Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: knny187 on April 29, 2006, 10:29:47 AM
-
someone explain this to me.....
see it in the news...
but I have no idea what was said in this book that could piss off so many people.
-
someone explain this to me.....
see it in the news...
but I have no idea what was said in this book that could piss off so many people.
In short, the director has it out for the Catholic Church and Christians alike. He make claims that cannot be substantiated with any facts, it's a blatant attempt to sway Christians away from their beliefs. For example, he said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, yet he cannot back it up. The movie is a blasphemous lie against Jesus. He'll more than likely rot in hell for his portrayal!
-
In short, the director has it out for the Catholic Church and Christians alike. He make claims that cannot be substantiated with any facts, it's a blatant attempt to sway Christians away from their beliefs. For example, he said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, yet he cannot back it up. The movie is a blasphemous lie against Jesus. He'll more than likely rot in hell for his portrayal!
It's not about the director it's about the book. Dan Brown stated in his book, "the Da Vinci Code" that aside from the fictional main characters all the assertions on Historical items, events, people etc are true and can be verified. Most of his stuff came from a book called "Holy Blood Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent,Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln, which i have. It's basically about a cover up by the catholic church regarding the 2 issues:
1. Mary was not a hooker and mothered a child from Jesus.
2. Mary fled to France and thier offspring continued to procreate resulting in a "Royal bloodline"
This would invalidate the present religious establishment of christianity.
Now before we get too way out in space rattling our "Facts" sabers...
We are going to see a large amount of negative press on both sides of these issues. Both will sound convincing to their respective sides.
some facts aside of that:
Both sides have holes.
Both sides will have reasonable angles to back up some of their claims.
That's the funny thing about looking into the past. All evidence is subject to interpretation. WE have very little REAL facts with out being there.
-
very interesting......
but if Catholics & Christans have such a strong faith.....
how could this worry them?
-
very interesting......
but if Catholics & Christans have such a strong faith.....
how could this worry them?
Who's worried?? Beside's you can't worry about a lie!
-
Who's worried?? Beside's you can't worry about a lie!
The Vatican....they announced it today.
-
In short, the director has it out for the Catholic Church and Christians alike. He make claims that cannot be substantiated with any facts, it's a blatant attempt to sway Christians away from their beliefs. For example, he said that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, yet he cannot back it up. The movie is a blasphemous lie against Jesus. He'll more than likely rot in hell for his portrayal!
LMAO!
Fundamentalists are so damn funny!
-
LMAO!
Fundamentalists are so damn funny!
I'd keep quiet if I were you...you're credibility is nil through your consistant lies and false resume'......go away!
-
I just finished reading it. Very interesting. And after watching the Gospel of Judas the other day, I can see alot of holes in what was put in the bible and what was left out.
And that's exactly what they want you to believe....that there were alot of holes!!
-
That's because members of these religions know it's BS that they're preaching.
-
Its called fiction people
i cant believe the fuss about this stupid ass movie....i'd rather go see scary movie 4 again
-
the davinci code is a story. you can speculate anything. what if jesus this, what if jesus that... nobody knows so who cares? i can say jesus loved ice cream and make a whole story of it. and the catholic church should have nothing to say. maybe they should tell their people to read the bible and stop worshiping idols.
-
catholic church should have nothing to say. maybe they should tell their people to read the bible and stop worshiping idols.
What the catholic church should do is sell all those gold septres they have inlayed with gems and the billions of dollars worth of other relics they have and feed some hungry people.
People no lon ger need physical things to amaze them about the power of the church in the name of god for them to believe in god. They need their help.
-
Christians don't like the idea of Jesus being a sexual being. Sexual means he was human and they don't want that.
Even though at the time he lived it would of been HIGHLY rare for a man his age to be unmarried. We see no mention of this in the bible though due to the authors intent to make him seem Godlike.
-
Christians don't like the idea of Jesus being a sexual being. Sexual means he was human and they don't want that.
Even though at the time he lived it would of been HIGHLY rare for a man his age to be unmarried. We see no mention of this in the bible though due to the authors intent to make him seem Godlike.
Why is it wrong to be sexual? I never understood this.
-
Why is it wrong to be sexual? I never understood this.
It's only wrong if you're not married!
-
Christians try to repress their sexual urges...And from the catholic church fiasco..we see where this ends up!
The christians on this board probably try to repress their sexual urges so much that doing so has made them raging pedophiles!
That's why they're so angry so much.
-
The christians on this board probably try to repress their sexual urges so much that doing so has made them raging pedophiles!
I doubt that. Most christians either have rationalized their sexuality various ways such as ignoring the literal bible text or justifying their actions through repeated repentence; just to name a couple of ways.
The reason Jesus's sexuality isn't protrayed in the Bible depends on what you believe:
If you believe Jesus was God on earth in the form of a man then he would have total control power to repress his sexual urges.
If you believe Jesus was just a man. Then he had sex and most likely had off spring. Thus making him a human and not divine.
-
Dan Brown created a novel to address many of his own unanswered questions.
His work was well researched and he drew upon many facts as well as fiction to weave an incredible tale that has people talking.
The Church is all up in arms because in Brown's novel, there exists too many facts, up against too many discrepancies in the "official" Church rhetoric, that the Church fears may cause people to leave the church. It frightens them to no end.
In previous days Brown would have been burned for heresy, so go see the movie, go read the book, and enjoy the fact that you have access to such heretical information.
BTW- does anyone have any credible sources of information on the "Cathars" of Rennes le Chateau?
-
Dan Brown created a novel to address many of his own unanswered questions.
His work was well researched and he drew upon many facts as well as fiction to weave an incredible tale that has people talking.
The Church is all up in arms because in Brown's novel, there exists too many facts, up against too many discrepancies in the "official" Church rhetoric, that the Church fears may cause people to leave the church. It frightens them to no end.
In previous days Brown would have been burned for heresy, so go see the movie, go read the book, and enjoy the fact that you have access to such heretical information.
BTW- does anyone have any credible sources of information on the "Cathars" of Rennes le Chateau?
You have it backwords. Quite a bit of his "research" was unproven and outright lies!
-
Dan Brown created a novel to address many of his own unanswered questions.
His work was well researched and he drew upon many facts as well as fiction to weave an incredible tale that has people talking.
The Church is all up in arms because in Brown's novel, there exists too many facts, up against too many discrepancies in the "official" Church rhetoric, that the Church fears may cause people to leave the church. It frightens them to no end.
In previous days Brown would have been burned for heresy, so go see the movie, go read the book, and enjoy the fact that you have access to such heretical information.
BTW- does anyone have any credible sources of information on the "Cathars" of Rennes le Chateau?
Judi, have you read the book? Is it worth my time?
-
did anybody catch 60 minutes last night?
-
If you pick this book up with any preconceived notions about what religion is supposed to be about, you're probably going to dislike it very much. If you read it with an open mind, you may still not like it, but at least it will make you think.
It's never made sense to me that people are so scared that Jesus may have fathered a child. I understand why it's scary to the church. They feel it would undermine their power. But why should anyone else be scared? How would that make any of His teaching less relevant?
-
Again, did anybody watch 60 minutes? I haven't read the DaVinci Code, but they pretty much poo-pooed on the whole Scion (sp) thing as it was made up by a hoaxster from France. Placard, was his name, I think. Gonna read it soon.
-
Again, did anybody watch 60 minutes? I haven't read the DaVinci Code, but they pretty much poo-pooed on the whole Scion (sp) thing as it was made up by a hoaxster from France. Placard, was his name, I think. Gonna read it soon.
No, but it's long been known that the Priory was a hoax. There's still many questions about Jesus' life, however, completely aside the Priory issue.
-
You have it backwords. Quite a bit of his "research" was unproven and outright lies!
When you're right, you're right.
From a literary standpoint, IMO Proust it ain’t. The grammatical structure and narrative style of the novel read like a Harliquin romance mystery. The little mystery “clues” sprinkled throughout are lame at best and take about 6 exciting seconds to solve. Every 3-page chapter does end in some little cliffhanger suspense thread, so the average non-reader can get through it, and that’s why it’s become one of the fastest-selling books of all time. The material itself is old news, been done a few times before, but no one ever paid attention. For good reason…it’s highly suspect, and unprovable. Dan Brown just made it good reading for the masses.
There is plenty of conjecture that da Vinci was a gay man, but even that aside, it’s a fact that painters and sculptors, certainly during the renaissance period, often hired common male street hustlers as models. (There’s anecdotal evidence that the subject of Michelangelo’s David was a notorious, and well-rewarded man of the streets.) More than likely, the supposed Mary Magdelene figure in the last supper was just another ethereal-looking boy-pro da Vinci fancied and cast as the disciple John. It also seems highly unlikely that in Jesus’ time, a woman would have been present at such a meal with a male-only crowd. She would have been serving, not dining. It seems ridiculous, centuries later to fit convenient “clues” into any of da Vinci’s works, and if he had any idea, he’d probably be spinning in his grave.
-
Again, did anybody watch 60 minutes? I haven't read the DaVinci Code, but they pretty much poo-pooed on the whole Scion (sp) thing as it was made up by a hoaxster from France. Placard, was his name, I think. Gonna read it soon.
Negative press. consider the source.
What Da Vinci code does to damage the church mostly will probably end up being the churches manipulation fo the original gospels. Causing us to re-think the structure our Christian relgion is based on. Not the groups or secret societies in the book. They can easily be discredited.
Some possible points regarding this to ponder:
Political agenda at the Council of Nicea such as combining pagan beliefs with christian beliefs to form a church that appeals to a larger numbers
The equality of women. Paul was such a woman hater.
The origin of the cathars and the churches propaganda campaign to align them with satan.
The other gnostic gospels
The fact the NT gospels where written 40-50 years after jesus's death
The many contradictions in the present KJV Bible
Good friday and a nicely cooked steak.
-
When you're right, you're right.
From a literary standpoint, IMO Proust it ain’t. The grammatical structure and narrative style of the novel read like a Harliquin romance mystery. The little mystery “clues” sprinkled throughout are lame at best and take about 6 exciting seconds to solve. Every 3-page chapter does end in some little cliffhanger suspense thread, so the average non-reader can get through it, and that’s why it’s become one of the fastest-selling books of all time. The material itself is old news, been done a few times before, but no one ever paid attention. For good reason…it’s highly suspect, and unprovable. Dan Brown just made it good reading for the masses.
There is plenty of conjecture that da Vinci was a gay man, but even that aside, it’s a fact that painters and sculptors, certainly during the renaissance period, often hired common male street hustlers as models. (There’s anecdotal evidence that the subject of Michelangelo’s David was a notorious, and well-rewarded man of the streets.) More than likely, the supposed Mary Magdelene figure in the last supper was just another ethereal-looking boy-pro da Vinci fancied and cast as the disciple John. It also seems highly unlikely that in Jesus’ time, a woman would have been present at such a meal with a male-only crowd. She would have been serving, not dining. It seems ridiculous, centuries later to fit convenient “clues” into any of da Vinci’s works, and if he had any idea, he’d probably be spinning in his grave.
Another very interesting post
I thought this would be a could topic to bring up here.
I can't say that I know anything about this topic, but it does seem to make some noise in the Christian/Catholic community.
I can't say I've formed an opinion in the matter either way.
-
I read the book while I was locked up... It uncovers alot of secrets that cathlics want kept buried, and murderd popes and what not and gay activity between priests and young boys.. and some other things. Excellent book, so I'm sure the movie will be good.
-
You have it backwords. Quite a bit of his "research" was unproven and outright lies!
I have none of it backwards, ...you're just having a knee-jerk reaction without reading what I wrote.
Dan Brown created a novel to address many of his own unanswered questions.
His work was well researched and he drew upon many facts as well as fiction to weave an incredible tale that has people talking.
The Church is all up in arms because in Brown's novel, there exists too many facts, up against too many discrepancies in the "official" Church rhetoric, that the Church fears may cause people to leave the church. It frightens them to no end.
In previous days Brown would have been burned for heresy, so go see the movie, go read the book, and enjoy the fact that you have access to such heretical information.
BTW- does anyone have any credible sources of information on the "Cathars" of Rennes le Chateau?
Now, unless you can provide me with some credible info on the Cathars... shut up!
please and thankyou :)
-
I have none of it backwards, ...you're just having a knee-jerk reaction without reading what I wrote.
Now, unless you can provide me with some credible info on the Cathars... shut up!
please and thankyou :)
Jaggerina, there's lots of info online, but if you want hard copy - The Perfect Heresy: The Revolutionary Life and Spectacular Death of the Medieval Cathars - I thought was brill. Plus, it's written by a fellow Canuck, Stephen O'Shea...gotta support our Canadian writers!
-
Jaggerina, there's lots of info online, but if you want hard copy - The Perfect Heresy: The Revolutionary Life and Spectacular Death of the Medieval Cathars - I thought was brill. Plus, it's written by a fellow Canuck, Stephen O'Shea...gotta support our Canadian writers!
Thanks Deedee, I'll check it out.
-
The Da Vinci Code is not full of facts. It's quite the opposite. Some of the places that are listed in the book have seen a 50% increase in tourism. All the tourist are asking these questions relating to the book and they have had to publish literature for the tourist stating that what was in the book is incorrect because they got so tired having to explain it to all of them.
-
Some of the places that are listed in the book have seen a 50% increase in tourism. All the tourist are asking these questions relating to the book and they have had to publish literature for the tourist stating that what was in the book is incorrect because they got so tired having to explain it to all of them.
The Louvre officials were frothing at the mouth when the sudden deluge of tourists caused endless bottle-necking at the Mona Lisa exhibit. They were finally forced (after much arguing and drama, french style) to include a da Vinci code tour for "les cretins."
-
All you need to know is that it is a work of FICTION not fact. Its also a very good entertaining story. Thats coming from a catholic.
-
The Da Vinci Code is not full of facts. It's quite the opposite. Some of the places that are listed in the book have seen a 50% increase in tourism. All the tourist are asking these questions relating to the book and they have had to publish literature for the tourist stating that what was in the book is incorrect because they got so tired having to explain it to all of them.
::) Sheesh! Does nobody read anymore? Get_Bigger, ...you need to Get_Bigger bifocals. {bad pun intended}
Dan Brown created a novel to address many of his own unanswered questions.
His work was well researched and he drew upon many facts as well as fiction to weave an incredible tale that has people talking.
Novel = a story printed into a book, a creation of the imagination etc.,
Not necessarily an accurate chronicle of events past or anything purporting to be. That would make it a thesis.
Fact = Something true & verifiable
Fiction = Something made up, a creation of the imagination.
Dan Brown used both facts combined with fiction to write his novel.
-
EVERY novel is combined with facts and fiction, but people are taking this one as an historic work and quoting it to others as ALL fact. I think that is where the problem is.
-
EVERY novel is combined with facts and fiction, but people are taking this one as an historic work and quoting it to others as ALL fact. I think that is where the problem is.
That's only one of the problems. Another problem is the book makes the church look bad.
-
That's only one of the problems. Another problem is the book makes the church look bad.
{ROTFLMAO} ...as opposed to centuries of intolerance, bigotry, mass murder, and corruption?
The Spanish Inquisition wasn't a tea party ya know. Try to get a little perspective here. {lol} ;)
-
Ban 'Da Vinci Code,' Says Philippine Official
(http://cdn.digitalcity.com/aolca_articles/0c/06/20060510151509990001.44623c5c-000d4-02e24-400cb8e1)
Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou appear in a
scene from 'The Da Vinci Code,' which hits
theatres in Canada May 19.
MANILA (Reuters) - The Philippine government should ban the controversial movie "The Da Vinci Code," a senior official in the mainly Catholic country said Wednesday, describing the religious thriller as blasphemous.
The film, based on the best-selling fiction novel of the same title, is due to open in Manila's cinemas next week.
"I think we should do everything not to allow it to be shown," said Eduardo Ermita, executive secretary to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, expressing his personal opinion as a "devout Catholic."
He told journalists the state's censors should take a closer look at its guidelines before giving the green light to the film whose central premise is that Jesus Christ sired a child by Mary Magdalene.
More than 80 percent of the Philippines' 85 million population are Roman Catholic. Along with Malta, the Philippines is one of only two countries in the world without a divorce law and frowns on the promotion of artificial contraception.
"In the name of many like you who love and revere the Son of God made Man, I strongly appeal to you that the showing of the film 'Da Vinci Code' be banned throughout our land," said a Roman Catholic archbishop in a letter to the chief censor this week.
Ramon Arguelles of the archdiocese of Lipa, south of Manila, said the movie was an affront to Christianity, reminding the censors that the government had imposed a ban on another movie, "The Last Temptation of Christ" in the 1980s.
Ermita said Arroyo, also a devout Roman Catholic, has not made any statement on the issue. She is due to return from a four-day state visit to Saudi Arabia Thursday.
"It's something that we should not be talking about," he said, referring to the movie's storyline. "We might get struck by lightning."
-
lol.... that's funny. silly flips :P
-
The last time I can remember them banning a movie here in Ontario was back in 1978 I think.
Mary Brown who was head of the Ontario Censor Board didn't want "Pretty Baby" with Brooke Shields because it depicted a girl younger than the age of consent, ...consenting. I'm not sure but I think Bob Guccione's "Caligula" was also banned here as well.
-
I just heard that in India, Christian protestors are burning copies of The DaVinci code.
In addition, a local Mumbai group called "The Catholic Secular Forum" has called on Christians to "fast unto death" to try to stop the release of the film in India. Christian only make up less than 2% of India's 1.1 billion people.
-
Stupid Christians...
-
Christians try to repress their sexual urges...And from the catholic church fiasco..we see where this ends up!
The christians on this board probably try to repress their sexual urges so much that doing so has made them raging pedophiles!
That's why they're so angry so much.
Absurd. I'm a Christian and I'm very happy.
You don't have to "repress" sexual urges. Sex is normal. Just needs to be confined to marriage. There is nothing abnormal about sex within the confines of marriage, which is what many Christians support.
Repressing sexual urges makes Christians pedophiles? Pure hyperbole.
-
Absurd. I'm a Christian and I'm very happy.
You don't have to "repress" sexual urges. Sex is normal. Just needs to be confined to marriage. There is nothing abnormal about sex within the confines of marriage, which is what many Christians support.
Repressing sexual urges makes Christians pedophiles? Pure hyperbole.
Thanks for proving my point...
"Marriage" isn't a natural thing. Humans by nature aren't monogamous. Hardly any animal species is. Marriage is an unnatural thing that humans invented. That's why the rate of infidelity is so high. Humans were not meant to be monogamous.
You've got two levels of repression of sexual urges here.
1.Not being able to have sex prior to marriage.
2.Not being able to even have sexual thoughts or urges before mariage or for other women than your wife DURING marriage.
Jesus stated that even sinful thoughts is in itself a sin!
Christians aren't even able to THINK about having sex or else that is a sin. Therefor christians repress their sexual urges like putting shaking up a cola bottle and getting supprised when it blows up in your face! That's why we see the rate of pedophilia so high among christians. They have been repressing their sexual urges so long they have gone out of whack and now crave little children!
-
Thanks for proving my point...
"Marriage" isn't a natural thing. Humans by nature aren't monogamous. Hardly any animal species is. Marriage is an unnatural thing that humans invented. That's why the rate of infidelity is so high. Humans were not meant to be monogamous.
You've got two levels of repression of sexual urges here.
1.Not being able to have sex prior to marriage.
2.Not being able to even have sexual thoughts or urges before mariage or for other women than your wife DURING marriage.
Jesus stated that even sinful thoughts is in itself a sin!
Christians aren't even able to THINK about having sex or else that is a sin. Therefor christians repress their sexual urges like putting shaking up a cola bottle and getting supprised when it blows up in your face! That's why we see the rate of pedophilia so high among christians. They have been repressing their sexual urges so long they have gone out of whack and now crave little children!
Hey. You didn't attack me. I think I can actually respond to this one. :)
If you believe in the creation story, like many do, then marriage was the first institution on Earth: Adam and Eve. Marriage is literally the oldest institution on the planet. Marriage and family are the backbone of most societies. The Bible talks about a man leaving home, finding a wife, and the two becoming one flesh. That's what marriage is all about. It has always been a special part of American society. It's very special. Weddings are beautiful. There are few things I admire more than a long-term, successful marriage.
It's obviously true that infidelity is a problem and the divorce rate is high, but those facts don't make marriage abnormal.
Nothing wrong with thinking about sex. It's the fantasizing that causes problems. Unhealthy relationships start with unhealthy thoughts. That's all those admonitions mean IMO.
And where is the support for your link between Christians and pedophilia?
-
Hey. You didn't attack me. I think I can actually respond to this one. :)
If you believe in the creation story, like many do, then marriage was the first institution on Earth: Adam and Eve. Marriage is literally the oldest institution on the planet. Marriage and family are the backbone of most societies. The Bible talks about a man leaving home, finding a wife, and the two becoming one flesh. That's what marriage is all about. It has always been a special part of American society. It's very special. Weddings are beautiful. There are few things I admire more than a long-term, successful marriage.
Except I DON'T believe in the creation story. You're begging the question here. Assuming the bible to be true to defend the bible!
Where I live(reality) marriage is farily new to the human species(a few thousand years old). Humans evolved for thousands and thousands of years without it and we are as we are now without marriage.
It's obviously true that infidelity is a problem and the divorce rate is high, but those facts don't make marriage abnormal.
Of course it is. Humans urge to have sex with multiple partners because it is part of who they are. Humans aren't monogamous animals naturally. NO OTHER primates are monogamous. Neither are humans!
Nothing wrong with thinking about sex. It's the fantasizing that causes problems. Unhealthy relationships start with unhealthy thoughts. That's all those admonitions mean IMO.
And where is the support for your link between Christians and pedophilia?
Jesus said that simply thinking about sinning is a sin.
Therefor thinking about sex with anyone except your wife(married or not) would be a sin.
Jesus even went as far as saying that simply LUSTING after a woman and being sexually attracted to someoen other than your wife is a sin! He said you should poke your eyes out if you lust too much to prevent you from sinning!
-
Jesus said that simply thinking about sinning is a sin.
Really? Where?
I look at the "thought" sins the same way I look at things like conspiracy. Only requires an agreement and some overt act, not the actual commission of the crime. With sin, and adultery in particular, I think admiring a beautiful woman is normal and not a "sin," but fantasizing about sex with this same woman is definitely a problem. Just like crime, most sin starts with unhealthy thoughts.
There is nothing abnormal about an admonition to control your own thought process. You shouldn't fantasize about robbing banks, murder, theft, rape, etc. Not a big deal.
-
Really? Where?
I look at the "thought" sins the same way I look at things like conspiracy. Only requires an agreement and some overt act, not the actual commission of the crime. With sin, and adultery in particular, I think admiring a beautiful woman is normal and not a "sin," but fantasizing about sex with this same woman is definitely a problem. Just like crime, most sin starts with unhealthy thoughts.
There is nothing abnormal about an admonition to control your own thought process. You shouldn't fantasize about robbing banks, murder, theft, rape, etc. Not a big deal.
You've obviously never read the bible...
Matthew 5:26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Mat 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
If this isn't Sexual repression I don't know what is.
-
You're taking things out of context. He didn't say "simply thinking about sinning is a sin." His comments were limited to fantasizing about sex with someone you're not married to.
Sure it's "repression" to not fantasize about sex with someone who isn't your wife. So what. That's a good thing. You can fantasize about your wife all day long and sleep with her seven days a week (if she can keep up). Sex is God's gift to married people.
-
Sure it's "repression" to not fantasize about sex with someone who isn't your wife. So what. That's a good thing. You can fantasize about your wife all day long and sleep with her seven days a week (if she can keep up). Sex is God's gift to married people.
Back to my initial point. Humans aren't meant to do that. Humans aren't naturally monogamous animals. They were meant to have multiple mates. It's not natural to supress your sexuality and it results in side effects(Like pedophilia).
-
Back to my initial point. Humans aren't meant to do that. Humans aren't naturally monogamous animals. They were meant to have multiple mates. It's not natural to supress your sexuality and it results in side effects(Like pedophilia).
JA, do you have something more concrete than just a blanken statement that "humans aren't naturally monogamous animals"? this sounds more like a justification of a lifestyle than it does fact. :-\
-
just read this article from noted researcher George Barna... i'm seriously not worried about all the hoopla about this movie. it will sell lots of tickets for sure, but i'm not certain that their will be a Star Wars or Lord of The Rings type following.
Da Vinci Code Confirms Rather Than Changes People’s Religious Views
May 15, 2006
(Ventura, CA) – Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code , has sold more copies than any other fictional work in U.S. history. With the release of the movie adaptation on May 19, interest in this controversial tale has risen substantially.
A new nationwide survey by The Barna Group says that the book has impacted millions of lives – but perhaps not in the way that many Christians have imagined.
Broad Reach
According to the Barna research, The Da Vinci Code has been read “cover to cover” by roughly 45 million adults in the U.S. – that’s one out of every five adults (20%). That makes it the most widely read book with a spiritual theme, other than the Bible, to have penetrated American homes.
The audience profile of the book is intriguing. Despite critical comments and warnings from the Catholic hierarchy, American Catholics are more likely than Protestants to have read it (24% versus 15%, respectively). Among Protestants, those associated with a mainline church are almost three times more likely than those associated with non-mainline Protestant congregations to have read the book. Upscale individuals – i.e., those with a college degree and whose household income exceeds $60,000 – are nearly four times more likely to have read the book than are “downscale” people (i.e., those without a college degree and whose household income is $30,000 or less).
Perceived Value of the Content
Among the adults who have read the entire book, one out of every four (24%) said the book was either “extremely,” “very,” or “somewhat” helpful in relation to their “personal spiritual growth or understanding.” That translates to about 11 million adults who consider The Da Vinci Code to have been a helpful spiritual document.
To place that figure in context, the Barna study revealed that another recently published popular novel about Jesus Christ – Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt , written by Anne Rice – was deemed to be spiritually helpful by 72% of its readers – three times the proportion who lauded Dan Brown’s book.
Changing People’s Beliefs
The study also explored whether or not the book caused people to change some of their religious beliefs. Among the 45 million who have read The Da Vinci Code , only 5% - which represents about two million adults – said that they changed any of the beliefs or religious perspectives because of the book’s content.
“Before reading The Da Vinci Code people had a full complement of beliefs already in place, some firmly held and others loosely held,” explained George Barna, the author of numerous books about faith and culture. “Upon reading the book, many people encountered information that confirmed what they already believed. Many readers found information that served to connect some of their beliefs in new ways. But few people changed their pre-existing beliefs because of what they read in the novel. And even fewer people approached the book with a truly open mind regarding the controversial matters in question, and emerged with a new theological perspective. The book generates controversy and discussions, but it has not revolutionized the way that Americans think about Jesus, the Church or the Bible.”
“On the other hand,” the researcher continued, “any book that alters one or more theological views among two million people is not to be dismissed lightly. That’s more people than will change any of their beliefs as a result of exposure to the teaching offered at all of the nation’s Christian churches combined during a typical week.”
The people most likely to have altered their religious views in response to the book’s content were Hispanics (17% of those who read the book), women (three times more likely than male readers to do so), and liberals (twice as likely as conservatives). Upscale adults were also much more likely than downscale individuals to shift their thinking based on the novel.
The Movie: A Blockbuster?
Industry observers expect the movie to be a hit. But how big of a hit is it likely to be? And what degree of influence is the movie likely to have?
The Barna study indicates that more than 30 million adults are likely to pay for a ticket to see the film – unless the early buzz regarding the film is negative. The company estimates that the movie is poised to break the $300 million box office barrier, based on the current level and intensity of interest expressed by adults. Reaching that plateau would place the movie among the top 20 movies of all-time based upon domestic box office gross revenue.
The statistics reveal that two out of every three people who are likely to see the movie have already read the book. That means more than 10 million adults who have not yet read the book are likely to journey to a theater to see the film.
Barna noted that if the movie has a similar level of influence on movie-goers as the book has had on adult readers, then about a half-million adults could be expected to change one or more of their religious beliefs based upon the movie’s content. The most significant impact, he noted, could well be on the young people who see the movie, since their belief systems are still in the process of development and are more susceptible to new teachings. Barna also mentioned the potential effect of the DVD on millions more people who do not see the movie in the theater, but rent or buy it for home viewing after the theatrical run is completed. “We know that in a home setting, young people frequently watch movies over and over, memorizing lines and absorbing ideas that they might not have caught during their first viewing.” He also stated that some studies have shown that movies have greater “stickiness” with information than do print materials, possibly making the movie even more influential than the book in terms of long-term impact on people’s spiritual development.
The Barna survey also indicates that the audience segments most likely to attend the movie are people under 35; Catholics; Hispanics; and political liberals. On the spiritual side, people who are not born again Christians are almost twice as likely to see the movie as are people whose beliefs classify them as “born again.”
Research Details
The data in this report are based on interviews with 1003 adults from across the nation. These telephone surveys were conducted by The Barna Group, during May 2006, based upon a random sample of people 18 years of age and older living within the 48 continental states. The maximum margin of sampling error associated with the aggregate sample of adults is ±3.2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. In the research, the distribution of survey respondents corresponded to the geographic dispersion of the U.S. population. Multiple callbacks were used to increase the probability of including a reliable distribution of qualified individuals.
“Born again Christians” are defined as people who said they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “born again.”
The Barna Group, Ltd. (which includes its research division, The Barna Research Group) is a privately held, for-profit corporation that conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries. Located in Ventura, California, Barna has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, weekly update on the latest research findings from The Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website www.barna.org
© The Barna Group, Ltd, 2006.
-
JA, do you have something more concrete than just a blanken statement that "humans aren't naturally monogamous animals"? this sounds more like a justification of a lifestyle than it does fact. :-\
I agree. Sounds like opinion, not fact.
-
JA, do you have something more concrete than just a blanken statement that "humans aren't naturally monogamous animals"? this sounds more like a justification of a lifestyle than it does fact. :-\
Name another Primate that is monogamous.
Name 10 other MAMMALS that are monogamous.
Explain why the rate of infidelity is so high.
Explain why the divoce rate is so high.
Explain why studies prove that both married men and women are still sexually attracted to others than their spouse.
All evidence humans aren't monogamous.
-
Name another Primate that is monogamous.
Name 10 other MAMMALS that are monogamous.
Explain why the rate of infidelity is so high.
Explain why the divoce rate is so high.
Explain why studies prove that both married men and women are still sexually attracted to others than their spouse.
All evidence humans aren't monogamous.
Got to agree with Johnny on most of these except the divorce rate. Most divorces are over money matters.
-
Name another Primate that is monogamous.
Name 10 other MAMMALS that are monogamous.
Explain why the rate of infidelity is so high.
Explain why the divoce rate is so high.
Explain why studies prove that both married men and women are still sexually attracted to others than their spouse.
All evidence humans aren't monogamous.
We're not animals. Animals lack common sense. And just because an animal can't control certain behavior, but humans can, doesn't mean the animal behavior is normal. Don't really see a comparison.
Explain why so many married couples DON'T cheat.
Explain why half of all people who get married STAY married.
All evidence monogamy is perfectly normal.
I don't know what "studies" you're referring to, so can't comment on that.
-
We're not animals.
Animals are any speceis that belongs to the Kingdom known as "Animalia".
Humans are Homo Sapiens.
Homo Sapiens belong to that kingdom.
Animals lack common sense. And just because an animal can't control certain behavior, but humans can, doesn't mean the animal behavior is normal. Don't really see a comparison.
Animals don't lack common sense. Many animals are extremly smart. Dolphins,Dogs,Chimps..All very smart and have common sense.
Animals absolutely can control their behavior. My dog controls himself by telling me he wants to go outside and pee by jumping at the door. He controls himself by barking at the door when he wants to come inside. He controls himself by barking at the dog food bag when he's hungry.
There's no such thing as "Animal behavior". Each animal behaves differently including humans. Human behavior is different from dog or monkey behavior. However that doesn't change the fact that Humans ARE animals and their behavior is similar to that of their closest relatives.
Explain why so many married couples DON'T cheat.
Explain why half of all people who get married STAY married.
All evidence monogamy is perfectly normal.
I don't know what "studies" you're referring to, so can't comment on that.
Those who don't cheat want to or have thought about it. They feel obligated by society not to through.
What studies am I refering to?
Genetic influences on female infidelity and number of sexual partners in humans: a linkage and association study of the role of the vasopressin receptor gene (AVPR1A).
Nonetheless, our findings on the heritability of sexual infidelity and number of sexual partners provide support for certain evolutionary theories of human sexual behavior, as well as justifying further genetic and molecular research in this domain.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15607016&dopt=Abstract
-
I disagree. Dogs, for example, cannot control sexual behavior. When they're in heat they will mate with the nearest available dog, by force if necessary. And if they can't find their own kind, they will hump a human's leg. Humans can control this kind of behavior.
And, again, why is that half of all marriages succeed? More abnormal behavior?
I read the link you posted. It proves nothing. You took a quote out of context. Here is the entire passage (emphasis added):
In humans, in contrast to animals, the genetic influences on infidelity are unclear. We report here a large study of over 1600 unselected United Kingdom female twin pairs who confidentially reported previous episodes of infidelity and total lifetime number of sexual partners, as well as attitudes towards infidelity. Our findings demonstrate that infidelity and number of sexual partners are both under moderate genetic influence (41% and 38% heritable, respectively) and the genetic correlation between these two traits is strong (47%). Conversely, attitudes towards infidelity are driven by shared and unique environmental, but not genetic, influences. A genome-wide linkage scan identified three suggestive but nonsignificant linkage areas associated with infidelity and number of sexual partners on chromosomes 3, 7 and 20 with a maximum LOD score of 2.46. We were unsuccessful in associating infidelity or number of sexual partners with a locus implicated in other mammals' sexual behavior, the vasopressin receptor gene. Nonetheless, our findings on the heritability of sexual infidelity and number of sexual partners provide support for certain evolutionary theories of human sexual behavior, as well as justifying further genetic and molecular research in this domain.
-
I disagree. Dogs, for example, cannot control sexual behavior. When they're in heat they will mate with the nearest available dog, by force if necessary. And if they can't find their own kind, they will hump a human's leg. Humans can control this kind of behavior.
Dogs having no inhibitions doesn't mean they can't control themselves. It just means they feel like having sex so they do it. Humans on the other hand usually don't due to society.
Humans in primative societies will rape anyone whom they see fit.
Also rape isn't an uncommon thing even in western society. Obviously humans don't have much more control than other animals do.
And, again, why is that half of all marriages succeed? More abnormal behavior?
I explained already.
Society pushes them to stay together. They feel obligated to do so.
I read the link you posted. It proves nothing. You took a quote out of context. Here is the entire passage (emphasis added):
In humans, in contrast to animals, the genetic influences on infidelity are unclear.
This is saying the contrast between humans and other animals the gentetic influences aren't known. I.E. the difference of genetic influences of heredity of humans compaired to animals.
Conversely, attitudes towards infidelity are driven by shared and unique environmental, but not genetic, influences. A
This doesn't say infidelity is driven by environment not genetics. It says ATTITUDES towards infidelity are driven by environment and not genetics.
This i've already been saying.
Read their conclusion.
Nonetheless, our findings on the heritability of sexual infidelity and number of sexual partners provide support for certain evolutionary theories of human sexual behavior, as well as justifying further genetic and molecular research in this domain.
-
Name another Primate that is monogamous.
Name 10 other MAMMALS that are monogamous.
Explain why the rate of infidelity is so high.
Explain why the divoce rate is so high.
Explain why studies prove that both married men and women are still sexually attracted to others than their spouse.
All evidence humans aren't monogamous.
with the exception of your first two questions, i can say with complete confidence that the answer to all other questions are due to the fact that we as humans have fallen away from the biblical values passed down from our ancestors. the Bible warns us against lusting for another man's wife or a woman lusting after a married man. this undoubtedly shows that God knows that we are lustful (a sin). it's an ignorant thought to believe that once we are married we no longer see others of the opposite sex as appealing. divorce and infidelity are high because there is an increasing number of those in this world with the kind of thought pattern that you share, which is asinine beyond compare. you think that we are so much like the other animals of this world.
i have a question in response to your question about primates? if we are so much like primates, why have they not "evolved" as we have? you would think that if we were so closely related in DNA that we would be able to see a pattern of evolution. but we can't, now can we?
-
with the exception of your first two questions, i can say with complete confidence that the answer to all other questions are due to the fact that we as humans have fallen away from the biblical values passed down from our ancestors. the Bible warns us against lusting for another man's wife or a woman lusting after a married man. this undoubtedly shows that God knows that we are lustful (a sin). it's an ignorant thought to believe that once we are married we no longer see others of the opposite sex as appealing. divorce and infidelity are high because there is an increasing number of those in this world with the kind of thought pattern that you share, which is asinine beyond compare. you think that we are so much like the other animals of this world.
i have a question in response to your question about primates? if we are so much like primates, why have they not "evolved" as we have? you would think that if we were so closely related in DNA that we would be able to see a pattern of evolution. but we can't, now can we?
And people wonder why I insult Christians....
-
And people wonder why I insult Christians....
you usually resort to insults when you don't have an answer that you would deem legit. this is par for the course from you.
-
you usually resort to insults when you don't have an answer that you would deem legit. this is par for the course from you.
You're just asking for a spanking aren't you?
Well since you're so anxious i'll oblidge...
with the exception of your first two questions, i can say with complete confidence that the answer to all other questions are due to the fact that we as humans have fallen away from the biblical values passed down from our ancestors. the Bible warns us against lusting for another man's wife or a woman lusting after a married man. this undoubtedly shows that God knows that we are lustful (a sin). it's an ignorant thought to believe that once we are married we no longer see others of the opposite sex as appealing. divorce and infidelity are high because there is an increasing number of those in this world with the kind of thought pattern that you share, which is asinine beyond compare. you think that we are so much like the other animals of this world.
Circular reasoning. Using the bible to support the bible.
You first have to prove the bible is accurate before you can base any arguments off of it.
i have a question in response to your question about primates? if we are so much like primates, why have they not "evolved" as we have? you would think that if we were so closely related in DNA that we would be able to see a pattern of evolution. but we can't, now can we?
You're so scientifically illerate it's laughable...Yet completly unfunny.
We aren't only so much 'like' primates..We ARE primates.
Why haven't other primates evolved? They have. They have been evolving as long as we have. We both share the same ancestors. However divergent evolution occured and we humans took a different course from other primates. They evolve just like us but you're making the false assumption evolution has some goal in mind. This is false. Evolution is a gradual process of adaption to the environment.
"If we were so closely related by DNA"? We ARE so closely related by dna. it's no assumption. it's a fact. Dna evidence proves this. Take your DNA and compaire it to a chimps and you're over 98% similar. take ANY humans DNA and compaire it to a chimps and they're over 98% similar.
A "patern of evolution"? what does this even mean? Do you even know what the term "divergent evolution" means? Think of a fork. The base is where we start and the ends are where we end up. The path "diverges" into different paths gradually. This is what happened with Humans and their other Primate cousins. They "diverged" into different paths and are gradually changing.
-
You're just asking for a spanking aren't you?
Well since you're so anxious i'll oblidge...
Circular reasoning. Using the bible to support the bible.
You first have to prove the bible is accurate before you can base any arguments off of it.
You're so scientifically illerate it's laughable...Yet completly unfunny.
We aren't only so much 'like' primates..We ARE primates.
Why haven't other primates evolved? They have. They have been evolving as long as we have. We both share the same ancestors. However divergent evolution occured and we humans took a different course from other primates. They evolve just like us but you're making the false assumption evolution has some goal in mind. This is false. Evolution is a gradual process of adaption to the environment.
"If we were so closely related by DNA"? We ARE so closely related by dna. it's no assumption. it's a fact. Dna evidence proves this. Take your DNA and compaire it to a chimps and you're over 98% similar. take ANY humans DNA and compaire it to a chimps and they're over 98% similar.
A "patern of evolution"? what does this even mean? Do you even know what the term "divergent evolution" means? Think of a fork. The base is where we start and the ends are where we end up. The path "diverges" into different paths gradually. This is what happened with Humans and their other Primate cousins. They "diverged" into different paths and are gradually changing.
I wouldn't necessarily call this a spanking, Johnny. But if it makes you feel good, carry on.
Even though our DNA matches 98% of a chimps DNA, isn't there a vast amount of unknown in the remaining 2% that differentiates us? I see your point about divergent evolution, but I liken this definition of it to something more like how we end up with different breeds of dogs, cats, cows, horses, etc . The fork analogy makes sense as to why we have so many different looks for humans, but I guess I'm still not understanding how this links humans and apes together.
-
I agree with Colossus. Johnny you are outnumbered! :)
-
I agree with Colossus. Johnny you are outnumbered! :)
Didn't you know that everyone's wrong but Johnny??
-
And people wonder why I insult Christians....
What happened to, "I don't disrespect anyone for their religious beliefs - I only disagree with them"? ::)
-
What happened to, "I don't disrespect anyone for their religious beliefs - I only disagree with them"? Roll Eyes
That would fall under the category of social competence. He's half empty in that category.
-
Even though our DNA matches 98% of a chimps DNA, isn't there a vast amount of unknown in the remaining 2% that differentiates us? I see your point about divergent evolution, but I liken this definition of it to something more like how we end up with different breeds of dogs, cats, cows, horses, etc . The fork analogy makes sense as to why we have so many different looks for humans, but I guess I'm still not understanding how this links humans and apes together.
1.There is alot of difference within that 2%. Differenting Chimps from Humans. But there is also difference between brother and sister but they're still related.
2.We aren't just "linked" to apes. Technically Homo Sapiens ARE apes. Be specific when you're naming a species. Say Gorilla or chimp. Not just "ape" since we are technically apes ourselves. We're "linked" to other apes from the fact we both evolved from the same ancestors. We're related.
-
I agree with Colossus. Johnny you are outnumbered! :)
Right...I MUST be wrong because most people disagree with me!
Same must of applied to Galileo when he said the Earth orbited the sun!
::)
-
1.There is alot of difference within that 2%. Differenting Chimps from Humans. But there is also difference between brother and sister but they're still related.
but brother and sister can be traced directly to parents, or at least one parent. are you saying that humans can be traced directly to chimps/gorillas (take your pick of species)?
2.We aren't just "linked" to apes. Technically Homo Sapiens ARE apes. Be specific when you're naming a species. Say Gorilla or chimp. Not just "ape" since we are technically apes ourselves. We're "linked" to other apes from the fact we both evolved from the same ancestors. We're related.
So what species did Homo Sapiens evolve from?
-
Right...I MUST be wrong because most people disagree with me!
No. Nothing wrong with being a minority of one. I do that sometimes. But you're still wrong. :)
-
We aren't just "linked" to apes. Technically Homo Sapiens ARE apes. Be specific when you're naming a species. Say Gorilla or chimp. Not just "ape" since we are technically apes ourselves. We're "linked" to other apes from the fact we both evolved from the same ancestors. We're related.
Johnny, ...does this make you... a monkey's Uncle? :D j/k ;)
-
Johnny, ...does this make you... a monkey's Uncle? :D j/k ;)
hahhaha. childish yet funny
-
hahhaha. childish yet funny
I can be soooo childish and immature sometimes... you have noooo idea. {lol}
-
Johnny, ...does this make you... a monkey's Uncle? :D j/k ;)
Actually that was really funny. ;D
-
So the movie had the second largest opening weekend wordwide ever. Who saw it besides me?
-
I saw it.
It was alright. they strayed from the book at the end and let it linger too long but over all i liked the movie.
No idiot holy rollers picketing outside the theater thank god!
-
I thought it was good. I liked the special effect of bringing the past into the modern day scenerey. Unfortunatley I spotted the end of the movie about 20 minutes in. Still good though. I did not read the book.
-
So the movie had the second largest opening weekend wordwide ever. Who saw it besides me?
I wanna finish the book first, ...plus I'm waiting for a DVD screener. I hate going to the theatre.
-
it's funny how the catholics complain the most when they made up the most stuff themselves.
-
You have it backwords. Quite a bit of his "research" was unproven and outright lies!
The Catholic Church has spread plenty of "unproven" claims and "outright lies" about the life of Jesus.
-
Pakistan Bans 'Da Vinci Code'
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- Pakistan on Saturday banned cinemas from showing "The Da Vinci Code" because it contained what officials called blasphemous material about Jesus.
Although the film has not been screened in any theater in mostly-Muslim Pakistan, authorities decided to ban it out of respect for the feelings of the country's minority Christians.
Earlier this week, Christians staged protests in two Pakistani cities against the movie, demanding a global ban. Christians make up about 3 percent of Pakistan's 150 million people.
The film version of Dan Brown's murder mystery novel is based around the premise that Jesus Christ and one of his followers, Mary Magdalene, had children whose descendants are still alive.
"Islam teaches us to respect all prophets of Allah mighty, and degradation of any prophet is tantamount to defamation of the rest," Minister for Culture Ghulam Jamal was quoted as saying by the Associated Press of Pakistan.
Shahbaz Bhatti, a prominent Christian leader, thanked the country's leadership and said the ban will go a long way to ensuring sectarian harmony.
"The Da Vinci Code is a sacrilegious act in the guise of freedom of expression and fiction," Bhatti said Saturday. "It has hurt the religious sentiments of Christians and Muslims throughout the world."
He also criticized Brown, saying the author had "evil intentions" and wanted "to undermine the historical as well as theological truth about Jesus Christ."
-
Man this is so silly. It's a movie for goodness sake. It's fiction. Big deal. I felt the same about the uproar over Harry Potter. My wife and I disagreed over that one. She thinks it glories witchcraft (which it does) and thought it was not appropriate for the kids, while I think it's akin to Snow White and Cinderalla. I gave up on that one, but she's still wrong (he says, looking over his shoulder).
-
Man this is so silly. It's a movie for goodness sake. It's fiction. Big deal. I felt the same about the uproar over Harry Potter. My wife and I disagreed over that one. She thinks it glories witchcraft (which it does) and thought it was not appropriate for the kids, while I think it's akin to Snow White and Cinderalla. I gave up on that one, but she's still wrong (he says, looking over his shoulder).
You mean harry potter is NOT true? $!%$^&
-
You mean harry potter is NOT true? $!%$^&
in 2000 years people will recognize Harry Potter as "the One who lived"
-
in 2000 years people will recognize Harry Potter as "the One who lived"
SEE!!!!! That's what i'm talking about! Would he have a blood line too?
-
my 2 cents since i ws made to go see it >:(
it ws REALLY long >:(
i figured out that that lady ws royal blood when she helped the druggie.. >:( can ya make it more obvious? >:(
then i spent a boring lotta time hungry and in the arcade with a buncha screaming kids >:(
2 thumbs wayy down >:(
-
its an act of fiction. a very good one at that. dan brown made it up completely. however it was based on real paintings places etc. tho this was simply inspiration.
-
also it only became a big fuss cos the bishop of turin i think shouted and condemned it. my mum read that book a few yrs ago and i remember it lying in my living room for ages befoe i heard one thing about it in the media. a lot of it has been disproved. i watched a documentary where 3 people from the uk and usa all followed the trail and the were welcomed at each site by experts who simply proved all of it wrong.
there was a member of opus dei who answered everything wonderfully and clearly. Thie opus dei can answer basically ne questions. this topic annoys me and people read to mush into it. have had so many arguements over it lol
basically its a load of shit.
-
this ws a work of fiction and people have their pannies in a bunch...
wonder what'd happen if someone wrote a similar book called "the unholy bible" ..if the vinchi code can have such an impact i can only imagine what such a book could do...
now remember "the satanic verses" < salman rushdi!
i find it interesting that when faced with supposed teensy blahsphamy of their religion people get their pannies in a bunch but then it hapens in another religion(at a much grander scale) and there is an uproar..people use the standard "those people" responce.
-
i find it interesting that when faced with supposed teensy blahsphamy of their religion people get their pannies in a bunch but then it hapens in another religion(at a much grander scale) and there is an uproar..people use the standard "those people" responce.
there might be some merit to that "those people" response.
I'd say the Da Vinci Code is far more blasphemous than the Mohammed cartoons, as it tries to undermine the very foundations of a religion, whereas the cartoons were merely flouting a commandment.
. . . death toll b/c of the Da Vinci Code-0
. . . death toll b/c of Mohammed cartoons-hundreds?
-
there might be some merit to that "those people" response.
I'd say the Da Vinci Code is far more blasphemous than the Mohammed cartoons, as it tries to undermine the very foundations of a religion, whereas the cartoons were merely flouting a commandment.
. . . death toll b/c of the Da Vinci Code-0
. . . death toll b/c of Mohammed cartoons-hundreds?
nah i wasn't talking about the toons..that ws just plain stupid how the muslims reacted..i ws talking about " the satanic verses"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_(novel)
find a similarity here? ;)
-
nah i wasn't talking about the toons..that ws just plain stupid how the muslims reacted..i ws talking about " the satanic verses"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_(novel)
find a similarity here? ;)
I don't know about that, bro. The pope hasn't sentenced dan brown to death (w/o a trial) . . .
maybe four hundred years ago, Dan Brown would find himself languishing in a dungeon beneath Rome, but now all he has to watch out for are a few loony fundamentalists.
-
I don't know about that, bro. The pope hasn't sentenced dan brown to death (w/o a trial) . . .
maybe four hundred years ago, Dan Brown would find himself languishing in a dungeon beneath Rome, but now all he has to watch out for are a few loony fundamentalists.
the guy that declared a 'fatwah' on the writer wasn't the equivalent of the pope man..it ws your equavalent of a loon fundamentalist..
the writer is alive in well...
but you gotta understand..the christian responce ws what it ws because the book ws called " da vinchi code"
change the name to "the unholy bible" (equvalent to 'the satanic verses" ) and the responce would be more profound..
-
the guy that declared a 'fatwah' on the writer wasn't the equivalent of the pope man..it ws your equavalent of a loon fundamentalist..
the writer is alive in well...
but you gotta understand..the christian responce ws what it ws because the book ws called " da vinchi code"
change the name to "the unholy bible" (equvalent to 'the satanic verses" ) and the responce would be more profound..
I can do ya one better than "the unholy bible"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Bible
in print continuously since 1969. ;D
-
The satanic bible has nothing to do with the Holy Bible.
-
The satanic bible has nothing to do with the Holy Bible.
most of the essays explicitly target Judeo-Christian ethics derived from the Bible. And I believe it has a section titled "jesus-the true prince of evil."
-
It is very plausible that Christ though divine could of had a spouse. He was after all human. According to the Bible though he never did. But since religion has always been a male dominated society its possible especially after the new testament with the rise in Christianity the male leadership wanted only males to be in power and thus hid a lot of the info.
I guess we will only know when we die