Hey all,
I loved this book. What made me want to read it was actually having seen the movie. I want to state upfront I am a strong Christian and I know this book has been the center of debate by many on the christian front because of many of the ideas that are presented in this book. I want to do a few things a bit different. I am going away for a week next week. I would LOVE for this time for any of you all to PLEASE feel free to ask your OWN questions about the book.. Things you want to know what others thought.. I will leave that as a question when I am done.
I am simply going to start with a few simple questions and when I get back on the 17th I will get much more into this book.. If anyone is interested I am heading onto Angels and Demons.. later.
1. Did the controversy behind the book in anyway effect the way you viewed the book when you started out reading it.
2. When you were done.. did you either understand the controversy or wonder why there was so much behind it?
3. did the book answer questions for you?
4. did the book leave you with questions.. for instance were there any Characters you wanted to know more about like Da vinci, maybe the agrippa( the extra books of the Bible that are not actually in there?)
5. If you haven't seen the movie are you wanting to now?
6. are you interested in Angels and Demons?
7. did you at all know any of the significance of some of the simbolism in the book previously and how it was used in many cultures and had more than one meaning?
8. What are the things YOU want to know..
Mysty
I read this one a while back before the movie was out so I may be a little rusty. I am always sceptical about these kind of controversies, thinking a good controversy sells books. I found the controversial part a bit much to swallow. I enjoyed the puzzles and codes and find the secrets and secret protector part of the book interesting and good reading. The symbolism is interesting for sure as is Da vinci.
ReplyDeleteI will explain a bit of the controvesy a bit more a bit later in the week.. being as I am a member in a very concervative church that told it's members this book was bad to read .. I think I can explain it some.. so it may give light to it.. I think it was a great book and I loved reading it.. It also those goes hand in hand with why the church would have been so into disposing of teh premise of the holy grail as it was in the book
ReplyDeleteMysty, I haven't read the book (and probably won't) because I have already read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the book that started this controversial proposition that Jesus was married and moved to France, etc. (Not being a Christian, I see nothing in the theme of the book to be excited about one way or the other, no matter how well the author may tell the story.)
ReplyDeleteJust here checking out the site (from the link on your page). I think I'll join, but how will we know which books will be discussed, or will we? (I mean if we don't know, there may not be much in the way of discussions, right? And I'm mostly into non-fiction, mostly history and archeology.)
The book are chosen each month Ron..
ReplyDeleteHi Sail2day2! I finished listening to the book on audio just last week and really enjoyed it. I am glad it was selected this month as I had wanted to read it for quite some time. The puzzles and codes were really interesting I agree. And I would like to learn more about Da Vinci as a result of reading the book
ReplyDeleteHi dude and welcome to BAM! To go the home page of our book group site to find your way around here a bit more. In the archives you will find all the books we have done since we have started. I would be interested in a non fiction book too. I hope one is selected in the near future.
ReplyDeleteSince my objection to the organized Christian Church - esp the ones who are more conservative- has been the way they view the role of women, I have to say the author had me 100% early on in the story. I have always felt it very wrong to sit little girls down in Sunday School and tell them 1) obey men and 2) that their gifts are not to be developed because they are girls, is very wrong. Besides being very unfair to the females it attempts to keep our entire society from benefiting from the talents of over half the population. So the idea the book brings forth about how the early church demonized women and stopped their role as leaders in the church was right on my wave length.
ReplyDeleteHi mysty and thank you for hosting this month!
ReplyDeleteNational Geographic Channel: Unlocking Da Vinci's Code | Movies & TV | SPIKE.com
ReplyDeleteI read a GREAT biography on davinci.. He is a very very interesting man.. to be honest and He did NOT like woman BTW so that is an interesting fact.. that makes one go HMMM...
ReplyDeleteDaVinci was centuries ahead of his time. First of all it is relatively accepted as truth that he was a homosexual and didn't make any great efforts to disguise that. I think that must have put the Catholic Church into a quandary. How can they continue to commission his works while they totally disagree with his lifestyle?
ReplyDeleteI think of DaVinci as the "stand up" comic of his time. Instead of standing in front of a microphone telling jokes for an instant laugh, he put little jokes in places they weren't discovered for hundreds of years later.
That's funny!
I personally love the symbolism.. I have always been entranced by how one symbol can mean one thing to one culture yet something soo horrible to another.. even something as simple as the swastika can have both a good and very negative meaning. here in the west it has become the nazi symbol and those who use it are considered white supremacists ect. However in many cultures in the east and even some Scandinavian cultures it is still a Holy symbol of Good.. many times reflecting a sun God.. Hitler used a sun cross knowing that it would never be able to be used in the west.
ReplyDeleteThe whole idea of symbols are completely relevant on the culture in which you live in.
There is more to davinci than just that.. he went under ground with his sexuality after being accused of something (darn brain can't pull it up right now) when he was in his apprenticeship. The most awesome thing about Him was he was also one of the first true anatomists as well and studied the human body so as to get the features just right. he was a perfectionist with his art. When I get back I will see if I can pull out the history on Him that I had out before it was one of the most excellent ones I had read on him ever. He was quite the character. There were many featured though in the book that would be interesting to study.. Sir issac newton for example would too be another one..
ReplyDeleteI think this book has a great appeal because of how so many cultures have mis-interperated the Bible (yes you read that correctly) and have used it to keep woman down under the thumb of man when in fact that was not the intent of it at all..
ReplyDeleteI've always felt the Bible is an interesting document, but I don't give it much more credit for accuracy than the Da Vinci Code. I spent many years proof reading others manuscripts and tried to used the rules that are in place to govern that vocation.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things you notice when you do that is when more than one person has contributed to the manuscript. Each person has his own unique style.
The Bible had hundreds of people who wrote part of it.
Unfortunately, there are just too many contradictions in the Bible. First of all, the events of the New Testament were 300 years old before they were ever written down. Word of mouth does not lend itself to accuracy. If you doubt that, get 6 or 7 friends in a room, whisper a phase, e.g, "The sky is blue and the grass is green" and have that person whisper it to the next and down the line. By the time it gets back to you it will have changed so much you won't recognize it.
The Bible has been through so many translations, from Aramaic to Hebrew to Greek to Latin to German to French to English. There are words and phrases in each of those languages that simply do not translate into the others, so a "best guess" is about all you can do.
The King James version of the Bible is just exactly what it says, the only version approved by King James of England. He edited out the things he disagreed with and added his own interpretation on things.
Interestingly enough, nobody prior to the time of King James used words like "Thee and Thou and Thine" Those phrases were brought to the New World by those of the Quaker Faith.
In some respects, I don't have any trouble at all believing that women were persecuted for centuries. That is historically accurate. Why they were persecuted remains somewhat a mystery. Women have only had the right to vote in America for less than 100 years, and have only be allowed to wear pants in public for less than 40 years.
As to whether or not Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had a child, the evidence for it is as good as the evidence against it.
And why not? Is getting married and having kids somehow un-Godly?
All in all I found the book a fun read. Very entertaining, and at times a little thought provoking. Tom Hanks did a good job in the lead role, and Ron Howard, who directed the film, has come a long way from going fishing with Andy Griffin and irritating Aunt Bea.
I hope that the Apostle Paul has returned in each of his subsequent lives, after writing those letters of his, as a woman.
ReplyDeleteControl of paternity.
ReplyDeleteOk .. they were NOT 300 year old before written down they were COLLECTED and put together 300 years later under Constantine.. They were written down by the original apostles which Hello.. were alive with Jesus so HOW could they write it 300 years later?? That isn't a truth. they were in fact written for different audiences.. something most Christians fail to see.. and yes with different voices.. They were put together and some books left out that is the agrippa..
ReplyDeleteMost true scollers of Christian faith try to go back to the origianal greek or hebrew that the texts were written into. that is also why you have different ways of looking at the Bible from those that believe it is 100 percent the word of God.. to calvenists(sp) where they view it as also the word of gGod BUT that it may be fallible in some ways.. Mostly due to translations ect.. To those that view it as the word of God But more as a moral handbook.
the interesting thing most miss with pauls aspistles is he also said " let not one deny the other.. (meaning sexually ) lest one fall into temptation" it was actually .. giving woman a sense of equality.. there is also some arguement that in another one of the espitles that it was broken up incorrectly therefore giving the men more power.. Interesting..
ReplyDeleteI do a lot of reading and researching and have studied theology:)
as for Mary Magdalene.. I fully agree if Jesus had a wife... I can't see how that would make him any less perfect to the Christian world.. It wouldn't make him 'sinful' in nature unless of course he violated his marriage because he preached one man one wife.. and there is no proof of that. The one thing I want to do is read intop the agrippe books.. as I have not thus far.
ReplyDeleteCertainly there are some "truths" in the Bible as far as parables being stories that teach a moral. But I have to agree with Tim when I say that men have twisted words therefore using the book over the years for their own self interests.
ReplyDeleteThat is a definite.. as has the Churches sad to say.. which was NOT what it was meant for.. That is also WHY this book becomes such a controversy.. It makes people THINK.. and that can be dangerous in and of itself to those that want people to believe blindly and blind faith is dangerous. while I am a Christian I think Blindly following anything a pastor says just because he or she says it is wrong..
ReplyDeleteThe first time anything that was actually written down during that time has ever seen the light of day was the Dead Sea Scrolls. I doubt very seriously if any of the apostles were literate. There is no evidence within historical records that anything that is the Bible was ever penned prior to Constantine. He is the one who directed the oral traditions be put down in a written format.
ReplyDeleteThe Bible is and was a political instrument. What was put in and what was left out was strictly up to Constantine and his whim.
If you look at the Holy Land and the areas in which the events of the Bible allegedly took place, you will see it contains lots of "states." Each of these states had it's own language ... verbal traditions according to their tribe.
If Jesus grew up in Galilee, he probably spoke Aramaic. There is no written record on the planet of Aramaic. The "official" language of Jerusalem at the time was Latin. You could be punished if caught speaking another dialect.
No doubt Herod spoke a different language as well.
Things were altered every time the Bible was translated. The original Gutenberg Bible as read in Old German, is quite different from the King James Version.
King James was the George W Bush of his age .. a megalomaniac consumed with his own idea of what what right and therefore had the Bible re-written according to his interpretation of things. Some of the stuff in the KJV don't even show up in any other versions. He made stuff up.
Why do all the Gospels say, "The Gospel ACCORDING to?" In modern day journalism we say, "ACCORDING to sources close to the incident.." that is a Cover-Your-Butt so you don't get sued phrase. It simply says, "I didn't see this, I'm not sure the guy who told me about it saw it, but maybe somebody saw it."
The "Apostle" Mark was 4 years old at the time of the Crucifixion. Would you trust your 4 year old to accurately repeat something he allegedly witnesses?
The fundamentalists always say, "It is the inspired word of God." I say, "How do you know?" They say, "The Bible says so."
As you can see, that is a case of the tail wagging the dog. If I wanted to write something that people would read and believe I also would tell them it was inspired by a higher power, and make them feel guilty if they didn't read it. and I would make that a part of the document.
The fact of the matter is, the Bible has borrowed extensively from other works and other cultures and a other traditions. Read some Pliny, read Beowulf, read the Talmud and the Koran. Read the writings of Krishna and others as I have. The similarities are too great to be a coincidence.
Some of the traditions in the Bible, e.g., Christmas are a carryover from Pagan times. The Festival of Light was celebrated for centuries before Christ in the latter part of the year as people began to realize that the sun was staying up longer and longer.
Hey, we survived another winter ... lets party! Come to my house .. have a little mead and we'll sing a couple songs. What, you brought me gift? Well you shouldn't have!
What better way to gather followers to your philosophy and introduce him to your guy than to have a party, give a few gifts, cook a bunch of food.
There was a song out a number of years ago which I always thought pretty much summed it up.
"I always thought I would be an Apostle, knew I could make it if I tried. When I retire, I'll write the gospels so people will talk about me when I've died."
The DaVinci code is entertaining ... it borrows just enough from history to lend a sense of reality. Of course Brown took some liberties to make things exciting, e.g., his interpretation of the Opus Dei and the Knight Templar were not exactly 100% accurate, but for fictional purposes, very entertaining.
On a scale of 1 to 5 I would give it a 3.
It has a good melody, but is hard to dance to.
Since I listened to the book on audio and do not have a copy of it in print to look for the part I can't quote exactly and give a page number, but I remember being impressed by the part where the heroes were debating whether to make the proof known if and when they found it, of whatever information the Priority of Scion had been hiding all these centuries. The professor from Harvard was explaining the danger from the church's point of view of the truth robbing people of their faith. Organized religion does provide a lifestyle and a social structure for many people that works for them. Many church goers have very little idea what their particular organization takes a stand on that makes it different from the next. Since their social group and it's required lifestyle is one that gives them the required structure for their life to be content and happy, I can see the point of not confusing them with facts. There are many references in the Bible to a child like demeanor and how not confusing one's self with reality is the way to go. For those that wish to seek a more complicated reality I think that is the way to proceed but for those that are not able or willing, I have no problem with them going with what works for them. It takes patience on my part at times to tolerate such choices because I always like to dig and question but to each his own.
ReplyDeleteYou've really hit the nail on the head. Fundamentalist Christians, including Charismatic Catholics, which are really wannabe Opus Dei but lack the discipline, DON'T want to know the facts. They like somebody taking them by the hand, telling them when and what to do and where to do it.
ReplyDeleteIn some respects it is like a career in the Military. You will always be successful so long as you blindly follow orders and never question anything.
It has been my experience, that the further a person goes in his education, either formal or self taught the less likely he is to follow any dogma simply because somebody tells him he must.
As people move in their education, part of what they learn is how to analyze things from multiple points of view, how to look at things logically without the expenditure of much emotion.
If you cannot ascertain with 100% certainty that something is a fact rather than propaganda or a position statement, then you set it aside for further study or simply say, "There is not enough real evidence presented here to validate this information. There are contradictions throughout that don't correspond to what are known facts,
In the Biblical story of Christmas, it says that Jesus, Mary & Joseph were travelling to be counted in the Census, #1. People are counted where they live, that's the purpose of the census #2. The census has always been conducted in the summer months or early fall because weather conditions are better for those in the field conducting the census.
Shepherds were watching their flocks by night.
If, this was late December, there were no flocks to watch. The sheep had all been herded in corrals for the winter and the shepherds were home. No doubt during these months the sheep were shorn and the wool gathered, some were traded or sold, some were slaughtered for food. In any case, this was done toward the end of the year.
So, these are the things that a scholar sees, the inconsistencies and the contradictions. If, as the fundamentalists say, the Bible was the "inspired" word of God, and that he dictated this like a CEO to his secretary, then he probably would have wanted to proof read it before it hit the news stand.
My experience in Journalism is that nothing ... NOTHING ever gets in the paper or read on the news until the News Director and/or Chief Editor has read it and approved it.
The consequence of bypassing this step can be disastrous. Just ask Dan Rather.
A number of years ago there was a piece on Public Television that was portrayed as being true.
ReplyDeleteA tomb was found with mummified remains of a man who appeared to have been about 30 when he died, and the entombment date was calculated to have been around AD 30.
This mummy was a man who had been crucified, nail holes in hands and feet, there was evidence of a large wound in his side, such as a spear might make, and marks on his head all around the brow as if something containing numerous sharp objects were forcibly thrust into the flesh.
Of course the immediate reaction was, "This is the body of Jesus Christ." All the evidence seemed to support it, according to the descriptions given in the scriptures.
You might think that this would be a welcome discovery. Wrong! If this is the body of Jesus, then the entire resurrection thing never happened. If that didn't happen, then there was no divinity. If there was no divinity, the entire premise of the Christian Faith would be shattered.
There were some lengthy debates and much soul searching, finally under what were probably orders from the Vatican, the tomb was destroyed .. bombed with hundreds of tons of rock on top.
The truth shall set you free ... but sometimes the truth is just too disturbing to contemplate.
It is easier to cling to the comfort of an illusion than to confront reality.
Wasn't it Karl Marx who said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses?"
Robert Langdon. I hate when a name or a word won't come forward in my mind till later.
ReplyDeleteBut a tolerant person gives the right to others to believe what they do. The right to freedom of religion in the US means that a person can be any religion that they choose. If someone is happy with their religious social group then I have to agree with not showing them the tomb (as in the example you cited). I would expect most would not care anyway. As I mentioned before, for many it is not what the religious body says they believe, but rather the social interaction that they obtain after the service. And that it is a socially acceptable place to be. It is a support network for them.
ReplyDeleteThat is of course, as long as they are not following a leader who is going to destroy those that do not agree with the belief system. Blind faith carries a grave responsibilities for the leadership of the group.
ReplyDeleteI have to say I thik the most amazing thing I loved about Robert langdon was his ability to allow people despite His disbelief their ability to believe.. I think there is nothing wrong with that..
ReplyDeleteI personally would NOT attack another persons faith the way I feel you just attacked mine.. OUCH.. that kinda hurt.. and it sounds veryu intolerant.. I will be back to this discussion later.. I thought it would be a nice break after all I have dealt with on my vacation but I can see it isn't.. ~sighs~ I was readfy to have to defend the Christian faith some with this book but not to this point.. this isn't a conversation as to whether Jesus was divine or not whether they found a body or not ect.. it is about the BOOK and if the facts in the book would make the Jesus presented in the bible any less divine which it doesn't
ReplyDeleteG'night..
The book claims that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had children. If that is true does it mean that Jesus Christ was not divine? That is the question you wish to debate?
ReplyDeleteIt is a similar question to if a person does not accept the virgin birth does that mean Jesus is not divine. Or if a person does not accept the Resurrection does that mean Jesus is not divine?
ReplyDeleteFirst we must define divine Mysty.
ReplyDeletedivine meaning the perfect .. if he did get married had a child would HE have been any less perfect.. the answer is no.. unless he cheated on his wife. a man in that time frame normally WOULD have married and had children by that age.
ReplyDelete(sorry about last night it has been a very long week..)
Does divine mean perfect or is it more about the fact that he is (in the Christian faith) believed to be the Son Of God and one part of the Trinity?
ReplyDeleteaccording to Christian faith christ is the a man.. the son of God that led a perfect life. the reason this book created a stir is because for some reason the fact that if he DID marry many feel it interferes with his ability to be perfect.. he was supposed to have lived the perfect life. never sinning.. but is marriage a sin? NO.. but the catholic variation of the faith is even more steadfast in the belief in that they hold that mary remained a virgin all her life..
ReplyDeleteI think too why so many like this book is because as another book I just got done reading shich was entitles saving Jesus from the Church which looks at Jesus as just a man.. no divine birth but more like a profit and looking more at the red letters of the Bible you see that he truly was unquque and was ministering to woman, children the sick.. people that in those days was unheard of.. the book in many was brings us back to that truth.. something many Christians fail to want to believe no mater what Jesus' divinity when he was on earth he WAS man.. and he did minister to those that would be"unporfitable" by the standards of the norm.
I think the DaVInci Code looks at what may have been the motivations for the early church to demonize sex and women and points out that marginalizing women is what they did when they formed.
ReplyDeleteexactly:)
ReplyDeleteAnd mysty, is the question you are suggesting we debate, whether or not sex is sin? As far as whether or not Jesus would still be with out sin if he had sex in the context of a marriage relationship? If I remember my Bible background correctly - and believe me I had more than my fair share of education in that area- some where in Paul's letters - grr to quite a lot of what he said any way - but somewhere in his letters he mentioned that if a person had to have sex then get married and do so but it distracted from the work doing the work of God. Was it Paul that said that or someone else?
ReplyDeleteThis is interesting?
ReplyDeleteWatch CBS Videos Online
another view
ReplyDeleteWatch The Priory of Sion at EncycloMedia.com
ReplyDeleteWatch Da Vinci at EncycloMedia.com
well He ALSO said in timothy that a man must be able to manage his own home.. so that is up for debate.. it is only Catholics that feel a pastor can't marry.. so I don't want to put that down but read timothy.. Personally I feel that given the time frame that Jesus lived.. he would have been a mortal man.. given his divinity after the cross.. If he married.. as would be the tradition of the day.. he would be no less perfect. the red letters of Jesus were so important.. yet they are obsured by words like saved, sin and verbage.
ReplyDeleteand to gileson I find it very interesting that Jesus when he showed himself to the disciples in the bible they never knew him until he reveled himself.. which means to me he took another form.. maybe a spiritual one.. not the bodily form we want to perceive but to say that is heretic in many of the Christian faiths..
What I love about the book is it makes people think.. Christian or non.. what was the role of Jesus.. I think he did walk the earth no matter what.. he had a tremendous impact..
I happened to love also the fact they brought in sir issaac newton. (gilson I will appologise to you here.. I came home and have been dealing with a very tragic death close to my family..)
Your position mysty - if I am rephrasing it correctly - that if it is true that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children - that fact does not impact his being divine nor does it impact the teachings of the Christian church.
ReplyDeleteI think maybe Gilson is on his cruise now?
ReplyDeleteI would think not.. so long as he did NOT stray from his own teachings :) Paul was the only one of the apostles that never saw Jesus.. in the flesh.. he had more of a spiritual experience with him on the road to demaskas(sp).
ReplyDeleteIf we were to do the one thing and look at the culture he WOULD have been married by age 33 when he started he public ministry.. that would have been the norm.. for a man of his age. Just like the cotholics deem Mary Jesus' mother to have remained a virgin the scriptures actually only say to Joseph to NOT know his wife until after the baby is born. there are some Christians that actually do not buy into Jesus being a divine birth being from the Holy spirit but that all of it was a 'cover up" that he had a earthly father Joesph and that he was a man.. a remarkable profit.. that got his divinity AFTER he was crusified for preaching so radically and for hanging out with woman and children in a time when it was uncool. keep in mind Jesus did allow mary and martha at his feet and to listen to him preach when others would not have. Jesus was NOT the one to down play woman in fact he was a freeing force to them if you read the red letters..
as I said I had come in from a long day of driving and from a very bad experience( a close friends father shot himself).. this leaving me in a position where I would NOT normally take offense. I am used to dealing with scholars and in fact would rather deal with them :) One of the biggest things I like about the book is it makes a person no matter which end.. a believer or a non believer think.. and saw so what if?? I have always taken the resumption God is not afraid why should I be. The end of the story leaves you with exactly what you JUST said about your son and the toothfairy and faith.. it isn't a bad thing.. and the movie leavces you even more with that feeling.
ReplyDeleteYet.. why if Jesus were to be married would it be such a horrible thing for the church to find out because .. of the fact that people do NOT want to face even the fact the the bible was put together by man or men 300 years after Christ died by a pagen. That would mean everything is lost.. but is it? then one would need to go back to the basics of what they SHOULD be looking at which isn't invoking wars.. but the actual red letters of the bible which say so much different.. scary for one to think about esp if they claim to be a "christian."
Yet like you said above.. there is enough reality in this book to keep it real.. I just started angels and demons I found it a bit slower but maybe my heart isn't as into it as it was this one.. or the timing because of vacation(or the fact there was an audio book playing on the drive LOL)..
In 1973 Tim Rice put Jesus Christ Superstar on the big screen. This is by far my most favorite movie and play of all time. I've seen both a half dozen times or more. Ironically, the last time I saw the play it was in New Orleans at the Sangor Theather and the part of Jesus was played by a young blond hair blue eyes singer from a Heavy Metal band. HE was stupendous!
ReplyDeleteHere is Mary Magdalene from the movie, Jesus Christ Super Star (Click on the icon just below the word You to go to full screen)
Great memory Tim! And speaking of religious statements made in the 1970s . . . .
ReplyDeleteAnd one more from that time frame
ReplyDelete