Da Vinci code evil?

[spblat]

How about "because he was never married"?

 

[k]

We don't know for sure if he was married or not. There are words that indicate as much but nothing definitive either way. How would him being married or not effect his theological mission?

 

[spblat]

Forgive me, I was being glib. I'm only saying that we probably don't want to dwell on the possibility that Jesus had premarital sex.

Now I'm being serious: what would be the theological consequences of Jesus' having actually been married? Are there people who believe that he was?

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

it's evil in that it is a travesty against good literature. it isn't evil because of the contents.

if books that tell lies about Jesus and are historically questionable, then the Bible is probably the worst offender out there

 

[Philosopher Odds]

The only thing that was good about The Davinci Code was that sexy albino guy. The rest made me want to fall asleep.

 

[Morcova]

I would say that the only redeeming quality of the book/movie was that it inspired a pretty funny south park episode.

 

[k]

It was actually inspired by non-fictional books that came out years before kenny got killed for the first time. Check out 'holy blood, holy grail' or the 'messianic legacy'

 

[Nathan Poe]

The book was written horribly & brown stole almost all the research from other people. He exploited some Christians' insecurities and made a ton of money off of it.

Clearly the man missed his calling as a televangelist.

 

[sister_maynard]

it's evil in that it is a travesty against good literature. it isn't evil because of the contents.

Of course. The pace is good and the thing is a decent piece of vacation fluff if you're looking for a change of pace, but Brown's writing style is pathetic, his characterization is flat, and every book has the same plot. It's famous because of the controversy, not because it had independent merit.

 

[spblat]

...every book has the same plot.

That's what bummed me out about Brown. I found DVC quite thrilling. Then Angels & Demons was pretty good, though I was a little surprised at the nearly identical formula. Then I went back to his earlier books, and ...well, don't bother with those.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Hmmm... my answer is yes. My folks were out a month or two ago, so I decided to do some Pay-Per-Vewing. "Da Vinci Code". Looks ineresting. I was expecting some sort of European twist on National Treasure, or something. That's not what I got. In the end; it had some nail- biting, butt-stiffening moments, but it left one with the conclusion that: not only is ther no God, it's crazy to believe so. And that sense ther is no God: Jesus was(of course!) not God. Jesus was a "Hugh Heffner" of his time, and that he never died on the cross. very offensive to me, fiction or not! But then ther was... It's not fiction. Some people have told me that Dan Brown himself said that the story was real. "look at the front page of the book!" So, next time I went into my local book-store, and I did. It's true. Now, I'm not quoting exactly, but, Dan Brown says something like this: "All depictions of Historical figures, secret societys, & Famous people are true". Bassicaly saying everything in his book, except the fictional characters that uncover the secrets, is true. Any thoughts?

1. How does the idea of Jesus having been married and a father turn him into a "Hugh Hefner"? Even if I were a Christian, I wouldn't be offended by the thought that Jesus might have led a normal life up to the beginning of his ministry. After all, the Bible tells us nothing about what happened between his early youth and his baptism in the river Jordan. So what's offensive about that? Unless, of course, you think that sexuality in general is inherently sin- and disgraceful - which is a pretty sad and neurotic stance.


2. Dan Brown knows how to write cliffhangers, but that doesn't turn him into a brilliant novelist. He's mediocre at best, and his sky-rocketing success is mostly the result of good marketing and PR.

 

[ImaginaryVoyager]

Rock music was once considered evil to, The Da Vinci Code is as evil as rock music. Maybe if you play it backwards you'll hear some subliminal messages.

Actually, if you play it backwards, it shows the cast re-enacting a KISS concert.

Tom Hanks is abysmal as Gene Simmons, but Sir Ian McKellen does a surprisingly good performance as Ace Frehley.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Actually, if you play it backwards, it shows the cast re-enacting a KISS concert.

Tom Hanks is abysmal as Gene Simmons, but Sir Ian McKellen does a surprisingly good performance as Ace Frehley.

And the Albino isn't an albino at all, just the world's worst Paul Stanley make-up job.

 

[Diane_Windsor]

Any thoughts?

Yeah, you shouldn't take the historical claims of an author seriously. It's a work of fiction, and if I want to read some history then I will read what historical scholars have to say.

 

[Diane_Windsor]

The book was written horribly & brown stole almost all the research from other people. He exploited some Christians' insecurities and made a ton of money off of it.

More power to him!

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

No, it is not evil. It is a rather over rated following a very over rated film. It is no more truthful than India Jones and the Last Crusade. The style of the book, whilst quite comical, is rather boring with cliffhangers at the end of every chapter. A mild thrill half way through, but if you don't work out the plot within the first 6 chapters then you need to get yourself checked out!

 

[JESUSFREAK1354]

The same exact claim is made at the beginning of the movie "The Hunt for Red October". Dan Brown can say anything he wants to.

I personally don't believe that it is true. not because I'm religious, but because in order for the story to be real, Jesus must also have been real. And I don't think jesus ever existed.

As I do not believe George Washington existed'

or that Pharoahs were not real.

lol!!!!!

come on! Yes, it is a matter of opinion wether Jesus was God, or the Messiah, BUT IT'S HISTORICAL IGNORINCE TO DENY HE EVER EXISTED!!!!!

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

lol!!!!!

come on! Yes, it is a matter of opinion wether Jesus was God, or the Messiah, BUT IT'S HISTORICAL IGNORINCE [sic] TO DENY HE EVER EXISTED!!!!!

Well, actually, Jesus hasn't too much going for him in terms of historical evidence - and the extraordinary and miraculous claims connected to his person don't exactly help his case. Personally, I consider it at least possible that there was an historical Jesus - but in terms of evidence, his credentials are about as good as Heracles's.

 

[sister_maynard]

As I do not believe George Washington existed'

or that Pharoahs were not real.

lol!!!!!

come on! Yes, it is a matter of opinion wether Jesus was God, or the Messiah, BUT IT'S HISTORICAL IGNORINCE TO DENY HE EVER EXISTED!!!!!

Please don't use the word "ignorance" unless you can spell it. It's tragic irony of the worst sort.