Da Vinci Plot May Get New Twist to Placate Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter jdnation
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Karin said:
It is a work of **fiction **…I guess I am not understanding what the big deal is…books have been written that have offend all faiths at some point in time…so Christianity does not hold the gold medal in this.
You know as long as the writer stated that these things where works of fiction I could care less what the writer chose to say in the book about Hitler…he could tell me Hitler was a gay jewish man that painted flowers on billboards as long as the plot of the story was interesting to me I would read it.
As to writing anything bad about Islam…Brown may not have but Rushdie did …he is still alive even though certain folks would like to see him dead (and hey that book was great also or so I thought!) !

Maybe you don’t see it offensive, but others do. Who cares if Hilter was gay. Try saying that he never killed a Jew. Which is more offensive to Jews? Saying that Jesus married Magdalene and have children plus other outrageous imagination…that’s extreme. True, fiction is fiction, but don’t go too far by pushing it to the limit. You might provoke some psycho out there and get a bullet in the head and don’t know why!
 
40.png
cathgal:
Maybe you don’t see it offensive, but others do. Who cares if Hilter was gay. Try saying that he never killed a Jew. Which is more offensive to Jews? People have written that…that is nothing new! Saying that Jesus married Magdalene and have children plus other outrageous imagination…that’s extreme. True, fiction is fiction, but don’t go too far by pushing it to the limit. You might provoke some psycho out there and get a bullet in the head and don’t know why!
Cathgal-
I have stated in posts that I do understand that some Catholics find this offensive and I have even learned why (thank you vern and Marie)…I respect you and all other Catholics for these feelings, views etc.
You stated…"true fiction is fiction, but dont go too far"…so this (DaVinci Code) is ficiton you admit it…yes it was pushed to the limit. My suggestion if you do not like this kind of ficton dont read it, it obviously upsets you) !
I would also suggest that you are careful about making comments about **putting a bullet into someones head. **
 
40.png
Karin:
Cathgal-
I have stated in posts that I do understand that some Catholics find this offensive and I have even learned why (thank you vern and Marie)…I respect you and all other Catholics for these feelings, views etc.
You stated…"true fiction is fiction, but dont go too far"…so this (DaVinci Code) is ficiton you admit it…yes it was pushed to the limit. My suggestion if you do not like this kind of ficton dont read it, it obviously upsets you) !
I would also suggest that you are careful about making comments about **putting a bullet into someones head. **
Dan Brown didn’t just write a plain innocent fictional book. He alleged that there is a conspiracy of the Catholic Church to hide ‘truth’ about Jesus. Oooh, makes one wonder what that is and if the Church can be trusted again. Brown is using his fictional book to voice his anti-Catholic and readers excused him because it’s only fiction. Smart man, because he’s already fooled those readers.
I don’t have to read the book to know that it’s anti-Catholic and I’m not upset like you think. I’m just trying to make a case for people who persistently defended the book. And why do you think the comment about the bullet is wrong. You’re not implying that I like to do that do you. If so, you’re totally mistaken. I’m just making an awareness that there are all kind of people out there, and provoking some psycho is not an impossibility. On the contrary, I think it’s a charitable thing to let writers like Dan Brown know it.
 
40.png
cathgal:
Dan Brown didn’t just write a plain innocent fictional book. He alleged that there is a conspiracy of the Catholic Church to hide ‘truth’ about Jesus. Oooh, makes one wonder what that is and if the Church can be trusted again. Brown is using his fictional book to voice his anti-Catholic and readers excused him because it’s only fiction…
Last I checked the law in this country allows him and others to do this and not jus to Catholics.
40.png
cathgal:
I don’t have to read the book to know that it’s anti-Catholic and I’m not upset like you think.** I’m just trying to make a case for people who persistently defended the book**…
How are you making a case for the people that defend the book…I do not see it that way.
40.png
cathgal:
And why do you think the comment about the bullet is wrong. You’re not implying that I like to do that do you. If so, you’re totally mistaken. I’m just making an awareness that there are all kind of people out there, and provoking some psycho is not an impossibility. On the contrary, I think it’s a charitable thing to let writers like Dan Brown know it.
Not sure…but the way you wrote it / worded it sure made it sound like you would or that you would condon it if someone else did.:nope:
 
Karin said:
Last I checked the law in this country allows him and others to do this and not jus to Catholics.

How are you making a case for the people that defend the book…I do not see it that way.

I’m sure there are other anti-Catholic books, but this DuhVinci no doubt outdone all the others. It totally turn Christianity INSIDE OUT, you know what I mean. It’s like everything we know to be true about Christianity, now we have to erase it cuz Brown just gave us a new gospel. Why do you think it’s so popular.

Brown has his agendas hidden in the book and it takes a very perceptive reader to see thru his disguise called ‘fiction’. Thankfully, there are perceptive Catholic readers to point out the disguise to us blind folks.
 
40.png
cathgal:
I’m sure there are other anti-Catholic books, but this DuhVinci no doubt outdone all the others. It totally turn Christianity INSIDE OUT, you know what I mean. It’s like everything we know to be true about Christianity, now we have to erase it cuz Brown just gave us a new gospel. Why do you think it’s so popular.

Brown has his agendas hidden in the book and it takes a very perceptive reader to see thru his disguise called ‘fiction’. Thankfully, there are perceptive Catholic readers to point out the disguise to us blind folks.
cathgal…Karin understands that…you should have read a bit further down. 🙂 We hashed it out earlier today. btw…several Christians…besides Catholics find Dan Browns book offensive and poor writing historically. Christianity today and several others have torn it apart for what it is…poor and very dangerous anti-Christian work disguised as innocent fiction.
 
40.png
cathgal:
I’m sure there are other anti-Catholic books, but this DuhVinci no doubt outdone all the others. It totally turn Christianity INSIDE OUT, you know what I mean. It’s like everything we know to be true about Christianity, now we have to erase it cuz Brown just gave us a new gospel. Why do you think it’s so popular.

Brown has his agendas hidden in the book and it takes a very perceptive reader to see thru his disguise called ‘fiction’. Thankfully, there are perceptive Catholic readers to point out the disguise to us blind folks.
Cathgal-
I guess my mind and eyes are failing me …it has been a long day, but I still can not see how you make a case for the people that defend the book (those are the people that like it & see nothing wrong)…??? It sounds to me like you are trying to defend the Catholics that believe the book is wrong and is trash.
 
40.png
Marie:
cathgal…Karin understands that…you should have read a bit further down. 🙂 We hashed it out earlier today. btw…several Christians…besides Catholics find Dan Browns book offensive and poor writing historically. Christianity today and several others have torn it apart for what it is…poor and very dangerous anti-Christian work disguised as innocent fiction.
😃 thank you Marie…and may I say it was friendly and respectful and knowledgable (sp??) “hashing”
 
Karin said:
😃 thank you Marie…and may I say it was friendly and respectful and knowledgable (sp??) “hashing”

Speaking of hash…Edwin has a nice breakfast Club in the Water Cooler called the Bed and Breakfast. 😃 We Junkies and Mudgies meet there for great cyber food. Drop by anytime.
 
40.png
Marie:
Speaking of hash…Edwin has a nice breakfast Club in the Water Cooler called the Bed and Breakfast. 😃 We Junkies and Mudgies meet there for great cyber food. Drop by anytime.
Thank you…I will be sure to check it out…!
 
I am appalled that people want this movie to be changed to “placate” Catholics… TOO BAD… the book is what it is… and that means the movie should follow the book and not be censored or altered. I would hope people who are for freedom of speech would want the same.

I also think that Ron Howard should put a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie that its based on FICTION…that is ALL that is needed… dont go changing a book cause it offends people…too damn bad… just add a disclaimer like Scorcese did for his screed of a movie Last Temptation of Christ. Case closed.
 
40.png
Karin:
I guess I am the odd person here…I actually enjoyed the book…as a work of fiction and I am looking forward to the movie…😃
Me too-it was a good read and I suspect, as with most Ron Howard/Tom Hanks movies, it will be a good movie.
 
40.png
cathgal:
What if someone wrote a fictional book portraying Hitler as a saintly man, who never killed the Jews. That’s right, Hitler was framed by some evildoer and now he’s taking the blame as a devil incarnate throughout history. You think the Jews would let it rest. Hey, it’s only fictional, why be so offensive right!

Smart man that this Dan Brown didn’t write anything fictional or offensive about Islam or their Mohammed; otherwise, he wouldn’t live long to enjoy his fame!

Yeah, offending Christianity is always a safe way to go… :mad:
Well so goes this thread. whenever someone starts the Hitler analogies you knw the thread has run its course.
 
40.png
tee_eff_em:
I must disagree with you there: Apollo 13
Even that one. I saw parts of it in stores, I found it booring. Besides, I know how the story comes out. It is part of history.

PF
 
40.png
estesbob:
Me too-it was a good read and I suspect, as with most Ron Howard/Tom Hanks movies, it will be a good movie.
Even though Karin had somewhat of an excuse (not Catholic and possibly not Christian) you my friend are Catholic and should have recognized that this stuff is as anti-Catholic as they come and just a piece of re-hashed gnostic, radical feminist drivel.
 
40.png
WanderAimlessly:
Even that one. I saw parts of it in stores, I found it booring. Besides, I know how the story comes out. It is part of history.

PF
:whistle: Now there is a bit of a problem with his History…more than a bit in fact. The man is no scholar and historically speaking the books a mess and completely off course. No wonder people in this day and age are so confused. One cannot re-write history and call it fact.

History it is not
Sandra Meisel=Historian:
Dismantling The Da Vinci Code
By Sandra Miesel

Brown actually cites his principal sources within the text of his novel. One is a specimen of academic feminist scholarship: The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels. The others are popular esoteric histories: The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince; Holy Blood, Holy Grail by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln; The Goddess in the Gospels: Reclaiming the Sacred Feminine and The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail, both by Margaret Starbird. (Starbird, a self-identified Catholic, has her books published by Matthew Fox’s outfit, Bear & Co.) Another influence, at least at second remove, is The Woman’s Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets by Barbara G. Walker.

The use of such unreliable sources belies Brown’s pretensions to intellectuality. But despite Brown’s scholarly airs, a writer who thinks the Merovingians founded Paris and forgets that the popes once lived in Avignon is hardly a model researcher. And for him to state that the Church burned five million women as witches shows a willful—and malicious—ignorance of the historical record. The latest figures for deaths during the European witch craze are between 30,000 to 50,000 victims. Not all were executed by the Church, not all were women, and not all were burned. Brown’s claim that educated women, priestesses, and midwives were singled out by witch-hunters is not only false, it betrays his goddess-friendly sources.

So error-laden is The Da Vinci Code that the educated reader actually applauds those rare occasions where Brown stumbles (despite himself) into the truth. A few examples of his “impeccable” research: He claims that the motions of the planet Venus trace a pentacle (the so-called Ishtar pentagram) symbolizing the goddess. But it isn’t a perfect figure and has nothing to do with the length of the Olympiad. The ancient Olympic games were celebrated in honor of Zeus Olympias, not Aphrodite, and occurred every four years.

Brown’s contention that the five linked rings of the modern Olympic Games are a secret tribute to the goddess is also wrong—each set of games was supposed to add a ring to the design but the organizers stopped at five. And his efforts to read goddess propaganda into art, literature, and even Disney cartoons are simply ridiculous.
 
Marie said:
:whistle: Now there is a bit of a problem with his History…more than a bit in fact. The man is no scholar and historically speaking the books a mess and completely off course. No wonder people in this day and age are so confused. One cannot re-write history and call it fact.

History it is not

Marie…
I think the part of history comment was made in regards to the movie Apollo 13 not the DaVinci Code.
Excellent post otherwise
 
40.png
Karin:
Marie…
I think the part of history comment was made in regards to the movie Apollo 13 not the DaVinci Code.
Excellent post otherwise
😃 Shoot…you mean I need to research my memory of Apollo 13 and critique that one too? :rotfl: It is probably easier though…I was alive and remember that…well…some of it…well on the other hand…maybe I took notes. Now where did I put my space suit and all that memoribilia? :hmmm:

Seriously though…I think your right…I am focused on DaVinci history. However did we include Apollo 13 in the mix? Was it because DaVinci history is so bad or Tom Hanks is so good? :rotfl:
 
40.png
Riley259:
Even though Karin had somewhat of an excuse (not Catholic and possibly not Christian) you my friend are Catholic and should have recognized that this stuff is as anti-Catholic as they come and just a piece of re-hashed gnostic, radical feminist drivel.
Hey…lets not make my faith a part of this discussion…!!!
And are you saying there is now a double standard…Catholics against non catholics?? FYI noncatholics do at times agree with catholics on things 😃
 
I’m going to read the book and see the movie…

The more I read on threads like these, the more I look forward to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top