Just got back from "The DaVinci Code"

[Artfully Martial]

It *isn't* that bad. But not because Dan Brown doesn't want it to be bad. He just misses the point. In Dan Brown's world, Jesus being married = Jesus not being divine. Actually, in mind, a ton of religious figures have been married, within Christianity and the Greek gods most certainly had relations. In Genesis, the Neriphym (I believe, I forget the exact name) were the children of angels marrying human women.

My point is, Jesus was supposed to be wholly human, and honestly, I don't care if he had kids or not--it's intellectual curiosity only.

That said, as I recall, Paul didn't get married either. But no one is debating that despite the alleged weirdness of being unmarried at 30...and he never did get married.

The claims the book makes aren't even that sensational, honestly.

What we, as an audience, can and deserve to be upset about is that Dan Brown claims that all rituals, places, etc, are accurate. And they're not. They're just not. We don't have to argue the religious aspects (that's stupid anyway, unless you can prove God one way or the other..) merely the historical ones.

All that said, I loved the book and I recommend it to anyone. It's one of the most compelling novels I've ever read.

 

[Svashtar]

I usually read the new best sellers but for some reason just never picked this one up. Based on everyone's recommendations though I'm going to have to try it. Someone told me that if you had read the book that the movie was disappointing? but I'm not seeing that reaction here.

I did pick up a book by Dan Brown the other day in the bargain bin, hardcover for $2 called "Angels & Demons." Haven't read it yet so not sure what it's about, but thought I would give it a try. I'll have to try TDC though and see what all the fuss is about. I had planned seeing the movie next week.

Norm

 

[namaarie]

Angels and Demons was good, IMO. Same main character as the Da Vinci Code, and it sort of sets up some good character background. I read it first, and I'm glad I did.

I'm just truly glad that this book and movie are promoting discussion! What's wrong with a little discussion? It makes people evaluate what they think about their faith, and what's wrong with that? It's fiction, sure, but it's thought-provoking. And it has brought a lot or interesting questions into prime time, mainstream discussion. I liked the story a lot, and am glad that it has caused these questions that I have long pondered to be aired for a while.

Chris

 

[Yvsa]

I'm just truly glad that this book and movie are promoting discussion! What's wrong with a little discussion? It makes people evaluate what they think about their faith, and what's wrong with that? It's fiction, sure, but it's thought-provoking. And it has brought a lot or interesting questions into prime time, mainstream discussion. I liked the story a lot, and am glad that it has caused these questions that I have long pondered to be aired for a while.

Chris

To some of us folks the whole subject is fiction or at the most a history of a people.
I haven't read TDC but I'll get around too it one of these days just out of curiosity more than anything else.
One of our daughters emailed Dan Brown and told him how much she enjoyed the Angels & Demons he wrote. Mr. Brown wrote her back and told her she would probably enjoy the book he was writing then more, it was TDC and she said she did enjoy it more.
Then PJ said she would loan me her copy.
I remarked that I didn't appreciate Mr. Brown writing a book of fiction and then cash in on it by writing such books as, "How to read or Understand TDC" and then PJ told me that it wasn't Mr. Brown who wrote said books, so much for me assuming so I guess.

 

[namaarie]

To some of us folks the whole subject is fiction or at the most a history of a people.

You said it like I couldn't! Fact is, there is so little hard evidence of events from that time that it's almost all on faith. And what is known by historians doesn't always agree with the good book. I say this only to emphasize that this is a matter of faith, not of "right" or "wrong." It's about belief, not proof.

Chris

 

[Jeff Clark]

My problem with Dan Brown's books is that he writes them as if they are thrillers while they are best viewed as comedies. Angels and Demons irritated the hell out of me because of my scientific and engineering background. There were simple ways around most of the problems in the story. The antimatter containment vessel was an incredibly stuipid concept and he concocted a huge conflict between physical scientists and the Roman Catholic church. The premises and the details were wrong. I even thought he did a bad job of representing the Brotherhood of Assasins. On the other hand if the book had been written as a comedy like National Treasure it would have been a hoot.

The DaVinci Code would be OK as a thriller if it wasn't spouting so many anti-historical absurdities. I was able to enjoy it by classifying it with Men in Black. If you see it as an absurdist comedy where every conspiracy theory and alien sighting printed in the tabloids (or on the internet) is true and every factual counter-argument is a cover story then you can enjoy the straight-faced delivery of such total tripe. I recommend it to my friends, but tell them to think "Men in Black" and remember the scene where Tommy Lee Jones "checks the hotsheets" for news on alien activity and figures out that the Bugs have landed by consulting the "Weekly World News". The tabloids are "Best damn investigative reporting on the planet. But hey, go ahead, read the New York Times if you want. They get lucky sometimes."

 

[DGG]

In the movie was there a really bad giant albino monk who went around whacking folks for the Catholic church? Like in the book?

 

[Jeff Clark]

In the movie the albino was not a giant. He did not work for the church, but for a splinter group within Opus Dei (which likewise is not directly in the church hierarchy).

 

[Return of the J.D.]

I always thought some of the disciples were married with kids when called. . . . I still attend just about every week out of devotion to the Creator who fashioned the biotic universe that facinates me so very much...."Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth....."

Yeah--it interested me when I noticed that the Apostle Simon Peter had a mother-in-law. (Matt. 8:14, Mark 1:30, Luke 4:38.)

In Genesis, the Neriphym (I believe, I forget the exact name) were the children of angels marrying human women.

Yeah--interesting. Genesis 6:4 ?