Ship of Fools: Another TDVC opinion....sorry!

Thread: Another TDVC opinion....sorry! Board: The Da Vinci Code / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=66;t=000039

Posted by hevsym (# 11471) on :

Hi, I'm new...
I was just wondering, I'm not a christian at all but interested in all religions and having read the book and seen the film etc....and remembering things I was taught as a child when I was forced to church every sunday so my parents could have some peace....Couldn't christians and the churches see a more positive side to TDVC like... Wasn't Jesus always going to come back again? couldn't they see that in their belief this could be some form of 2nd coming? I mean it doesn't have to be as things were in the time of the crucfixion but in modern times, it could be interpreted to the church's advantage surely? But instead they seem to be afraid of TDVC. Where I live, folk are now asking themselves what they believe, but before all this fuss the churces were empty and no one mentioned anything to do with religion. Surely this is God's work????

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

Could you clarify how you feel The Da Vinci Code ties in with Christian beliefs about the Second Coming of Christ?

I agree that anything which raises awareness of religion is probably positive. However, tDVC is full of mis-representations of both historical and contemporary fact - so people are becoming aware of what are fundamentally lies, but believing them to be true.

Welcome to the Ship!

T.

Posted by Gextvedde (# 11084) on :

Hi there hevsym. I think a lot of churches are using TDVC to their advantage and getting some pretty good discussions going. (Well they are in my area anyway). One thing I would say is that in your OP you mentioned people (Christians) being afraid of the book/film. Maybe some are but I’ve noticed that if one, as a Christian, makes a case against the book, people sometimes see this as merely being defensive and not admitting that the book could somehow ‘disprove’ Christianity. Have we really come to the point where an intelligent argument in defence of Christian faith (in whatever form) is pointless because ‘everyone knows’ it’s just a load of cobblers?

quote:
Posted by Teulfelchen

I agree that anything which raises awareness of religion is probably positive. However, tDVC is full of mis-representations of both historical and contemporary fact - so people are becoming aware of what are fundamentally lies, but believing them to be true.

I think this is the case.

[ 30. May 2006, 14:07: Message edited by: Gextvedde ]

Posted by Louise (# 30) on :

Hevsym,
Welcome aboard! There are actually already a couple of threads open on how Christians should/could respond to the DVC, in particular, this one would be relevant

The Church Militant (What should Christians do?).

I'm going to leave this thread open for now as there seems to be room for a slightly different angle here (can people see a more positive side to it) but if the threads start to duplicate each other I will close this one and ask that discussion move to the other thread

Ta.
Louise

DVC Board Host

Posted by A Feminine Force (# 7812) on :

I think it has had an enormously positive impact on people purely because it takes the viewpoint that church doctrine as we know it was not written in stone from the beginning.

I think it's enormously helpful for people to understand that Christianity began as, was, and continues to be, a fluid and often contentious dialogue of ideas which results in something far from the rigid and hierarchical structure they might perceive it to be.

I think it's an enormously positive influence for people to be able to frame an alternate view of Christianity as a gateway to a transformative Christian experience which they might otherwise miss due to resistance to dogma annd hierarchy.

You know, Christ met people where they were: fishers, tax collectors, prostitutes, princes, and then invited them to follow him. If it's impossible for some people to imagine the divinity of Christ, then I think this book is means by which Christ is meeting people where they are, within their current limitations of belief. If this is how He gets His foot in the door, it won't be very long after He is lodged within before people will begin to feel the magnetic pull of His invitation.

"Come dance with Me. I am the Lord of the Dance" said He. I feel this book is just one tune among many by which He invites us to follow, not as pilgrims, but as Beloved dance partners.

FF

Posted by hevsym (# 11471) on :

Hello again all, thanks for the welcome.

I think as with all things, all publicity is good publicity.
I mean the fact that we are all talking about our beliefs whatever they may be, is really positive and all of us as well as the various religions and different churches around the world should be pleased about this. It doesn't really matter whether we think the book is fact or fiction, we are all standing back and looking at ourselves in a really positive way and for that I am grateful to the author, not just Dan Brown but of all the books that are now being read, about the same subjects.

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by hevsym:
Couldn't christians and the churches see a more positive side to TDVC like... Wasn't Jesus always going to come back again? couldn't they see that in their belief this could be some form of 2nd coming?

Sorry, hevsym. I'm still curious about what you mean here. Can you clarify this bit for me?

Many thanks,

T.

Posted by hevsym (# 11471) on :

Hi, Sorry if I am not clear.

What I mean is that Christians always say that Jesus will return one day, churches say there will be a 'second coming of Christ' and the point I am trying to make is that if some of the book were true, like the bloodline...it could be interpreted as 'the return or the second coming'. Where I live, all the churches have a negative view of the film and book which is understandable but they could look at the book in a different and more positive way.
.
I'm sorry if I am not explaining myself clearly, I am not really used to posting messages, and i'm not christian. I am trying to look at the subject without bias and give a fair opinion, but I will have to get some practise on the computer.

Posted by hevsym (# 11471) on :

I mean that Jesus's descendents in the blood line could be seen as the return of Jesus.

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by hevsym:
Hi, Sorry if I am not clear.

No worries. In terms of posting to the web, there's a thread 'UBB Practice' on the Styx board which can be used to hone your skills at this sort of thing. You're doing fine so far.

quote:
What I mean is that Christians always say that Jesus will return one day, churches say there will be a 'second coming of Christ' and the point I am trying to make is that if some of the book were true, like the bloodline...it could be interpreted as 'the return or the second coming'.

Ah, I see what you mean. There are a number of reasons why the churches would not want to take this course:

Firstly, because the claim that such a bloodline exists is untrue. This is not just a matter of dogma, but of historical accuracy. It's no more accurate to say that a distinct 'bloodline of Jesus' exists than it is to say that the sun rises in the west. As I've said a number of times, for any given person living at the time of Christ, either more or less everyone is descended from that person, or no-one is. There is no such thing as a separate bloodline.

Secondly, because such an idea would be a direct attack on the Christian belief that there is no distinction of race, sex, or class in Christ. If Christ were himself the founder of a 'special race', St Paul would have been mistaken indeed to suggest that all could be one in Christ.

Thirdly, because the teaching of the Second Coming rests primarily on the words of the angels to the Apostles after the Ascension - that 'this Jesus will return in the same manner as you have seen him go'. Any highly allegorical treatment of the doctrine of the Second Coming will have to compete with the directness of this statement.

Fourthly, because we are all already the children and the family of Christ through our fellowship and the sacrament of Holy Communion. The Blood of Christ is in us already, whoever we are.

T.

Posted by hevsym (# 11471) on :

I think that what I'm trying to say is in life, there is always more than one way to look at things. No one person is always right, everyone looks at things in different ways and has different beliefs. There are positive ways to look at the book and for others ..negative ways. But I think it'a a good thing that has come out of it all, and that is that we are all examining our feelings and beliefs. Teenagers where I live are all discussing what they think/ asking each other if they think it's all true/wondering if there could ever be a descendent of Jesus etc and even if the book is the biggest load of rubbish ever, our chuches here are fuller at the moment and these same teenagers were sat out on street corners a few weeks ago graffiting on the nearest fence and I don't expect they had ever read a book right through before and thats a really good thing.
So whether it's rubbish or not, it does have a positive side to it and surely all positive and beneficial things can be linked to God if you believe in him?

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

I'm still not sure I agree with you, hevsym. As I mentioned above, the whole 'bloodline' thing is wildly counter-productive for Christianity, as it encourages people to think that their ancestry has a religious significance. Christianity teaches the opposite - that we are all equally children of God.

Simply asserting 'Well, it's not all bad, so it must be good, so it must be good for the church' doesn't really make much of an argument. There are plenty of books about religion out there. Why should one which encourages people to believe things which are simply historically untrue be worthy of so much approbation?

This isn't just about what the church teaches. TDVC is bad history through and through. One might as well argue that the forged 'Hitler Diaries' have real value for students of WWII.

T.

Posted by The Royal Spaniel (# 40) on :

I can't help thinking that this business about a royal bloodline is a bit of a red herring ? Dan Brown in his book seems to view Jesus as being purely human or at least more human than divine.If this was the case I don't really see it matters in the least that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, sloped off to the South of France for his honeymoon and had children - it'd be the same as any other couple, except your average Jew probably couldn't afford to rob the bank at Monte Carlo..... [Two face]

It's the fact that the book is historically inaccurate - and 'm being charitable! - that grates on me and you have to go into any amount of technical details on order to refute it - the same is true of any conspiracy theory I'd agree
I'd be inclined to say, though - although perhaps others on here would not agree - that cries of blasphemy censorship are not terribly helpful and just cause suspicions in the popular mind that the church does have something to hide even when it doesn't!

Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Royal Spaniel:
I'd be inclined to say, though - although perhaps others on here would not agree - that cries of blasphemy censorship are not terribly helpful and just cause suspicions in the popular mind that the church does have something to hide even when it doesn't!

I thoroughly agree with this. Of course it should not be censored. But I don't see that this makes it automatically a good thing for raising awareness of religion. Was the Malleus Maleficarum good for raising public awareness of witches? Up to a point...

T.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0