NCAAbbs

I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

Read the book, it's a pretty good read. It won't win any awards but it is an entertaining book. Basically, it challenges the catholic church and has some interesting consipiracy theories about what happened with Jesus.

I think it has something to do with the bible being coded and some guy wrote a book saying that Da Vinci broke the code.

If I'm wrong it's not the first time.

SouthavenTiger Wrote:I think it has something to do with the bible being coded and some guy wrote a book saying that Da Vinci broke the code.

If I'm wrong it's not the first time.

You're wrong. The code isn't in the Bible.

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

***SPOILER*** DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK

It's a fiction novel that has some loose elements of truth to it. Best I can remember, it's about the quest for the Holy Grail. Instead of the grail being an actual chalice or cup, the author's story is that the grail is the lineage/bloodline of Jesus. The author's story is that the Catholic church destroyed all evidence that Jesus was actually very mortal, was married, and had children. His descendents are supposedly amongst us today. The Holy Grail, I believe, is portrayed as a set of secret documents that a select few members of a secret society are charged with protecting & preserving as they are the only records of Jesus marriage, children, etc.

The controversy arises because it makes some scathing accusations about the Catholic church, Christianity, Jesus' celebacy, etc. The book is fiction, but the author fuels the fire that it may indeed be true. I don't know if he actually believes it or if he just does it to drive sales.

There are elements of truth in the novel and the lines between what is truth and what is fiction are blurred to the point that there is a huge gray area. Apparently a lot of people believe the book to be non-fiction and it has sparked a large cult following.

The secret is passed down to members of the secret society, of which Da Vinci is purported to be a member and his artwork contains clues (I think).

Someone feel free to correct me if I've told the story inaccurately.

In a nutshell, it's an entertaining fiction novel set in modern-day Europe. A few people uncover the secret and find themselves in danger.

I haven't read it but from what I hear it is good. The conflict is about Jesus having a secret lover in Mary Magdaline. From what I have seen on tv as far as interviews go is that the author has said it is about 85% fiction. There is a secret society kinda deal called the Opus Diem that is real. The problem other than the Jesus thing is while the author says it is fiction, apparently from what I have heard, inside the cover claims this to be true.

uofmcamaro Wrote:I haven't read it but from what I hear it is good. The conflict is about Jesus having a secret lover in Mary Magdaline. From what I have seen on tv as far as interviews go is that the author has said it is about 85% fiction. There is a secret society kinda deal called the Opus Diem that is real. The problem other than the Jesus thing is while the author says it is fiction, apparently from what I have heard, inside the cover claims this to be true.

There is a growing number of people that believe what is said in the book is true, and Dan Brown got a lot of his ideas and info from a non-fiction work about the templars, Jesus' bloodline, the holy grail, and how it all was covered up.

I loved the book but refuse to go see the movie. I do not see Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon. So I won't see it.

uofmcamaro Wrote:I haven't read it but from what I hear it is good. The conflict is about Jesus having a secret lover in Mary Magdaline. From what I have seen on tv as far as interviews go is that the author has said it is about 85% fiction. There is a secret society kinda deal called the Opus Diem that is real. The problem other than the Jesus thing is while the author says it is fiction, apparently from what I have heard, inside the cover claims this to be true.

It's not just a secret lover but that they were married...

Let's just say that I've started looking at the pictures by DaVinci very close.

Supposedly the people who saw it in Cannes booed the screen, and not b/c of the content, but simply b/c it was a bad movie.

tigergreen Wrote:Supposedly the people who saw it in Cannes booed the screen, and not b/c of the content, but simply b/c it was a bad movie.

I've heard that too. That it is too long and drawn out. It is getting bad reviews for all of the hype.

uofmcamaro Wrote:There is a secret society kinda deal called the Opus Diem that is real.

Opus Dei isn't a secret society, it's a "prelature of the Catholic church that helps people seek holiness in their work & ordinarty activities" (from their website).

The secret society is the Priory of Sion. This society was formed in 1956 and subsequently dissolved. The notion that it is actually a real secret society that holds the keys to the truth about Jesus' lineage is a hoax.

But you refreshed my memory. Aside from the obvious problems the Catholic church would have with the notion that Jesus was married w/children, the book portrays the Opus Dei as an oddball, fanatical fringe sect of the Catholic church. I don't really know anything about Opus Dei, but apparently they've had to try to clear their name as a result of the book because many people who read the book & believe it have a very bad impression of Opus Dei.

TigerTwice Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

There are elements of truth in the novel and the lines between what is truth and what is fiction are blurred to the point that there is a huge gray area. Apparently a lot of people believe the book to be non-fiction and it has sparked a large cult following.

There's the gist of the controversy. Dan Brown made a fictional story based on different elements that are true (Jesus' existance, Jesus & Mary Magdalene knew each other, DiVinci did religious works of art, etc) and pieced them together with fiction thrown in (Jesus & Mary Magdalene married, DiVinci revealed secrets in his art, etc) to make a fictious book that people now take to be truth.

I'm going to start a new book on how George Washington had a secret love affair with Betsy Ross...they have offspring that are now running the CIA...the guy that did "Dogs Playing Poker" was part of a secret society that knew about it & his paintings point to the secret about the offspring. Hopefully, people will be just as willing to accept that as truth.

Nashville Tiger Wrote:

TigerTwice Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

There are elements of truth in the novel and the lines between what is truth and what is fiction are blurred to the point that there is a huge gray area. Apparently a lot of people believe the book to be non-fiction and it has sparked a large cult following.

There's the gist of the controversy. Dan Brown made a fictional story based on different elements that are true (Jesus' existance, Jesus & Mary Magdalene knew each other, DiVinci did religious works of art, etc) and pieced them together with fiction thrown in (Jesus & Mary Magdalene married, DiVinci revealed secrets in his art, etc) to make a fictious book that people now take to be truth.

I'm going to start a new book on how George Washington had a secret love affair with Betsy Ross...they have offspring that are now running the CIA...the guy that did "Dogs Playing Poker" was part of a secret society that knew about it & his paintings point to the secret about the offspring. Hopefully, people will be just as willing to accept that as truth.

:shhh: Ssssh, they may be watching or reading. :shhh:

TigerTwice Wrote:

uofmcamaro Wrote:There is a secret society kinda deal called the Opus Diem that is real.

Opus Dei isn't a secret society, it's a "prelature of the Catholic church that helps people seek holiness in their work & ordinarty activities" (from their website).

The secret society is the Priory of Sion. This society was formed in 1956 and subsequently dissolved. The notion that it is actually a real secret society that holds the keys to the truth about Jesus' lineage is a hoax.

But you refreshed my memory. Aside from the obvious problems the Catholic church would have with the notion that Jesus was married w/children, the book portrays the Opus Dei as an oddball, fanatical fringe sect of the Catholic church. I don't really know anything about Opus Dei, but apparently they've had to try to clear their name as a result of the book because many people who read the book & believe it have a very bad impression of Opus Dei.

TIME mag had a article a few weeks back about the Opus Dei and what they are about. They are somewhat different. Things like saying prayers while having someone hit them with a whip and such were said about them. Seemed kind of strange.

TigerTwice Wrote:I don't really know anything about Opus Dei, but apparently they've had to try to clear their name as a result of the book because many people who read the book & believe it have a very bad impression of Opus Dei.

As well they should. I have a friend who got tangeled up with opus dei and it took a long time to get it out of his system. Lets just say they are like a cult & brainwashing is their specialty.

SouthavenTiger Wrote:

See, the clues are there. Look at the picture, doesn't that look alot like the Deleware River? The clock is at 2:06 & 30 seconds...multiply that by 2 & what do you get? That's right 13. How many stars were on Betsy Ross' flag? 13! Coincidence? I think not!

TigerTwice Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

***SPOILER*** DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK

It's a fiction novel that has some loose elements of truth to it. Best I can remember, it's about the quest for the Holy Grail. Instead of the grail being an actual chalice or cup, the author's story is that the grail is the lineage/bloodline of Jesus. The author's story is that the Catholic church destroyed all evidence that Jesus was actually very mortal, was married, and had children. His descendents are supposedly amongst us today. The Holy Grail, I believe, is portrayed as a set of secret documents that a select few members of a secret society are charged with protecting & preserving as they are the only records of Jesus marriage, children, etc.

The controversy arises because it makes some scathing accusations about the Catholic church, Christianity, Jesus' celebacy, etc. The book is fiction, but the author fuels the fire that it may indeed be true. I don't know if he actually believes it or if he just does it to drive sales.

There are elements of truth in the novel and the lines between what is truth and what is fiction are blurred to the point that there is a huge gray area. Apparently a lot of people believe the book to be non-fiction and it has sparked a large cult following.

The secret is passed down to members of the secret society, of which Da Vinci is purported to be a member and his artwork contains clues (I think).

Someone feel free to correct me if I've told the story inaccurately.

In a nutshell, it's an entertaining fiction novel set in modern-day Europe. A few people uncover the secret and find themselves in danger.

Most of what you say is true except the part I have bolded. At least I didn't get that out the book. It is a great read. I guess people have failed to realize that it is fiction. I am pretty sure interviews with the author have said that this is not what he believes himself even, just a story. He is a great author and this is not even his best work. Angels and Demons is better by far and I recommend you pick that up after this whole DaVinci thing has quited down.

make sure to check out the book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail where the author got his inspiration from

The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

Those people were never Christians to begin with if a work of fiction can shake their faith. Many people profess to be saved, but do it due to peer pressure or other factors.

JTiger Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

Those people were never Christians to begin with if a work of fiction can shake their faith. Many people profess to be saved, but do it due to peer pressure or other factors.

Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

Another angle from a story on Yahoo. It sounds kinda like the Davinci Code...read all three parts. These folks believe Jesus lived out his days in Kashmir and is buried there.



http://travel.news.yahoo.com/b/rba_daily...1zdG9yeQ--

uofmcamaro Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

Those people were never Christians to begin with if a work of fiction can shake their faith. Many people profess to be saved, but do it due to peer pressure or other factors.

Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

I agree to a large extent, but some of these people may be "new" Christians who have not yet developed a firm understanding of Christianity and wonder if they have been led into believing a lie. I think those are the people that there is a legitimate concern about. I have also heard of people who are just considering whether to believe who have been run off from the possibility because they believe the "facts" in this book.

uofmcamaro Wrote:Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

30%? Try 70%, 80% or 90%. 70% are in church because they think they need to be there. Another 10-20% are there and are hardcore people who don't drink, smoke or otherwise "sin" too much, but they're ornery people who are there because it makes them feel better to think they're "better" Christians than those other 70%. Maybe 10% are actually there for the right reason and have a clue about what being a Christian really means. Those are the ones who are very pleasant to be around.

Ooops

bman Wrote:

uofmcamaro Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

Those people were never Christians to begin with if a work of fiction can shake their faith. Many people profess to be saved, but do it due to peer pressure or other factors.

Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

I agree to a large extent, but some of these people may be "new" Christians who have not yet developed a firm understanding of Christianity and wonder if they have been led into believing a lie. I think those are the people that there is a legitimate concern about. I have also heard of people who are just considering whether to believe who have been run off from the possibility because they believe the "facts" in this book.

I guess the "new" Chritians that the Passion of the Christ produced are being turned away by a fictional novel. A perfect example of sheeple.

TigerTwice Wrote:

uofmcamaro Wrote:Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

30%? Try 70%, 80% or 90%. 70% are in church because they think they need to be there. Another 10-20% are there and are hardcore people who don't drink, smoke or otherwise "sin" too much, but they're ornery people who are there because it makes them feel better to think they're "better" Christians than those other 70%. Maybe 10% are actually there for the right reason and have a clue about what being a Christian really means. Those are the ones who are very pleasant to be around.

I wouldn't say 70%, I'd say 50%.

Dr. J Wrote:

TigerTwice Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:I don't read books, but this thing seems somewhat controversal. What's the deal?

***SPOILER*** DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK

It's a fiction novel that has some loose elements of truth to it. Best I can remember, it's about the quest for the Holy Grail. Instead of the grail being an actual chalice or cup, the author's story is that the grail is the lineage/bloodline of Jesus. The author's story is that the Catholic church destroyed all evidence that Jesus was actually very mortal, was married, and had children. His descendents are supposedly amongst us today. The Holy Grail, I believe, is portrayed as a set of secret documents that a select few members of a secret society are charged with protecting & preserving as they are the only records of Jesus marriage, children, etc.

The controversy arises because it makes some scathing accusations about the Catholic church, Christianity, Jesus' celebacy, etc. The book is fiction, but the author fuels the fire that it may indeed be true. I don't know if he actually believes it or if he just does it to drive sales.

There are elements of truth in the novel and the lines between what is truth and what is fiction are blurred to the point that there is a huge gray area. Apparently a lot of people believe the book to be non-fiction and it has sparked a large cult following.

The secret is passed down to members of the secret society, of which Da Vinci is purported to be a member and his artwork contains clues (I think).

Someone feel free to correct me if I've told the story inaccurately.

In a nutshell, it's an entertaining fiction novel set in modern-day Europe. A few people uncover the secret and find themselves in danger.

Most of what you say is true except the part I have bolded. At least I didn't get that out the book. It is a great read. I guess people have failed to realize that it is fiction. I am pretty sure interviews with the author have said that this is not what he believes himself even, just a story. He is a great author and this is not even his best work. Angels and Demons is better by far and I recommend you pick that up after this whole DaVinci thing has quited down.

And if you want to nitpick, the story implies that the descendants only number in the handful. And some of the controversial allegations are based on at least sincere speculation, if not corroborated fact (and truth be told, much [edit for the religiously reactive: but certainly not all] of the existing beliefs are still uncorroborated speculation, hence requiring faith). Where DB provides artistic license is in connecting the dots to an extreme, likely fanciful conclusion. The mixture of fact and fiction is genius and fuels food for thought that I think is good for society. We have to question what we've been indoctrinated to believe in. Doesn't mean the questions have to compromise the fundamental beliefs. But recognize the weaknesses and strengths of your belief system.

Angels and Demons is much better. And I think that it treats religion more evenhandedly there (in terms of who the good and bad folks from each perspective are, misunderstandings, and inaccurate presumptions). And the brands are f'in cool. I guess you can make one of those brands from just about any word if you work at it hard enough. Unfortunately I read it before Da Vinci Code and was very disappointed with the Code.

bman Wrote:

uofmcamaro Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

Those people were never Christians to begin with if a work of fiction can shake their faith. Many people profess to be saved, but do it due to peer pressure or other factors.

Probably 30% of the people who sit in church don't get it. They go for fire protection to escape hell but they live like hell too. It is ok to question things but you shouldn't let a fictional book/movie make you question your faith.

I agree to a large extent, but some of these people may be "new" Christians who have not yet developed a firm understanding of Christianity and wonder if they have been led into believing a lie. I think those are the people that there is a legitimate concern about. I have also heard of people who are just considering whether to believe who have been run off from the possibility because they believe the "facts" in this book.

A few summers ago I spend a couple of weeks in Romania and the churches over there have a year or so period of where they make sure you are a christian. They don't do the whole, "he said a pray, he is a christian". Not saying that works get you into heaven, but they show a change and works show where your heart is.

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

I had to get my copy out and make sure, but this is entirely untrue. The book says "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. He does not claim anywhere that everything he writes about Jesus is indeed fact. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and Dan Brown himself have all said that this is not necessarily their own belief system.

Dr. J Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

I had to get my copy out and make sure, but this is entirely untrue. The book says "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. He does not claim anywhere that everything he writes about Jesus is indeed fact. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and Dan Brown himself have all said that this is not necessarily their own belief system.

What author in the bible said he doesn't believe the bible? Or is that what you meant?

uofmcamaro Wrote:

Dr. J Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

I had to get my copy out and make sure, but this is entirely untrue. The book says "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. He does not claim anywhere that everything he writes about Jesus is indeed fact. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and Dan Brown himself have all said that this is not necessarily their own belief system.

What author in the bible said he doesn't believe the bible? Or is that what you meant?

Not what I meant at all. Brown himself wrote a work of fiction. He knows its fiction. I guess the rest of the world has failed to realize this. If you are strong enough in your faith you should be able to discuss things like this with an open mind. That doesn't mean you have to come away from it believing in it.

uofmcamaro Wrote:

Dr. J Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

I had to get my copy out and make sure, but this is entirely untrue. The book says "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. He does not claim anywhere that everything he writes about Jesus is indeed fact. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and Dan Brown himself have all said that this is not necessarily their own belief system.

What author in the bible said he doesn't believe the bible? Or is that what you meant?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Bible assembled after most of the authors contained as well as those in the Nag Hammadi had died? While I'm on the issue, is it true that the agnostic gospels were at least considered for inclusion (not looking for motives for inclusion or not, not looking for the decisions, just, when they were assembling the bible, what was up for consideration at the beginning of the process). And I guess I can research this myself, but who was involved in the process of deciding and assembling the text?

kabluey Wrote:

uofmcamaro Wrote:

Dr. J Wrote:

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

I had to get my copy out and make sure, but this is entirely untrue. The book says "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. He does not claim anywhere that everything he writes about Jesus is indeed fact. The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and Dan Brown himself have all said that this is not necessarily their own belief system.

What author in the bible said he doesn't believe the bible? Or is that what you meant?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Bible assembled after most of the authors contained as well as those in the Nag Hammadi had died? While I'm on the issue, is it true that the agnostic gospels were at least considered for inclusion (not looking for motives for inclusion or not, not looking for the decisions, just, when they were assembling the bible, what was up for consideration at the beginning of the process). And I guess I can research this myself, but who was involved in the process of deciding and assembling the text?

Google "Council of Nicea" it should answer everything

JTiger Wrote:

kabluey Wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Bible assembled after most of the authors contained as well as those in the Nag Hammadi had died? While I'm on the issue, is it true that the agnostic gospels were at least considered for inclusion (not looking for motives for inclusion or not, not looking for the decisions, just, when they were assembling the bible, what was up for consideration at the beginning of the process). And I guess I can research this myself, but who was involved in the process of deciding and assembling the text?

Google "Council of Nicea" it should answer everything

You can check out this wiki as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_ca...ian_canons

Essentially, the Bible as we know it today was assembled over a very long period of time. All told, there were over 600 books/writings at one point. It got whittled down to 66.

Reading about the Council of Nicaea is a good recommendation.

I've been involved in several posts on the topic. I don't have the energy to do it again. I'll just say that being indoctrinated in Christian beliefs (or any beliefs) is very powerful. People tend to generally accept what they are told without question. I find it odd that people with sense don't question many of the things they were taught as they get old enough to think independently.

TigerTwice Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

kabluey Wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Bible assembled after most of the authors contained as well as those in the Nag Hammadi had died? While I'm on the issue, is it true that the agnostic gospels were at least considered for inclusion (not looking for motives for inclusion or not, not looking for the decisions, just, when they were assembling the bible, what was up for consideration at the beginning of the process). And I guess I can research this myself, but who was involved in the process of deciding and assembling the text?

Google "Council of Nicea" it should answer everything

You can check out this wiki as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_ca...ian_canons

Essentially, the Bible as we know it today was assembled over a very long period of time. All told, there were over 600 books/writings at one point. It got whittled down to 66.

Reading about the Council of Nicaea is a good recommendation.

I've been involved in several posts on the topic. I don't have the energy to do it again. I'll just say that being indoctrinated in Christian beliefs (or any beliefs) is very powerful. People tend to generally accept what they are told without question. I find it odd that people with sense don't question many of the things they were taught as they get old enough to think independently.

I like the last statement about questioning things as we get older. I remember back about 10 years ago (I was only 12) and my parents telling me stuff and me learning things in church. I just would accept these things as truth. The older I have become I have looked into things, not always questioning them, but researching. Through this research I either affirmed my beliefs or changed them. Through books I have read and different points of view I have gained great insight. In some areas I would consider myself to be very deep and have valid points to my parents old teachings while in some areas I still have much to learn. I just think it is neat to see how much my views have changed as I got older, I don't just conform to what I was taught. If I was taught something I yearn to know why and if I find out that it was from a bias standpoint or not completely true then I change my way of thinking.

uofmcamaro Wrote:

TigerTwice Wrote:

JTiger Wrote:

kabluey Wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Bible assembled after most of the authors contained as well as those in the Nag Hammadi had died? While I'm on the issue, is it true that the agnostic gospels were at least considered for inclusion (not looking for motives for inclusion or not, not looking for the decisions, just, when they were assembling the bible, what was up for consideration at the beginning of the process). And I guess I can research this myself, but who was involved in the process of deciding and assembling the text?

Google "Council of Nicea" it should answer everything

You can check out this wiki as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_ca...ian_canons

Essentially, the Bible as we know it today was assembled over a very long period of time. All told, there were over 600 books/writings at one point. It got whittled down to 66.

Reading about the Council of Nicaea is a good recommendation.

I've been involved in several posts on the topic. I don't have the energy to do it again. I'll just say that being indoctrinated in Christian beliefs (or any beliefs) is very powerful. People tend to generally accept what they are told without question. I find it odd that people with sense don't question many of the things they were taught as they get old enough to think independently.

I like the last statement about questioning things as we get older. I remember back about 10 years ago (I was only 12) and my parents telling me stuff and me learning things in church. I just would accept these things as truth. The older I have become I have looked into things, not always questioning them, but researching. Through this research I either affirmed my beliefs or changed them. Through books I have read and different points of view I have gained great insight. In some areas I would consider myself to be very deep and have valid points to my parents old teachings while in some areas I still have much to learn. I just think it is neat to see how much my views have changed as I got older, I don't just conform to what I was taught. If I was taught something I yearn to know why and if I find out that it was from a bias standpoint or not completely true then I change my way of thinking.

Unfortunately, not everyone challenges their own deeply held beliefs as the years pass.

I know my parents would sometimes ask me to explain why I believed something when they sensed I just believed it because they did. They didn't want me to become sycophantic.

Article from the CA today. How does a 14 year old get it and adults can't?? Does anyone on here who has read the book or seen the movie think that it is blasphemy? I don't think any of the Mary Magdelene marriage or a child has any truth to it, but if it was true I don't think it necessarily means that Jesus couldn't have been our Savior just because he got married and had a child. It's fiction. It's your choice whether or not you go see it.

Quote:Catholics stand up against 'Da Vinci'
Justin Shaw/Special to The Commercial Appeal

Christina Cromwell recites Scriptures with fellow Catholics at Malco's Paradiso theater in protest of Ron Howard's "The Da Vinci Code." Story Tools
E-mail this story | Print

By Sherri Drake
Contact
May 20, 2006
Protesters held signs and rosaries and spoke quiet prayers under the arched columns of the Paradiso Cinema Friday night.
About a dozen Catholics were at the theater near Poplar and Mendenhall to speak out against the premiere of "The Da Vinci Code," a film they say blasphemes Jesus Christ.


Advertisement
The movie is based on Dan Brown's fictional work, which is centered around the idea that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a daughter and the Catholic Church has hidden the fact for centuries.
Tamar Hugoboom, who attends St. Louis Church, prayed on her knees, drawing the attention of many moviegoers.

"You have to stand for what is truth and what is right," said Hugoboom, holding her olive wood rosary.

"There's a cloud of evil over the world. And you have to decide what side of the fence you're going to be on. You can't straddle it anymore."

The protest was peaceful, with many stopping to ask questions. A few shouted as they went by.

"I love Jesus! Whoo!" a young driver yelled from a minivan.

Vic Carter, 45, said he's Catholic and doesn't understand why the group was protesting.

"This is entertainment," said Carter, who'd just bought a ticket to the movie. "It's somebody's interpretation of what might have happened."

Bart Crowell, who attends Church of the Nativity Catholic Church in Bartlett, called the film an "abomination."

"The movie denies the divinity of Christ, and that is blasphemy and we're here to protest just that," Crowell said. "In support of our Lord and our Father, we, as Christians, have to stand up."

Amber Stone, 16, stopped to watch the protesters after she saw the movie.

"I think they should have better things to do than sit out here and protest against this," Stone said.

Bilio Renfroe, 14, was on his way to see the movie and said he respects the protesters, but disagrees with them.

"I'm a Catholic and all, but honestly, I don't see anything wrong with it. It's like any other movie. It's like fiction."

The protesters stood outside the East Memphis theater for about two hours.

"It's just our hope to raise consciousness," Hugoboom said.

-- Sherri Drake: 529-2510

Dr. J Wrote:Article from the CA today. How does a 14 year old get it and adults can't?? Does anyone on here who has read the book or seen the movie think that it is blasphemy? I don't think any of the Mary Magdelene marriage or a child has any truth to it, but if it was true I don't think it necessarily means that Jesus couldn't have been our Savior just because he got married and had a child. It's fiction. It's your choice whether or not you go see it.

Quote:Catholics stand up against 'Da Vinci'
Justin Shaw/Special to The Commercial Appeal

Christina Cromwell recites Scriptures with fellow Catholics at Malco's Paradiso theater in protest of Ron Howard's "The Da Vinci Code." Story Tools
E-mail this story | Print

By Sherri Drake
Contact
May 20, 2006
Protesters held signs and rosaries and spoke quiet prayers under the arched columns of the Paradiso Cinema Friday night.
About a dozen Catholics were at the theater near Poplar and Mendenhall to speak out against the premiere of "The Da Vinci Code," a film they say blasphemes Jesus Christ.


Advertisement
The movie is based on Dan Brown's fictional work, which is centered around the idea that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a daughter and the Catholic Church has hidden the fact for centuries.
Tamar Hugoboom, who attends St. Louis Church, prayed on her knees, drawing the attention of many moviegoers.

"You have to stand for what is truth and what is right," said Hugoboom, holding her olive wood rosary.

"There's a cloud of evil over the world. And you have to decide what side of the fence you're going to be on. You can't straddle it anymore."

The protest was peaceful, with many stopping to ask questions. A few shouted as they went by.

"I love Jesus! Whoo!" a young driver yelled from a minivan.

Vic Carter, 45, said he's Catholic and doesn't understand why the group was protesting.

"This is entertainment," said Carter, who'd just bought a ticket to the movie. "It's somebody's interpretation of what might have happened."

Bart Crowell, who attends Church of the Nativity Catholic Church in Bartlett, called the film an "abomination."

"The movie denies the divinity of Christ, and that is blasphemy and we're here to protest just that," Crowell said. "In support of our Lord and our Father, we, as Christians, have to stand up."

Amber Stone, 16, stopped to watch the protesters after she saw the movie.

"I think they should have better things to do than sit out here and protest against this," Stone said.

Bilio Renfroe, 14, was on his way to see the movie and said he respects the protesters, but disagrees with them.

"I'm a Catholic and all, but honestly, I don't see anything wrong with it. It's like any other movie. It's like fiction."

The protesters stood outside the East Memphis theater for about two hours.

"It's just our hope to raise consciousness," Hugoboom said.

-- Sherri Drake: 529-2510

In the book it makes it seem like the Catholic Church set up Christianity to the way it is in order to obtain power. The book claims that there were over 80 gospels originally but the Church destroyed most of them and only used the ones that made Jesus seem divine. It also makes it seem that the Church did a lot of things to oppress women.

klg316 Wrote:In the book it makes it seem like the Catholic Church set up Christianity to the way it is in order to obtain power. The book claims that there were over 80 gospels originally but the Church destroyed most of them and only used the ones that made Jesus seem divine. It also makes it seem that the Church did a lot of things to oppress women.

It has been probably a couple years since I read the book and I did forget about some of that. I am not a Catholic myself. I will have to go see the movie and probably reread the book when I get a chance.

Dr. J Wrote:

klg316 Wrote:In the book it makes it seem like the Catholic Church set up Christianity to the way it is in order to obtain power. The book claims that there were over 80 gospels originally but the Church destroyed most of them and only used the ones that made Jesus seem divine. It also makes it seem that the Church did a lot of things to oppress women.

It has been probably a couple years since I read the book and I did forget about some of that. I am not a Catholic myself. I will have to go see the movie and probably reread the book when I get a chance.

I just finished reading the book this past Monday so it's still a little fresh in my head. I am Catholic but I am somewhat cynical towards religion. The book didn't offend me. Of course when some of my Protestant friends ask me why the Catholic Church does certain things the way they do I usually respond with, "They just do that to piss off the Baptists."

klg316 Wrote:

Dr. J Wrote:

klg316 Wrote:In the book it makes it seem like the Catholic Church set up Christianity to the way it is in order to obtain power. The book claims that there were over 80 gospels originally but the Church destroyed most of them and only used the ones that made Jesus seem divine. It also makes it seem that the Church did a lot of things to oppress women.

It has been probably a couple years since I read the book and I did forget about some of that. I am not a Catholic myself. I will have to go see the movie and probably reread the book when I get a chance.

I just finished reading the book this past Monday so it's still a little fresh in my head. I am Catholic but I am somewhat cynical towards religion. The book didn't offend me. Of course when some of my Protestant friends ask me why the Catholic Church does certain things the way they do I usually respond with, "They just do that to piss off the Baptists."

Joke -

Q. You know the difference between Catholics and Baptists, don't you?

A. Catholics say "Hi" to each other at the liquor store.

For those that did not follow or read my link...


Mystery of the Martyr's Tomb: Part One
Mon May 15, 10:48 AM ET


Is an ancient sepulcher in Kashmir the resting place of Jesus Christ? The question plagued award-winning writer James Polster for years, so much so that he made a journey to Kashmir to find out, an odyssey of discovery reminscent of the DaVinci Code. This is the first part of a three-part account of Polster's journey nearly 30 years ago.

Srinagar, India ? Sahibzada Basharat Saleem was silent. In one corner of his sitting room, a lazy ceiling fan pushed the thick afternoon air toward a plastic replica of the Taj Mahal. Saleem rubbed his right forefinger into his brow and stared off toward the garden. This restaurant owner and poet from Kashmir in northernmost India was pondering questions that one day may influence the soul of the western world.

ADVERTISEMENT


Sahibzada Basharat Saleem was the man in the middle of a great mystery. In 1979, city maps of Srinigar marked a place in the Khanyar district called the Martyr's Tomb. Rozabal, the squat, sprawling structure that houses the tomb, is next to Saleem's ancestral home. Family tradition required that the tomb be maintained by the eldest son in each generation. Saleem was that eldest son, a direct descendent of the inhabitant of the tomb.


Yet who was in that tomb?


In the fall of 1979, I'd been following a string of possibility that had led from a dusty bookshop in London, to a memorable afternoon at the Press Club of London, and eventually to a Pan Am flight to New Delhi. In those days, few people made the trip north from Delhi to the Vale of Kashmir. Those who did, however, found themselves in a quiet world of gilded houseboats, lush jungles, towering mountains, and turquoise lakes. A paradise; heaven on earth.


But as I tried to plumb the mystery of the tomb's occupant, I found that Saleem was no public figure, and difficult to find. It was a tip that he owned a restaurant that eventually led me to the right restaurant. Then, some helpful scrawls from a waiter on a torn napkin corner sent me into the tangle of roads in Khanyar that confused even my taxi driver.


I knocked on the door. Nothing. I surreptitiously peeked in some windows (yes, I was unexpected and uninvited; but I was hot, the cab was gone, and I'd come a long way, so, I did it.) I shouted out some polite hellos.


Someone unseen returned my call, and asked me to unbolt a large metal door around the side. I did, clanged it closed behind me, and made my way through a long row of hedges.


Sahibzada Saleem, wild-eyed, with bright, red-dyed hair, wearing pajamas, shuffled up to me and placed the palm of his hand on my forehead. The effect was immediate and electric. This was still the time of the gurus in America; it would be nothing for another god or prophet to surface in India.


That, however, was not the case. Saleem just excused himself and reappeared a short time later in slacks and a button-down shirt. The wild eyes were because he didn't have his glasses on. The touch on my forehead, an understandable attempt to communicate a greeting in India if one is caught without his hearing aid. The blazes of red at the temples, while a little unusual, were only a touch of vanity covering up his creeping grey hair.


Saleem presented himself as a mild man, certainly no publicity seeker. But when I told him the purpose of my visit, he nodded. "The truth must be told," he said, raising to his lips a small blue book from his breast pocket as we settled into chairs. "The truth must be told and the truth must prevail. One should always be guided by actual facts."


Basharat Saleem had in his possession ancient genealogical tables which he, and many others, claims link him back through the centuries to the occupant of that tomb, as a direct descendant of whatever martyr's remains are held within.


When I asked any native of Srinagar why this place is famous, they invariably replied, "Because it is the tomb of Jesus Christ."


And when I asked if most people in Kashmir believed this, the reply was "Not most. Everyone."


Part 2 - The Geneaology


James Polster is the author of "Brown," "A Guest in the Jungle," and "New Orleans Mystery," and several history-rewriting screenplays.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mystery of the Martyr's Tomb: Part Two
Tue May 16, 10:55 AM ET


Who is buried in Srinagar's ancient sepulcher? The question plagued James Polster for years, so much so that he made a journey to Kashmir to find out. This is the second part of the three-part account of Polster's journey of discovery nearly 30 years ago.

Srinagar, India - Deep in the Khanyar district of the old capital, there is a tomb which many sources have suggested, or insisted, is the final resting place of Jesus Christ. Sahibzada Basharat Saleem, caretaker of the tomb, had in his possession ancient genealogical tables which he claimed link him back through the centuries to the occupant of that tomb, a direct descendant.

ADVERTISEMENT


With the success of the book "Da Vinci Code," by Dan Brown, and the movie being released this week, interest in such alternative histories has spiked. Brown was sued for plagiarism by the authors of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," a supposedly nonfiction work outlining the survival of Jesus' bloodline in Europe, a legal battle in which Brown prevailed. Last month, National Geographic aired a television special based on a resurfaced "lost gospel" questioning long held beliefs on Judas and his role in the betrayal of Jesus. All of these works drive home how malleable long held theories may be, subject to interpretations of fact, problems with translations, coded information, allegories, cryptic writings... legend and myth intertwining with history.


I embarked on my own journey nearly 30 years ago, a quest that that began in an old London bookshop and sent me down a trail of evidence reaching from Palestine to Kashmir, and beyond to the Tibetan border. It suggests that after the crucifixion, Jesus did not ascend to heaven, but remained alive, escaped into Persia, and continued to travel east. This theory that Jesus became a father, lived out his final years in Kashmir and remains buried there today, bears odd resemblance to the "Da Vinci Code" theory.


The New Testament itself has puzzling passages, such as the one from Luke where Christ speaks to his disciples after the crucifixion. "Behold my hands and feet that it is I myself, handle me and see for a spirit hath no flesh and bones as ye see me have."


"I am not a man to force my views on anyone," said Saleem, when I tracked him down in the Khanyar district of Srinagar. "The truth must be told and the truth must prevail. One should always be guided by actual facts."


While we spoke, I wondered which was more likely true, more supported by facts. One, the widely held belief that Jesus died and ascended to heaven, or two, that he was only badly injured, his followers hustled him out of dangerous Jerusalem and, some time in the course of his life, he had at least one child; and that the inheritor of that bloodline in Kashmir was now sitting across from me.


"I am the most authentic source," Saleem maintained, "the most directly concerned. I possess the history." He indicated the genealogies.


"According to the family history and genealogical tables (written in Persian), the name clearly and explicitly mentioned is Shahzada Nabi Hazrat Yura Asaf. From him the lineage comes directly down to my father and to me. This man came here from Afghanistan more than 1,900 years ago. He was a prophet, highly reverenced, some sources say of the highest reverence, who performed miracles.


"But the name," Saleem said carefully, "is always Yura Asaf, not Jesus."


The group that first claimed that Jesus and Yura Asaf were the same man was the Ahmadiyya movement, a controversial nineteenth century offshoot of Islam. Numerous Muslim and Persian documents ? the Tafir-Ibn-I-Jarir, the Kanz-al-Ummal, and the Rauzat-us-Safa ? have references that contribute to the theory of Christ's escape. Some of these also mention that Jesus was accompanied by Mary, and there is another burial place in Pakistan, along his theoretical route to Kashmir, known as Mai Mari da Ashtan, or "resting place of Mother Mary."


The Tarik-i-Kashmir tells of the prophet Yura Asaf arriving in Kashmir at a time coinciding with the supposed arrival of Jesus. An old Persian book, Negaris-Tan-i-Kashmir, tells how Jesus became a husband and father. The Bhavishya Mahapuroma, an ancient Hindu text, places him in Kashmir decades after the crucifixion, and in the old lamasery of Hemis in Ladakh, scrolls exist which reportedly attest to Christ's presence there at one time.


Genealogies, ancient books, family traditions. But what of the tomb itself, the Martyr's Tomb of Srinagar? I had to see for myself.


Part Three - Into the Tomb


James Polster is the author of "Brown," "A Guest in the Jungle," and "New Orleans Mystery."




------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mystery of the Martyr's Tomb: Part Three
Wed May 17, 10:08 AM ET


Who is buried in Srinagar's ancient sepulcher? The question plagued writer James Polster for years, so much so that he made a journey to Kashmir to find out, an odyssey of discovery reminscent of the DaVinci Code. This is the third and final part of Polster's journey nearly 30 years ago.

Srinagar, India ? It was 1979. City maps of Srinagar marked a place called only the Martyr's Tomb. Rozabal, the squat, sprawling structure that houses the tomb, is next to the ancestral home of Sahibzada Basharat Saleem, and, it is family tradition that the tomb be maintained by the eldest son in each generation.

ADVERTISEMENT


The main street leading up to the Rozabal was too narrow and torn to allow a car to pass through. Women fully veiled in their black chadreh, and men dressed in baggy pants, skull caps, vests and dark fur hats noisily charged about in front.


The grounds were overgrown ? twists and clumps of green leaves hid most of the arches and elaborately carved shutters of the small, whitewashed old building on two sides, a short metal fence surrounded a cleared section on the others.


The Rozabal was kept locked. Gulam Mohammed, the custodian, had to first be located, then tolerated. He unbolted the thick door which creaked predictably. I ascended a few stone steps, removed my shoes, and entered a small hall leading into the main chamber.


Inside, there was an official decree dated 1766 proclaiming it to be the tomb of Yura Asaf. But within the crypt itself, I was to find a final, chilling clue.


The tomb dominated the cool, rectangular interior of the Rozabal. Faded green wooden walls were carved in diamond and six-point star motifs forming a tall, cage-like box. The box itself was divided into large and small lattice-carved sections which made it look a bit like the sort of elaborate device a stage magician might use.


The tomb walls echoed the shape of the larger exterior walls and ran along the perimeter of the crypt area. Long Kashmiri carpets were laid the length of all sides.


It was just possible to crawl into the tomb, 2,000 years back in time, through a small opening in one of the walls. The ground was hard and cool, and, should you ever enter that same, shadowed vault, the slightest flinch of imagination will be enough to spin your thoughts.


I lit a single candle. In the tight space above me, an orange cloth was draped over a worn, wooden scaffold which protected a short, three tiered, rectangular mound at the head of the crypt .


Moving deeper inside, I pulled next to the burial head. There was an old stone cube with the life-size imprints of a pair of feet. I pushed my candle forward.


The feet appeared to be ancient carvings, but, at the center of each foot, there was the clear mark of a deep wound.


◊ ◊ ◊


"In the Koran," Saleem told me, "God says, ?We did not let Jesus die on the cross. We lifted him up and took him away to a place full of mountains, rivers, lakes, flowers. A place of beauty.'


"This place in the Koran can be none other than heaven," Saleem explained with a serene smile. "It is written further, ?Jesus is alive in heaven'. The Koran says bodily alive, but the word ?heaven' is not actually written in the Koran."


Saleem paused for a moment, then sat up a little straighter in his chair. "Many people say this place he went to is Kashmir, instead of heaven, because Kashmir has this same beauty."


"I can talk for days and nights about this because I am the man concerned," Sahibzada Basharat Saleem said. But the sun was setting behind unfamiliar streets, and it seemed like I had heard enough.


James Polster is the award-winning author of "Brown," "A Guest in the Jungle," and "New Orleans Mystery

bman Wrote:The problem with the book/movie from a Christian perspective is that according to some who have done polling/research, this work of fiction supposedly has caused thousands of people who previously claimed to be Christians to doubt their faith because Brown claims on the first page of the book as Fact that the info in it about Jesus is truthful. Even at least some of the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which these "facts" were taken from, admit that there is no proof for them, it is just their theory. I saw one of the authors on TV and heard him admit this myself.

How is that the book or the authors fault? If a book or movie makes you doubt/change your faith you never had it to begin with!