yikes. i like talkin religion as much as i like talkin politics...and i like that as much as I enjoy getn my prized jewels squished in a big metal vise. I know this movie will make some people stop n think, and others will dismiss it immediately with no effect on them...I am not even going to watch this movie til it comes out on dvd so i can get all the deleted scenes that i KNOW will get thrown out, n watch it for half the price (dvd costs 20, i take my girl n get soda/popcorn, we're talkn $30 not incl. gas!) thats my opinion.
Da vinci code
- Thread starter warwgn
- Start date
yep. I read it and enjoyed it as great fiction. but i got the distinct impression that Dan was paddled by a few too many evil nuns growing up or SOMETHING. most of his books are religion bashing
controversy sells. and money is is Dan's "Truth", not exposing hidden secrets in paintings. He did a great job at it. some people make porn, others play pro sports, some cash in from the pupit, some run for office. whatever ya do, if money is the target you're missing a lot.. but Dan made a good career move never the less.
what ever happened to Salmon Rushdie? Oh yeah.... nothing
<!--EDIT|WWJD
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148100139 -->
Yep, I can see that my views(Agnostic) on this subject would be about as popular as a lead (or led) balloon...so....
BTW, in case you think want to get me started
...I once debated a pair Jehovahs witnesses (mom and son) for hours. By the time I was done they looked a little confused and needed to go "look up some scripture" and get some more ppl to help(said she was going to bring her husband and one of the other higher ups to answer the questions they couldn't find answer for). I INVITED them to come back(we even scheduled a time)...they never showed up at my house again. In fact I havent seen another jehovah's witness at my house in 3 years. I'm thinking I must have been black listed. hahaha
<!--EDIT|TheDude27
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148104543 -->
BTW, in case you think want to get me started
<!--EDIT|TheDude27
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148104543 -->
I haven't read the book. I may see the movie. Where I have a problem with several movie makers, not just Don Brown and not just religous topics, is that they produce a work of fiction, then try to pass it off as as non-fiction documentary film.
I may not be religous but I am spirtal.
The differance. Religon divides people. its used as a way to take there minds off other problems thay have and redirect them to what other feel are the "big" problems.
Spiritual at least you belive in something that is bigger than yourself and those around you.
I think thats what God wanted and what he was shootin for.
But I think the movie will be great.
and Im sorry for the miss spelled words, never could spell.
The differance. Religon divides people. its used as a way to take there minds off other problems thay have and redirect them to what other feel are the "big" problems.
Spiritual at least you belive in something that is bigger than yourself and those around you.
I think thats what God wanted and what he was shootin for.
But I think the movie will be great.
and Im sorry for the miss spelled words, never could spell.
Whats a TRE?
This is probably the best scenario that describes it all, and I'm basically in total agreement with it. It's up to the individual how he chooses to live life. Whether it be a 'believer' or 'non-believer.' I categorize myself as a believer because there is a higher power than any of us can ever conceive. Science is always trying to theorize about creativity and those unexplained phenomena that has religious overtones. I choose not to argue these points as I try to live my life with a sense of love, morality, and spirituality in my heart. That's how I was raised and I try to raise my kids the same way. I am a devout Catholic, but there are some things about the Catholic religion that I don't totally agree with, but who am I to change age-old traditions and beliefs. One thing that GOD gave each and every one of us is the capacity to use logic and common sense to decipher what we believe to be true in our hearts. It's what is called "free will." I think that "free will" is probably one of the single-most valuable gifts that GOD gave to us. We sometime choose to let others make up our mind for us. We don't take the time to try to evaluate our own individual situations and then choose to play 'follow-the-leader' in drawing conclusions as to how we think. It's this state of unconciousness that gives way to racism and other forms of intolerance. I could say more, but I think I've said enough without sounding like I am preaching.
"Whats a TRE?"
In the Da vinci code it was somthing that added over 59 hp to a motorcycle but was suppressed by the HD Motor Company!
<!--EDIT|Greg B
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148155909 -->
In the Da vinci code it was somthing that added over 59 hp to a motorcycle but was suppressed by the HD Motor Company!
<!--EDIT|Greg B
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148155909 -->
I know the movie is "fiction" but it raises a truthful point about our society. As historical fact unravels and changes we embrace technology and welcome individuals who discover new information about our past. When someone tries to do the same with the bible they are immediately ripped apart and discredited before the facts are looked at. If we claimed someone from this ORG found evidence that VA Busa's relatives discovered America she would be the talk of the town. However, let one of us challenge a fact from the bible and our entire life would be twisted and critiqued in order to discredit us, of course our claims would then automatically be looked upon as unfounded.
I say live your life to its fullest extent while trying to be a good citizen and neighbor to "all". It's the "all" that eludes some religions now isn't it...
I say live your life to its fullest extent while trying to be a good citizen and neighbor to "all". It's the "all" that eludes some religions now isn't it...
You do the same thing as the book. You state it is fiction but then your next sentence starts talking about historical facts being unraveled. Which is it? Fiction or fact???
Your analogy doesn't stand up either. What if someone wrote an article in the Star stating that your family were Nazi's and that they were directly responsible for the gassing of Jews? Everyone knows the "Star" is fiction. So do you just let it slide thinking that everyone who reads the Star knows it isn't true or do you sue for defamation and slander?
I think many people consider this a veiled attack against the One they worship and love, thus the fuss.
If you would like to read something amusing, check this out. It will take a while to get through it.
http://www.stltoday.com/blogs....omments
Later,
Steve
http://www.stltoday.com/blogs....omments
Later,
Steve
My post referenced the inability to address issues concerning religion. Had nothing to do with wether or not the book and movie are fact or fiction. Wasn't informed that analogies have to stand up to the scrutiny of others "views" as well. I will say it was used correctly so go back and read it again, maybe it will take.
I believe your post solidifies my point, people choosing to express an opinion or talk about facts that differ from others get bombarded with negative connotations while playing on semantics in order to discredit what they are saying. Good to know my "analogy" about society and religion was way off base.
I would venture to guess that since this thread was about the book then your statement; "As historical fact unravels and changes we embrace technology and welcome individuals who discover new information about our past. When someone tries to do the same with the bible they are immediately ripped apart and discredited before the facts are looked at." would have something to do with that book. Perhaps you believe the book presents new facts concerning Jesus even though the book is fiction? Which facts were you referring to? I guess I missed that part in your statement.
There is a disclaimer at the beginning of the book that the book is fiction but then in the first chapter it begins by stating facts (which are inaccurate and thus not facts).
I believe thats what most people are fussing about. When you take something that is sacred to people whether it is religion or family and then present it in a dishonest manner, no manner how you slice and dice it,(my opinion) you had better have proveable facts to back up your claims.
There is a disclaimer at the beginning of the book that the book is fiction but then in the first chapter it begins by stating facts (which are inaccurate and thus not facts).
I believe thats what most people are fussing about. When you take something that is sacred to people whether it is religion or family and then present it in a dishonest manner, no manner how you slice and dice it,(my opinion) you had better have proveable facts to back up your claims.
steelhead
Registered
I will not be watching this movie. I have read enough of the book to know it is entertainment and a fun read, but nothing more. The movie is just hype on controversy.
It is a lame excuse to say Dan Brown's book, "DaVinci Code" is fiction and therefore ok to disparage the Catholic faith. No matter what you may or may not believe in, most of us are firm supporters of the constitutional rights of religious expression and artistic expression in a secular constitutional democracy. Otherwise, we would experience a chilling effect where citizens would be afraid to express themselves because of one moral governing "religious" authority that rules out all other opinions. I have the constitutional freedom to choose to not watch "DaVinci", and I exercise this freedom not to help someone profit by something which I consider, in my opinion, a load of poorly written rubbish.
But with freedom comes responsibility: Opus Dei has been dumped on by Dan Brown with an intent to portray this organization in a negative light. His facts are wrong, yet he insists that Opus Dei is sinister. He tries to avoid responsibility for his assertion by citing his book as a "work of fiction", yet clearly writes in his book that "Opus Dei" is a real organization. Nice Move. For this reason, I am waiting for this movie and book to first cash in, and then a nice big LAWSUIT in civil court against Dan Brown by Opus Dei. He is going to have to prove that his assertion about "Opus Dei" was factual since he implied by his opinion that the organization was somehow subversive.
Good Luck Dan Brown! It would have been better to write his book with a fictional splinter group of crazies than to attack a real life organization. What was he thinking?...$$$
Now he pays...and still gets off rich after the lawsuit. Amazing how capitalism works.
<!--EDIT|steelhead
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148275744 -->
It is a lame excuse to say Dan Brown's book, "DaVinci Code" is fiction and therefore ok to disparage the Catholic faith. No matter what you may or may not believe in, most of us are firm supporters of the constitutional rights of religious expression and artistic expression in a secular constitutional democracy. Otherwise, we would experience a chilling effect where citizens would be afraid to express themselves because of one moral governing "religious" authority that rules out all other opinions. I have the constitutional freedom to choose to not watch "DaVinci", and I exercise this freedom not to help someone profit by something which I consider, in my opinion, a load of poorly written rubbish.
But with freedom comes responsibility: Opus Dei has been dumped on by Dan Brown with an intent to portray this organization in a negative light. His facts are wrong, yet he insists that Opus Dei is sinister. He tries to avoid responsibility for his assertion by citing his book as a "work of fiction", yet clearly writes in his book that "Opus Dei" is a real organization. Nice Move. For this reason, I am waiting for this movie and book to first cash in, and then a nice big LAWSUIT in civil court against Dan Brown by Opus Dei. He is going to have to prove that his assertion about "Opus Dei" was factual since he implied by his opinion that the organization was somehow subversive.
Good Luck Dan Brown! It would have been better to write his book with a fictional splinter group of crazies than to attack a real life organization. What was he thinking?...$$$
Now he pays...and still gets off rich after the lawsuit. Amazing how capitalism works.
<!--EDIT|steelhead
Reason for Edit: None given...|1148275744 -->
TruWrecks
Banned
The only problem with religion is people!
If movies like this offend someone, they must have doubts about their own religion. People who claim not to be religious tend to have many doubts about everything in life, including spiritualallity.
I was raised Episcopal, but I rarely go to church. I definitely think of myself as more spiritual than religious. I don't get offended when anyone attacks my religion because I know my relation with God. I only get offended when someone messes with my freedoms!
If movies like this offend someone, they must have doubts about their own religion. People who claim not to be religious tend to have many doubts about everything in life, including spiritualallity.
I was raised Episcopal, but I rarely go to church. I definitely think of myself as more spiritual than religious. I don't get offended when anyone attacks my religion because I know my relation with God. I only get offended when someone messes with my freedoms!
Similar threads
