Da Vinci Code - Book is all wrong, critics say

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunherald/living/14560165.htm

Book is all wrong, critics say
Author didn't bother to get his facts straight


By JEFFREY WEISS
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS

Experts agree: Dan Brown got most of his facts wrong.

Religion scholars have been whacking "The Da Vinci Code" like a low-hanging piñata. The swings have come from establishment Christianity - the Vatican and the Archbishop of Canterbury - and from the fringes of the faith - a member of the liberal Jesus Seminar and the agnostic historian Bart Ehrman.

At least 44 books debunking "The Da Vinci Code" are for sale at Amazon.com, several written by serious academics or well-known pastors. And with the movie starring Tom Hanks scheduled to open next week, surely more are in the pipeline.

All of which leaves this question unanswered: Why bother?

Why do serious people take the book so seriously? "The Da Vinci Code" is fiction. A novel. It says so right on the cover. That means the writer made stuff up.

The critics have at least 46 million reasons to want to set the record straight. That's the number of copies Brown has sold worldwide. And the movie may play to an even larger audience.

But popularity alone can't explain the cascade of criticism, even if you figure many of the authors are trying to sell their own books by hitching their wagon to Brown. "Star Wars" was an international blockbuster, and physicists didn't fill bookshelves explaining there's no such thing as a light saber.

George Lucas never claimed there was anything real in "Star Wars," though. Brown has tried to have it both ways. Charles Gibson, host of ABC-TV's "Good Morning America," pressed the author on the point in 2003.

"If you were writing it as a nonfiction book," Gibson asked, "how would it have been different?"

"I don't think it would have," replied Brown, who almost never grants interviews.

"I began the research for 'The Da Vinci Code' as a skeptic...

. (A)fter numerous trips to Europe, about two years of research, I really became a believer... "

A believer in what? The book's plot revolves around a centuries-old conspiracy to hide the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene and their descendants. The conspirators included Sir Isaac Newton and Leonardo Da Vinci, who cleverly hid clues to the secret in his paintings. (Hence the title.)

The very first sentence in the book implies this is more than a mere tale. "Fact: The Priory of Sion - a European secret society founded in 1099 - is a real organization." This arcane society, according to Brown's telling, has been the keeper of the secret about Jesus and Magdalene.

But the "fact" is almost certainly wrong. Last month, "60 Minutes" piled up evidence that a Frenchman - an anti-Semite with a history of criminal fraud - "created" the Priory as a hoax in the 1950s.

The book reeks of truthiness and smartiness, the appearance of being truthful and smart without necessarily being either. The protagonist is a Harvard professor (in a department that doesn't exist). The fast-moving plot is propelled by a series of clever puzzles based on famous works of art.

But the debunking books list factual errors large and small:

The glass pyramid at the Louvre has 673 glass panes, not 666. The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by Jews and say nothing about Jesus. They were discovered in 1947, not the 1950s.

The irrational number Phi is not precisely equal to 1.618.

If the figure to the left of Jesus in "The Last Supper" is really Mary Magdalene, as the book claims, then Leonardo left out an apostle. If it's really John, as most art historians claim, Leonardo was neither the first nor the only artist to paint him as a beardless, long-haired young man.

Brown's best "proof" of a romance between Jesus and Mary Magdalene comes from the Gospel of Philip, one of the Gnostic gospels. In "The Da Vinci Code," the quote reads: "The companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth."

But Ehrman, a text scholar, says the only manuscript we have of that gospel is full of holes. And that all we have of that passage is "The companion of the (gap) Mary Magdalene (gap) more than (gap) the disciples (gap) kiss her (gap) on her (gap)."

If Brown can't get inarguable facts right, the experts say, what faith can readers place in his conclusions about the nature of Christianity?

Some critics say they're intent on tearing down the credibility of the book because many people, mostly ignorant of what is known of the early years of Christianity, accept Brown's fictions as gospel truth.

"In our experience, readers are taking it as true," said Ehrman, a religious studies professor at the University of North Carolina and the author of "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code." "Historians care about what happened in the past, and it's important... to separate the fact from the fiction."

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is so concerned about the book that it's created a Web site, jesusdecoded.com, with official Catholic responses to the issues Brown raises in the book.

"A bishop came to me and said, 'I never had to read a novel because my parishioners came up to me to say I should read it,'" said the Rev. Francis Maniscalco, communications director for the conference.

Brown is muddling people's thinking in ways that could shake faith and affect the reputation of real institutions, said the Rev. Timothy Friedrichsen, a New Testament professor at Catholic University.

"Brown's work only confuses the matter, and in this reader's opinion, intentionally," he said. But Friedrichsen joked that Brown need not fear worldly retribution from the Vatican.

"He can, however, look at the bright side: The dark chapter in the church's history of the Inquisition is long past."

There is some evidence that readers are buying the bunkum.

Last year, pollster George Barna reported that 53 percent of American adults who finished the book said it had been helpful in their "personal spiritual growth and understanding."

Whatever that means.

A Canadian survey commissioned last year by National Geographic showed that 32 percent who read "The Da Vinci Code" believed its theories.

And last week, in a Catholic Digest poll, 73 percent of American Catholics said the book "did not affect their faith or opinion of the church in any way." Which means that up to 27 percent - about 14 million Catholics - may be vulnerable to having their faith affected by Brown's tale.

The author shrugs off his critics.

"It's a book about big ideas, you can love them or you can hate them," he said in a speech in Portsmouth, N.H., last month. "But we're all talking about them, and that's really the point."

That discussion is good news, even from the critics' perspective.

"As a scholar I'm very grateful to Dan Brown. People like me are in demand right now in a way we have never been before," said Gail Streete, a religious studies professor and expert on Mary Magdalene at Rhodes College in Memphis. "Most of the time nobody pays any attention to what we do."

Brown has made Darrell Bock of Dallas a successful author on several continents. Bock, a professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, is the author of "Breaking the Da Vinci Code."

The book has hit best-seller lists in Australia, Brazil and Germany, he said. He's become a sought-after speaker at church and college events.

"People are finally engaging these topics, and want to engage on the level of substance," he said.

Robert Price is a member of the Jesus Seminar, an academic group that has tried to sift the Gospels for "historical truth" by rejecting accounts of miracles and other supernatural elements. He's also the author of "The Da Vinci Fraud." He's not angry at Brown for casting doubt on the official histories of Christianity. He's mad, he said, because Brown did it so badly.

For Price, the success of "The Da Vinci Code" is evidence that people are willing to entertain doubts about theology.

"It must mean people are a lot more open-minded than I ever figured they would be about it," he said.

The Rev. Kendall Harmon, an Episcopal theologian in South Carolina, compares Brown to Celsus, a second-century critic of Christianity. Celsus inspired early Christians into thoughtful responses, he said.

"A Christian who reads 'The Da Vinci Code' and can explain to his or her friends why 'The Da Vinci Code' is wrong is a more effective Christian," he said. "As Celsus strengthened the early church, so Dan Brown is strengthening us."

Quotes

Forty-six million readers can't be wrong, but the book they're reading might be. Excerpts from scholarly critics of Dan Brown's blockbuster:

"There were numerous mistakes, some of them howlers, which were not only obvious to an expert but also unnecessary to the plot...

. Why didn't he simply get his facts straight?"

Bart D. Ehrman, "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code"

"It repeatedly misunderstands or misrepresents people, places and events."

Carl E. Olson and Sandra Miesel, "The Da Vinci Hoax"

"What is the likelihood that Jesus was married? The answer here is short - none."

Darrell L. Bock, "Breaking the Da Vinci Code"

"This is why 'The Da Vinci Code' is so dangerous. Many readers assume that all of the... detail involving Christianity is true when it is not. Rather, the few factual references are heavily interlaced with fiction or outright falsehood."

- Hank Hanegraaf and Paul L. Maier, "The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction?"

"... a startling number of blatant, glaring errors on matters great and small... "

Amy Welborn, "De-Coding Da Vinci"

"One can see why the issues of 'The Da Vinci Code' have people talking, arguing, searching - however... rewoven or spun out of whole cloth the religious history may be."

Dan Burstein, editor, "Secrets of the Code"

Quotes

Forty-six million readers can't be wrong, but the book they're reading might be. Excerpts from scholarly critics of Dan Brown's blockbuster:

"There were numerous mistakes, some of them howlers, which were not only obvious to an expert but also unnecessary to the plot...

. Why didn't he simply get his facts straight?"

Bart D. Ehrman, "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code"

"It repeatedly misunderstands or misrepresents people, places and events."

Carl E. Olson and Sandra Miesel, "The Da Vinci Hoax"

"What is the likelihood that Jesus was married? The answer here is short - none."

Darrell L. Bock, "Breaking the Da Vinci Code"

"This is why 'The Da Vinci Code' is so dangerous. Many readers assume that all of the... detail involving Christianity is true when it is not. Rather, the few factual references are heavily interlaced with fiction or outright falsehood."

- Hank Hanegraaf and Paul L. Maier, "The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction?"

"... a startling number of blatant, glaring errors on matters great and small... "

Amy Welborn, "De-Coding Da Vinci"

"One can see why the issues of 'The Da Vinci Code' have people talking, arguing, searching - however... rewoven or spun out of whole cloth the religious history may be."
 
Laura said:
http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunherald/living/14560165.htm

Book is all wrong, critics say
Author didn't bother to get his facts straight

By JEFFREY WEISS
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS

[...]

At least 44 books debunking "The Da Vinci Code" are for sale at Amazon.com, several written by serious academics or well-known pastors. And with the movie starring Tom Hanks scheduled to open next week, surely more are in the pipeline.

All of which leaves this question unanswered: Why bother?

[...]

George Lucas never claimed there was anything real in "Star Wars," though. Brown has tried to have it both ways. Charles Gibson, host of ABC-TV's "Good Morning America," pressed the author on the point in 2003.

[...]
Seems to me the book has been 'managed' so that people can "have it both ways," or whichever way they want it, accommodating Christians, New-agers. and so on; it's as though an industry has grown out of, or intentionally been designed as, a management program.

I haven't read the novel, but I did read one of the debunking books (don't remember which one), which used the Bible and accepted Christian myth-history to refute the premise of the novel, although it appears debunkers have used various methods.

Ultimately, it appears Laura is the only one who has written anything of real value on the subject in The True Identity of Fulcanelli and The Da Vinci Code and The Secret History of the World.
 
Lucy said:
Seems to me the book has been 'managed' so that people can "have it both ways," or whichever way they want it, accommodating Christians, New-agers. and so on; it's as though an industry has grown out of, or intentionally been designed as, a management program.

I haven't read the novel, but I did read one of the debunking books (don't remember which one), which used the Bible and accepted Christian myth-history to refute the premise of the novel, although it appears debunkers have used various methods.
For those interested, here are two links regarding books on DVC. One is a set of reviews at Phenomena Magazine, the other is a bibliography by Paul Smith at priory-of-sion.com. It seems most of the "debunking" books are nothing but Christian reverse propaganda (i.e. my Bible propaganda says you DVC propaganda is wrong!).

http://phenomena.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Into+The+Fringe&action=page&obj_id=4681
http://priory-of-sion.com/posd/hbhgchildren.html

Regardless, I am planning on reading Holy Blood Holy Grail, just to get a better handle on the Rennes phenomenon. Then I'll read Bill Putnam and John Edwin Wood's The Treasure of Rennes-le-Chateau: A Mystery Solved. Does anyone have any other recommended books on the subject? (I know there's a lot of crap written on the subject...)
 
I have seen a great documentary movie about Rennes, it was about the guy who wrote "Holy Grail ...", but that particular movie was focused on buildings in Rennes he was investigating and hidden geometries, triangles, pentacles and so on. It also showed evidence that builders/designers knew exact distance from earth to sun and other interesting stuff. It' like revisiting Great Pyramid.
Will try to find the title of this movie and will post here tomorrow.
 
Well no wonder it was such a hit! Drum up a sensational interest in what borders some of the deeper truths in the world - throw in some truths with lies and WHAMBO - those that come in and debunk it 'prove' their position is 'right' and you should follow them - and all that pseudo jesus-was-a-man crap can be tossed in the gutter and never looked at again!
 
Too Funny. The Church, all upset that their version of the Truth is being Challenged (finally). Who here now was alive when all this occurred? What 'proofs' are offered to bolster the arguments. It's the SOS all the time. Look at our ignorance of the History of the World. Look at what, for instance, the Meier Material says about our origins. Pick whatever version resonates with your world View. No One Alive now has any more 'evidence' than anyone else. Its really all just here-say, as much as UFO's. After all, we have living Humans in the millions who have interacted with them, and look what the Collective Society has to say about the fact. It's Venus, yes swamp gas. LOL over and Over. The more they yell about the 'Code' the more it makes me feel that there is indeed something there. "Methinks thou dost protest too much." The Bible is a great piece of spin. Who could ever know what occurred for sure. Seems a vehicle to control the population more than anything. What could 'They' have Hidden in their walls in the Vatican that 'they' 'KEEP from US' Why would anyone believe anything told to them. They want to be led so they don't have to figure it out for themselves. The Bible is the Old SERPO... The more they want to keep us from it the more I know something stinks in Denmark... I rest.

We know One thing, the the Version of History that the world has been taught is a Myth. Big Time. Plus the suppression of all that does not fit into the Status Quo is Iron Clad, even unto Death if disobeyed. You best not disagree in public with the accepted story, if you value your Peace. The machine is set and running pell-mell at speed, lest you not forget to stay out of it's way.
 
There is this two part serie that was played yesterday on TV

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/W/weirdworlds/da_vinci_code/index.html

It's from 2005 but considering that the movie is soon to be released here I suppose there will be many many shows like this one on the air.

I haven't seen it yet (taped it) but it seems (from articles about the sho) to debunk the book.
 
i don't know the book, but it has also struck me to see so much attention heaped on a book supposedly fiction. first the church wants to sue the author, then they start an incredible media campaign to debunk it ?

i found it terminally weird to see a "documentary" on Arte debunking the whole book, all the while the speaker making "fun" of whatever the book said before debunking that asseveration. also strange that he would implicate some french "weirdo" and "antisemite" in the whole affair of the priory of sion.

would it be going too far to suppose that the whole book was set up as a strawman (as implied above, "managed") in order to have something to take down ? my impression is that the whole "da vinci code" affair is an indirect attack on the many articles and books published by laura/cassiopaea. the priory of sion, the templars, the possibility of jesus having gone into exile, ... have been discussed before on the net, but IMO here the whole thing is put together and in context with other interesting things. it may have gotten out of hand from their POV so "they" needed to attack laura but without coming near her too dangerous material, so they commissioned somebody to write an easily debunkable book, and debunked it was.
 
name said:
... , so they commissioned somebody to write an easily debunkable book, and debunked it was.
Yes, exactly the way I see it but I am not sure whether it is to attack Laura, or Laura only. There's many more that will be discredited. I haven't read the book though, and I don't intend to either :P

There's many strategies that are being recognized more and more that all have one common purpose. And that is to keep (or lead) people away from the truth. One such strategy is the good cop/bad cop approach, where the bad cop takes people very far away from the truth, while the good cop takes people less far away from the truth. As the latter feels to most people as "correcting" when compared to the bad cop, they become at peace with this new position which, however, is still away from the truth. Here we can learn of an alternative strategy that is used as frequently.

When people are confronted with false data or interpretations within a given set that are debunked, because that was actually very easy to accomplish, most people will throw everything from the table, also those data and/or interpretations which have not, or can not, be debunked within that given set.

Most people are too lazy or have not learned yet, that "the devil is in the details".

An identical strategy has been used to discredit the 9/11 truth movement, with one additional layer. Here it was not enough to insert material that was easy to debunk, here it was deemed necessary to scatter the movement into many separate factions that were then led to divert their energies to attack each other. This would be the classic divide and conquer, being and additional layer on top of "how would we call this strategy?"

Staining (infecting/polluting) of the baby's bathwater? Any creative idea's here?
 
I personally liked the documentaries. Watched 6 of them so I could have a better overview,
I wasn't after paintings, people forget that paintings represent only what Leonardo believed in.
It was geometry and accuracy that I found interesting, there certainly is something more to this.
That geometry stuff was mentioned only in 1 out of 6 documentaries I saw, probably because it was Lincoln telling the story and not someone who jumped out of the blue. Others seem to focus on Jesus/bloodline/paintings thing.
5-pointed-star, it's everywhere - 3/5 code?

Untitled-1.gif


Untitled-2.gif


Untitled-3.gif


Untitled-4.gif


Untitled-6.gif


Distances between objects is extremely accurate.
Untitled-5.gif


Besides, all distances are in english miles, while it wasn't supposed to exist yet at those times.
The hughe pentacle on the island on 5th pic takes earth's curve into account, which wasn't supposed to be known at those times.

for those interested, the Title: Origins Of The Da Vinci Code
 
"Da Vinci Code" secret is out: most critics hate it

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2006-05-17T213631Z_01_FOR639302_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-CANNES-DAVINCI.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

By Mike Collett-White

CANNES, France (Reuters) - Most critics panned "The Da Vinci Code" on Wednesday ahead of the world premiere of the year's most eagerly awaited movie.

Kicking off the annual Cannes film festival, Ron Howard's adaptation of the Dan Brown bestseller was described variously as "grim", "unwieldy" and "plodding", though one reviewer bucked the trend and said "You'll Louvre It!"

The cool reception was temporarily forgotten at a glitzy opening ceremony, where screen legend Sidney Poitier and Bollywood star Aishwarya Rai joined Da Vinci Code star Tom Hanks and the normally publicity-shy Brown on the red carpet.

Even before its general release on May 18 and 19, The Da Vinci Code generated controversy as Christians around the world called for it to be banned.

The novel has enraged religious groups because one of its characters argues that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had a child by her, and that elements within the Catholic Church resorted to murder to hide the truth.

In Thailand on Wednesday, a police-run censorship board overturned an earlier decision to cut the last 10 minutes of the film, but insisted the distributor add disclaimers stating it was fiction.

In Ireland, volunteers plan to distribute free copies of a special edition of The Irish Catholic newspaper outside cinemas showing The Da Vinci Code over the weekend.

A Vatican cardinal has called for a boycott of the picture, and the Indian government said it would show the movie to Christian groups before clearing its release. In the mainly Catholic Philippines censors gave it an "adult only" rating.

Howard and Hanks defended the film at a news conference, saying it was a piece of fiction. British actor Alfred Molina, who plays a Machiavellian bishop in the movie, blamed the media for creating controversy where there was little or none.

LAUGHTER, THEN SILENCE

At a screening late on Tuesday in Cannes, members of the audience laughed at the thriller's pivotal moment, and the end of the $125 million picture was greeted with stony silence.

Trade publication Variety had barely a nice word to say.

"A pulpy page-turner in its original incarnation as a huge international bestseller has become a stodgy, grim thing in the exceedingly literal-minded film version of The Da Vinci Code," wrote Todd McCarthy.

Lee Marshall of Screen International agreed.

"I haven't read the book, but I just thought there was a ridiculous amount of exposition," he said. "I thought it was plodding and there was a complete lack of chemistry between Audrey Tautou and Tom Hanks."

Lou Lumenick of the New York Post was far more upbeat:

"Ron Howard's splendid The Da Vinci Code is the Holy Grail of summer blockbusters: a crackling, fast-moving thriller that's every bit as brainy and irresistible as Dan Brown's controversial bestseller."

Critics say the controversy surrounding the film, and the fact more than 40 million people have bought the book, will ensure a strong box office performance, but they believe word-of-mouth is likely to hit sales later on.

The movie industry will be watching The Da Vinci Code particularly closely after the first two summer blockbusters -- "Mission: Impossible III" and "Poseidon" -- stumbled.

Howard had some advice for those who objected to the story.

"There's no question that the film is likely to be upsetting to some people. My advice is ... to not go and see the movie if you think you're going to be upset."

Ian McKellen, an openly gay actor who plays Leigh Teabing in The Da Vinci Code, tried to make light of the controversy.

"I'm very happy to believe that Jesus was married," he said. "I know the Catholic Church has problems with gay people and I thought this would be absolute proof that Jesus was not gay."

The opening ceremony and Da Vinci Code premiere kick off 12 hectic days of screenings, interviews, photocalls and partying in Cannes, the world's biggest film festival.
 
Some comments on the film: I only made it 30 pages into the book before I gave up. My imagination stalled before it could take flight, mainly due to Brown's stylistically inept writing. And I must say, having seen the film today, it had the same effect. Since I was unfamiliar with the plot, it started off rather well, but went downhill from there. The flashback scenes felt superficial, not to mention the lack of romance. There were some pivotal moments, such as the explanation of Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene, where I found myself chuckling at the childish dialogue and awkwardness of the actors. Even the Silas character, an Albino assassin who you would think would have a hard time not looking menacing, seemed ridiculous at times. Overall, the plot simply fell apart near the end. A very average film.
 
Laura said:
http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunherald/living/14560165.htm

Book is all wrong, critics say
Author didn't bother to get his facts straight


By JEFFREY WEISS
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS

Experts agree: Dan Brown got most of his facts wrong.


"One can see why the issues of 'The Da Vinci Code' have people talking, arguing, searching - however... rewoven or spun out of whole cloth the religious history may be."
Well I just saw the Movie and I thought it was very good. The sets and acting were great as was the photography. I loved the film. After all the PR we have endured I thought it justified the 'hype'. I could instantly see why the negative reviews. It imparted ALOT of information very intensively. It gave the 'critics' allot of room to fault the production as it was not your 'normal' film ( thank God). It was a real pleasure for me to take in as I had not read the book. I would recommend it to all who have an interest in such matters. I thought it was very plausible. At least as plausible as the trash the Church tries to push as 'their' version. All religious zealots who are upset, well its a great sign, that information they would not like shared is being shown. Its about time,as the Church has bastardized the entire history of the world for its own agenda ( money,power) I know I'm preaching to the choir here about alternative views of history, but I for one found it very soothing to have a alternate view made available to a hypnotized world. I think it will do very well as perhaps a majority of the Christians of the world know that the stories they have been told leave much to be desired. Ditto for what all religions have been telling their followers, not just Catholics. Go see it.
Yeah Experts agree he got most of his fact wrong, those SAME EXPERTS who have been Pushing the collective view since the beginning. Those experts who discount the reality UFO's etc. (experts, don't make me laugh)
 
Most of my ... let's say, less than endearing comments on The Da Vinci Code ... can probably be connected to poor direction. We know Tom Hank and Jean Reno can act, we know the script could have been written less clumsily (yes, I know, there wasn't much to work with, but you don't have to carbon copy Dan Brown's awkward dialogue). The difference between an average director and an good director can make a world of difference.

Although The Da Vinci Code is probably as disinforming as it is informing, it can definitely work to the advantage of those who wish to share knowledge of a higher clarity (*cough* SOTT) as it will probably put many truth seekers on the right path, or at least a path that could lead to a path that could lead to a path that could lead to a sort of right path! What direction the seekers take is ultimately up to them, but if the PTB are trying to lead those who are awakening through a veritable hedge maze of COINTELPRO, then their undoing may be those who actually (shock! horror!) see the forest for the trees - or the maze for it's ... hedgeness? - and try their own path instead.

All we need is street signs on more of these pathways that read: "THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE WORLD AND HOW TO GET OUT ALIVE ... OR AT LEAST A HALF-DECENT SHOT AT GETTING OUT ALIVE. (White rabbit not included)."

:P
 
Lucy said:
Seems to me the book has been 'managed' so that people can "have it both ways," or whichever way they want it, accommodating Christians, New-agers. and so on; it's as though an industry has grown out of, or intentionally been designed as, a management program.
Precisely!

Just watched the movie the other day, and at the end Langdon says to Sophie smth along the lines of "Jesus, Mary Magdalene -- does it really matter what really happened? It is what you BELIEVE that matters ... Imagine what would MM do in this situation ... would she seek to destroy the faith -- or to revitalize it?"

And this is why I suffered 2.5 hours of jaw-stiffling boredom, to hear THIS @#$%?

I think we may soon start seeing car stickers and bracelets with "It is what you BELIEVE that matters" or
"What would Mary Magdalene do?" :):)

IMO the Da Vinci Code may actually have serve the religious right. It may have led the masses to stifle their vague questioning of the official story of Christianity, and into accepting any alternative concept as either a version of the same basic truth, or a work of fiction -- or both.

Yet, this "It is what you BELIEVE that matters" reels of a typically liberal "You're OK, I'm OK, WE are both OK". This kind of talk makes the conservatives' blood boil, since it goes against their proclamed absolute values. Thus we have yet another false dichotomies, when a solution to a problem is reduced to two alternatives, neither of which accurately reflects reality. And a choice between these alternatives inevitably results in a dog fight.

It does seem to cover all bases indeed.
 
Back
Top Bottom