the da vinci code/HBHG etc etc etc

[bananabrain]

anyone read it? is this the right place to discuss it? or should it be under christianity?

anyway, i'm just finishing it at the moment and finding it fairly chucklesome rather than surprising, having been aware of that whole holy blood/holy grail theory for years.

leaving aside the rather poor quality of the writing, the blindingly obvious codifications, the cardboard characters there to provide hooks for the narrative, the overblown sense of portentous self-importance and "shock, horror!!!!!!!!!!!" style, there are at least a few howlers in there, one of which being the suggestion that leonardo's mirror-writing looks like rashi-script. hur, hur, hur. the most amusing part though is the bit where he talks about the Tetragrammaton as being a fusion of the Name Yod-Kei and the "pre-hebraic" name for eve. the problem here, of course, is that "havvah" (hebrew for eve) is spelt differently from the last three letters of the TG, starting with a het, not a heh. deary deary me.

so what do people think of the theory? naturally, it's not a problem for me, because i'm not a christian anyway and never thought jesus was the messiah or anything but a human being (albeit an exceptional one), although i thought it pretty unusual for a 33-yr old to not be married. the genealogy aspect of it would have to be sound - but that requires us to believe that jesus was a direct male-line descendant of king david, upon which we only have luke chapter 3 to rely, don't we? so actually, what happens after jesus has not a great deal of relevance to whether he was the messiah or not if, like me, you're not prepared to take luke's word for it. also, i'm not sure why it's such a big deal that mary magdalene should be a benjaminite heiress. i know the jerusalem territory is in benjamin, but how do we get from there to her being a "princess" or an "heiress"?

anyway, i find this all terribly good fun and as i know the area round temple tube station extremely well, this is all very local, too! i dare say it's all overrun with grail tourists now...

b'shalom

bananabrain

[lunamoth]

I agree with BB about the quality of the writing etc., but it was a fun read anyway! Being far from a scholar of religious history I wondered throughout how much Brown had researched and how much he just pulled out of thin air. Wished he had put in footnotes. But apparently all this consipiracy theory stuff is quite prevelant even though I was unaware of it. One interesting tangent it took me on was to look up some conspiracy theory book reviews on Amazon. I had a fun evening of reading and nearly rolled on the floor when I hit a book where a majority of the reviews started with something like "well, I'm not fully certain that George W. Bush is a lizard alien but the rest of XXXX's theory is spot on!"

Anyway, I think one good thing to come from all this tizzy around the Da Vinci Code is to get Christians interested in the feminine divine again. It has too long been a paternal church and if bible historians, religious scholars and popular culture can combine to remind us that there is no male or female in His eyes, and thus no dominance of male over female is justified, it may bring a welcome change.

My own pet question is not whether one of the twelve was a woman (can't remember which one the theory suggested), but whether Jesus was actually a genetic woman. After all, he was born of the Virgin Mary who could only donate X chromosomes. Was he a clone of Mary? Feeling a bit heretical actually writing this one out...

[brucegdc]

I'm finding the furor over the DaVinci Code amusing. It's fiction - and presented as such. Reading one of his other ones - the one set at the NSA, whcih contains a computer which "blows up" when it gets a virus disguised as an encrypted message, I doubt Dan Brown holds much credibility as a source (umm... silicon doesn't explode, or burn, folks...). Although it's fun to watch one of my colleagues go crazy when I mention the author - he likes scientific mysteries to be at least true to science (despite introductions that credit "employees of the agency" with checking the book, in the one case). I'd take the intros of "these are true" with about the same shipload of salt I do his other books. Good reads, though, as long as you don't mind howlers sprinkled throughout the books as he gets something really really wrong.

For good conspiracy stuff, though, I'll take Umberto Eco's Focault's Pendulum any day - he manages to tie a lot more conspiracy theories together in that one than Dan Brown did.

[Mus Zibii]

I downloaded the book illegally, read the first page and deleted it. I find the furor over the theology amusing, too. If there's any reason to hate the book, its the poor prose.

[sjr]

I thought it was a quick entertaining read, felt like jumping a bullet train.


For good conspiracy stuff, though, I'll take Umberto Eco's Focault's Pendulum any day - he manages to tie a lot more conspiracy theories together in that one than Dan Brown did.

DITTO!!!! Have you read Baudolino another master piece.

[bgruagach]

Originally Posted by brucegdc

I'm finding the furor over the DaVinci Code amusing. It's fiction - and presented as such. Reading one of his other ones - the one set at the NSA, whcih contains a computer which "blows up" when it gets a virus disguised as an encrypted message, I doubt Dan Brown holds much credibility as a source (umm... silicon doesn't explode, or burn, folks...).

I used to work as an internal tech support person at a software company in Toronto, Canada a few years ago. I remember one day we did have one particular computer just spontaneously catch fire. Smoke and everything!

I doubt it had anything to do with computer virus infections though. It was more likely due to dust buildup (dust bunnies!) that were ignited by a short circuit or something.

[Ratanya]

A friend of mine raved over this book and pushed it on to me to read. Odd thing was, I only just recently decided to read it (some weeks later) and forgot I already had it as they left as a loan.. so after spending all day in shops looking for it, I came home to find it on my shelf.

Result: Hrm.. it was very easy reading. I read it in about 4-6 hours. The writing style left me with feeling the author was pushing his agenda a bit too obviously. The initial plot was good, but I felt the author did some odd twists with some of the characters at the end, which made them then follow illogical courses of action. It is not especially researched, and I would stress on people who plan to read it that is a *novel* so some creative license has been taken in many areas.

I don't find the concept of a married Jesus with heirs at all offensive myself. I felt the author did their the best to not *defame* Jesus in this novel in any other way, which I did like. Despite my own personal beliefs in various things, I don't actually like seeing faith ruined for others.

I would recommend Laurence Gardners book on the Bloodline of Jesus for people who are further interested in this area. This book did however *defame* Jesus in my opinion, however.. if you can ignore Gardner's ramblings on ancient Nazarene Jewish traditions, which he claims are founded in the dead-sea scrolls traditions, it is considerably well researched in many areas.

[Sacredstar]

Well friends are all raving about the book eventhough it is fiction, don't make time to read fiction, so am waiting for the film to come out next year. I hear there is two films coming out on this subject matter, very pleased about that.

I remember seeing a TV programme called The REAL Jesus some year's ago and the rabbi's said that Jesus must have been married because it is only the wife that can claim the body????

I must admit I love the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, it is clear to me that she was clairvoyant. There is also reference in the Gospel of Thomas and the apostles refer to Mary. It seems that the male apostles were quite jealous of the relationship that Jesus had with both Mary and Thomas.

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[1spirit]

D. Browns book is fiction.However, remember the list of reference books in the middle ? Those are Real books, Holy Blood Holy Grail by Michael Baigent & Richard Leigh, I am in the middle of the sequel "The Messianic Legacy". The Woman w/ Alabaster Jar & The Goddess in the Gospels by Margaret Starbird are both very good reads. There are a couple more on the list, but I haven't found those yet.

[Satanist]

It should be under mysticism and not under christianity.
The templars were a heresy and possible another religion.
To put it under Christianity would limit that discussion.

Leonardo da V is supposed according according some too not only have been a part of idealogical group setting the standards for the renessance
but also some occult groups related not only to the Templars
but to a religion worshiping Johaness the baptist instead of Jesus as the holy messah.
Jesus was just a student and Johaness was really the master
all the time. Christianity is the heresy and not the other way around and the teachings of Christ are obvioulsy replaced.
No Christian heroes or ideals of knighood.

This is supported by folklore that claim that Jesus had a evil almost Anti-christ-similar rival that was the first Magican called Magus
who gained his power from the devil.
A story that used to point at why magic was against God.

This has been labeled satanism, the Johaness heresy become
worship of the demon Bathometh the false baptist.
You could say the church hide johanism as bathometh
but it does say alot of what Bathometh could have become in occultism.

I think that the Templars are still around and that they are not Christians but evolved into a Satanism.
Just as egyptianism has become the Temple of Set and a early Christian group of gnostics become Luciferianists.
I think that is the reason they are devoted to destoying the christian religion and thats why the former Johanesists wanted to try create a rebirth of the antique world.

According to pure rumors and speculations they were militant and intellectual in nature becouse Johanes has supposedly a coldhearted intellectaul fellow.

The head and a finger were wholy and they believed in stigmata on the throat as Johaness was beheaded.

That is my theory, not knowlegde but I know that many kightly orders were heretical becouse aristocrats simply could afford to invent new religions and they did, even in the mideaval period.

There were many noblemen in the dark ages who were excomunicated and didn't care.
In a point in history the academical instutite become a heresy,
the Skoolacism who challanged the church's authority on theology
and from who we got Schools.

Who did you think all those guys who died in the witchunts were
and why did you think there were so many?
Did you think they were witches?

It was quite simply in the end of the antique area and begining of the dark ages, the church had spread Christianity with violence and politics to create a new Roman empire.
In high of the mideaval period the roman church tried again to create a new roman empire the only way they knew, to research and invent a new christianity with violence and politics against all the other Christians.

[pohaikawahine]

personally I really liked it .... a good read and lots of symbols, even if the inner meanings are never reached .... it goes right up there on the shelf with all four books by Laurence Gardner, THe Name of the Rose, Foucault's Pendulum and Baudolino by Eco, The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell & Dustin Thomason, Rosslyn by Tim Wallace-Murphy & Marilyn Hopkins, and of course Harry Potter .... all have played a role in re-introducing concepts (not always perfectly, but nevertheless they are there) that cause people to look again at symbols and meaning .... like the Celestine Prophecy, the reading was fun so people purchased it and seeds were planted ....

Three books that gets a special place on the shelf are"The Seven Mysteries of Life, an Exploration in Science and Philosophy" by Guy Murchie along with "The Tao of Psysics" by Fritjof Capra and "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" by Paulo Friere in which he states "the important thing is to detect the starting point at which men visualize the 'given' and to verify whether or not during the process of investigation any transformation has occurred in their way of perceiving reality."

All my friends that read the da vinci code loved it and what was really important was that "they read it" ..... aloha nui, poh

[wil]

I haven't read the DaVinci Code

Those are Real books, Holy Blood Holy Grail by Michael Baigent & Richard Leigh, I am in the middle of the sequel "The Messianic Legacy". The Woman w/ Alabaster Jar & The Goddess in the Gospels by Margaret Starbird are both very good reads.

I did read all of the above and agree. The exploration is interesting. Some people read the books and thier faith is threatened...others it strengthens. I think it depends on how much you are tied up in the mythology, the more dogmatic/literal you are the more you either have to reject the discussion out of hand or crumble. To me this is obviously part of a Christianity thread...all that is discussed revolves around the life and followers of Jesus...

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by wil

I haven't read the DaVinci Code I did read all of the above and agree. The exploration is interesting. Some people read the books and thier faith is threatened...others it strengthens. I think it depends on how much you are tied up in the mythology, the more dogmatic/literal you are the more you either have to reject the discussion out of hand or crumble. To me this is obviously part of a Christianity thread...all that is discussed revolves around the life and followers of Jesus...

From my point of view Jesus HAD to be married, but I think it was during His early years. Why?
He is called Rabbi throughout the Gospels. A Rabbi HAD to be literate and educated. A Rabbi had to be a mature man, i.e. "married".

If He had married at fifteen He might have finished raising children before He started His ministry.

Mary Magdalene should be considered an Apostle - who has a better right?

Were they a "couple"? What does it matter?

Regards,
Scott

[wil]

Were they a "couple"? What does it matter?

to me, not at all, as so it appears to you....

However just the thought he had brothers and sisters taints the virgin mary in many eyes....the concept of him having a wife and offspring....a lineage....descendents walking amongst us stands a whole lot of conventional thnking on its head... and could be why this had to be taken from the christianity forum and banished to the blasphemy thread...

I didn't expect the spanish inquisition....but as previously posted... I got bettuh.

namaste,

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by wil

to me, not at all, as so it appears to you....

However just the thought he had brothers and sisters taints the virgin mary in many eyes....the concept of him having a wife and offspring....a lineage....descendents walking amongst us stands a whole lot of conventional thnking on its head... and could be why this had to be taken from the christianity forum and banished to the blasphemy thread...

I didn't expect the spanish inquisition....but as previously posted... I got bettuh.

namaste,

LOL! This does seem to be the blasphemy board, doesn't it?

I don't buy the descent of the Carolingians from Jesus Christ. It's essentially a pre-urban myth. There was a renowned series of computer RPG's called Gabriel Knight. He was a supernatural detective. The third and last game in the series postulated that the "blood" transmitted was vampire blood, and the descendants of Jesus were nosferatu. More entertaining fiction in the long run than the da vinci stuff.

Mary was spotless before the conception - meaning without sin, and that is a much cleaner bill of spiritual health than simple virginity in a young girl.

Yet she was supposed to marry Joseph and be his wife, why does that preclude children by the marriage. Chastity is sex within marriage is it not?

Moses had wives and children. Abraham had wives and children. Buddha even had a wife before He pursued enlightenment. Krshna certainly had a wife and children. Muhammed had wives and a daughter who figures prominently i9n the faith of Islam, and the descendants of Muhammed are carefuilly tracked and called "Siyyid".

The Messengers are ONE and separate at the same time. Why should it shock Christians to consider Jesus a family man?

Regards,
Scott