The Da Vinci Code (Jesus, virgin, tradition, blood, doctrine)

[Shadow Wolf]

I am wondering, Why do some people get so p***ed off over the Di Vince Code, when the book is clearly marked "Fiction." Also, the author of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" which first theorized that Jesus was married, admited he has very little evidence to back it up, and it shouldn't be taken seriously.
History channel is re-showing the Di Vince Code shows, so feel free to watch them if you need conviencing, or want to feel some reliefe.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf

I am wondering, Why do some people get so upset over the Di Vince Code, when the book is clearly marked "Fiction." Also, the author of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" which first theorized that Jesus was married, admited he has very little evidence to back it up, and it shouldn't be taken seriously.
History channel is re-showing the Di Vince Code shows, so feel free to watch them if you need conviencing, or want to feel some reliefe.

I have got a theory as to why. I think it isn't so much that they are worried it will be presented as fact or taken as fact. The authors of the movie books and media have been very professional in presenting it as a work of fiction.

I think what bothers them more, and it is in interesting topic..great thread shadow Wolf--that their is fear that some people will start to accept some of the fictionalized ideas as a valid faith.

What I mean by valid faith is valid in construction in their eyes and faith being a belief in the absense of evidence. The Christian uneasyness with Islam stems along similar lines as Muslims see Jesus as a prophet and not an aspect of a tribune God.

If you read enough religions, say 10 or more, just skim them, and they are in similar time periods, you will see each borrows from other faiths around them. The "ideas" of modern faiths are not knew but inpired and/or borrowed.

I think it creates a two-fold sensativity issue for Christians:

1) Jesus portrayed as yet again, as something other a virgin tribune God.

2) That the reality of faith is that it is a belief in the abscence of evidence which would mean, that though the da vinci code is a work of fiction, validity wise, if someone were to buy into the premises it presents it holds equal validity to the christian religions.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by robtex

I have got a theory as to why. I think it isn't so much that they are worried it will be presented as fact or taken as fact. The authors of the movie books and media have been very professional in presenting it as a work of fiction.

I think what bothers them more, and it is in interesting topic..great thread shadow Wolf--that their is fear that some people will start to accept some of the fictionalized ideas as a valid faith.

What I mean by valid faith is valid in construction in their eyes and faith being a belief in the absense of evidence. The Christian uneasyness with Islam stems along similar lines as Muslims see Jesus as a prophet and not an aspect of a tribune God.

If you read enough religions, say 10 or more, just skim them, and they are in similar time periods, you will see each borrows from other faiths around them. The "ideas" of modern faiths are not knew but inpired and/or borrowed.

I think it creates a two-fold sensativity issue for Christians:

1) Jesus portrayed as yet again, as something other a virgin tribune God.

2) That the reality of faith is that it is a belief in the abscence of evidence which would mean, that though the da vinci code is a work of fiction, validity wise, if someone were to buy into the premises it presents it holds equal validity to the christian religions.

Perhaps some of the confusion is due to the success of the fiction books in the Left Behind series that is written by a well-known preacher and representative of popular Christian theology.

Christians do have a very long tradition of incorporating orthodox or pseudo-orthodox (in the case of the Left Behind rubbish) doctrines into fiction. There is a large market today for "Christian" fiction. We should remember the works of C. S. Lewis and many others who fit into this genre.

[angellous_evangellous]

And I have no doubt that the media has hyped the movie and book for all it's worth.

[michel]

Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf

I am wondering, Why do some people get so p***ed off over the Di Vince Code, when the book is clearly marked "Fiction." Also, the author of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" which first theorized that Jesus was married, admited he has very little evidence to back it up, and it shouldn't be taken seriously.

History channel is re-showing the Di Vince Code shows, so feel free to watch them if you need conviencing, or want to feel some reliefe.

Personally, I can't understand it.

We all know that when someone writes a piece of fiction, he/she uses actual people or events, and 'works them into the book'; but for some reason, anything which has any religious connotations or connections immediately gets people fraught.

There is only one possible reason that I can think of, and it isn't a 'good' one, it is that the religious establishment is fearful of people believing in the fiction above religion.

To be frank, if people are that naive, we'd better stop having films of kidnaps, airplane wrecks..........well, just about anything (in case anyone thinks it is 'real').

I am sorry if I offend any Christian, but surely, we are not so pathetic as to need to be led by the hand everywhere?

[fromthe heart]

Originally Posted by michel

Personally, I can't understand it.

We all know that when someone writes a piece of fiction, he/she uses actual people or events, and 'works them into the book'; but for some reason, anything which has any religious connotations or connections immediately gets people fraught.

There is only one possible reason that I can think of, and it isn't a 'good' one, it is that the religious establishment is fearful of people believing in the fiction above religion.

To be frank, if people are that naive, we'd better stop having films of kidnaps, airplane wrecks..........well, just about anything (in case anyone thinks it is 'real').

I am sorry if I offend any Christian, but surely, we are not so pathetic as to need to be led by the hand everywhere?

No offense takenby me personally Mich...but it all stems from sown seeds and you should know what I mean....there ahve been past times where fictional things led some folks wrongly...perhaps they weren't starting off well upstairs but still 'some' things can turn fiction into reality for some people. AND YES some people are very naive in concepts they see and hear...that doesn't make them stupid just lacking proper instruction.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Perhaps some of the confusion is due to the success of the fiction books in the Left Behind series that is written by a well-known preacher and representative of popular Christian theology.

Christians do have a very long tradition of incorporating orthodox or pseudo-orthodox (in the case of the Left Behind rubbish) doctrines into fiction. There is a large market today for "Christian" fiction. We should remember the works of C. S. Lewis and many others who fit into this genre.

My understanding is "Left behind" is a prophecy and may be apples and oranges..not to nit pick.....

But C.S. Lewis is a great comparision. He wrote, like you said, Christian fiction. What seperates him from a Dan Brown, in the way of fiction? Great comparision!!

[robtex]

Originally Posted by michel

, but surely, we are not so pathetic as to need to be led by the hand everywhere?

So you don't think one of the purposes of the bible was to lead Christians the same direction in regards to their faith?

[Booko]

Originally Posted by michel

There is only one possible reason that I can think of, and it isn't a 'good' one, it is that the religious establishment is fearful of people believing in the fiction above religion.

Religious establishments, as well as other sorts of establishments, are known for fearing the idea that people might actually think for themselves.

Some individuals I've seen often respond to these sorts of things with, "But what about those of weak faith?" That seems to be more about them trying to convince themselves about how wonderful they are for having a "strong" faith -- much better than *those* folks...

Myself, I don't see how anyone can come to any sort of faith that means anything without asking questions.