How many books have you sold? What have you published?
If you don’t like Dan’s writing then simply don’t read any more of his work. Don’t go around searching for people who may have enjoyed it, and insinuate they only liked it is because they’re a bunch of dimwits. Some people read with their imagination, over-thinking the writing ruins the fantasy, that’s what art is all about and it’s so sad you cant get down from your high horse and enjoy it like the rest of us.
p.s. I hope the movie follows the book word for word and with the same fast pace, twist and turns (what you call “its plodding style, poor pacing and unsatisfying conclusion”). Then when it breaks all the box office records maybe you can criticize Ronny’s movie making ability.
passable.
for one, much of the style is a lot of imitation.
of Sydney Sheldon(i refer to the internal
soliloquies of the characters)and the dialogues
are an echo of Ludlum.
To begin: If only the published are allowed to comment on the works of those who are published, I presume you have a bibliography of your work to produce before you continue?
I have a few remarks of my own while I’m waiting…
‘What the hell am I talking about?’ Several times in the book, Dan Brown uses variations on ‘Character A didn’t know it but everything was going to change soon.’ To me, that’s a cardinal sin in a purported suspense novel, akin to a comedian saying “Okay, now this joke is really funny.” He does it not once but at several points in the book.
I can criticize because I have a brain, I read a lot, and I paid for the book. Books and movies arent’t made only for people who are published or are in the movie industry, they’re produced to be sold to the general public, and as such they’re going to be critiqued by the general public. That’s regular joes like you and me.
As for ‘getting off my high horse and enjoying it like the rest of us’, I decline, because I indeed have my own opinion and expect everyone else to have theirs. ‘Just because everyone else does’ is a silly reason to do anything; I don’t accept it from my 11 year old. Why would I accept it from anyone else?
I already said I’d decline to read Demons and Angels. Feel free to extrapolate what that means as far as ‘simply don’t read any more of his works’.
I actually thought this was a board discussing what people thought of the book. I’ve ready many reviews from people who thought it was great, and a few from people who thought it was flawed. If this is strictly a ‘Dan Brown Fan Club’ page then I apologize, and the moderator of the board should indeed feel free to delete my comments as they are in appropriate for the board.
Still waiting for that bibliography. ;-)
P.S. I’m willing to bet that Ron and Tom do a smashing job.
Oh yes. Forgot something:
Just to make it clear, I’m not insinuating that anyone who liked it was a dimwit, as you put it, anymore than I think the millions who liked, oh, ‘Mortal Kombat: The Movie’ were dimwits. Everyone likes what they likes. But it doesn’t mean that the action and direction in the movie were ‘good’, ‘cuz boy, it wasn’t. But a lot of people saw it because they liked the subject matter and enjoyed it anyway. The Da Vinci Code to me falls into that category. The subject matter kept people reading. Heck it kept me reading. But the writing style itself in my opinion was weak.
I’d also watch that implicit assumption a thing’s artistic value can be determined by how many people liked it. By that scale, ‘Jurassic Park III’ is a much better movie than ‘A Beautiful Mind’, for example, cuz it made more money….
I could care less if you criticise Dan’s work, but statements about the mentality of those people who enjoyed it speaks volumes about your character.
If we’re talking insinuations, let’s talk about yours shall we?
You insinuate that the only people qualified to talk critique Dan Brown are the people who’ve written best sellers. I’m still waiting for the bibliography.
You insinuate that the people who are dissatisfied with shoddy workmanship and say so are elitist.
You imply that the only measure of excellence is popularity.
And I stand by the third assessment of the book’s popularity: It reveals its ‘mysteries’ in steps that are easy to follow and thus make the reader feel smart. Frankly, if I (and I suspect a vast number of readers) can figure out some of the puzzles presented before a learned professor and a top cryptologist, I (we) will feel smart. I suspect Brown presented the puzzles in that manner for just such a purpose, perhaps knowing that people get turned off if they feel like they’re in over their heads.
How that makes YOU feel about YOUR intelligence should not be smeared across the board to everyone else. Some authors like to make their mysteries as opaque as possible. Brown, apparently, subscribes to the opposite view.
To be frank, I think you’re reading things into my observations of the book and its astonishing popularity because you’re either a) insecure, or b) an ex-paratrooper, because you need special training to jump to conclusions so quickly. If you want to think I look down on everyone who enjoyed the book, that’s your perogative. You’re only partly right; I’m looking down on you, because you seem unable to distinguish between what i think of the author’s writing (poor) and what I think of the author’s audience (which is, so far, a very varied section of humanity).
I’ll sum up: Dan Brown is a weak writer who has stumbled into the market at a time when the subject matter he is writing about (which is fascinating) has grabbed the public’s attention. His narrative is at best, cliched; at its worst, stilted and wooden. The subject matter on the other hand is intriguing.
If my third observation regarding Dan Brown’s popularity sounded condescending, I apologize, but it’s how I felt while reading the book; that the clues were presented in easily digestible chunks so that I’d be able to solve them easily and feel smart. But I gave three reasons off the top of my head, and although ‘dim’ has chosen to focus solely on the third there’s no law saying we have to.
Do you think that the timing was particularly ‘right’ for a conspiracy book that deals with the church? In the wake of the child-molestation scandals, the fight to ordain female ministers, debates over the role of the church and god in politics, I think the book came out at just the right time.
I also wonder what role the mainstream media has to play in pushing this book so hard. They ought to know better, rife with the kind of intellectual snobs of the type that ‘dim’ obviously thinks that I am. Yet there seems to be little criticism of Brown’s research (sloppy) or writing ability (suspect at best). Granted there’s a certain amount of bandwagon jumping involved, but come on. Brown fumbles with the english language like he’s wearing mittens. I’d think there’d be a few more people willing to point out that the emperor has no clothes.
I think the popularity of this book is proof there are major flaws in the worlds education systems today. If schools would actually teach their students instead of giving them passing grades just for showing up, we would have a much more intelligent society, A society of intellectuals like myself who can see past Dan Browns treats for the feeble minded and understand his work for what it really is, an exercise in literary impotence and verbal depravity.
I know this site is basically a forum for the discussion of the theories purported in Dans book but why go to one of the numerous book review sites to critique his work when I can flaunt my vastly superior intelligence amongst the retards found here. After all maybe the gift of my presence will encourage some of you to go out and get a better education so as in the future you will be able to enjoy more sophisticated works and not so readily fall prey to the cheap literary exploitations of second rate writers such as the likes of Dan Brown.
Anyway, tah tah for now, glad to have been of service.
yesterday night and i found it so so.
The Only thing that kept me reading was
because it dealt with a controversial issue.
But in the end we dont get to know the
bottom of the truth. The story is
nicely spun though.
sometimes i felt it was somewhat blasphemous.
but in the end it was ok
good work dan
I’ve read some of the posts here from people stating that The Da Vinci Code is the best book that they have read. As a fiction book it is excellent and gives the reader plenty of reasons to question ‘the established truth’. But, if you really want a great controversial non-fiction book try reading ‘False Inheritance’ by Michael Rice. It is guaranteed to make the reader run to the library or search the internet wanting to know more!
It was a shock to me to find out that The Bible was written so many years after the “actual events” were meant to have happened and also that no archeaological evidence can be found to validate any of these events anyway!
Do yourself a favour.
I don’t know if Dan Brown really achieved anything, but my guess is in the long run it will all mean very little.
smack bang awesome
i love it
ps: i loved the book i wan’t more please
my brain is crying for any information
Given all the above I have to say that the Church has a lot to answer for especially to all the christians. In my country or in any other country for that matter the church subscribes to active conversion tactics. Sometimes the persuasion is monetory in nature and meaner and cheaper tricks are known to have been used.
I am a Hindu and my religion is more of a way of life than a mere ritualistic phenomena. The idea is oyu may claim to be a muslim or a christian or maybe even an atheist. If you follow a good life by the rules laid down by the Sanathana Dharma (Eternal Righteousness) you are a hindu. The rituals practised are extremely focussed on nature. Agriculture has always been a main stay and so it is most natural that rain,sun,wind and other climatic factors be personified into demigods forworship. The cow being a serious mainstay is revered as a mother as it provides asking for little for itself. If we were to look into the inner significance of the rituals practised by various sects cults and religions we will not be too hasty in branding them as ancient uncivilised and barbaric.
Coming to Jesus, in my personal opinion he was a amn who was able to lead an exemplary life and through his life he taught people that they could do the same. The reason why he is elevated to the position of the son of GOD can be understood toward the end. When he is on the cross and he is about to die, he doesn’t curse the people responsible for his condition. He forgives them. I quote shakespeare ” The quality of mercy is not strain’d it dropeth like the gentle rain from heaven. It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.” Forgiveness and mercy are divine qualities. The next someone smashes into your car at peak traffic. Can you smile at him and say itas allright? Difficult right? So you get to appreciate what jesus did .. . he prayed to God to forgive them for they knew not what they do. Therin lies the divinity of Jesus. Nothis miracles . ..not walking on water .. . but his good qualities which ultimately stand us in good stead. Think about it friends .. .you can achieve a lot more as a good human than as a man of power ..
regards to all . .
sarat
I guess that’s what it all boils down to.
and why are you not troubled about the Catholic Church “misleading and lying” about it’s history.
Jon wrote”I hope all of you, who doubt your faith or those of you who have lost faith because of this book, will read further into the real truth behind Jesus.”
and how do you know the real truth behind Jesus? Experts and scholars are still debating who he really was and whether or not he even really existed. Having faith is somebodies way of getting people to believe something regardless of what the truth is. You tell people ” You hope they find what they are looking for” yet you want them to look with blinders on. Come on, it’s time to stop using those who have a proven track record of lying and decieving as our main source of truth. The truth is starting to surface dispite the churchs effotrs to once again surpress it. Certainly don’t use a book of fiction to form your opinions, but definately let it open your eyes to the fact that maybe everything you’ve been taught, is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
SHould we all believe them blindly? I think to question faith is a good thing. If these theories coming outinto the open creates harmonious discussion then that is a good thing.
I recommend everyone do their own research and make your own mind up. If nothing else the book is a great read and certainly makes you think
Dan Browm should be commended for his work and boldness.
You talk about doing research with blinders on?? Look at the comments from 95% of this board and tell me who is researching with blinders. These people are going in search of only ONE side of the story because they ALL want to think of the Catholic church as evil. If these people had ANY prior knowledge other than what they hear on the news and what they read on conspiracy websites, they would have a much different view of Brown’s book. I have read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the book which Dan Brown steals almost all of his information from. I have been researching this topic on both sides of the secrecy and conspiracy and the conclusion that i have reached, each and every single time, is that you will never get the truth out of someone who has an agenda. Dan Brown, as evident in his book, only gives his reader ONE side of the story. Like i have asked you all to do, and you too Glen, is read the history behind the early Christians. Read what real scholars have to say about Nicea and the foundations of the Catholic church (it won’t hurt to read a christian website, i promise). Just because someone knows a whole lot about one side of a certain subject does not make them an expert. “Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.”
here is an unbiased reference for you about the Council of Nicea. In it, it explains what happened at the council. You may find it hard to believe since you obviously rever Dan Brown as some sort of liberator of human minds from the grips of the evil catholic church.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/nicea.htm
The church is going out of it’s way to discredit Dan’s book, not because it’s based on false history, but because it makes people question the history they’ve been taught. If what the church has taught us or allowed us to learn, was indeed the undisputable truth they would pay little attention to anything Dan Brown wrote, as was the case with “Angels and Demons”. That one bashed the church even more so, yet it did not entice the average person to do any further research, so the church barely gave an opinion on it.
Yes Jon, you are right, it is very hard to get the truth out of some one who has an agenda, and if that agenda happens to be to write and sell fiction, why look there for the truth. The ones we need to turn to for the truth should be our spiritual leaders and if they werent so tied up in debunking a fiction and covering up their past and would just open up the vaults and the closets and let the people decide for themselves just what the truth is, people would not so readily let their minds get caught up in the fantasies created by fiction writers.
Seekers of the truth are always welcome by those with nothing to hide. It’s those with something to hide that tend to go on the deffensive.
I dont think the majority of the people who have read The Davinci Code are taking everything in it as cold hard fact. They are not so much trying to prove that Dan Browns theory is true as much as they are trying the figure out whether or not what theyve been taught in the past is actually the complete truth. If it is, no book written by any author whether a historical scholar or a high profile fiction writer is going to change their beliefs. Sure it may send them off on a wild goose chase for a short period of time, but in the end the truth always prevails. The scary part is, if a fiction can so easily make people question what has been passed off as the truth, one has to wonder if maybe there is more to the true story then some would have us believe.
“Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” John 21:25
P.S. Do you know if that da vinci code special is playing again on the history channel?
Someone mentioned JFK and all the conspiracy theories surrounding his murder. Well I have always believed that there is more truth out there than what has been publicly released (even before the movie came out). While I do now believe its possible that Oswald acted alone, I’m still not convinced it was him.
What would make sense is that he was away receiving his religious teachings and becoming a high priest of the sec of which he belonged. But if you ask a bible thumper about this little gap, they will give you a silly non-answer like “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”
The more logical explaination is that this period was left out because in real life it would show him recieving his education and you can’t have the son of god being taught by man, could you. What could man teach a god that he wouldn’t already know. If the facts don’t fit in with the story your trying to tell, simply leave them out. It’s easier that twisting them to fit.
Why don’t you just come out and say that you don’t believe in Jesus as the Son of God? Just because YOU don’t believe in what the Bible says does not, BY ANY MEANS, make it wrong. As you are entitled to your own opinions, which i think are asinine, try to make the distinction between “fact” and “fiction.” I realize you like Dan Brown so very much but when you mimic his way of relating the “truth” you really start to look foolish. As he did.
Jon, are we not all children of God?
Jesus claimed to be the “Son of Man”, are you saying he lied.
Jon, you are commenting as if you believe everything in the bible is indeed fact, the mere fact that you have searched and located this forum (most likely using key words like Sangreal, chalice or Mary Magdalene or some combination) tells me that in the back of your mind you have a flickering of doubt that maybe everything you thought you knew may not be 100 percent fact. Otherwise you would just hang out on one of the many Christian based forums where you can all praise one another for your vast insights into the greatest fiction ever written.
At least I admit I have come to this forum in search of the truth, which after all, is the whole meaning behind the Sangreal in the first place (a quest for the truth). Like Ive said before, people are here not so much to prove Dans theory as true as much as they are looking for answers to questions about their faith that their spiritual leaders are failing to provide. Instead of giving straightforward answers the only response they seem to have is to attack and call other peoples opinions asinine. But this is their M.O., first label then burn.
Yes Jon, I guess I do look pretty foolish for believing a fiction may have some underlying truth, but then again, dont you feel pretty foolish going around trying to convince people that a fiction isnt true. Why, what are you afraid of? That people may have a different opinion then yours? Wouldnt that be a terrible thing?
” Jesus claimed to be the “Son of Man”, are you saying he lied.”
That, just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.
“Jon, are we not all children of God?”
Just because you are achild of God does not mean you believe in his Son Jesus. Which in the long run will get you a one way ticket, my friend.
As for believing the Bible to be all fact, you must be crazy. I can sense from you that you are a devout liberal. No doubt about it. Only a liberal would make a claim like that without ANY idea of what he/she is talking about. I have read the Bible. I know what parts were written as stories to lead our lives or give us the inspiration to do good.
As for coming to this forum. Simple. I wanted to see what you people had to say. When i attend my science classes here at PSU, does that mean i am rejecting God or doubting him. NO. If one were to lead his life with blinders on and not see what the world and its inhabitants were up to or thinking, they would eventually become a fragile husk of life. I came to this forum because i wanted to challenge some of you people to do real UNBIASED research. Which, no one has commented on. If it bothers you that someone is questioning Dan Browns motive or what he says in his books, then maybe you need to be a bit less sensitive. I came here for knowledge and all i seem to find is a bunch of sheep with blinders on. It’s a shame.
As for that website….........................
I was wondering something. Just because Da Vinci painted a woman in his “Last Supper,” what does that prove??? As for the whole splitting of the painting and whatnot, pure speculation and good PS skills. Big deal.
but he starts his first posting:
“So much to say to you people”
and quickly tells us who we are:
“I see it all over this board. I suppose it is just uneducated people being gullible.”
and what we believe”
“Those of you who believe that you are “thinking outside of the box” have merely just jumped into another one.”
then how I look:
“you really start to look foolish.”
then the name calling:
“As you are entitled to your own opinions, which i think are asinine.”
“Glen, I have never in my life heard anything as asinine as what you just wrote to me.”
“I can sense from you that you are a devout liberal. No doubt about it.”
now he states:
“I came here for knowledge and all i seem to find is a bunch of sheep with blinders on.”
It’s funny you say this, yet you act as if you already know it all, and anybody who disagrees with your self proclaimed undisputable opinion is a fool.
do yourself a favor – go away.
Here’s one of your lines:
“their spiritual leaders are failing to provide. Instead of giving straightforward answers the only response they seem to have is to attack and call other peoples opinions asinine. But this is their M.O., first label then burn.”
GENERILIZATION TO THE EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My guess is that some spiritual leader or devoted religious person hurt you emotionally somehow, and now you are on a crazy quest to attack religion.
Let’s just hope that you are never in a position of power as I am quite sure you would lead a massice genocide on anyone remotely religious.
Assuming truthmonger isn’t glen, would you like to share your source as to the production manager of the show on history channel being a devout catholic who concealed things. You do have a source right, or was from your imagination.
I’m sure glen your now thinking of your response to label me another bible thumper, but sorry I don’t beleive in God, or a word of the Bible. What I do know is that those who are seeking a life of righteousness should stay the heck away from you. Once again, may God or whatever you believe in, have mercy on mankind if someone like you gets a position of power.
karen
I hate nothing. The only thing I have done is point out the past of one particular religious group and have demonstrated how their tactics haven’t changed much (except they are no longer allowed to perform executions) over the centuries. Any claims I have made are rooted in historic fact. Look them up.
he writes:”So many of your posts, as well with many others, are pointing out that if the theories were not true why would the church try to cover them up. What kind of logic is that. If you were accused of something that wasnt true, would you not try everything in your power to debunk it?”
The church has tried to cover up much of it’s past, this is fact. They are just now finally coming forward and making apologies for some of the stuff they have done. Not because they want to but because so much evidence is out there they no longer can deny it. They still refuse to open up all their archives and let every one learn the complete truth. And I have no problem with anybody “debunking” Dan Brown’s theory, his theory is that Jesus and Mary were married and had a child. Since they can not disprove this, they have gone on a witch hunt trying to make the case that because other claims made in his book are historically inaccurate then the whole theory is crap. My argument being that the book is a “fiction” and just because it’s based on real life controversy does not mean everything in it has to be historically accurate. The theory can have merit regardless of the books content. You can’t debunk a fiction, by it’s definition it’s already debunked. If that fiction can get so many people to question their faith then there must be very weak arguments in support of their beliefs in the first place. You cant blame Dan or myself for that.
He writes: My guess is that some spiritual leader or devoted religious person hurt you emotionally somehow, and now you are on a crazy quest to attack religion.”
sorry, wrong. But now you’re a psycho analysis. I hope you have credentials, maybe that is why you’re not using your real name, it may hurt your practice. If pointing out facts is attacking religion what do you care if you dont believe in God or the bible anyway.
nameless wrote: Another thing you keep on labeling anyone who has a different point than you as a bible thumper”
no, the only people I have labeled as “bible thumpers” are those people who have come here not to debate and discuss but to preach and convert with no other argument then “the bible says” so it must be, without presenting any other proof to back up their claims. The whole purpose of this forum is to discuss the probability of alternate history, so why come here if your mind in closed to anything outside the bible, there are plenty of other forums just for that. And as far as I’m aware “bible thumpers” don’t consider being called as such, derogatory, they are proud of that title.
sorry to hear you don’t believe in God. What is it you believe in? It has to be something powerful to get you so upset over my comments. I apologize if my seeking the truth offends you so much, but just stop reading my post. I’m not hear trying to force my beliefs on anybody, I’m only expressing my opinion, take it or leave it, I could care less.
It is a shame that you have to shout me down because i provided the people who read this bulletin with a different view of what they have seen for so long. The only truth i ever claimed was about the council of Nicea which, by the way, you STILL have yet to comment on. When i say “this” or “that” about Jesus, i am talking of my express belief in him as God. Because YOU do not like that, maybe YOU are the one that should leave. To be honest, i feel bad for you. I came here to challenge you and your friends and i see now that when faced with that challenge at least ONE of you buckled under it. Tis a shame it had to be you my friend. Nonetheless, i hope some day you find God AND Jesus in your life because things truly are brighter with the Hand of God guiding you through the darkness. Remember people, do your research with an open mind and an open heart, for truth will only find those with pure intentions.
Karen::::: What do you, truthfully and personally, consider to be agnostic.
Have a good night all.
The burden of proof lies with the accuser. You say that the Church can’t disprove that Jesus and Mary had a child. Can YOU give me evidence that they DID. All you can give me is:
“Since they can not disprove this, they have gone on a witch hunt trying to make the case that because other claims made in his book are historically inaccurate then the whole theory is crap.”
and
“The church has tried to cover up much of it’s past, this is fact. They are just now finally coming forward and making apologies for some of the stuff they have done. Not because they want to but because so much evidence is out there they no longer can deny it. They still refuse to open up all their archives and let every one learn the complete truth.”
If you could, i would love to see your sources for all of this. Show me proof that Jesus had a child with Magdelene. Just because DaVinci painted about it does not make it fact. An infant can see that.
Another thing is, you love to claim that Dan Brown wrote a “Fiction” and that it is already debunked. But what you fail to see (or pretend not to) is that with Dan Brown’s statement of “Fact:” before every book sets a particular mood. The reader dives into the book with the idea that they will be reading a bunch of FACTS that some guy molded into a fictional account of them. It is the same thing as a “Vietnam” movie or something of the sort. If you read the “Facts” that Brown gives in the begining of “The DaVinci Code” he sets the mood of the main antagonist Opus Dei (or the Catholic Church) as being evil. You CAN NOT deny that Dan Brown wanted desperately to get his ideas out to people. Unfortunately for Dan, someone already had a Non-Fiction book written his ideals. That book, “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” is where Brown finds ALL of his “shocking” new ideas and facts that he presents to the reader so stealthily that he calls it a fiction. If you can not see that Dan Brown wanted his book to be a “Faction” then i feel bad for you. I truly do. Because something has blinded your intellect.
As for proving Dan’s theory about Jesus and Mary and a possible child that is what these discussions are all about. If there was proof it would not be considered a theory now would it. There is evidence that their relationship was more likely than not much closer then what the bible indicates. so why not talk about it, it would be crazy not to.
And the fact that some proof that Leonardo really did hide his alternative beliefs in his art is now starting to surface does in fact give some creditability to Dan’s claim of a Da Vinci code and a secret that was hidden. And sure it does not prove Leonardo had all the facts, but one has to wonder why he would risk he life just for a practical joke? What that tells me is that other beliefs did exist in that period in time, and that they had to be hidden. Why? Because of a very real fear that you are not willing to admit really existed at the time. You and I both know AS FACT, where that fear came from! So if you want facts just read your history books and read up on current events and you will learn the truth is peeking its head out and for the first time in ages, it’s not in fear of getting it chopped off.
You, as of late, still have not answered any of my questions. And saying that something you claimed is asinine is not belittling. I have NEVER said that my opinions are fact as that is a complete reversal of the word but what i did do is BACK UP my opinions with factual information. Something you have NEVER done so far. You truly are a spinster Glen and it is very evident in all that you write. You should become a democrat politician some day.
If i am the person you seem to think i am then why in the world would i have read Brown’s book. If you go to war without any armor because you think the opposition doesn’t have weapons and are summarily destroyed, you are an idiot. For the passed 6 years i have been reading about the Priory, the Knights Templar, The (horrible) Masons and the Illuminati. not yet have i once found any shred of evidnece supporting their claim. That, my friend, is why it bothers me when i see comments like yours. Do yourself a favor and approach the subject with an open mind and open heart. I didn’t always have God in my life. Only recently (passed year or so) have i found him in everything that i do. I read this book 2 years ago when it came out and researched the hell out of it. Not ONE shred of evidence. I would realy love to hear what you have to say about indisputible HISTORICAL FACT like the events that happened at the Council of Nicea. Like i have said before, Brown’s and the foundation of all of these secret sect’s focus on the idea that Jesus was a man. From the begining of this modern era, the followers of Jesus have been steadfast in their beliefs. Not faltering at all.
I truly feel sorry for you.
Jon, just because you have done your research and have found what you believe is the correct course of events and the true history in your opinion, that does not mean you are 100 percent correct. I have followed these stories and claims very closely also, and I don’t think anyone thus far can claim the whole story is written in stone and that there is nothing more to be discovered. Just because people don’t see everything as clearly as you do, does not mean they are all uneducated and gullible, and it’s snide remarks like that that get people on the defensive. Try and consider coming across a little less arrogant and you may have an easier time getting your message across… have a good day all.
You give me all of Glen’s questions that i have NOT answered and i will write as much as i possibly can on them. You have my eternal word (whether or not you take it).
One has to wonder why first century christians would risk there lives in something that wasn’t true?
As to me not posting my real name….what the hell kind of sick pervert r u…never under any circumstances should you reveal personal info on the net…glen i’m not to sure where u were going with that, considering that u have used other names as well, if u were only saying this so you could adress me properly sorry but nameless will have to suffice.
“There is evidence that their relationship was more likely than not much closer then what the bible indicates”
Ok, like what?
Another question I have for those who believe in an alternate life of Jesus, If u believed he survived the crucifixtion. If you think u can believe in that and God, you need to start reading the Bible…start with John 3:16, practically the theme of the New testament, and what is prophesized in the old.
“What is it you believe in? It has to be something powerful to get you so upset over my comments.”
Open-mindness (is that a word….whatever you get the point.)
What is known about Jesus outside the bible?
Philo who was born before Jesus and died sometime will after his alleged crucifixion and living the whole while in Palestine during , according to the Gospels, the “glad tidings” were being preached all over the country, never makes any mention of Jesus or his group in any of his numerous commentaries on the course of religion at the time.
Josephus, the painstaking enumerator and careful historian of even the most unimportant sects, who was born three or four years after the death of Jesus, entirely ignores the existence of a Christian sect and only mentions Jesus execution in a short sentence, and even those few words are widely consider to have been altered by a Christian hand”.
Suetonius, secretary of Hadrian, writing in the first quarter of the second century, knows so little of Jesus or his history as to say that the Emperor Claudius “banished all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances, at the instigation of one Crestus,” meaning Christ, we must suppose.
The Emperor Hadrian himself, writing still later, was so little impressed with the tenets or importance of the new sect, that in a letter to Servianus he shows that he believes the Christians to be worshippers of Serapis.
Who wrote the Gospels?
According to Catholic tradition, the four Gospels were written by four individuals called the four Evangelists. Many scholars today, however, argue that the original authors were “anonymous,” and that the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were only later connected with these four books. No one would trouble to ask such a question if it were not that all four of the biblical gospels are deliberately, even playfully, anonymous in their texts. The Third Gospel for example carefully names its audience, Theophilus (“Friend of God”-
Luke 1:3), but never its author; while the last chapter of the Fourth Gospel takes great pains to identify the author of that work as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 21:7, 20), and then never tells us his name! The gospels are so anonymous that their titles, all second-century guesses, are all four wrong. Christians in the second century, possessing anonymous manuscripts and eager to give names to them, fastened upon four historical figures-the Apostles Matthew and John, Luke the “beloved physician” of Paul (Col. 4:14), and John Mark of Jerusalem, the “son” of Peter (Acts 12:12; I Peter 5:13). It’s relatively easy to show that these identifications are imaginary and based on wishful thinking.Source:http://www.herbertwarmstrong.com/who_wrote_the_gospels.htm
Who is Apollonius of Tyana?
Apollonius of Tyana was a man who history had almost lost. This is a bit hard to believe seeing that the record of his life is almost a mirror image of that of Jesus Christ as recorded in the bible. Consequently, the parallels between the two cannot be mistaken. Both lived in the same era, and both performed “works” and “miracles” nearly identical to one another. In fact it is quite likely that the reason Apollonius of Tyana life story has been so conveniently “buried” buy the Christian community is because the parallels are to remarkable to be coincidental. They compare so closely in fact, one has to wonder if the life story of one, has not been transposed over that of the other. As to which was overlaid on the other, we have to look at which of the two has a more verifiable existence. Outside the bible, there really isn’t any verifiable evidence whatsoever that Jesus Christ ever really existed. It is becoming quite clear that the biblical accounts were written using second or third hand knowledge. Historians during this time and shortly after make no mention of him. We have no clue of what he looked like (although ever since Da Vinci’s great depiction of him in the last supper, almost every church depiction of him from that point forward resembles this image). This in itself is very strange seeing as the likeness of other great people in this time period and that of more ancient historical figures have been preserved.
This is not the case with Apollonius of Tyana, there are several statues and bust of him located throughout the ancient cities of which he traveled and taught. His travels, teachings and life history have been well document. Thusly, it would be very hard to imagine that this person is not a real historic figure and that his life story is simply a transposition of some one elses. These facts can only lead to one logical conclusion, I will leave it up to you to put 2 and 2 together.
Source: http://www.wisdomworld.org/setting/apollonius.html
jon“Dr. Allen: You give me all of Glen’s questions that i have NOT answered and i will write as much as i possibly can on them. You have my eternal word (whether or not you take it).”I take it the Dr.Allen address is another one of your little snide arrogant remarks I was referring to. No need for me to reiterate Glen’s questions, just scroll back and read them for yourself.
he was a miracle performing messiah for christ sake, who rose from the dead, he should have made the local news or at least been the talk of the town, wouldn’t you suspect?
that would be a nice way to try and spin it. Good luck with that one.
Glen, who knew about Jesus’ rising from the dead?
“Josephus, the painstaking enumerator and careful historian of even the most unimportant sects, who was born three or four years after the death of Jesus, entirely ignores the existence of a Christian sect and only mentions Jesus execution in a short sentence, and even those few words are widely consider to have been altered by a Christian hand”.”
Another, Glen. Who are those that WIDELY CONSIDER this ?????? How could ANYONE make a conjecture about that. I mean, please, that statement is just ridiculus. THE ONLY WAY ANYONE WOULD KNOW is if they had an “unadultered” copy of it. Sorry, but NONE exist. Surprising, i think not.
“The Emperor Hadrian himself, writing still later, was so little impressed with the tenets or importance of the new sect, that in a letter to Servianus he shows that he believes the Christians to be worshippers of Serapis.”
The Christians of that day were being murdered regularly and their numbers dwindled so. My people (the Maronites [Lebanon]) even relocated their whole lives in the early 400’s because they were systematically being killed for their faith. Doesn’t that strike you as odd. The Christians were being killed because they believed in Christ. Why on earth would they kill if they did not think that Jesus was a real threat. Now the christian religion is THE BIGGEST in the world. Maybe they were right in trying to kill all of Christs’ followers. Their PAGAN ways are now all but unknown in this world.
“http://www.herbertwarmstrong.com/who_wrote_the_gospels.htm”
I really REALLY thought you were smarter than this Glen, i really did. I am truly ashamed. I have never in my life seen a more biased account of a fiction in my life. Except for maybe “The DaVinci code.”
Your “go to” guy Apollonius is also a shame. In the FIRST sentence it denounces what you are trying to convey in your post. I am not sure why you even quoted that source at all unless you thought no one was going to check up on it.
Just do us all a favor; if you are going to do research please try your hardest to give us something that isn’t as laughable as the stuff you already have given us.
Here is a great place to start.
http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/
What are you talking about? who are “they” and who is killing who? What strikes me as “odd” is this statement.
jon wrote:
“http://www.herbertwarmstrong.com/who_wrote_the_gospels.htm”
I really REALLY thought you were smarter than this Glen, i really did. I am truly ashamed. I have never in my life seen a more biased account of a fiction in my life. Except for maybe “The DaVinci code.”
This would be a fair statement, if one – you can tell us all who did write the Gospels? and two – give us some hard evidence to prove your claim?
Jon wrote: “Your “go to” guy Apollonius is also a shame. In the FIRST sentence it denounces what you are trying to convey in your post. I am not sure why you even quoted that source at all unless you thought no one was going to check up on it.”
What is it that I am trying to convey in my post? That we may not know all there is to know about our past? That there are things that out there, that should be discussed and researched further? That some material that may be relevant to events in the past may have been lost or destroyed? That the RCC may not be as wonderful as you seem to think it is?
there are multiple sources where you can study up on the life of Apollonius of Tyana, I just happened to grab this link which does tell his story.
Well folks, I guess we need to shut down this forum, Jon has looked it over and determined it to be a waste of our time. If you have any questions please feel free to contact Jon, as he has all the answers (just don’t ask him for any proof).
Jon wrote: “Here is a great place to start.
http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/”
Jon, you just called ridiculous a statement I quoted that used the phrase “considered by many”. Now you are recommending us to read and article filled with more conjecture and speculation than you can shake a stick at. Count up how many times this author uses phrases like, “he could have, it is said, it seem like, most likely because, let’s imagine, it looks like, could it be, we can infer, this can mean, it is likely that, some might have, this suggest, according to some, and what probably occurred.”
This is just from one section and I’m sure if I was to read the whole speculation I would run across the “considered by many” phrase also.
I really thought you thought you were smarter then this. I really did Jon. You should be ashamed.
Jon, It’s clear to see that your only purpose here is to attack any discussion or thought that is outside what conforms to scripture. That’s not being very “open minded” now is it.
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible4.html
Who wrote the 4th Gospel?
http://members.tripod.com/~Ramon_K_Jusino/magdalene.html
Here’s some food for thought for some of the more open minded individuals on this forum. Remember – never fear searching – only fear those telling you not to.
that would be a nice way to try and spin it. Good luck with that one.”
How open minded of you Glen, do some research on it u will be surprised.
Another thing Glen, u keep mentioning all of these confidential documents by the church, and that they are super damaging to the foundations of christianity.= and its doctrines. Did u ever think that just because they are confidential dosent make them that? For all you know it can be Bank Bills showing a cardinal taking a bribe, or a Pope buying some aphrodisiacs. Eitherway confidential doesnt mean SUPER DAMAGING DOCUMENTS THAT COULD DESTROY THE FOUNDATIONS OF CHRISTIANITY, could just mean embarasing stuff.
Interesting to learn that the girl that Appolonius supposedly brought back from death died soon later.
that would be a nice way to try and spin it. Good luck with that one.”
Dammit glen, that really pisses me off. How can you of all people Mr. Open mind denounce that so easily dammit!!! I just don’t get you.
Dont be so nasty! you guys are trying to prove points just for your ego not for an actual search for the truth! Be compassionate.Dont make it personal!
Bye!
Dont be so nasty! you guys are trying to prove points just for your ego not for an actual search for the truth! Be compassionate.Dont make it personal!
Bye!
The choise of which parts to use as the basis of the ‘standard’ bible was made by council of men.
The “parts” put in the bible WERE “faxed” from heaven as you say. Belief in that is something we call faith. Because man compiled the works that were sent by God for the Bible, does not hinder its divinity.
As for confidental documents, why wouldn’t anyone suspect that the church is hiding inforamtion when for centuries the church refused to make public the records they held regarding the Inquisition. This information was locked away in the Vatican vaults and they refused to allow anyone access. It wasn’t until public outcry forced them to capitulate. And the only reason they decided to do this is because ,as historians did not have all the records at their disposal, it was becoming popular to believe the the number of heretics, witches and pagans that were murdered was in the tens of millions when the church knew, by opening up the vaults it could prove that the true numbers were in reality only in the tens of thousands. Yah, that’s not nearly as bad. I guess that’s just one of those little embarassments NAMELESS (charly) is talking about. Mind you this is just one vault, there are several others the Vatican still refuses to make open to the public. I can only imagine these may be a little more “embarassing stuff” then the last and that’s the reason for the hold out.
as for NAMELESS’s comment “How open minded of you Glen, do some research on it u will be surprised.”
There’s the problem, the more research I do the more I find, and the more I find the more disgusted I become. I can see why the church is so determined to convince people not to buy Dan’s book, it sends orginary people like myself out to do a little research and it doesn’t take but a little digging to find that a bunch of dirt has been swept under the rug. And that’s not even looking at any of information contained in “The DaVinci Code”. You can throw all that fiction out the window (that’s why I refuse to debate on it, it’s not important). The church thinks that by discrediting the book, people won’t be interested in researching their past. That’s what scares the them the most, not that people are going to believe that Dan Brown’s stories are true but that people are going to start looking under their rug.
And I will say it again and I repeat, “BELIEVE NOTHING I TELL YOU HERE, BELIEVE NOTHING DAN BROWN CLAIMS IN HIS BOOK” go out and do your own research, consider all your resources, look at their past record for truth, and then form your own opinion.
What does that prove?
I wrote: “that would be a nice way to try and spin it. Good luck with that one.”
Nameless wrote: “Dammit glen, that really pisses me off. How can you of all people Mr. Open mind denounce that so easily dammit!!! I just don’t get you.”
———————————————————-
I don’t denounce it, it would be hard to believe seeing what is known of these two men, but go ahead and give us some proof, don’t just make a statement without giving us any back-up, Isn’t that what you guys are claiming I do. I’m all ears.
“I think we’re all smart enough to figure out the fic from the fac on our own.”
What makes you say that…you give to much praise and credit to the intelligence of mere man.
Another thing Glen, anyone who has different views than you, you assume them to be ignorant defenders of the RCC. Everyone,well close too everyone, no research needed, knows the dirty history of the RCC, but give me a human organization that is free from all sin. This isnt saying what the RCC did was ok, but not worse than any other human organization. What I don’t get with you is that you have no way to reach God, you can;t find him through scripture, you aint gonna find him using older dated texts and pure speculation, so basically all you are glen is bordering on agnostic, or hopelessly in a quest to find the “truth”.
Another thing that confuses me, you believe in God, atleast i think you do, an omni-(could put a few words here) being,yet you doubt him able to accomplish miracles, to give man divine inspiration for the Bible. I don’t understand the nature of your god.
I would have to agree 100% on that whole post.
Glen:
Are you a former Roman Catholic? If not, can you please tell me why you are spending so much time trying to denounce something that you never belonged to and in faith wouldn’t matter to you either way?
totally made-up nonsense.
Nameless wrote: “Everyone,well close too everyone, no research needed, knows the dirty history of the RCC”
that’s funny, didn’t you just get finsish saying how man is to stupid to see the truth. Quote “What makes you say that…you give to much praise and credit to the intelligence of mere man.”
Nameless wrote: “but give me a human organization that is free from all sin.”
People/organizations tend follow the morale and ethical standards set forth by its leaders. The RCC has over 2000 years to set those standards and has failed drastically in every respect. How can anyone know the difference between right and wrong when those who have appointed themselves as the doorkeepers to heaven don’t.
Nameless wrote: “This isnt saying what the RCC did was ok, but not worse than any other human organization.”
The RCC directly and/or indirect (through its policies of intolerance and suppression of scientic advancement) has caused more death and destruction than all other organizations in the world combined in the history of man on earth. And their influence and financial support of their causes are still the number one cause of death even to this day. It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. You don’t have a past record such as their’s and just all of a sudden wake up and say that was the past, we have changed. If that’s the case, you tell me when that change took place and when was their doctrine ammended, come on now, tell me the turning point?
Nameless wrote: “What I don’t get with you is that you have no way to reach God, you can;t find him through scripture, you aint gonna find him using older dated texts and pure speculation, so basically all you are glen is bordering on agnostic, or hopelessly in a quest to find the “truth”.”
Say what you may. I know God and I didn’t find him through any scripture or book or gospel or sermon, it wasn’t until I let go of all that crap that he came to me. I am not on a quest to find God, I’m searching for how man f—- up his message so bad to the point that so many people had to die and are still doing so. Call me whatever you want, it doesn’t matter to me.
Nameless wrote: “Another thing that confuses me, you believe in God, atleast i think you do, an omni-(could put a few words here) being,yet you doubt him able to accomplish miracles, to give man divine inspiration for the Bible. I don’t understand the nature of your god.
You wouldn’t know a miracle if it slapped you in the face, in fact it has and you still haven’t seen it. Man was given divine inspiration, then other men tried to harness that power and use it for their own self-interest and wrote the bible.
Jon wrote: “Are you a former Roman Catholic? If not, can you please tell me why you are spending so much time trying to denounce something that you never belonged to and in faith wouldn’t matter to you either way?
what a stupid question. Jon, why are you here? Oh ya, you say you were searching for knowledge but in your very first post you proclaimed, “I have so much to say to you people”. What you should have proclaimed is, “I have so much to say to you people, just don’t say anything back or I’ll get mad and attack”. That would have been a little more honest now, wouldn’t have been?
He later writes on 01/23/05: “Another question I have for those who believe in an alternate life of Jesus, If u believed he survived the crucifixtion. If you think u can believe in that and God, you need to start reading the Bible…start with John 3:16, practically the theme of the New testament, and what is prophesized in the old.”
oh what a wicked web we weave, when…....
charly.
Fact(undisputed): There have been more war related deaths in the 20th century than the entire history of mankind. Now while there have been religious disputes in the 20th century all horrendous, its quite minor compared to WW1 and WW2. Did religion take side in these wars…yes…but these wars were political and economical, and racial/facist, in nature. Sorry religion has to take second place when it come to death and destruction.
“Nameless wrote on 01/21/05: “I’m sure glen your now thinking of your response to label me another bible thumper, but sorry I don’t beleive in God, or a word of the Bible. What I do know is that those who are seeking a life of righteousness should stay the heck away from you. Once again, may God or whatever you believe in, have mercy on mankind if someone like you gets a position of power.”
He later writes on 01/23/05: “Another question I have for those who believe in an alternate life of Jesus, If u believed he survived the crucifixtion. If you think u can believe in that and God, you need to start reading the Bible…start with John 3:16, practically the theme of the New testament, and what is prophesized in the old.”
oh what a wicked web we weave, when…....
charly.”
I miss you point?
“Man was given divine inspiration, then other men tried to harness that power and use it for their own self-interest and wrote the bible.”
hmmmmmm…you have the key words right but you have to rephrase the sentence, like this. Man was given divine inspiration and wrote the bible and men succeeded(not tried) to pervert its scriptures for self interest harnessing AWESOME POWER.
“It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. You don’t have a past record such as their’s and just all of a sudden wake up and say that was the past, we have changed. If that’s the case, you tell me when that change took place and when was their doctrine ammended, come on now, tell me the turning point?”
So you don’t believe people can change? hmmmm u mention doctrines, be more specific what needs to be ammended. Not saying this because I disagree, just easier to converse if you be more specific.
“I know God and I didn’t find him through any scripture or book or gospel or sermon, it wasn’t until I let go of all that crap that he came to me.”
you sure? Once again I don’t understand the nature of your god(note the lower case “g”). Does your god require anything from you. What are the set morals and standards, cause without that its man’s word against man’s word.
“You wouldn’t know a miracle if it slapped you in the face, in fact it has and you still haven’t seen it.”
Let’s not play to much with the meaning of miracle, you knew what I meant.
“Nameless wrote: “Everyone,well close too everyone, no research needed, knows the dirty history of the RCC”
that’s funny, didn’t you just get finsish saying how man is to stupid to see the truth. Quote “What makes you say that…you give to much praise and credit to the intelligence of mere man.”“
ahhhhhhhhhh, gleny, gleny, gleny, why don’t you go back and read the posts as to why i said “What makes you say that…you give to much praise and credit to the intelligence of mere man.” You can see that I was replying to jims statement on fac and fic. Dirty history of RCC is well established fac, or do u disagree there as well.
wow, witty, original, and humorous. acronyms all you got.
Well you know what glen says, first label than destroy.
Uh, you didn’t answer my question (again).
Glen wrote:
“”“The RCC directly and/or indirect (through its policies of intolerance and suppression of scientic advancement) has caused more death and destruction than all other organizations in the world combined in the history of man on earth. And their influence and financial support of their causes are still the number one cause of death even to this day. It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. You don’t have a past record such as their’s and just all of a sudden wake up and say that was the past, we have changed. If that’s the case, you tell me when that change took place and when was their doctrine ammended, come on now, tell me the turning point?”“”
Any source or information on that claim? Or are you just going to get mad at me for asking you for it???
I am not going to argue with somebody who can’t even figure out who he/she is (although you seem to think you know who I am). You claim not to believe in God or the bible yet you quote scripture as if it were the word of God. If the words given via divine inspiration and God wanted them all compiled in one book, he could have had his son or his son’s disicles write them down, or better yet, just carved the lessons himself in stone as he had done with the law. That way they wouldn’t of had to later be piecemilled together and voted on by men who by that time were going off in several directions. Instead we are left mostly with the testimony of Paul and of those who followed him. I’m sorry, second and third hand testimony does not hold up when it’s something this important. That’s why it’s so easily subject to perversion to begin with. There is no reason not to leave a clear cut path. My God has only one law, and that is to respect life, and with that as a guide everything else falls into place, it’s that simple. I don’t expect for you to buy into that nor will I proactively go out and try make anyone else buy into it. If believing life is sacred buys me a one-way ticket in the wrong direction so be it. I don’t need you to save me. I am completely content in all aspects of my life. I have family that loves me, I have friends who trust me and colleagues who repect me. I want for nothing and expect nothing. I’ve got it all. I just hope your as content with your life.
Uh, you didn’t answer my question (again).
Glen wrote:
“”“The RCC directly and/or indirect (through its policies of intolerance and suppression of scientic advancement) has caused more death and destruction than all other organizations in the world combined in the history of man on earth. And their influence and financial support of their causes are still the number one cause of death even to this day. It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. You don’t have a past record such as their’s and just all of a sudden wake up and say that was the past, we have changed. If that’s the case, you tell me when that change took place and when was their doctrine ammended, come on now, tell me the turning point?”“”
Any source or information on that claim? Or are you just going to get mad at me for asking you for it???
——————
Nameless says religion is second behind the world wars. I don’t think he is taking into account all the deaths that may have been avoided if the church hadn’t suppressed scientific exploration that could have led to the discoveries of cures for plagues and diseases centuries earlier. He’s also not taking into account the church’s refusal to allow their followers to receive simple vaccinations and drugs that would have save the lives millions of adults and children.
Jon the source are no secret. You know as well as I do what the facts are. Why do you keep playing this game? You have yet to answer any questions, even after you told Allen you would write volumes.
Seriously, all i want is a source to your freakin claims. Is that so hard man. Geez, what is with you. I know you have a prejudice towards the Catholic church but come on, the least you can do is throw a quote in there from some source or something. You claim i KNOW the facts and even if i do you can not assume that other people do. In the intrest of “getting the word out there” about the evil catholic church, you would think you would actually try to add some credit to your claims.
Glen wrote:
“the church’s refusal to allow their followers to receive simple vaccinations and drugs that would have save the lives millions of adults and children.”
Source?
As for your questions, i don’t see any from the previous posts that i haven’t answered. If i have not sufficed your indulgences for knowledge by not answering your questions to the fullest, just ask me again instead of saying:
“You have yet to answer any questions, even after you told Allen you would write volumes.”
That leaves me nowhere man. Tell me what you want me to answer and i will.
May God Bless you.
by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln. Much of the information Brown uses appears in this book and is a highly fascinating read that I cannot recommend enough.
I came across your postings just fiddling around with various searches (I’m bored and at work) and I have read through many of them. I find it wonderful that in this age so many of us can still be amazed and that that can fuel our education.
As I reached the end of the postings, I started skimming – Glen Jon Charly – whoever – just not interesting – haven’t you got a chat room you can go to, shouldn’t you be doing your homework. Yes, Religion has committed many sins, but only because they have been allowed to by their followers. Yes, Religion has done much good, but only because of it’s followers. We all have the power to say no and to leave the sheep to be led. We all have the power to do good and harm. The Catholic church is not alone – don’t get me started on the Mormons… I find the influence of religion in the US mind-blowing, astounding in fact…We should never allow others to own our thoughts and opinions. We can beleive in anything we want – I may choose to believe in fairies and why not?
The blind leading the blind…the lord helps those that helps themselves. Any idiot can read the bible, any idiot can join a church. It is finding your own way that takes inteligence and courage.
All the best
CJ
by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln. Much of the information Brown uses appears in this book and is a highly fascinating read that I cannot recommend enough.
I came across your postings just fiddling around with various searches (I’m bored and at work) and I have read through many of them. I find it wonderful that in this age so many of us can still be amazed and that that can fuel our education.
As I reached the end of the postings, I started skimming – Glen Jon Charly – whoever – just not interesting – haven’t you got a chat room you can go to, shouldn’t you be doing your homework. Yes, Religion has committed many sins, but only because they have been allowed to by their followers. Yes, Religion has done much good, but only because of it’s followers. We all have the power to say no and to leave the sheep to be led. We all have the power to do good and harm. The Catholic church is not alone – don’t get me started on the Mormons… I find the influence of religion in the US mind-blowing, astounding in fact…We should never allow others to own our thoughts and opinions. We can beleive in anything we want – I may choose to believe in fairies and why not?
The blind leading the blind…the lord helps those that helps themselves. Any idiot can read the bible, any idiot can join a church. It is finding your own way that takes inteligence and courage.
All the best
CJ
and as for you answering my questions, please point to the post where you have answered the very first 2 questions I asked of you: Why are you not troubled about the Catholic Church “misleading and lying” about its history? and How do you know the real truth behind Jesus?
year 2000: Pope John Paul II makes a request for forgiveness for the conduct of his church over the centuries. The infirm pontiff has prepared a list of the murders, tortures and horrors the papacy has caused to humanity. Some 50 pages are needed to lay it all out – things like the papal pograms against the Jews, the crusades against Islam, and the Inquisitions that went on for centuries.
But in the end, the Vatican rest the blame on its flock saying the church has no control over what individual members have done. This is the equivalent of saying the Nazi party is not responsible for the horrors of its members. Until the Vatican takes full responsibility for its role there will always be a doubt as to their true sincerity.
Jon wrote : “May God Bless you.”
I sincerely thank you for that. I feel he has, and I’m sure you feel the same way. Good luck in all that you do.
wow, witty, original, and humorous. acronyms all you got.
looks like one right out of the ol’ fatherapriestwhoabusedhim / nameless / asdf playbook if you ask me.
Q1 “”“Why are you not troubled about the Catholic Church “misleading and lying” about its history?”“”
In modern era, after apologies from the Catholic church and the lack of any “evil-doing” at the hands of the church, there is no reason for me to be concerned about what they did 1500 or 1000 years ago (even though i DO research everything i can about it). My faith lies in God, The Holy Spirit, Jesus and the Maronites of Lebanon (first Rite of the Catholic Church formed around 400 A.D.) For me to constantly worry about a threat that is no longer there would be a hinderance to my faith and love in Jesus.
“”“But in the end, the Vatican rest the blame on its flock saying the church has no control over what individual members have done. This is the equivalent of saying the Nazi party is not responsible for the horrors of its members. Until the Vatican takes full responsibility for its role there will always be a doubt as to their true sincerity.”“”“
Glen, i would like to think that you said this to just troll a little here. You know, as well as I do about the Nazi party. When you compare the Church to the Nazi party, that is just an insult. Not to mention how wrong you are. The head of the Nazi party, Hitler, commanded his forces to do what they did in WWII, something that is WIDELY known. Your analogy holds about as much water as a sieve.
Q2 “”“How do you know the real truth behind Jesus?”“”
You couldn’t have asked me an easier question. I know the real truth about Jesus through my faith in him. It is that simple. When one feels his presence in ones life, THAT is when you know. Not to mention that there is NO worthwhile evidence to support that he was not divine. The only evidence people have are old scrolls and conspiracy theories well hidden in the works of compulsory anti-Christians. Thats how i feel. I will say again: I know the truth about Jesus because i have felt him in my life.
Any more questions? I’d be happy to answer.
Two very different examples Glen, The ideologies of the nazi party were horror, the doctrines of the church were virtuous, and it is only stupid men that screw things up and when doing so, are no longer part of the church, in my view atleast.
“I am not going to argue with somebody who can’t even figure out who he/she is”
What relevance does that have, you put a name and an email adress, what does it matter at all.
“My God has only one law, and that is to respect life, and with that as a guide everything else falls into place, it’s that simple.”
Do you really believe that, you think that it is that simple? Don’t start a religion glen, with a doctrine like that it is begging for perversion. That is not simple at all, and I believe if you could rethink what you said you’d retract your statement, there are 1000’s examples which would lead to man’s word against man’s word there.
“I don’t think he is taking into account all the deaths that may have been avoided if the church hadn’t suppressed scientific exploration that could have led to the discoveries of cures for plagues and diseases centuries earlier.”
That’s not a fair statement, thats like saying if lincoln wanst assasinated man would have already landed on mars.
I don’t know what spawned such a strong response, glen, do not take this anonymous web log so personally, it is not my intention to attack you personally, good for you if that is really how your life is, but you will not stop me form expressing my views and beliefs. If it makes things easier ignore the post made on last paragraph of the 21st.
Hmmmm, looking back I have said some rude things, as have you, but when I say something as ridiculous as fatherapriestwhoabusedhim? I don’t expect you to take it personally.
It just bothers me that you think you can find God and live as he would want without the Bible.
Secondly- That the Creation we behold is the real and ever-existing word of God, in which we cannot be deceived. It proclaims his power, it demonstrates his wisdom, it manifests his goodness and beneficence.
Thirdly- That the moral duty of man consists in imitating the moral goodness and beneficence of God, manifested in the creation toward all his creatures. That seeing, as we daily do, the goodness of God to all men, it is an example calling upon all men to practise the same toward each other; and, consequently, that everything of persecution and revenge between man and man, and everything of cruelty to animals, is a violation of moral duty.
I trouble not myself about the manner of future existence. I content myself with believing, even to positive conviction, that the Power that gave me existence is able to continue it, in any form and manner he pleases, either with or without this body; and it appears more probable to me that I shall continue to exist hereafter, than that I should have had existence, as I now have, before that existence began.
It is certain that, in one point, all the nations of the earth and all religions agree- all believe in a God; the things in which they disagree, are the redundancies annexed to that belief; and, therefore, if ever a universal religion should prevail, it will not be by believing anything new, but in getting rid of redundancies, and believing as man believed at first. Adam, if ever there were such a man, was created a Deist; but in the meantime, let every man follow, as he has a right to do, the religion and the worship he prefers.
THOMAS PAINE – Age of Reason
sorry that bothers you.
but I have, and if you believe life is sacred then all the laws on how we need to live and what we need do to make life worth living are just common sense. Life without love is not worth living and when you think about it, hate (and all it forms) is the only true sin.
The Bible gives you the extended version of who Jesus was. His life, his trial, are all coroberated by independant witnesses, as was the life of Mohammed, Nero or Moses.(Mike Kremer said that).
Whether or not you believe that Jesus was the Son of God is up to you. I happen to know he was. That, my friend, is something i can not explain to you.
Instead, he made the world round and moving, giving us the resource to discover math and calculate time and distance. Do universal truths like those found in math and phi and pi just exist by random chance? Or were they left for us to use in solving problems, navigating our world and solar system, and to construct ever-greater things to ever-greater precision. Instead of simply giving us soil to grow plants, he also gave us minerals of which we could forge and create new and better tools and building materials. Instead of just making us free of disease and having us die when we became worthy to go to heaven, he allowed us to have sickness and challenged us to find the cures he left for us in nature.
How can so many cures just by happenstance be found in nature if this wasnt by design? Doesnt it strike anyone as funny that man has never really invented anything; he has only found new ways of using the resources God had already left for us? With that said, can any man made religion that tells you to look no further, ever be considered a true plan of God? Why do lower forms of life fight tenaciously to survive and thrive in every environment no matter how hostile or inhospitable it may seem? It knows of no bible or teachings to lead its way. This will go on whether man is here or not. It happens for one reason, and one reason alone, life must survive. To do so, certain laws are built in and cannot be changed. If they are, the whole system will eventually collapse. Thats the point man is at now, he has tried to change the laws God set in place for him, and now we are stuck trying to make those laws work. It cannot and will not ever succeed.
My last thoughts,
I want to thank everyone here who has posted challenging me to seek the truth, If it wasnt for your persistence in attempting to convince me to see your light, I dont think I would have every completely and clearly seen my own. So long, and may God bless you all.thanks
p.s. never stop exploring, the truth never stops revealing itself.
BF
“”When I discussed my concerns with other Bishops common response I received was “The mind belongs to God and only he will decide what it should contain”.”“
Are/Were you a Bishop?
If so, how could you not have known about the fallacies in Browns book before hand?
Not to tear you apart or anything but have you hear what Islam does to their young children? Have you heard what they teach to them. Would you rather them learn that or some stuff about God and Jesus and have them lead a good healthy life???
Oh, and the Christian rock bands you talk about, they’re already here. Look up a these bands.
“Living Sacrifice”
“Haste The Day”
“Norma Jean”
They are the newest and the best. Though, i think maybe if you actually listen to them you might be surprised by the music and singing. Try it on for size.
They both believe that theirs is the correct and only path for the world.
One believes the world should ultimately be made up of a superior race of white men the other a superior race of Christian men.
Both understand and have used the same methods for brainwashing its current and potential members.
Both believe it is justified to eliminate those that are not a part of their elite group.
Both groups have had leaders that would stop at nothing to accomplish their task.
Both have leaders that believed the end justifies the means.
Both believed their course would ultimately make the world a better place.
Both feel it is best to only let the people know what they consider necessary and nothing more.
Both think women are inferior to man.
Both claim what they are doing is in the best interest of mankind.
Even their methods of death and torture seem to mirror one another.
The only difference that I can think of is one attempts to take over the world using advances in technology while the other uses a more psychological approach.
It makes me stop and think, how soon after did the anti-Christ appear and if he did was he so clever of an imitator that everybody un-questioning followed? It real makes you wonder if its not to late.
“Both believe it is justified to eliminate those that are not a part of their elite group.”
What the hell are you talking about??????
“Both believed their course would ultimately make the world a better place.”
You ever read anything about what Jesus said. Obviously not. You can snivel all you want at the RCC but the way of Christians around the world is the way of CHRIST. If you don;t think the world would be a better place if we all acted like Jesus then, IN MY OPINION, there is something seriously socially wrong with you.
“Both claim what they are doing is in the best interest of mankind.”
Same as above.
“Even their methods of death and torture seem to mirror one another.”
I would love to hear you explain this.
“Both understand and have used the same methods for brainwashing its current and potential members.”
Same here.
Mat 10:34 “Don’t think that I came to send peace on the earth. I didn’t come to send peace, but a sword.
Mat 10:35 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
Mat 10:36 A man’s foes will be those of his own household.
and I have concluded that despite the good sayings there are those like that above and those that leave so much open for interpretation that it is no wonder people have used them to justify any actions they so desire.
First of all, you didn’t answer any of my questions. All you did was take a passage from one of the Gospels out of context. If you read that whole passage and those surrounding it you will come to realize that all Jesus is doing is reiterating the first 4 commandments. All He is saying is that those that follow him must love Him more than any other because He will do the same. If you could, please answer some of my questions.
“”“and I have concluded that despite the good sayings there are those like that above and those that leave so much open for interpretation that it is no wonder people have used them to justify any actions they so desire.”“”“
I take it that you are akin to the saying “a few bad apples…” ?
You fail to see what Islam is and has been doing for the past 1500 years. Maybe you just have some underlying problem emotionally?
LA out
Mat 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 10:33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
It sounds to me like all the killing mentioned in Mat 10:34 through 10:35 starts if you “deny Jesus before men”.
After:
Mat 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
This doesn’t sound like: “all Jesus is doing is reiterating the first 4 commandments” as Jon states. It sounds to me that he trying to come between a family’s love for one another and break them apart and turn them against each other to the point of taking the sword to them. I’ve read all the passages before and after these and can not find anything that would lead me to believe Jesus is simply “reiterating” anything but death to those who do not follow him.
1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
3. Remember thou keep the Sabbath Day.
4. Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
Jon says “All He is saying is that those that follow him must love Him more than any other because He will do the same.”
How can anybody come up with a statement like that from these words unless they were totally delusional? This clearly states, believe in me or I will cause your death, plan and simple.
Uhhhhh, ya, i agree 100%. So, whats your point? Islam is the ONLY religion that does that.
“”“This doesn’t sound like: “all Jesus is doing is reiterating the first 4 commandments” as Jon states. It sounds to me that he trying to come between a family’s love for one another and break them apart and turn them against each other to the point of taking the sword to them. I’ve read all the passages before and after these and can not find anything that would lead me to believe Jesus is simply “reiterating” anything but death to those who do not follow him.”“”
Your point may seem valid to someone who only reads those passages but i find it hard to believe that you have read the whole New Testament. If maybe you could stomach Jesus for the few hours it would take you, i think maybe you would understand, or maybe not, it seems you have a problem with Jesus and what he stood for and the people who believe in him.
If you can find me ONE instance where Jesus did what you said, “death to those who do not follow him.”, i will stop posting on this board.
You just do not understand, it is obvious and i feel bad for you. I hope one day that you find God and Jesus (not necessarily the RCC or whatever evil you think they are). I truly do pray for you guys. Peace.
Read Mark 3:31-35
And i know it is cliche, but try and read JOHN 3:16, you might learn something about what you know so little about.
“”“What kind of God would claim the only path to salvation for man is to follow a path that he outlines in the words of a book that could have been written by anybody and was only available to a few in that small area of the world.”“”
You try your hardest to start a new religion that is so controversial that people MURDER you for believing or talking about it. Do it in the face of death and with out any media, any compassion from those you oppose you, or any way to let people know your beliefs. See how many people you reach. See how long you live. A sixth of the world today is Christian. That is not a small amount Allen. That is more than ANY other belief. Do you really think that we are all brainwashed sheep. That we all are just so gullible and can’t think for ourselves. You fail to see what Jesus really taught because you are hooked on only ONE aspect of history, the Roman Catholic Church. You are blinded by the media and everything else. Read the New Testament or read something about what Jesus taught and for once just focus on that. People throughout history have done some horrible things in the name of many more. Inca death gods, roman gods, greek gods and even the great pagan gods all were subject to the reason for war. You focus all of your attention on Christians that you have not once criticized the last 1500 years in the middle east. The muslim nation over there has done more killing in the name of their god than any other faction ever. They put fear into the lives of their own people and yet you seem to be hooked on christians.
There are always people who go outside and try to manipulate the true teaching of ANYTHING. You can not base your opinions on those few. All you have ever said is negative things about what i believe in. So how am i supposed to react? All i’ve done now is asked you to read about it. Thats all i’m asked to do and that is all i have ever done. I am just trying to do what the early Christians did and it is not very surprising that i am meeting with the same criticism that they did. I suppose that is to be expected.
All i’m asking you people to do is put down your newspapers and pick up a Bible to actually get a first-hand look at who Jesus is. If thats wrong of me to do then i guess we really aren’t free.
“”“Your sole purpose of coming to this forum is to cram your beliefs down everybody elses throats.”“”
Could you be more cliche?
Why does it piss you off so much when all i want to do is ask you to read a portion of a book. Are you that afraid?
And, to be honest, i would start a webpage if i could, but alas, i’m only a junior in college studying Electrical Engineering, so its not my fortay.
Oh and about the brainwashing, you couldn’t be more wrong my friend but in your eyes YOU are the right one. YOU are doing the same thing that you are saying I am doing. Could you be more of a hypocrite? It really make syou mad that i believe in Jesus, doesn’t it. I just think its funny. God bless you Allen, you really need it.
“”“No matter how great a God you think Jesus to be, he is only as good as the worst of his followers. “”“
That makes no sense Allen. Really. You could say that about ANYONE. About Mohammed, Ghandi, Buddha…ANYONE. Man, you are really reaching far, aren’t you. The tighter you grip the sand of your reality the faster it falls through your hand.
All i try to do is lead my life like Jesus wanted me to. Sorry if that pisses anyone off. Sorry if that offends anyone.
It doesn’t piss me off, If Jesus wants you to go around attacking eveyone that believes differently then you, it actual proves quite a lot and convinces me much more so that you are on the wrong path. And that is exactly the type of behavior I see the Bible reinforcing. But it’s your path so take it. Jesus made himself the victim, just as you are trying to do. I have read / studied the bible and I can see in it how people like yourself get sucked in and start seeing only what they want to see. Its happened over and over through out its history and it has lead to all kinds of hatred and division. First they fought over what should be included, then they fought over how what was included should be interpreted than how what was interpreted should be implemented and then their was more division and more fighting. All that fighting to put the inspired word of God in print and it still does not paint the rosy picture of Jesus that you claim it does, but you only seem to focus on the good parts of the story. That’s fine, but if you are to take the bible seriously you have to take it as a whole. And as a whole it is a mixed bag of babel. And despite what you believe, you have know clue of how Jesus wanted you to live your life other then your strong “feelings”. Any of the lessons the bible has to offer to do good, are all common sense and can be found even in cultures that never knew of the bible. In fact everything the bible says is taken from other cultures to begin with. In fact the only thing new about it was, it now put a face to God and made him only accessable through man. What a racket.
I hope you have fun collaborating with all the other on this site for your remainder here on earth Allen. As for me, i have better things to do with my time than be insulted and persecuted.
“”“Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words—go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet.
Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
“Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves.
But beware of people, for they will hand you over to courts and scourge you in their synagogues,
and you will be led before governors and kings for my sake as a witness before them and the pagans.
When they hand you over, do not worry about how you are to speak or what you are to say. You will be given at that moment what you are to say.
For it will not be you who speak but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.”“”
Matthew 10:14-20
Thanks for your stimulating conversations all. May you go with God!
I seriously don’t think Jon believes half of the garbage he dumps here, he’s just bored and looking to start an argument. He thinks he is the only one who has ever read the Bible so he tries to use what he considers his superior knowledge to try and provoke a fight. You have to kind of feel sorry for him, he seems to be so full of hate. It’s refreshing to see that people are finally feeling safe enough to express their true feelings. 2000 years is a long time to be mentally and emotionally stifled.
To be a true Christian, by their definition, means you cannot question any aspect of what the Bible tells you. If you do, you are not putting your trust in Jesus Christ our Lord therefore you are not a true believer nor a Christian. In their view you are a heretic and either being coerced by, or already possessed of, Satan. There goal is, and has always been, to either save you from this fate or, if that is not possible eliminate the said threat altogether. They believe the perfect world that God has mandated them to build, cannot be reached if they allow Satan to get the upper hand. You may say that they have changed; they no longer burn non-believers, then labeled witches, pagans, heretics or savages (what they considered the Indians) and that these acts were just due to misguided interpretations of the Bible by rogue members of the faith. The fact of the matter is, these interpretations were shared and support by all members of their faith from the lowest members to the top ranks (no top ranking member ever tried to stop the horror because they always believed it was justify in their battle against Satan, if they were to try, it would be like saying they sided with the devil). Not one word of their textbook (the Bible) has ever been changed (the inspired word of God cannot be wrong). The only thing that has changed is the fact that these practices were finally made unlawful by citizens who came to their senses and realized exactly what it was these Men of God were trying to accomplish. The thing that is getting them all riled up now, about Dan Brown’s book, is not because it paints them in a bad light, but because it makes people look into their dark, not so distant, past and start to see what they’re really all about. This can cause a lot of problems in their recruiting efforts when they try to paint the rosy picture they want everyone to see. And why is it so important for them to draw in new members, well just take a look at the gold gilded structures they have built and the life styles of the higher ranking members and ask yourself, where does all the money come from to support such an ever-expanding opulence? The answer is, its Joe Fiver, placing his weekly sacrifice on the offering plate that pays for all of it. Just lesson closely to every sermon they preach, the underlying theme is always how you, need to sacrifice more, and how Jesus gave his life for you, and now you need to make the same sacrifice for him. But they don’t mean your life; its your wallet they really want. And the sad part is that the people they send out to do their recruiting are blind to all this madness, they are so brainwashed by the whole salvation and everlasting life spiel, they honestly have no clue why they are being told, to be a good Christian they must go out and spread the word. The real word is cash flow and nothing more. You may ask, what is wrong with ridding the world of Satan? The problem is they are the ones who have defined who Satan is and their definition is anyone who is not one of them. Scary, isnt it?
I was surprised to see the diversity of reactions on this site. Moreover I was startled to find out that some people really feel manipulated, forced to reconsider their believe or even personally attacked. I for one loved Dan Brown’s masterpiece because it taught me a lot about something a new nothing of. I had heard about the Sangreal, but at least now I understand. This writer was able to teach me something AND provide a mysterious, breathtaking story. Do I believe that the Church has been lying to us? Frankly, I don’t know. This book has made me think about it, like many others. And what’s wrong with that? If you have been believing in God and the Bible your whole life and you choose not to do any research, than that’s your very right. If you want to look things up out of curiosity, that’s your right as well. I just wonder about one thing… If one is convinced about ones believes, then why be so furious about some writer making a statement? If what the man is saying is all crap, then why bother?
To be a true Christian, by their definition, means you cannot question any aspect of what the Bible tells you. If you do, you are not putting your trust in Jesus Christ our Lord therefore you are not a true believer nor a Christian. In their view you are a heretic and either being coerced by, or already possessed of, Satan. There goal is, and has always been, to either save you from this fate or, if that is not possible eliminate the said threat altogether. They believe the perfect world that God has mandated them to build, cannot be reached if they allow Satan to get the upper hand. You may say that they have changed; they no longer burn non-believers, then labeled witches, pagans, heretics or savages (what they considered the Indians) and that these acts were just due to misguided interpretations of the Bible by rogue members of the faith. The fact of the matter is, these interpretations were shared and support by all members of their faith from the lowest members to the top ranks (no top ranking member ever tried to stop the horror because they always believed it was justify in their battle against Satan, if they were to try, it would be like saying they sided with the devil). Not one word of their textbook (the Bible) has ever been changed (the inspired word of God cannot be wrong). The only thing that has changed is the fact that these practices were finally made unlawful by citizens who came to their senses and realized exactly what it was these Men of God were trying to accomplish. The thing that is getting them all riled up now, about Dan Brown’s book, is not because it paints them in a bad light, but because it makes people look into their dark, not so distant, past and start to see what they’re really all about. This can cause a lot of problems in their recruiting efforts when they try to paint the rosy picture they want everyone to see. And why is it so important for them to draw in new members, well just take a look at the gold gilded structures they have built and the life styles of the higher ranking members and ask yourself, where does all the money come from to support such an ever-expanding opulence? The answer is, its Joe Fiver, placing his weekly sacrifice on the offering plate that pays for all of it. Just lesson closely to every sermon they preach, the underlying theme is always how you, need to sacrifice more, and how Jesus gave his life for you, and now you need to make the same sacrifice for him. But they don’t mean your life; its your wallet they really want. And the sad part is that the people they send out to do their recruiting are blind to all this madness, they are so brainwashed by the whole salvation and everlasting life spiel, they honestly have no clue why they are being told, to be a good Christian they must go out and spread the word. The real word is cash flow and nothing more. You may ask, what is wrong with ridding the world of Satan? The problem is they are the ones who have defined who Satan is and their definition is anyone who is not one of them. Scary, isnt it?
Posted by: Allen at February 3, 2005 03:00 PM “
Give me one scripture used in proper contect that justifies any of these crimes. You can’t, it’s not fair to blame the Bible, Jesus, Religion etc…, you are always going to find that its the fault of a few stupid men controlling stupider men. If you dislike religion, bible, etc.. than you hate every single human organization or ideology ever created…How many crimes have been commited in the name of Democracy and Freedom? How bout Darwin’s theories of evolution, didn’t forget bout social darwinism did you? If everyone lived by the bible there would be no problems in thsi world.
Mystery and intrigue and tales of ancient legends, espcially concerning known historical figures, and treasure:they never fail to catch our interest simply because we all want to believe in something out of the ordinary.I should hope the book should serve as an insight on what other opinions are period.Like soemone else wrote, don’t let it shake your faith or get you thinking on other lines.
FG – Have you actually read the entire Bible or just those passages that said the things you wanted to hear?
The OT is loaded with “the wrath of God” type stuff, and the NT, although it presents a kinder and gentler God, it still makes it clear what will happen to all those who don’t go along with the plan or who are simply ignorant (not neccesarily due to any fault of their own) of it.
Quote – “If you dislike religion, bible, etc.. than you hate every single human organization or ideology ever created.”
This is a utterly stupid comment. Man is basically good by nature, it’s not until he forms groups or organizations, religious or otherwise, that are intolerent of anybody that does not belong to their exclusive group, that all the hatred and fighting begins. If you look at the different organizations that have been form throughout history that are all inclusive and undiscriminating you don’t tend to see all this hatred and bloodshed. A good example of this is The Red Cross.
quote – “If everyone lived by the bible there would be no problems in thsi world.”
This is another ludicrous statement. Just look at all the “in” fighting just amongst those who claim to follow “the bible”. The bible followers have never been able to get along amongst theirselves and yet you think forcing everyone esle to follow this example will solve all the worlds problems. Come on, get real.
And, as someone who knows Roslin well (and any south of Edinburgh road sign to it will tell you that Roslin is not just the town’s ancient name, but its name today), it’s accepted that the name Roslin is from Scots Gaelic ros, a promontory, and linn, a waterfall, which is just what the landscape is there, so, sorry,I don’t buy the rose-line stuff.
However, Rosslyn Chapel is spelt thus, despite the village being Roslin. And it is full of Templar images. But the whole sangreal thing is as true as SnowWhite and Cinderella ! Great story, though!
Col’
Col’
Lets congratulate Dan Brown! What a great bag of lollies… you can’t stop eating, its so good and bad its bloody brilliant!!
My hubby and I talked for hours about pages in this book and we even got to get into a little art and checked out the last supper and the madonna and the virgin on the rocks… what inspirational works they are.
Clever very clever Dan Brown… thank you….
We (mankind in general) has come on leaps & bounds in the last couple of centuries in terms of technology and understanding of medicine and scientific proof. These days we refuse to believe anything that isn’t proved by years of research and a well-drawn diagram! We have almost lost the ability to trust an unknown.
Surely the security and hope that believing in the Christian message is part of the message itself? Cynics have attempted to systematically disprove all the physical trappings associated with Christianity, from the Turin Shroud, and now even to the bible. If the claims in the book of Constantine re-writing the bible to influence how the Christian message is taught and marginalise the female element of the story are true, then it is possibly the most significant era in history since records were first made.
However, if you look at it all objectively, you have to ask yourself: “What is evidence?” Primary, Secondary, heresay – the classifications go on. Was the research performed for the book the same “research” we are doing doing right now? Did Dan Brown read many of the same websites the Google just gave us and thread together an excellent thriller from that? Trying to empathise with Constantine, it would stand to reason that a Roman Emperor would try to quell the rise of the Christian faith by “watering down” the gospels. So if that is correct, then the other gospels written at the time may have been even more evangelical, as the message was spreading throughout the region. The gospels (in their current form, re-written in English from Latin centuries ago so the “common man” could read it instead of the elite ruling class) describes Jesus’ early years and then picks up the story later. My point is that there was a day when Jesus was baptised by John, and from then on his ministry began. In the 30ish years before that, why could he not have been married? He was a man, who became the physical personification of God, and was then crucified.
Looking through some (but not all) of the above comments, one thing is clear – most people are so caught up in the whole theory that “maybe He had married Mary”, “maybe they had children”, “maybe there is a bloodline traceable from Jesus who is alive today” that they miss the fundamental point. Like the scene from Monty Python’s Life of Brian where the crowd of followers focus on the shoe thrown by Brian, and worship the shoe, so the focus here is wrong. We should be focussing on the choice which is in front of us all… Can we cast all doubt aside and believe the message, regardless of the physical technical details, and follow the lifestyle encouraged bible; or will we spend our life searching through websites on conspiracy theories, links to references of Sangreal, Da Vinci, Knights Templar et al, hoping to prove it for ourselves – which defeats the whole principal of “faith”.
Many of you seem to have missed the thought that Dan Brown may have had access to the internet while writing the book. Of course you are finding sites which say the same things as he is – they are probably the sites he went to himself for ideas. It is fiction. I am not a historian but I have heard a lot of the things Prof Kleinberg is saying. Please remember some things:
1. Every nut with an idea is on the internet – just because it appears it is not true
2. The idea that any long-established authoritarian organisation has lied to us is hugely appealing
3. Christianity, both catholic and protestant broke, and continues to break with many other traditions in it’s approach to women, racism, class issues and all forms of prejudice. Not perfectly or consistantly, but where biblical principles are followed… Have a look around the world and see where sexual equality is strongest, and check the religious history of those societies. Before I get a backlash – this is not an attack on other religions, but a challenge to the idea that the church is uniquely mysoginistic.
If you looked carefully there are probably many inconsistencies in the book’s philosophy – here is the one that glared to me first – it first denies that Jesus is divine, but goes on to say that Mary magdalene was, and that they provided a devine bloodline. You can’t have it both ways at once!
If goddess religion was squashed by Constantine in the west – what happened in the rest of the world?
The one fact I have been able to check absolutely is the reference to atbash code and Jeremiah. There are 2 references to Sheshach in Jeremiah, and none anywhere else. It is readily accepted that this probably means Babylon (not Babel) and while atbash coding is commonly recognised, I can find no references to any other possible atbash codes in the Bible. Unlike the implication that there are hundreds.
By all means research the stuff – remember good research seeks the truth, bad research seeks confirmation of what you have already decided.
I do beleive that it is very possible that Christ may have had a child and that our Catholic Church is hidding secrets that are called “Mysteries”
Keep the Faith, and God Bless all..
Happy Easter .
Over the years I’ve grown away from the Catholic faith due to many incidents and situations with a few of the priests. I still have a wonderful belief in God. For many years I’ve been seeking answers on my own and this book has given me many tools that I’ve been needing to find more information. I seriously believe that it is Dan Brown’s wish to inform us of the possibility of ‘other’ truths, that perhaps the Bible is not as we’ve been taught.
I don’t mean to sound negative in any manner but I personally feel that religion is, as is the Bible, man made. Why do people feel the need to follow religion in the ways that they do? I know that we have the NEED to believe. That is why we have God. We believe in God. Why the need to believe in the Bible, in any one religion or in this book for that matter. Can we not all develop our own thoughts rather than believing what we’re preached? Are we really that weak that we must copy the beliefs of others?
Many have said that The Da Vinci Code is fiction….yes, it is AS IS THE BIBLE.
I think what we should be thinking about is who and what WE, ourselves, really believe, not what anyone else tells us to beleive. I’ve stated MY beliefs. I don’t ask you to believe what I believe, I ask that you be true to yourself and search your heart for what you REALLY believe in. Dig deep! Your true beliefs may surprise you.
Dan Brown I think we all can agree has written one hell of a great book, that roused intrest in the minds of almost everyone that read it. I know that this book was classified as fiction and I personaly don’t care at all about that. Some of you have chosen to use this post as a soapbox and I dont aim to follow in your footsteps. I will say though that I choose to beleive in the idea that there is another way. I can’t see how anyone in this world where we live could think the course of events our world is on is a good one.
Be the change you want to see in this world. Love your neighbor, and may you all find peace and your awnser and don’t take everything so serious. It was just a book. Even if jusus had a child, was married to mary, and even if their great grand child times 1000 was still alive, me and you would still be here and our kids would still need food. the rent would be due by the 5th and bhla, bhla, bhla…....
dont be so petty. the point is not to say your right, its to be able to say that maybe there is another way to look at things.
find more joy in life
I mean it (it’s what Jesus would want)
Dan Brown I think we all can agree has written one hell of a great book, that roused intrest in the minds of almost everyone that read it. I know that this book was classified as fiction and I personaly don’t care at all about that. Some of you have chosen to use this post as a soapbox and I dont aim to follow in your footsteps. I will say though that I choose to beleive in the idea that there is another way. I can’t see how anyone in this world where we live could think the course of events our world is on is a good one.
Be the change you want to see in this world. Love your neighbor, and may you all find peace and your awnser and don’t take everything so serious. It was just a book. Even if jusus had a child, was married to mary, and even if their great grand child times 1000 was still alive, me and you would still be here and our kids would still need food. the rent would be due by the 5th and bhla, bhla, bhla…....
dont be so petty. the point is not to say your right, its to be able to say that maybe there is another way to look at things.
find more joy in life
I mean it (it’s what Jesus would want)
following a cause or movement and blindly trusting any doctrine placed before us can be a very dangerous thing. Why would one not want to seek the truth. How else will we ever be entirely certain we are not being misled. Certainly don’t believe everything found on the internet or in books of fiction, but do make sure the books you do follow are what they claim they are. Every book ever written has been done so by the hands of man and any man can claim the words were given to him by god.
i read the da vinci code a while ago but was just recently thinking that one of the worst things the church could do is tell everyone not to read the book. That was the one thing they could do to ensure that the book was widely read and questioned. I am so pleased that people are opening their eyes now. I think religion can help people in some ways but there are too many lies to give it any credit, and too much hypocracy. Thank you Dan Brown. You’re a genuis, i dont care what anyone says.
Sophie
Harry Potter is a best seller and no-one is questioning the possibility of there been magic in this world.
What is the point of writing books? To get a story across and to inspire people to get them talking. Who cares if the facts in this book are real or not? The fact that people are so passionately involved in this argument is enough proof that this book has accomplished something.
It doesn’t matter if Dan Brown has authentic sources etc. or that he has a biased point of view. He has done what all books should do; get the reader thinking and engaged. If you question anything about yourself after reading a book it might not be any good – but it ceratinly is powerful.
What I meant (without saying it very well) was that we could spend lots of energy in researching the sources of the grail and bloodlines etc, so long as we know what we will do when we find the truth (assuming we could prove it is the truth). If there is enough factual evidence to show that the catholic church has been covering things up for centuries, will that diminish our faith in God, or just our faith in man?
Now dont take this wrong i am not a basher or anything but….
I was very dissapointed with this book, i had read it on recommendation from some friends and it took me about 3 weeks to read (i am usually a book a week man) the general topic of the novel was very interesting but i was devestated when i got to the end of the book and found that Dan Brown had completely chickened out.
By chickened out i mean he left the books end in the exact manner i had predicted in so much as robert langdon didnt find the sangreal and the revelations were not revealed….surely if this book is a work of fiction why didnt he speculate what was contained?
I would love to haer if anyone has any theories about this.
It’s true, the truth might be something that’s hard, maybe impossible, to find. Does that mean we all should just sit back and believe whatever it is we are being taught without question. For this to happen would mean we have more faith in man then we do God, because if that’s the case, we have to first believe that those who taught us the things we now believe in, knew the whole truth and trust that they received the truth from a reliable source. We also have to believe man was flawless in translating the inspired words of God as recorded by yet other men. At what point is it that our entire faith in God is dependent on first and foremost a complete faith in man and his ability to perform flawlessly. Is man God? If we have reached that level of perfection, then is there really any need for a church in the first place? If man is anything less than perfect, do we want to put something as important as the path to everlasting life in his hands. It’s scary anyway you look at it.
Well, in my opinion, this book is AWESOME.
For those of you who would like a more humorous approach, I strongly recommend “SMALL GODS” by Terry Prattchet. It’s an excellent book telling us how bad the church has become…
And all of you who are bickering and fighting about this and that…it is ridiculous. The book is very nice, very researched, and a very good read.
I think the most important issue in the book would be the end. That’s the most important part. Not where it is, if it is what they say it is…but the essence. Notice how the entire conspiracy theory is debunked at the end as just the manipulative works of a powerful man. It’s all about the cain vs. abel, farmer vs. hunter story that existed somewhat, got blown out of proportion, and ended. Now that common knowledge is catching up, myths are resounding and conspiracy theories exist.
After hours of research, I was left with a slighty anoyed feeling. The thing is, a lot of things in the book are factual and veriafiable, but some other things are portrayed one-sided, with information left out that went against the flow of the books theory. Other parts are plain factually incorect.
The reason this is annoying is that anytime Dan Brown mentions anything that is historicaly based, there is a chance it is either hevily biased, or plain wrong.
That means that if I didn’t want to spend 100’s of hours researching EVERYTHING, I would have to take all events/places/dates/groups/people etc. etc. as fictional. All from a book that has a page before the prologue titled “Fact”
As for the book, a great read. Dan Brown builds the suspense very much, but I was really disappointed at the end. Otherwise a recommendation to all, considering the whole issue with the pope. Very interesting.
Eko
Eko
You all have a great day! Im back to finish the book!
I am only 27, read the book in an evening and the most important part for me is when Sophie remembers back to the newspaper article concerning her grandfather’s views on a film. When she wants to know whether Jesus had a girlfriend, her grandfather asks her if it would bother her and she says she wouldn’t mind.
When an author writes a book, he places each sentence in the correct place for it to work. When we are about to learn the amazing secret of the grail, we are shown how a child dealt with the same info.
Everybody pause for a second. The book IS brilliant and we can all learn and grow from it, but only if we want to learn and grow at all. Let’s put the same passion into being good people as we are into arguing over the net and then, whether Mr Brown is accurate or not, at least our intent will be meaningful.
I am about to look up all the ref sites I have picked up here, so if anyone has anything fresh, pls post it or mail me ;-)
Frankly, I don’t and never did need Dan Brown’s book to convince me that christianity hides the truth, or that it lies to us, so to say that this book has changed my view in any way.
There is one thing that the people on this forum could learn from the book though; how to spell.
How does this book teach us to spell? Why is spelling so important to you? Are you not able to understand the points being made if the words are mis-spelled? I don’t and never did respect nit-pickers. Why are you not so concerned with sentence structure, “Frankly, I don’t and never did need Dan Brown’s book to convince me that christianity hides the truth, or that it lies to us, so to say that this book has changed my view in any way.” So to say what?????
O, DRACONIAN DEVILS!
If you liked this book, like I initially did, don’t do any additional research, you’ll see that the book might as well have been placed in another galaxy. In short a fat pack of lies. Dan Brown congratulations on fooling me.
Mara (from Argentina, so sorry for the mistakes).
Well, I do not know, if it is funny, that it is bestseller readed by human beings as just one of a little books i n their lifes.
But I got it from a woman :) , so I took that boring ride.
If it is in fact true that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a female child (or even other children) then if the daughter’s (or their other children’s) bones can ever be located and correctly identified, and DNA tested, it is possible, especially with Mitochondrial DNA, to establish who are the modern day descendants of Mary (and Jesus). That is something which I believe that the Catholic and other Churches would find it difficult to explain away based on their current teachings – that Jesus was not married. However, if Jesus and Mary had a daughter as some believe, her bones would have be located with some fairly conclusive documentary or other evidence of her parentage, and DNA would have to be salvagable from her bones for her descendants (if any) to be identified.
Also, alas, over the centuries, it is hard to imagine what texts about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and others religious notables, have been lost, hidden, or destroyed for one reason or another. In medievial europe, very few persons other than clergy could read or write, therefore those manuscripts and writings that ever surfaced generally found their way into the hands of the church, where if they did not follow proscribed teachings or doctrine, were destroyed or hidden away under lock and key (presumably in the vatican libraries).
I am not a church goer and belong to no specific church. Yet I believe in Christ and him crucified to rise from the dead three days later. His suffering and death was not faked in any way but very real.
In my belief what does it matter if Christ had sex with his duly married wife and produced hybrid children. To me that makes his sacrifice for the world and all human generations even more magnificent and that much greater.
He knew the secrets of human flesh yet was not seduced by them and proceeded to carry out his divine mission. How hard it must have been for him to give up his humanity, his love for wife and children for a greater purpose.
Is there one of us who could have made the same choice Jesus Christ did even for this great mission? How many ministers do you know whom you can imagine taking the same deadly route our Savior did knowing what the outcome would be? Please remember that Jesus prayed for that cup to be taken away which I think shows serious second thoughts. But God his Father in heaven would not take that awful cup away and Jesus began his journey into the destiny meant for him.
View the painting that hangs directly on the wall across from the last supper for a stunning powerful view of what our Savior suffered. Mary Magdalene kneels in that painting , her arms wrapped around the cross. Christ and the two thieves are crucified on crosses of a stupendous height. Its easy to imagine Jesus looking down at his wife and saying “Woman, behold your son”. Of course no one knows exactly what those words meant to MM but he could have been telling her to look after their children.
These paintings are only that, the expressions of the painter. Da Vinci included. But the Last Supper does show a red headed woman sitting to the right of Jesus. But it must be kept in mind that painting proves nothing, that it is only a concept of Da Vinci who was not present for either the Last Supper or any other event in the life of Jesus Christ.
I am a strong believer in the Holy Trinity, The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. Jesus was born of woman as we all are and it is my belief he came to experience every facet of human life. That necessarily includes human sexuality. Which does not make him lesser , it makes him Greater. His destiny was such that he had to be torn from his wife and children to make his sacrifice of that Precious Blood which was the only hope of every person who lived after it was done. It still is the only hope today.
I dont understand how the pious ministers of today insist on having their own wives yet are furious with anyone who thinks Christ was also married.
I f the human marriage of Christ is true then why can we not understand that it quite possible his almost human descendents are alive somewhere today. To me that would be good news. If it is so, that person or persons may not even be aware they carry the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Such knowledge would be quite dangerous to them and they may not know until such time as Jesus chooses to reveal the fact to them.
Remember that men of peace have always been killed. Jesus, Ghandi, Martin Luther King and others. Truth and peace are two things the world just cannot deal with.
My preferred religion is Lutheran which is almost the same as Catholic, not much difference.At other times in my life I have been with the Church of God, and the Holiness or Charismatic church.I also flirted with the Catholics at one time but I have always had problems with accepting the doctrine of any church. It is always exclusive, you must believe as they do and I have trouble with that. I suppose I would be branded as heretic by every church because of what I just posted here.
Perhaps in time we will know if Children were born to Christ and Mary Magdalene. But even if confronted with absolute proof all the churches will deny it. Just as they will deny the Savior when He returns to earth. Once again He will drive the money changers from the Temple. The last thing established religions want is For Jesus Christ to Come Again. At that point established churches would cease to exist because we would no longer need religion . Why would we need religion when we could worship Jesus in person?
I hope this posting is taken as a message of hope. I am sure some will disagree with what I believe and have said here but we are all free to believe as we want. The Da Vinci Code shook me to the core but still reinforced my basic belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ as both the Son of Woman and The Son of God. I too have done much research since reading it. In the end it all means nothing. It doesnt matter if Jesus married Mary MAGLADENE and produced children with her. I think he probably did but that changes nothing, it adds to the Glory of Jesus Christ and the Sacrifice of His Precious Blood for us all.
I found the book to match my entire life’s beliefs and suspicions of Religion manipulating peoples minds and souls and guiding beliefs towards its prosperity and power.
This power owned by only few was what Christ tried so hard to change, eliminate and share in his time on the earth and that is why those then and these powerful hidden under robes today crucified him for.
As a woman I feel proud to know that some people out there are daring enough to admit that women even back then were important and played an essential role in the change of the history and the world in a wider point of view.
I am glad that I bought the book, which gave me the push to try to learn more, cultivate myself, open my mind and try to observe and discover.
True as a concept of course for every one of us is entirly relevant to what we all have gathered all the years we live on this earth so no one is wrong or right.
Thank you
Pat
If I lived in Jesus time, heard some stories about him, and wrote a story about him myself- the gospel according to Ms. Smith. In my gospel, I say that I was the mother of Christ’s children, that I can do miracles, and that Christ my husband assigned to me special religious authority. Religious leaders, finding it many years after my death, dismissed it as not divinely inspired, but that doesnt mean the early church conspired to thwart my gospel and deliberately hide it. Same thing with the gospel of Thomas, Mary Magdelene. The decision by church leaders to not include these in the Bible doesnt negate the truth or completeness of the Bible, either!
I wonder why no one is including other Christian denominations in the conspiracy? I mean, it has been a very long time since the Catholic Church had absolute political power, if it ever did! It is hypocritical and intellectually dishonest, at best, and bigotry, at worst, to single out the Catholic Church. If the conspiracy is true, then the Presbyterian Church USA, the PCA, Southern Baptists, Evangelicals, any denomination that uses the Bible as its foundation of faith- have all been duped by the pope, or or they simply guilty in perpetuating the conspiracy?
Compare some paintings of the Last Supper dating from the same time as Da Vinci. You might notice that they were set up according to a desired formula of the time – just like there are the same theatrical character types in every Broadway musical today, for instance. Maybe the other artists were in on the sangreal secret, too!
The book was FUN, but it is FICTION!
If you want a list of stuff that’s not right just look at the Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_The_Da_Vinci_Code
Enjoy the book, just don’t let it spoil your life – it’s fiction.
SANG#REAL
SANG REAL
ROYAL BLOOD
IN
JESUS CHRIST WAS NOT A VIRGIN
The very painting of the last supper by da vinci
shows Jesus & the Apostles
to be Europeans, (even scandanavians), where on earth (or in hell) did he get such Imaginations.
Da vinci was a good painter & worked according to his own imaginations. Dan brown & his believers should understand truth is not based on wild thoughts.