• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Da Vinci code - Not all bad?

I know different things about Christianity than I did when I was one. I think that's because my interests changed when my beliefs changed.

I was a Christian for a long time, and then gave it up in my early twenties. That's a pretty common story.

What I have noticed on JREF is that a lot atheists criticize Christians for not knowing something about Christianity because the Christians don't know something the atheist thinks is very important. However, in the course of pointing out the error of the Christian ways, they frequently make some pretty glaring errors about Christianity. Each side has an agenda, and that agenda causes them to focus on those elements that support their own agenda. That seems pretty human, and not limited to those for or against Christianity.
 
Meadmaker said:
What I have noticed on JREF is that a lot atheists criticize Christians for not knowing something about Christianity because the Christians don't know something the atheist thinks is very important. However, in the course of pointing out the error of the Christian ways, they frequently make some pretty glaring errors about Christianity. Each side has an agenda, and that agenda causes them to focus on those elements that support their own agenda. That seems pretty human, and not limited to those for or against Christianity.
Click to expand...

That's one of the reasons I'm here, to make sure I keep up with the latest ammo. A while while while back I toyed with the idea of making a new name, popping in and establishing myself as an uber-atheist, scourge of all visiting Christians. Just to see if I could do it, and I think I could.

I think a Christian can hang out here and get his/her arguments whipped into shape, streamlined and all that. Find out what buttons to push, what buttons not to push, what arguments are flimsy. I know it can work in the opposite way as well...a Christian can follow several threads and see all his/her logic undercut, or see information that makes them question their beliefs. That's why I think it's good to have Christians in these discussions.

-Elliot
 
I agree. I post most often on topics I don't feel extremely strongly about, because I'm testing the logic I'm not cerain of.

The funny thing is that sometimes it means I don't take the skeptical party line, and some of the people around here just go ape when they hear a self proclaimed atheist/agnostic or whatever saying that Christians, even fundamentalists, aren't necessarily complete idiots. Occasionally, I've been accused of being a fundamentalist Christian in disguise. As I said the first time that happened, "Please don't tell the rabbi. He thinks I'm an agnostic."
 
elliotfc said:
With the notion, or the fact? If it was some obtuse notion, yes I would have a problem with that...but that curtsies to the reality. My personal problem with the concept is independent with the reality of the situation.

-Elliot
Click to expand...


I can't seem to filter your answer out of that ..

Do you have a problem with Christians questioning the word of God, based on the writings of Dan Brown ?
 
Diogenes said:
Do you have a problem with Christians questioning the word of God, based on the writings of Dan Brown ?
Click to expand...

Not really. Or I don't know. I've never actually *talked* to anyone who has told me that because of the Da Vinci Code, they now question the Bible. I'm sure they are out there. I think the mere fact is symptomatic of something greater, and there are a several suspects for the something greater.

-Elliot
 
elliotfc said:
Not really. Or I don't know. I've never actually *talked* to anyone who has told me that because of the Da Vinci Code, they now question the Bible. I'm sure they are out there. I think the mere fact is symptomatic of something greater, and there are a several suspects for the something greater.

-Elliot
Click to expand...

gee Elliot I'm confused...


elliotfc said:
I think many people do take the Da Vinci Code seriously, as two local priests have told me.
-Elliot
Click to expand...


Let me guess..

Taking the Da Vinci Code seriously, doesn't imply a questioning of ' The Word of God ‘…

Care to elaborate ?
 
Diogenes said:
gee Elliot I'm confused...

Let me guess..

Taking the Da Vinci Code seriously, doesn't imply a questioning of ' The Word of God ‘…

Care to elaborate ?
Click to expand...
As I interpret it, Elliot has not personally talked to anyone like this, but that he has talked to priests who have done so, or who believe such people are fairly common. That doesn't necessarily mean that he accepts the priests' conclusions.
 
Diogenes said:
gee Elliot I'm confused...

Let me guess..

Taking the Da Vinci Code seriously, doesn't imply a questioning of ' The Word of God ‘…

Care to elaborate ?
Click to expand...

Right. Two local priests have told me they have talked to concerned church members about the Da Vinci Code. I talked to the two priests, not to the people they talked to. I think the main concern has more to do with possible church conspiracy (are they hiding certain gospels from people, is there more to the story that isn't being told) then the Bible itself. What's not in the Bible, as opposed to what's in it.

What's my point...OK...yes, I take the Da Vinci Code seriously in that, apparently, many people take it seriously. That's my point.

Does that imply that people question the Word of God? Maybe. Or probably. I don't know. Let's say yes.

-Elliot
 
Oleron said:
The book and film of the Da Vinci Code have come in for some, deserved, criticism on these boards. I'd like to play devils advocate by suggesting that their effect on the world has not been completely negative.

Firstly, I quite enjoyed the book (haven't seen the film) and thought it was a fast-paced page-turner. Yes, it lacked depth and substance but wasn't the worst book I've ever read.
Click to expand...
My opinion, as well. A fun read, but nothing more.
Oleron said:
Second, people are discussing christianity and its origins now. They are daring to question where the bible has come from and, more importantly, what it has left out. These are people who probably never gave a moments thought to religion or philosophy and now, thanks to Dan Brown, it has become a topic of water cooler discussion in the workplace.

I welcome this, even though most of the discussion is going down the woo route. Many of us got to be skeptical through questioning and considering our own woo beliefs.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing, but nobody else seems to agree with me. I think that if people have to think about the origins of the bible and how Constantine shaped the xian religion in its early days to suit his own agenda, that can only be a good thing. Most people don't know this stuff.
 
wolfgirl said:
I think that if people have to think about the origins of the bible and how Constantine shaped the xian religion in its early days to suit his own agenda, that can only be a good thing. Most people don't know this stuff.
Click to expand...

Thankfully his agenda coincided with and corresponded with God's, that's why we call him Constantine the Great! Eusebius was a big fan too.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm
 
elliotfc said:
Thankfully his agenda coincided with and corresponded with God's, that's why we call him Constantine the Great! http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm
Click to expand...
LOL. God's agenda is the same as the man who had the most say in interpreting it? Yeah, funny how that works. If Constantine had been a bloodthirsty egotistical despot, God would have probably been like that too.

Oh wait...
 
Tricky said:
LOL. God's agenda is the same as the man who had the most say in interpreting it? Yeah, funny how that works. If Constantine had been a bloodthirsty egotistical despot, God would have probably been like that too.

Oh wait...
Click to expand...

Thankfully we kept the Creed and ditched the methods, eh?

Evolution my friend. Evolution.
 
elliotfc said:
Thankfully we kept the Creed and ditched the methods, eh?

Evolution my friend. Evolution.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Religion evolves to become whatever it's believers need it to be. Don't like the bit about adultry being wrong? That's okay, we can fix it in rewrites.
 
Tricky said:
Indeed. Religion evolves to become whatever it's believers need it to be. Don't like the bit about adultry being wrong? That's okay, we can fix it in rewrites.
Click to expand...

Religion is for by the people, for the people, of the people!
 
Tricky said:
LOL. God's agenda is the same as the man who had the most say in interpreting it? Yeah, funny how that works.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Constantine had little if any say in actually interpreting Christian doctrine, except perhaps in The Da Vinci Code.
 
Last edited:
Tricky said:
Indeed. Religion evolves to become whatever it's believers need it to be. Don't like the bit about adultry being wrong? That's okay, we can fix it in rewrites.
Click to expand...
Like they say, "history is written by the vicars..."
 
Tricky said:
LOL. God's agenda is the same as the man who had the most say in interpreting it? Yeah, funny how that works. If Constantine had been a bloodthirsty egotistical despot, God would have probably been like that too.

Oh wait...
Click to expand...

I had to nominate you for that one !!!..

So eloquent in it's simplicity ...

Wish I'd said that ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom