"Boycott Da Vinci Code film" - Vatican

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Then why were they (the Catholic Church) worried about the Thorn Birds, a far more obvious work of fiction?

Cowperson

I don't know. I wouldn't have to assume that they had the same reasons for boycotting the two works, and I don't really know anything about the Thorn Birds (except I think the novel is written by Colleen McCullough, who writes an _amazing_ Roman historical fiction series).

It makes sense to me that the church doesn't specify their problems w/ the da Vinci code because they don't want to draw attention to the embarassing fact that the bible is a politically/socially edited work.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

It makes sense to me that the church doesn't specify their problems w/ the da Vinci code because they don't want to draw attention to the embarassing fact that the bible is a politically/socially edited work.

But don't most people, including Christians, already know this? Seems like it ought to be a matter of historical record by now. Most people know that the Bible was assembled from a larger collection of religious texts--or there'd be no such thing as "apocrypha."

Otherwise, how does one explain the fact that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John can't all be telling the truth...?

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

But don't most people, including Christians, already know this? Seems like it ought to be a matter of historical record by now. Most people know that the Bible was assembled from a larger collection of religious texts--or there'd be no such thing as "apocrypha."

Otherwise, how does one explain the fact that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John can't all be telling the truth...?

Most people simply accept the bible . . . . . they don't know poop from shinola about its origins or that its origins, as it might relate directly to a figure named Jesus, are dubious.

Cowperson

[Agamemnon]

^ Mostly what Cow said.

You'd be surprised how little people actually know about the nature of the Christian Bible. Many, many people believe it to be the directly inspired word of God, who used several different men to get his Word onto paper. These people have faith in the fact that the words in the bible are the end-all/be-all to life (not necessarily word-for-word truth, but at least supernaturally inspired).

They don't tend to dwell on the fact that it was edited and revised with political/social/personal motivation, which isnt' really surprising given that most Christians/Church probably wouldn't really want to dwell on that, for obvious reasons. So I guess I'd argue that while it IS a historical fact... a LOT of people aren't really up on their 'history'. At all.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by peter12

I just finished the book this morning. Took me about 5 hours of reading to finish up the whole thing. Really simple, almost childish writing. All in all the book really sucked. The ending was awful, the twist was predictable, and the whole thing had no logical or historical flow.

Yes let it be known.....Peter 12 is a speed reader and historicallly....is apparently a speed reader.

5 hours...had the clock going and could identify al the relevant religious and historical facts???

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Yes let it be known.....Peter 12 is a speed reader and historicallly....is apparently a speed reader.

5 hours...had the clock going and could identify al the relevant religious and historical facts???

Someone's in a ball-busting mood again.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Yes let it be known.....Peter 12 is a speed reader and historicallly....is apparently a speed reader.

5 hours...had the clock going and could identify al the relevant religious and historical facts???

Actually yes I can speed read. I learned to read when I was about 3 years old. And I spend most of my time reading history and political writing anyway. Most of the ideas in the book were poorly developed and not very hard to identify or decipher.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

^ Mostly what Cow said.

You'd be surprised how little people actually know about the nature of the Christian Bible. Many, many people believe it to be the directly inspired word of God, who used several different men to get his Word onto paper. These people have faith in the fact that the words in the bible are the end-all/be-all to life (not necessarily word-for-word truth, but at least supernaturally inspired).

They don't tend to dwell on the fact that it was edited and revised with political/social/personal motivation, which isnt' really surprising given that most Christians/Church probably wouldn't really want to dwell on that, for obvious reasons. So I guess I'd argue that while it IS a historical fact... a LOT of people aren't really up on their 'history'. At all.

Yes they are so disturbed by that that you can find every single bit of that information at any University in North America. Theology right back to and beyond Homer. Nevermind you can go to Rome and getit too.

Yes they are afraid.

You are such a dimwit.

Lets set up the strawman again. Get Cheese in here. Lets deny any and all evidence that you don't agree with.....

I mean Troy never happened either. Just a fairy tale....umm.... The fall of Troy happened centuries after Christ, right?

Why stop there. We have exactly 2 pages on Alexander the Great. ut he definitely existed.....right?


Cowperson and other have simply said I don't believe so he doesn't exist. Yet they are more than willing to accept Alexander on far less evidence of existance because they are willing to believe.



oops.

[rubecube]

EDIT: Nevermind. Not going to start a flame war.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by peter12

Actually yes I can speed read. I learned to read when I was about 3 years old. And I spend most of my time reading history and political writing anyway. Most of the ideas in the book were poorly developed and not very hard to identify or decipher.

Hey so did I! It took me an afternoon to read thisbook. I am not a speed reader and nor doI need to brag about the speed at whoch I read. Speed readers and finish pages in a glance. It took me 5 or so hours too.

so.......

Considering you historical facts on previous posts I would guess differenty. What theological and historical ideas facts would you suggest are poorly developed?


And since you are such a speed reader...
Which Lieutenant was standing outside of the Depository Bank of Zurich?

What Avenue was Opus Dei on is New York?

A speed reader would have these answers in moments.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Hey so did I! It took me an afternoon to read thisbook. I am not a speed reader and nor doI need to brag about the speed at whoch I read. Speed readers and finish pages in a glance. It took me 5 or so hours too.

so.......

Considering you historical facts on previous posts I would guess differenty. What theological and historical ideas facts would you suggest are poorly developed?


And since you are such a speed reader...
Which Lieutenant was standing outside of the Depository Bank of Zurich?

What Avenue was Opus Dei on is New York?

A speed reader would have these answers in moments.

Dude, I didn't speed read it and I can't answer this. I read it a few months ago so that might be why...

Still, why do you care so much?

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Dude, I didn't speed read it and I can't answer this. I read it a few months ago so that might be why...

Still, why do you care so much?

Well Peter12 should be able to. Why worry? The answer will be before us in minutes. I am sure google willdoit's job.

It's Gnostic Peter....

[peter12]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Hey so did I! It took me an afternoon to read thisbook. I am not a speed reader and nor doI need to brag about the speed at whoch I read. Speed readers and finish pages in a glance. It took me 5 or so hours too.

so.......

Considering you historical facts on previous posts I would guess differenty. What theological and historical ideas facts would you suggest are poorly developed?


And since you are such a speed reader...
Which Lieutenant was standing outside of the Depository Bank of Zurich?

What Avenue was Opus Dei on is New York?

A speed reader would have these answers in moments.

Collet and Lexington.

I wasn't bragging at the speed of my read, but rather at the simplicity of the writing that allowed me to read it so quickly.

Just as a context, I am currently re-reading Rousseau's Social Contract, it's only about 150 pages long but after about 30 hours of reading I am only about half done.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by peter12

Collet and Lexington.

I wasn't bragging at the speed of my read, but rather at the simplicity of the writing that allowed me to read it so quickly.

Just as a context, I am currently re-reading Rousseau's Social Contract, it's only about 150 pages long but after about 30 hours of reading I am only about half done.

WOW!
So what facts are poorly contrived.....???

[peter12]

Originally Posted by HOZ

WOW!
So what facts are poorly contrived.....???

Well this whole notion of Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married or sexually involved isn't exactly a new one.

I am not sure if poorly contrived is a good way to describe the way Brown portrays his "facts", I just found tehre wasn't any mystery to the books. He spells out everything in such a simplistic tone that anyone with a basic knowledge of European history can decipher what he is saying.

I am not saying that people who like the book are stupid, I just like the books I read to have a bit more brain material.

[Igottago]

Frankly, I'm sick to death of hearing about this book and this film, which by all accounts, is meant to be utter crap. The news last night had like 3 stories about Da Vinci Code, with some useless twit babbling on about his opinion on the matter. Who cares. X-3 is out next week.

[Agamemnon]

Peter12, you were expecting Tolstoy? The book isn't popular because it was (not) well written, its popular because its fun, easy, and conveys historical concepts to the layman. I'm sure literary elites find it rubbish... but its not like most of society can relate to these people's opinions. It was a really fun read, easy enough for nearly everyone to give it a crack.

Not everybody speed-reads history and political science. Some people are just looking for entertainment, and I think thats the basis this particular book should be (and is) judged by.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

^ You were expecting Tolstoy? The book isn't popular because it was (not) well written, its popular because its fun, easy, and conveys historical concepts to the layman. I'm sure literary elites find it rubbish... but its not like most of society can relate to these people's opinions. It was a really fun read, easy enough for nearly everyone to give it a crack.

Not everybody speed-reads history and political science. Some people are just looking for entertainment, and I think thats the basis this particular book should be (and is) judged by.

Of course not. That is why I was offering my own personal judgement and not a critique of other people who enjoyed it.

Hey I read entertaining crap too. I just found that the reputation of the book certainly did not live up to itself.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Cowperson and other have simply said I don't believe so he doesn't exist. Yet they are more than willing to accept Alexander on far less evidence of existance because they are willing to believe.



oops.

Actually, you claim that Jesus Christ existed. I said to you, "prove it."

And, of course, you can't.

On the other hand, I never said Jesus never existed . . . . . it would be pretty much impossible to prove that as well.

The way I framed the question though puts the burden of proof on yourself.

Cowperson

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Yes they are so disturbed by that that you can find every single bit of that information at any University in North America. Theology right back to and beyond Homer. Nevermind you can go to Rome and getit too.

Yes they are afraid.

You are such a dimwit.

Lets set up the strawman again. Get Cheese in here. Lets deny any and all evidence that you don't agree with.....

I mean Troy never happened either. Just a fairy tale....umm.... The fall of Troy happened centuries after Christ, right?

Why stop there. We have exactly 2 pages on Alexander the Great. ut he definitely existed.....right?


Cowperson and other have simply said I don't believe so he doesn't exist. Yet they are more than willing to accept Alexander on far less evidence of existance because they are willing to believe.



oops.

As usual, I can't really make heads or tails out of what you're trying to say.

You, sir, are an idiot.