A lot of religious groups are against the da vinci code HOWEVER.......................................?
541452
Well I think that yes, it's getting people interested in who Jesus really was. People who already have Faith in Him wont be moved by a book or movie.
563850
Well I´ve read the book and enjoyed it throughly! But sad to say there is a lot of thingd in the book that is false, \nbut it does makes you wonder. \n\nWhat I can´t understand is that a few years ago there were some old scripures found, but wouldn´d be accepted by the church. These scriptures underwent all the neccassary test to prove its validity(and it was found to be written the time Jesus was alive and 100 after he died).But it was a little bit contridicting to what is in the bible.\n\nAnyway what the da vinci code does is start to put doubt in the minds of people, and why did  the church reacted so strange to this book which is a novel! \n\nAnd okay the thought that Jesus actually has a living heir is strange, but Dan Brown was not the first to write about this there are many other listed books. And ´if´ that were true then the church would clear not want that knowledge to be known because it would loss a lot of credibility.\nSome modern writers,including Dan Brown, have come forward with claims that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. These writers cite Gnostic writings to support their argument. Sources like the ´Gospel of Philip´ do depict Mary Magdalene as being closer to Jesus than any other disciple. \nHowever, there is no known ancient document that claims she was his wife and Gnosticism was generally non-supportive of sexuality. The closeness described in these writings depicts Mary Magdalene, representing the Gnostics, as understanding Jesus and his teaching while the other disciples, representing the Church, did not.\nMary Magdalene appears with more frequency than other women in the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the Crucifixion and Jesus's tomb, while hardly conclusive, is at least consonant with the role of grieving wife and widow, although if that were the case Jesus might have been expected to make provision for her care as well as for his mother Mary. Given the lack of contemporary documentation, this scenario cannot be proven, and although some consider the idea desirable to believe, most scholars do not take it seriously.\n\nAn argument for support of the married status of Jesus is that bachelorhood was very rare for Jewish males of Jesus' time, being generally regarded as a transgression of the first mitzvah (divine commandment) — "Be fruitful and multiply". According to this reasoning, it would have been unthinkable for an adult, unmarried Jew to travel about teaching as a rabbi.\nA counter-argument to this is that the Judaism of Jesus' time was very diverse and the role of the rabbi was not yet well defined. It was really not until after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 that Rabbinic Judaism became dominant and the role of the rabbi made uniform in Jewish communities.\nPaul of Tarsus was an example of an unmarried itinerant teacher among Christians. Jesus himself approved of voluntary celibacy for religious reasons and explicitly rejected a duty to marry: "There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." (Matthew 19,12)\n\nThe idea that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized by books like the pseudo-historical Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Da Vinci Code (2003), a novel heavily influenced by the former book. These assertions have found no acceptance from scholarly circles.\n\nAnd secret societcy are meant to be kept secret so I don´t expect the historians to find a lot of concrete information about the Priory of Sion. \n\nAnd maybe Leonardo did discover something and instead of just saying or exposing it out right he decided to be clever and hide it within his works of art. After all he was known as a genuis.\n\nSo I(am born and raised catholic, but was taught to have an open mind about things.) personally an very intrigued by this idea of Dan Browns, but I am neither for it nor against it. I
489053
Their stance is that the author has passed off some gross historical inaccuracies as fact, and that Mr. Brown has essentially incited hatred against one of the church's prelatures (Opus Dei.)\n\nThe Catholic Church would be irresponsible if it allowed some of these libels to be spoken unchallenged. History has shown - with certain religious libels like the "Protocols of Zion" - that lives are literally at stake when religious hatred is sown.\n\nAnd if the Catholic Church will not stand up to an anti-Catholic writing.... who will?\n\nAll the people jumping up and down, shouting "How dare the Catholics defend themselves!" should ask themselves this. If the "Da Vinci Code" was about a bloodthirsty albino Rabbi hiding the reality of the Protocols (Priory) of Zion from the world, would you think that anti-Semitic?\n\nWhy should it be so different for Catholics?
651347
Technically, catholic organizations can't really ban a movie, they can only force the issue with the state because ultimately, the state will decide. Most of the censorship boards operating in the world are state controlled.\nBut I know what you mean and for me, there really is no need to ban Da Vince Code. First of all, Robert Langdon and all the plots in the movie/book are fiction. Now how about the issue that although fiction, it's based on fact? After all, this is really Dan Brown's assertion in the book. Well, the truth of the matter is that Dan Brown simply presents a hypothesis of the real Holy Grail. There are many sides to a story, and with the book/movie, Brown presents us his (and his group's). It can be true, it can be false. The audience still is going to make up its own mind if it's going to accept the idea as fact. If you recall, in the ancient times, people had always believed that the earth was flat. To say otherwise was blashpemous, and they can carve your balls out for saying that. If nobody went out of the box and declared that the earth was round, how could have the scientific revolution ever started? Im not saying that the Holy Grail hypothesis is going to turn out true, only the fact that it's actually worth discussing. For the catholic groups, it could be an opportunity to further educate their flocks with the fundamentals of their faith.  \nFurthermore, catholic organizations simply do not have the right to dictate the people what to watch, and what to believe. Freewill has always been a basic right, no matter what religion.\n\nI myself am a catholic, but my mind is alwways open.
519225
I don't like the fact that some people are reading it as fact when it is fiction. The man who wrote it(Dan Brown) was charged with plagiarism. I haven't cracked the book but know someone who is reading it but aren't taken in by it's lies. I find it just as abusurd as the supposed "book of judas."  \n\nHere is one of the lies of this book and the truthfull answers to it.\n\nThe Da Vince Code says...\nIn 325 the council of Nicea decided by vote to make Jesus divine. "Until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet." It was a close vote at that.  P.233\n\nFACT:\nThe council, of which we have the historical writings and decisions, had mothing to do with the divinity of Jesus. They were didscssuin Arius, who had begun teaching that Jesus was not eternally co-existent with the father but was divine, The discussion was around whether Jesus was eternally co-existant with the father not wherether Jesus was divine. The close vote.... was almost 300  to  2. WE WOULD call that a landslide in today's English. Consider these Verses.\n\nMatt 16:16  Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son fo the living God" NKJV\n\nMark 15:39  So when the centurion, who stood oppostie Him, saw that He cried out like this and breathed His last, he said,"Truly this Man was the Son of God!"\n\nLuke 4:41   And demons also came out of many, crying out and saying. "You are the Christ, the Son of God!?\n\nJohn 10:33  The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God."\n\nJohn 20:28  And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"\n\nThe Da Vinci Code says...\nThe church demonized the sacred feminine and the goddess by reaching teh concept of original sin, "whereby Eve tasted the apple and caused the downfall of the human race." P238\n\nFACT:\nThe Bible actually blames Adam much more that Eve and nowhere does the Bible mention an apple, merely fruit.\n\n! Cor 15:21-22  For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.  22.  For as in Adam all\ndie, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.\n\nRom 5:12 Therefore, just through one man sin intered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned-\n\nSo if they read the Bible they will see that the Da Vince Code is a joke. The fact that it is a novel: n. a fictious prose narritive of considerable length... fictious: adj. \n1. created or assumed for the sake of concealment; false.\n2. of or consisting of fiction; created by the imagination.\n\nThese definitons came from Websters Dictionary not something I made up.
652787
No. I tried very hard. Verse by verse. The more you read the more convinced you are of the cover-up. Religions (islam and judaism as well, not only christianity) are scams. Why do you think everybody writing against religions is under a ton of threats? When you hold the truth you are not afraid of anyone talking about it...are you? If you are running a scam...you behave like they do now with DaVinci Code movie out. They are afraid so there's your answer about truth and the bible and the nothing in common they have.
598573
I believe that there is a lot more truth in the Da Vinci code than any religious institution is going to admit.  After all, it stands to under mind all they have been teaching for centuries.  Symbologists, I believe so--this isn't the only place they have been mentioned.
682680
Nice article. Carole Mikita always does a decent job or representing the facts.\n\nThis isn't really a big deal. I mean, people have been writing stories about the Mormons as long as they've been around (see Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's collected tales of Sherlock Holmes, especially one very ridiculous story about the Mormons).\n\nYes, several of the early church leaders had strong ties to Freemasonry. I've never been able to figure out exactly what anyone thinks is wrong with Freemasonry, but I probably just don't delve into conspiracy theories enough. Anyway, I just don't really see the connection as anything particularly shocking or disturbing.\n\nAs far as access to the church archives, I think that is a fairly common practice. I believe that if someone has a legitimate curiosity, they'll let just about anyone in to study and research. None of it is a secret, you know. Even the temple goings-on aren't secret. They are sacred, and as Mormons, we prefer not to make all of it public knowledge, because people can be very cruel when they choose to twist things and take them out of context. Nobody wants the things that are so close to their hearts to be trampled on by non-believers, right?\n\nThe symbols on the temple are outside, for everyone to see. There's nothing secret or shameful about early members' ties to masonry. At face value, which is all I've really seen, freemasonry seems like a nice idea to me. Good people doing good things. Now what could be bad about that? I don't know much about the Knights Templar, other than what I learned by watching National Treasure (my favorite movie) and The Da Vinci Code, so I really can't comment much there.\n\nNo worries. Either way, the Lord's work will roll on. :)
689057
da vinci code is a novel written by the famous author dan brown. he states in his book that jesus was married to mary magdalene and their bloodline is still existing in the world. he also states that the holy grail is not a cup but was the code name of mary magdalene. the most important theme of the book is the most famous artist(all-rounder infact!)leonardo da vinci has shown this in most of his paintings including "the last supper".though it is work of fiction, many christian communities are against this bcoz according 2 them it is blasphemous.but the book is really good.sorry for the looooong explanation though.bye!
299319
Okay, the big FUSS is that the Christian tradition does not include Jesus being married and having children. The Da Vinci Code is all about the Catholic Church conspiring to keep this "truth" hidden for hundreds of years. Also, the descendents of Jesus have been hidden by the Catholic Church.
618750
Well... I guess many people have hard feelings towards cristianity.. and the book gave them "arguments". Have you realized people who think it is a great book are not readers? I mean.., most of them have not read more than ten books in their life. but somehow they knew that there was a book "revealing" the truth about those things in the form of a novel.. and that caught their atention.\nA funny thing. I know some who don't believe in what church does... but didn't have any trouble to accept blindly right away what the book says.
286942
I wouldn't care. I think Jesus wasn't all he's cracked up to be anyway. I don't live my life by that book, regardless. I hate all the anti-female messages in it. As I grew older, I realized that Christianity was created as a way to control the people after the fall of the Roman Empire. I love how hateful people are like dagger and how quick they are to call names (usually the "diehard" Christians, ironically). I am not anti-God. I strongly believe in a supreme being, but I am anti-religion. I just think people got some of the details wrong along the way, that's all.
638113
The Da Vinci Code isn't completely true. What bothers me is that the Vatican is complaining. They thought Catholics would see right through a book based solely on speculation and stories that are probably false, oh wait.....
149233
Da Vinci code can not be proven true.  People are playing it off to be a huge conspiracy.  I think it's a load of horse pucky. If it were true it would have been completely covered up YEARS AGO.  The church has a huge amount of power, even still today.
653096
Not all "Church people" dislike the movie.  Only the ignorant ones who do not think that people should have an imagination or think that people should not question or wonder about life in general. I, myself have no problem with the book or the movie.
667335
how many ppl thinks its anti christian\nand the ppl that thinks its a fiction book\n\nThat is a flawed statistic. The people who think it is antichristian also know it is a book of fiction.\n\nStats like this have not been established or published. Anyone trying to answer this will be guessing.
196185
Yeah, they have women preachers and gay preachers, both of which are against the Bible.  Open hearts, open minds, open doors, and open disregard for the Biblical teachings.