The Da Vinci Code

saw a show about this last night and found it pretty interesting. yeah I know its a fictional book but it appears to be based on some ledgends from different sources through out the mid east and europe. So anyone have any thought about this espically the part about jesus and mary being married and having a child? and if so does this make any difference on your beliefs?

 

im not really a christian, i just searched to see if there were any threads about the da vinci code, but anyway. im reading the book at the moment and its quite interesting that people like walt disney and mozart apparently had used secret pagan art and music to give the world clues about the truth.
i could go on and on, lol. even if the church has been covering up secrets for centuries to me it wouldn't really matter because people who followed jesus knew the truth to begin with and personally i don't see why it should bother people seeing as it doesn't make jesus any less important.

 

A lot of the things about the Da Vinci Code are, like the Bible, fiction, and should not be taken literally.

However, the part about Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene, and them having a daughter named Sarah, that part is true, and has been confirmed by a number of non-fiction sources.

And for those of you who have read the book ... the reference to the Lion King stillframe where the dust spells out "SEX," that actually does exist ...

 

how could jesus get married? wasn't he supposed to be pure?

 

I'm talking about historical documents. I cannot say which ones as I do not know, but I saw a thing on the History channel about it, with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Why do you think the Church fought so hard to keep the Dead Sea Scrolls from being made public?

And even now, I know the Church has been pumping out LOTS of propaganda to say "oh yeah the scrolls back up everything in the Bible" but if you actually look into them, they do portray Jesus as being a family man with a wife and daughter, and many of the gospels in the scrolls do apparently speak of Jesus' humanity as opposed to divinity.

Duh, that's what they want you to think.

Edit: I've also talked with people who haven't read the Da Vinci Code, and they also said previously that they knew Jesus was married and had a daughter, though I know they're not Christian.

 

also apparently, if i remember rightly in the book im reading that christianity isn't original, sunday is pagans day of worshipping the sun, pagans son of god or whatever was born on december 25th but died, and that jesus was actually an aquarius meaning that he was born i think either betweed the second half of february or early march.
basically the roman empire at the time collided these two religions together and created one,...so it is said....

 

babies come when we get down and dirty and i really don't think jesus would want to touch vaginal juices... he was too pure for all that

 

Define Pure??

 

apperently according to the dead sea scrolls of somethin and other resources of the time state that jesus's original followers stated that he was more or less human, just an ordinary human, not the sun of god, etc.

 

I just liked the book because all the churches were claiming it a "book of lies".

pot

kettle

kthnxbye

 

hooray for this human's brain!


elipse

 

hey if you havnt read them, look into reading the gospel of thomas.

 

Dan Brown is little more than a talentless hack....if yer want religious fiction based on historical references, try Umberto Eco...

 

That part has a LOT of evidence backing it up.

When Christianity became dominant, it absorbed many of the symbols and holidays of pagan religions in order to make converting easier. That's why we have Christmas in December and Easter on a Sunday, among other things.

Maybe the Biblical Jesus interpretation was, but the man himself (as other sources show) was quite human and undoubtedly was a fan of the cunnilingus. Hahah.

My thoughts inexactly. =)

 

Popularity = quality?

He's a hack because, simply, there is nothing original in Da Vinci Code (or Digital Fortress for that matter)....if people enjoyed those books, fair enough....but imo it's all been done before, and soooo much better

 

free from the taint of vaginal slanking or penis protrusion combustions as his conception was of god as he was born of a virgin

i find it hard to believe that someone who was thus born to a virgin would unconsecrate himself with gushing sticky vaginal juices desiring his steaminess total penetration

 

Im trying to read Foucault’s Pendulum, its really interesting. Dan Brown sucks, he cant even properly describe what direction Versaille is in when youre in Paris. His whole theory about the V between Jesus and Mary Magdalene in the painting meaning they had a kid was just crap.

 

Well the author of the da vinci code didn't exactly make all these theories up by himself. i heard he took a year to do some research into it first. Thats the thing with this topic...its always gonna have array of different opinions

 

Molly, could you say that again, slowly this time?

Anyway, I enjoyed the book, though I agree that Brown is not a great author. He did research it painstakingly, but many of his sources are fringe idiots. What really scares me about the whole thing is not only did the Holy Roman Catholic Church try to suppress this book, it further published a book almost the same length as Brown's work REBUTTING EVERY POINT made in Da Vinci Code and then made a video which they are now marketing.

So if it's fiction, why rebut? This is like the hardline Muslims condemning Salman Rushdie. What is the church trying to hide? Hmmmmm?

 

it s is the duty of the roman cahtolic church to protect jesus' reputation from besmirchment so this is why they have gone on the offensive against the da vinci code