DeBunking the DaVinci Code, Part I: Is the book accurate?

[mrplunkey]

If we were comparing one Christian culture to one non-Christian culture then I would agree with you.

When, as I suggest, virtually EVERY culture that was shaped by Christianity in its schools, government, legal system, etc, has better living conditions, opportunites, protection, etc for women than non-Christian cultures, you've got to conclude that it is a factor, if not THE factor.

Furthermore, it absolutely kills any notion that somehow Christianity has been bad for women.

Can you point out any of today's cultures that is not shaped by Christianity which has better conditions for women than any Christian-shaped culture?

"Shaped" by christianity is a bad definition, because it pretty-much carves-out the Western world. Hell, I can argue that Japan was "shaped" by Christianity as part of it's post-war reconstruction effort.

Let's try it this way... if your theory is correct, then the rights and well-being of women should closely track the *degree* to which Christianity is adopted and practiced.

Example... Christianity isn't practiced as strongly in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, or UK as it is in say... the US, Mexico, Ireland and Italy.

So are women better off in the US, Mexico, Italy and Ireland than they are in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, and the UK?

If Christianity is driving their progress in society, women's freedoms and living conditions should follow with heavier religious penetration.

 

[Longhorn85]

5) Did Constantine and the Church turn Jesus into God?

5. Yes, they did. There was another pagan Gods movement raging around. His b-day was on Dec 25th. Now Jesuses followers needed something bigger than that. They made all the cicrcumstances as if Jesus was really from royal blood, the stars, teh 3 wise men.....all that is made up

Dan Brown claims:

"Constantine…held a gathering known as the council of Nicea…(325 A.D.)…Until that moment in history Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet…not the Son of God…Jesus’ establishment as the ‘Son of God’ was…a relatively close vote " (Page 233) The DaVinci Code

Fact: The Council of Nicea (325 A.D.) was not a close vote, 300 bishops from throughout the Empire arrived to discuss Arius, teaching that the Son was created, and therefore not God incarnate, the vote was 300 to 2…not close at all. Arius did not believe the Son was mortal but the first of creation.

Regarding Christ (Messiah), the New Testament confirms what the Old Testament revealed about His Nature. The Messiah being God incarnate is not a New Testament doctrine, but an Old Testament Doctrine, fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

 

[Longhorn85]

"Shaped" by christianity is a bad definition, because it pretty-much carves-out the Western world. (No coincidence)

Hell, I can argue that Japan was "shaped" by Christianity as part of it's post-war reconstruction effort. (do you suppose women fare better in pre WWII Japan or post WWII Japan?)

Example... Christianity isn't practiced as strongly in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, or UK as it is in say... the US, Mexico, Ireland and Italy.

So are women better off in the US, Mexico, Italy and Ireland than they are in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, and the UK? (You're comparing a set of nations that are all influenced by Christianity. Why not compare to a culture not influenced by Christianity?)
If Christianity is driving their progress in society, women's freedoms and living conditions should follow with heavier religious penetration. (Good point, but that was not my contention. I said that women fare better in Christian cultures (or those shaped by Christianity, which in my opinion, includes Northern Europe) vs non-Christian ones)

---

 

[foreigngirl]

5) Did Constantine and the Church turn Jesus into God?



Dan Brown claims:

"Constantine…held a gathering known as the council of Nicea…(325 A.D.)…Until that moment in history Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet…not the Son of God…Jesus’ establishment as the ‘Son of God’ was…a relatively close vote " (Page 233) The DaVinci Code

Fact: The Council of Nicea (325 A.D.) was not a close vote, 300 bishops from throughout the Empire arrived to discuss Arius, teaching that the Son was created, and therefore not God incarnate, the vote was 300 to 2…not close at all. Arius did not believe the Son was mortal but the first of creation.

Regarding Christ (Messiah), the New Testament confirms what the Old Testament revealed about His Nature. The Messiah being God incarnate is not a New Testament doctrine, but an Old Testament Doctrine, fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

do you see now what I was talking about way earlier that this is just going in circles? Everyone views it as they see fit. I can go and Google shit to prove the oposite of what you just posted. There is web sites that are "proving" any point of view and any belief.

Do a little deeper research on Mithras. I am too lazy to write, seriously.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/virgin_birth.html

 

[Longhorn85]

do you see now what I was talking about way earlier that this is just going in circles?

Do a little deeper research on Mithras. I am too lazy to write, seriously.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/virgin_birth.html

You don't go in circles when you deal with facts. The items that Brown presents as fact are false, and I've demonstrated that. If you don't accept the facts, then you're just being close-minded.

Nothing wrong with a little discussion about history, religion.

I'll check out Mithras.

 

[foreigngirl]

The word Gnostic is derived from the Greek word Gnosis meaning “To Know”. Gnostics believed that salvation was attained through the attaining knowledge.

the Gnostic Jesus, unlike the Jesus of the Bible, was not a Savior who died form sins. He was the bringer of “Gnosis”. According to many Gnostics he was a completely spiritual being separate from the flesh, because he was really projecting a phantom body.

Gnostic Gospel’s were named after known bible characters to justify “Gnostic” doctrines

Gnostic works contradicted the Both Old and New Testament scriptures…The God of the Old Testament was viewed as an evil demon and the serpent as good.
Gnostic works were not connected to the Apostles…but battled their teachings

http://www.debunkingdavinci.com/

can you post ANYTHING without googling? I know what Gnostic means. The Bogomils and Cathars saw the scriptures the same way. They believe there is 2 Gods - evil and god. Th eone from the Old Testament is the evil one aka Jehova. The one from the New Testament is the good God. So, they threw aside the Old Testament and were preaching only the New one, and sometimes not even all gospels. They didnt believe in going to church, cause you dont need to go to an institution like that to find God - you can do it in your own house. Thats why they were prosecuted and hunted - the church was threatened by that kind of movement, cause they depended on the masses to make money for their lazy priests

 

[Longhorn85]

can you post ANYTHING without googling?

...and I'll ask you, do you have a reference for anything? You haven't offered any. You state things as fact and you expect others to accept it why? So far you have stated at least three falsehoods.

Makes your entire argument hard to believe.

 

[mrplunkey]

---

You've said that women fair better in Christian cultures, and implied that christianity is the cause. Are you saying we don't know if Chrsitianity caused it, and you are merely pointing-out an interesting correlation?

 

[bluepeter]

You don't go in circles when you deal with facts. The items that Brown presents as fact are false, and I've demonstrated that. If you don't accept the facts, then you're just being close-minded.

Nothing wrong with a little discussion about history, religion.

I'll check out Mithras.

lol at even mentioning facts in a discussion about religion.

 

[foreigngirl]

You don't go in circles when you deal with facts. The items that Brown presents as fact are false, and I've demonstrated that. If you don't accept the facts, then you're just being close-minded.

Nothing wrong with a little discussion about history, religion.

I'll check out Mithras.

Whoever was writing the gospels in the NT MADE Jesus fulfill th eprophecies from the OT. Every religion or mythology stressed the virgin birth. He couldnt be associated with royal blood AND being aprophet = the real messiah unless he had a connection with David and Betleheem, so they did write that and THEN transfered his childhood in Nazareth.

The whole bible reeks of borrowed myths and legends from Mesopotanians and Egyptians - the Old and New Testament. Gilgamesh = Noah; the story about Joseph = the story about 2 brothers; Jesus = Mithra + mixed predictions from teh OT to make him bigger than other previous "sons of God"......Did you know that originally God had a wife? Her name was Asherah...I wonder what happened to her when the Bible was being put together....

 

[javaguru]

You don't go in circles when you deal with facts. The items that Brown presents as fact are false, and I've demonstrated that. If you don't accept the facts, then you're just being close-minded.

Nothing wrong with a little discussion about history, religion.

I'll check out Mithras.

Wait, I've brought up Mithras in countless religious discussions and you're just now checking it out, I feel ignored.

 

[foreigngirl]

...and I'll ask you, do you have a reference for anything? You haven't offered any. You state things as fact and you expect others to accept it why? So far you have stated at least three falsehoods.

Makes your entire argument hard to believe.

I havent offered reference, cause I am writing from remembering th ebooks I read - BOOKS. I am too lazy to google and plus anyone can google. I can have no clue about anything, google the subject and paste that here just as you are doing it.

But, if you insist, here:

Mithra, the "virgin birth" and Jesus
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/virgin_birth.html

God had a wife
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/ark/stories/s1095690.htm

paralels between paga egyptian myths and Jesus's "holyness"
http://mystae.com/reflections/messiah/deepertruth.html

Gilgamesh = Noah
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=414

the story of Joseph = The story of 2 brothers
http://www.nndb.com/people/648/000101345/

 

[ceo]

Is this one of those "powerful absolutes"?

 

[ceo]

It would be logical that Jesus was married, and as was said, it wouldn't affect his holiness, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

If the story of Christ were centered around logic he wouldn't have knowingly put himself in a position to be crucified for the sake of a bunch of sinners.

So God is illogical?

This is assuming (as Christians do) that JC was God...which I can't find enough evidence to support that even in the Bible alone (not including other historical records). Don't get me wrong...JC was a great man, but God...???

 

[Longhorn85]

Whoever was writing the gospels in the NT MADE Jesus fulfill th eprophecies from the OT. Every religion or mythology stressed the virgin birth. .

You don't even pretend to know who wrote the gospels yet you are convinced that they are made up. It doesn't matter where you get your information, google, books, movies, hearsay. If it is wrong, it is wrong, and you base your belief (or disbelief) on misinformation, which is your choice.

You humorously (and condescendlingly) act as if you are the only person who has ever read a book. We're all adults here, there are no points awarded for that, it is assumed.

You claim the Bible "reeks" of borrowed myths. Your bias is obvious, but that's okay, we all have them. The Bible makes many references to polytheism and condemns it. Do you feel that some pagan religions were similarly influenced by God and religion as the Hebrews knew it?

 

[Longhorn85]

For those who haven't seen the movie or read the book yet, enjoy the entertainment. Also keep in mind that in this piece of "historical fiction", Dan Brown has based his tale not on facts, as he claims, but on rubbish.

 

[foreigngirl]

You don't even pretend to know who wrote the gospels yet you are convinced that they are made up. It doesn't matter where you get your information, google, books, movies, hearsay. If it is wrong, it is wrong, and you base your belief (or disbelief) on misinformation, which is your choice.

You humorously (and condescendlingly) act as if you are the only person who has ever read a book. We're all adults here, there are no points awarded for that, it is assumed.

You claim the Bible "reeks" of borrowed myths. Your bias is obvious, but that's okay, we all have them. The Bible makes many references to polytheism and condemns it. Do you feel that some pagan religions were similarly influenced by God and religion as the Hebrews knew it?

yeah, sure, I think other religion(s) have been influenced by the Bibles texts.

I am not convinced of anything yet. There is no proof for any of the thesis - either if its Gods work or not. I just like to see and read up on everything. I dont think anyone should accept what I re-tell you here of what I read. Its your opinion that I have misconseptions and its mine that other people do too. I didnt read any of your answers from previous pages here, so I cant say anything about your own point of vew on things.

I dont think I deserve a medal for reading books But every post from you to me was a copy-paste job. Thats where I was getting.

If you are so convinced that you are the one with open mind and not me, look up on the links I gave you in one of my previous posts.

Btw - I was not debating "The Da Vinci Code" here. The book is amusing, but I dont accept it as historical fact, cause its stated that it isnt.

 

[lowpro]

Amazing that people would put so much effort into discrediting this and yet they accept the terms of their religion without question.

The terms of their religion have been in place before time. This book, was set in place during their time. Not the greatest comparison.

Everyone believes in his or her own religion for their own reasons. Even if everyone is wrong and religion is bogus, at least a chuck of humanity lived a better life believing in something greater than themselves. Not a bad way to live. I'd rather believe in something that doesn't exist instead of not believing in something that does; I win either way.

It's amazing how people discredit a higher power, but are the firsts ones to call upon GOD for help when they "need" it. It doesn't hurt the average Joe to believe in something that makes him a better man. Shit, if the 10 commandments are not the word of GOD, so what. Not a bad set of terms to live by as your base principles.

 

[bluepeter]

The terms of their religion have been in place before time. This book, was set in place during their time. Not the greatest comparison.

Everyone believes in his or her own religion for their own reasons. Even if everyone is wrong and religion is bogus, at least a chuck of humanity lived a better life believing in something greater than themselves. Not a bad way to live. I'd rather believe in something that doesn't exist instead of not believing in something that does; I win either way.

It's amazing how people discredit a higher power, but are the firsts ones to call upon GOD for help when they "need" need. It doesn't hurt the average Joe to believe in something that makes him a better man. Shit, if the 10 commandments are not the word of GOD, so what. Not a bad set of terms to live by as your base principles.

100% valid comparison. Believers have spent countless hours (such as this very thread) attempting to 'prove' that Dan Brown is full of shit and his book is based on falsehoods. Yet these very same people follow THEIR version of divinity without questions. If you cannot see the fallacy here then I don't know what else to say.

By the way, I am not one of those who 'discredit' God or the existence of a higher intelligence. I also do not call upon such an entity when I am in 'need'.

I agree wholeheartedly with your assertions that if it makes one a better person, fantastic. It's just too bad that as much if not more harm has occured because of the divinity question than good.