"Boycott Da Vinci Code film" - Vatican

[Cheese]

The Vatican stepped up its offensive against "The Da Vinci Code" on Friday when a top official close to Pope Benedict blasted the book as full of anti-Christian lies and urged Catholics to boycott the film.
called the book "stridently anti-Christian .. full of calumnies, offences and historical and theological errors regarding Jesus, the Gospels and the Church."

Boycott!

Ok I have no real problem with the Vatican asking its minions to boycott the movie...thats their perogative.
The question I have for them is this....IF the movie is so full of lies etc...why dont they list what the lies are and show PROOF of anything that they might construe as something that might have happened....including those of the Jesus Christ?

Maybe just maybe, they dont have any proof themselves? Maybe they have been lying to their people all along?

Isnt it hypocritical to ask people to boycott something because theres no proof, when in fact they have none themselves?

[habernac]

it's a book of FICTION ya ######s!

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by habernac

it's a book of FICTION ya ######s!

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner!!!

Yeah, I liked the book, going to see the movie...**** the vatican.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by fotze

So is the Davinci Code!

nice!

[BlackEleven]

Idiots.

Physists say faster than light travel is impossible. Star Trek says it isn't. Star Trek is a sack of lies, we should boycott it.

[NuclearFart]

Hahah fotze, nice one. The same "proof" that the church would use, would be equivocal to the "proof" Dan Brown used, which is not much either way. I think all this further controversy is just going to fuel even more ticket sales for Tom Hanks and the gang. This reminds me of the church urging my parents not to listen to Rock & Roll. How effective was that?!
________
Xs 650

[The Familia]

Originally Posted by rubecube

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner!!!

Yeah, I liked the book, going to see the movie...**** the vatican.

You have your own opinions on religion and what-not, but "**** the Vatican" is a little over the top and offensive to those who might follow. So **** you rubecube you assclown, show some class. There are over 1 Billion Catholics in the world. Obviously there is something in the religion that has caught the eye of so many people to believe in it. Religion is based on faith, not fact. So all you scientific losers, spend your time finding cures for diseases and how the the world was formed, stop trying to prove something wrong that follows faith not science.

I'm a Catholic, but by no means "hardcore" and I definetly don't take everything the Bible says as literal. With that said there is definetly a line between faith and religion, and there should be a happy balance of both.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Cheese

The question I have for them is this....IF the movie is so full of lies etc...why dont they list what the lies are and show PROOF of anything that they might construe as something that might have happened....including those of the Jesus Christ?

There are actually a lot of peer reviewed papers available on the net that pick apart the inaccuracies of the book. MacLean's had an article that summarized some of them: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books...20_95307_95307

I have no problem with the book being fiction, but it does try to pass itself off as fiction supported by fact. Some of the things said in the book are outright lies and do nothing but promote anti-Catholicism (see the part about the with hunt in the article).

[Bobblehead]

Ya know, I read the book, liked the story but wasn't overly impressed by the way he told the story. I wasn't going to bother seeing the movie, but with Tom Hanks, Ron Howard, and annoying the church, how can I pass up that trinity?

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

There are actually a lot of peer reviewed papers available on the net that pick apart the inaccuracies of the book. MacLean's had an article that summarized some of them: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books...20_95307_95307

I have no problem with the book being fiction, but it does try to pass itself off as fiction supported by fact. Some of the things said in the book are outright lies and do nothing but promote anti-Catholicism (see the part about the with hunt in the article).

well if they are talking about the years things "may" have happened, or the number of witches burned at the stake...whatever. Theres nothing in the McLeans doc or any other Ive read that suggest anything definitive. There is as Jean Chretian would say...no proof of the proof that is proof.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

Physists say faster than light travel is impossible.

actually no, they don't.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Cheese

IF the movie is so full of lies etc...why dont they list what the lies are and show PROOF of anything that they might construe as something that might have happened....including those of the Jesus Christ?

Because like the book says. The Vatican won the battle and therefore the right to make up their own story.

You better watch out Cheese or Bishop Aringarosaand "the teacher" are going to collaberate and send an Albino assassin after you to carry out the work of Opus Dei..

[J pold]

good story but poorly written, I was excited for the movie but after watching a few trailers I have changed my mind I don’t think it will be good at all

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by habernac

it's a book of FICTION ya ######s!

Quoted because that's what I was gonna say.

I'm not going to see it because I want to read the book first. At least that's what I'm telling myself. I don't have much time for reading though, so I may break down and go see it.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by The Familia

You have your own opinions on religion and what-not, but "**** the Vatican" is a little over the top and offensive to those who might follow. So **** you rubecube you assclown, show some class. There are over 1 Billion Catholics in the world. Obviously there is something in the religion that has caught the eye of so many people to believe in it. Religion is based on faith, not fact. So all you scientific losers, spend your time finding cures for diseases and how the the world was formed, stop trying to prove something wrong that follows faith not science.

I'm a Catholic, but by no means "hardcore" and I definetly don't take everything the Bible says as literal. With that said there is definetly a line between faith and religion, and there should be a happy balance of both.

No way am I going to show class towards an establishment that attempts to promote hate, could easily help to not promote the spread of AIDS, and protects child molestors. If you don't like it, find your ignore button.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Cheese

well if they are talking about the years things "may" have happened, or the number of witches burned at the stake...whatever. Theres nothing in the McLeans doc or any other Ive read that suggest anything definitive. There is as Jean Chretian would say...no proof of the proof that is proof.

It's not the years or the numbers. It's that the author tries to set up the "Big Lie" by blaming the Catholic Church for witch hunts in general. He ignores that they were conducted by various sects, and they were largely a result of politcal and cultural tensions in the countries involved. If such lies and generalizations were put in book about Jews, Muslims, Americans, or Africans (and just about any other group), it would be considered hateful and wrong.

The paragraph of interest:

So forget the numbers. It's the wholly Catholic nature of Brown's holocaust that's disturbing. (Talk about piling on -- the Roman Catholic Church has enough real sins to atone for.) Salem, Mass., site of the English-speaking world's last great witch hunt, saw the judicial murder of 13 women and seven almost forgotten men in 1692. Brown, a graduate of Massachusetts's Amherst College, presumably knows that Salem was a Puritan colony, not a stronghold of the Spanish Inquisition.

The witch craze reached its peak between 1550 and 1650 during the vicious religious wars of the Reformation era. Areas where the Catholic Church was strong were largely free of it -- Ireland killed only four witches in three centuries. But in Germany, epicentre of the sectarian struggle, 26,000 witches died in an era of extreme social turmoil. Most of them were executed by local secular courts, victims of the grievances of their neighbours, Catholic and Protestant alike. The other main witch-hunting countries were France and Switzerland, similarly fissured by religion. For a novel whose characters frequently discourse on the evils of the Big Lie, Brown's witch burning is more than a bit much. He likes his puzzles childishly complicated and his history infantile.

So why have these mistakes and falsehoods not made a dent in The Da Vinci Code's unstoppable popularity? In part, it's because the bad history isn't as noticeable as the exciting plot twists; most readers are probably unaware of it, and many wouldn't care if they were. Reflexive anti-Catholicism, with its centuries-old roots in the English-speaking world, remains among the most tolerated of prejudices.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally Posted by rubecube

No way am I going to show class towards an establishment that attempts to promote hate, could easily help to not promote the spread of AIDS, and protects child molestors. If you don't like it, find your ignore button.

Haha! Good job. I read the Familias post and said to myself "Oh, I hope Rubecube doesn't take that lying down!".

I loved the book and will see the movie for sure. Anything that ticks off the church is OK in my books!

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by rubecube

No way am I going to show class towards an establishment that attempts to promote hate, could easily help to not promote the spread of AIDS, and protects child molestors. If you don't like it, find your ignore button.

I am in no way anywhere close to being Catholic.

And I find that statement both offensive and absurd.

You wouldn't know "class" if it came up and kicked you in the cajones.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I am in no way anywhere close to being Catholic.

And I find that statement both offensive and absurd.

You wouldn't know "class" if it came up and kicked you in the cajones.

Offensive? Maybe. Definitely not absurd. I can post many a point elaborating on those arguments too, but from the tone of your second sentence you've already decided to get your knickers in a bunch.

[zarrell]

How many threads a week do we need here where the same topics come up and the usual suspects take their shots at Christianity?