[jaydee]

What's with all these Christian fanatics protesting about the release of the Da Vinci Code movie? They don't seem to understand that it's fiction, and nobody, including the author, claims otherwise. If they are so unsure of their religion that they believe a Hollywood movie will undermine it, maybe they need to shop around for a shiny new one. At least it's comforting to see proof that all the furballs in the world aren't Islamic. I do like that idea that the Indian Catholics came up with though; they plan to go on a hunger strike until death if the movie is released. If the Islamic nutballs took this approach instead of blowing up everybody else, the problem would shortly solve itself.

 

[DirtyDog]

Religious crackpots acting crazy? Get out......

 

[LordOpie]

As active as x-tians are with the movie business, you'd think they owned it instead of the jews.

 

[Changleen]

It is fairly humourous.

 

[DaveW]

If anything their protests are more likely to make me go see it as a kneejerk "fvckyou...DON'T tell me what I can and cant see" type of reaction.

 

[fluff]

As active as x-tians are with the movie business, you'd think they owned it instead of the jews.

Christians own the Jews? Sweet, get me a coke, dude.

 

[conleycm1]

Someone who just simply defends their beliefs is not a "fanatic", Jaydee. The book is offensive to my beliefs, though it will not undermine them or cause me to question the truth of the Bible.
I know you can't deny me the right to my own opinion, but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assualt on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God. How hypocritical! The author and others try to hide behind the cloak of "it's just fiction, what are you getting so worked up about?"

What if someone wrote a book which was then hyped by the media which was full of perverted lies about your mother and discribed your father as a deciever. Even if the author tried to claim it was a work of fiction, don't you think you would speak out in defense of your parents (beliefs), and against the lies and misinformation told about them? I certainly wouldn't call you a fanatic for doing so.

 

[Changleen]

Someone who just simply defends their beliefs is not a "fanatic", Jaydee. The book is offensive to my beliefs, though it will not undermine them or cause me to question the truth of the Bible.
I know you can't deny me the right to my own opinion, but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assualt on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God. How hypocritical! The author and others try to hide behind the cloak of "it's just fiction, what are you getting so worked up about?"

What if someone wrote a book which was then hyped by the media which was full of perverted lies about your mother and discribed your father as a deciever. Even if the author tried to claim it was a work of fiction, don't you think you would speak out in defense of your parents (beliefs), and against the lies and misinformation told about them? I certainly wouldn't call you a fanatic for doing so.

Yeah but my Mother and Father actually exist.

 

[fluff]

Someone who just simply defends their beliefs is not a "fanatic", Jaydee. The book is offensive to my beliefs, though it will not undermine them or cause me to question the truth of the Bible.
I know you can't deny me the right to my own opinion, but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assualt on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God. How hypocritical! The author and others try to hide behind the cloak of "it's just fiction, what are you getting so worked up about?"

What if someone wrote a book which was then hyped by the media which was full of perverted lies about your mother and discribed your father as a deciever. Even if the author tried to claim it was a work of fiction, don't you think you would speak out in defense of your parents (beliefs), and against the lies and misinformation told about them? I certainly wouldn't call you a fanatic for doing so.

I believe god does not exist, should I picket every book shop that sell the Bible? That's not even seen as a work of fiction by many.

 

[Inclag]

What's with all these Christian fanatics protesting about the release of the Da Vinci Code movie? They don't seem to understand that it's fiction, and nobody, including the author, claims otherwise. If they are so unsure of their religion that they believe a Hollywood movie will undermine it, maybe they need to shop around for a shiny new one. At least it's comforting to see proof that all the furballs in the world aren't Islamic. I do like that idea that the Indian Catholics came up with though; they plan to go on a hunger strike until death if the movie is released. If the Islamic nutballs took this approach instead of blowing up everybody else, the problem would shortly solve itself.

Actually, the author does claim that everything in the book is fact. The actual story isn't true, but I think you can see what the author is doing here (cough marketing). Also, there are alot of people that believe that facts in the book are true while they are clearly not if you do a little research or watch 10 minutes of the Discovery/History channel.

The conclusion is that people are idiots for taking the book so seriously on both fronts, but it is understandable to a degree why some christians are upset.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I read in the WaPo recently about how some Xtians see this as an opportunity to start dialog about their faith with others. So, while some see the movie as a boycott-worthy event, others (seeing the glass half-full) decided this was a good way to proselytize.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/13/AR2006051301104.html

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Actually, the author does claim that everything in the book is fact. The actual story isn't true, but I think you can see what the author is doing here (cough marketing). Also, there are alot of people that believe that facts in the book are true while they are clearly not if you do a little research or watch 10 minutes of the Discovery/History channel.

The conclusion is that people are idiots for taking the book so seriously on both fronts, but it is understandable to a degree why some christians are upset.

It sort of depends on where you get your facts and research from. A big problem with the Bible is that many historians have taken the tact that the Bible is true, without question, and then tried to fit the history around it. It's only recently that historians have come to question some of those assumptions made. So, not being aware of the "facts" in the book, I can't say much about their validity, but I do know that there is a lot of misinformation floating around out there due to unwarranted assumptions about the validity of the Bible.

 

[binary visions]

Unfortunately, the book was well-written enough, and well-presented enough, to have a huge amount of people believing every word in it. While I agree that, to a certain extent, people shouldn't be so worked up over this, you can rest a lot of the blame on the gullible public.

After all, if someone wrote a realistic novel that portrayed mountain bikers as being, say, murderers and child rapists - and wrote it well enough that it was easily believable by the general public... I'd probably be a little up in arms about it, too. Not because I was "scared" that people would find out anything - it's a work of fiction, and it's not me that's deluded into thinking it was true - but because the public's opinion eventually has an impact on everyone.

That said, I liked the book and I'll go see the movie. Not because I think it's true, but because I think it's entertaining.

 

[Andyman_1970]

I figure I'll chime in here on this subject.

First, this book is fiction, both sides need to get a grip in that respect.

Second, church history has ALOT of skeletons in it's closet, and I think it's something that Christians should be educated on and be able to, IMO, apologize for.

Third, it's fiction, just like the Left Behind (or if your Homer Simpson "Left Below".......... ) books and movies. Those LB books and movies twist the Scripture just as much, and have just as much of a political agenda as the DVC does........how many Christians uncritically consumed that Left Behind crap but are crying about this work of fiction? The irony is staggering to say the least.......

Anyway...............

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Someone who just simply defends their beliefs is not a "fanatic", Jaydee. The book is offensive to my beliefs, though it will not undermine them or cause me to question the truth of the Bible.
I know you can't deny me the right to my own opinion, but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assualt on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God. How hypocritical! The author and others try to hide behind the cloak of "it's just fiction, what are you getting so worked up about?"

I'm just wondering how it offends your beliefs.

One of the book's premises that I'm aware of is that it says Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had offspring. How would that be offensive to Xtians? Or is that not one of the offensive ideas put forth in the book and is just a bad example? (Sorry if it is a bad example, but it's probably the only example I've come across, not having read the book.)

 

[LordOpie]

Yeah but my Mother and Father actually exist.

Wait, mother and father? Did he just say that Jesus was married?

 

[LordOpie]

...IMO, apologize for.

I think people should apologize for the mistakes/problems they caused or were involved with.

They don't need to apologize, just admit the past.

 

[Andyman_1970]

I know you can't deny me the right to my own opinion, but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assault on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God.

Ok here’s a question, please note I’m a Christian, so I’m not attacking your beliefs I’m just curious.

Where in God’s Word does it say we are to defend it (God’s Word)?

 

[fluff]

Ok here’s a question, please note I’m a Christian, so I’m not attacking your beliefs I’m just curious.

Where in God’s Word does it say we are to defend it (God’s Word)?

Does it say you're not to?

 

[Andyman_1970]

I'm not aware of anywhere in the Hebrew Scriptures where one is called to "defend the Word"...........or even defend God.......this idea of defending God is not even present in say the Talmud. The concept of "defending" (where our apologetics came from) is a very Greek/Western way of explaining our faith (vs. the Hebrew/Eastern way of understanding/explaining faith).........not a concept the authors of said Word would have held.

 

[valve bouncer]

Wait, mother and father? Did he just say that Jesus was married?

If they weren't married, that makes all Christians.......oh dear.
Actually I thought the book was mediocre at best and I expect not even the considerable talents of Mr T Hanks will save the movie from being a clunker. All of these "controversial Jesus movies" (Hail Mary", "Jesus of Montreal"etc) tend to be utter borefests. Most of the time if the Christians just shut up only 2 men and a mangy dog end up seeing them cos they're crap. I suspect however The Da Vinci Code will start in a blaze of glory before crashing and burning at the altar of over-hype.

 

[binary visions]

Where in God’s Word does it say we are to defend it (God’s Word)?

Does it matter?

Most people defend what they believe in and what is important to them. Why does there need to be a divine mandate to defend beliefs just because they're religious? It doesn't say in the first amendment that other people need to stand up and defend the right to free speech.

Wouldn't not defending your beliefs, if you feel they are being slandered and misreperesented, be a poor way to act?

I'm not saying the DaVinci uproar is right or wrong, just pointing out that the defense of one's beliefs doesn't need to be mandated in order to make it justified.

 

[Tenchiro]

Yeah but my Mother and Father actually exist.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Does it matter?

I think it is because IMO this is one of the reasons I believe mainstream evangelical Christianity is becoming more and more irrelevant.

Most people defend what they believe in and what is important to them.

When I talk about my 2 year old son, I don’t pull pics out of my wallet and defend him to others…….I share with people what he’s like and invite people to see how cute he is………I don’t carry an outline of proof texts on how to “prove him”.

Why does there need to be a divine mandate to defend beliefs just because they're religious?

I don’t believe there is a divine mandate to defend God or His Word.

Wouldn't not defending your beliefs, if you feel they are being slandered and misreperesented, be a poor way to act?

Doesn’t Jesus talk about turning the other cheek and carrying the Roman Soldiers pack an extra mile denote how Christians should view those who misrepresent their belief system?

I certainly think this movie is a great opportunity to dialog about the subject it deals with……..but to have a hunker down “we’ve got to defend God from this movie” is ridiculous and from what I’ve studied not something God’s people need to be concerned with.

I'm not saying the DaVinci uproar is right or wrong, just pointing out that the defense of one's beliefs doesn't need to be mandated in order to make it justified.

I think because mainstream evangelical Christianity has had the mindset of defending or “proving” God (a very modern era mindset), rather than being concerned with acting and living in a way that demonstrates the character of Jesus.

Again………………..IMO.

 

[Tenchiro]

When I first heard about how many people read the book and considered it a work of non-fiction I was astounded. I remember reading about groups of people that would travel to the different locations mentioned and try to sleuth around. There are a lot of really gullible people who take everything they read at face value. I guess that if you tell a good story throw enough historically accurate names and places in you can get people to believe anything.

I guess that applies to both books in question.

 

[binary visions]

When I talk about my 2 year old son, I don’t pull pics out of my wallet and defend him to others…….I share with people what he’s like and invite people to see how cure he is………I don’t carry an outline of proof texts on how to “prove him”. <snip>

I certainly think this movie is a great opportunity to dialog about the subject it deals with……..but to have a hunker down “we’ve got to defend God from this movie” is ridiculous and from what I’ve studied not something God’s people need to be concerned with. <snip>

I think because mainstream evangelical Christianity has had the mindset of defending or “proving” God (a very modern era mindset), rather than being concerned with acting and living in a way that demonstrates the character of Jesus.

Okay, I see your point now. I agree with what you're saying. I was just pointing out that a lack of instruction to defend God's Word doesn't necessarily mean that people shouldn't defend what's important to them.

Specifically on this topic, or a lot of topics, I completely agree that getting on the defensive isn't the best way to handle it.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I guess that applies to both books in question.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Actually I thought the book was mediocre at best and I expect not even the considerable talents of Mr T Hanks will save the movie from being a clunker.

Don't forget about Audrey Tautou. Talk about talent.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Here's another WaPo article on the film. Notice that someone calls it a "historical film." I also like the quotes from Hanks and Howard.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051600149.html

 

[BurlyShirley]

Here's another WaPo article on the film. Notice that someone calls it a "historical film." I also like the quotes from Hanks and Howard.

It's about as "historical" as the bible.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

It's about as "historical" as the bible.

Um, notice Tenchiro's comment (comment #25). You're a little late to the party.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Um, notice Tenchiro's comment (comment #25). You're a little late to the party.

shut up

 

[golgiaparatus]

Surely they arent afraid that someone might read a book and actually believe every word of it... that would just be crazy.

 

[Slugman]

<snip>but it's like you are saying that believers should just ignore the media's assualt on their beliefs and not do or say anything to defend the Word of God. <snip>

I seem to be missing the point here. How is it that raising the possibility that Jesus Christ had children an attack on your faith?

How is the possibility of Jesus acting like a man an assault on your beliefs? Or do you believe that he died (and rose again) a virgin?

I find a lot of people to mix up their belief in god and Jesus with their following of a church.

I always thought religion was about your belief in god, not in the politics of your spiritual leaders... but what do I know, I'm an atheist.

 

[Transcend]

While I agree that, to a certain extent, people shouldn't be so worked up over this, you can rest a lot of the blame on the gullible public.

The irony of this statement, when refering to religion, is not lost on me.

 

[LordOpie]

Or do you believe that he died (and rose again) a virgin?

no one should die a virgin. That's sad.

 

[jaydee]

I don't understand the concept of "defending the faith" in this context. Nobody is exterminating Christians or burning down churches. There is no "attack" on anybody or anything; this is a mystery/thriller movie based on a FICTIONAL book. Brown does not say everything in the book is fact. In his prologue he lists the facts that he used in his book, and states that he has created a fictional "what if" novel using these facts as a framework. Nobody, least of all the author, is claiming that the book is historical.

It was mentioned that I would have to make some kind of defense if someone wrote a book defaming my parents. If the author prefaced the book by saying it was fiction, exactly what "attack" am I supposed to "defend" myself from? I would say to all these protesters that the best protest they could make would be to not spend their money on going to the movie. Case closed.

 

[Silver]

Brown should have just said God revealed the idea to him in a dream.

That seems to work...

 

[JRogers]

I don't understand the concept of "defending the faith" in this context. Nobody is exterminating Christians or burning down churches. There is no "attack" on anybody or anything; this is a mystery/thriller movie based on a FICTIONAL book. Brown does not say everything in the book is fact. In his prologue he lists the facts that he used in his book, and states that he has created a fictional "what if" novel using these facts as a framework. Nobody, least of all the author, is claiming that the book is historical.

It was mentioned that I would have to make some kind of defense if someone wrote a book defaming my parents. If the author prefaced the book by saying it was fiction, exactly what "attack" am I supposed to "defend" myself from? I would say to all these protesters that the best protest they could make would be to not spend their money on going to the movie. Case closed.

The problem is that "people" are dumber than you and forget what is fact and what is fiction. A lot of people, consciously or unconsciously, will take some of what is said in the book and the movie as fact when it is not.

If someone wrote a book defaming my parents and threw in a line or two about how it was fiction, I'd still be pissed. Tossing in a discalimer and then depicting real-world subjects in a hurtful and inaccurate way is irresponsible.

 

[Silver]

Hey, as Ian McKellen pointed out, at least if Jesus screwed Mary Magdalene and had kids, it means he wasn't a faggot. Glass half full, and all that...