The Da Vince Code

Because people are believing someone who's main sources are Gnostic writers from the 4th Century and Feminist Critics from the 70's?

 

The humor part comes from the fact that Welborn herself is a little short on the subject.

 

You're supposed to buy her book.

Before we get too carried away with this Da Vinci Code stuff, let's consider that this author takes Secret Societies seriously. I mean, c'mon, man, secret societies.

 

How so?

The book is an attack on the Church's claims at authority, nothing more nothing less.... with some fluffy fiction to keep people interested.

 

She wrote a book (nonfiction) debunking Brown's book (fiction). Her understanding of The History of Jesus is just as flawed as Brown's. She thinks that lay people should have a better understanding of her flawed history. I find that amusing.

We here in past threads have beat the subject of Jesus's Historicity with a stick. The synopsis of my take is that we know no specifics of Jesus' live with any certainity (or even if Jesus was a myth turned divine human). That does not mean Jesus and Christianity are a lie. It just makes believing what the Christian Church teaches An Article Of Faith, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

The only problem is he states at the beginning that many of the things he says are facts, when they aren't.

How is her understanding insufficient without going in to the long of it...

 

And the church states many things as facts which are clearly not. As an example, both the Trinity and Mary were made "holy" by votes in the early councils of church leaders. Votes by men 300 years removed from fact.

Articles of Faith are not a bad thing.

 

This discussion could get too annoying to continue but I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that....

 

If you really want a headache or maybe have your head explode, just read the Athanasian Creed a few times.

 

Or listen to an album by Creed.

 

You disagree that the elders voted to make them holy?

 

I'm disagreeing with the fact that the way that is phrased makes it sound as if they were not holy until the proper doctrines were formulated. Hail Mary, Full of Grace from an angel means holy to me...

But the way its phrased is as if the doctrine just came about one day by some arbitrary Early Church Fathers, when thats not even close to the case, and not worth arguing about on a Rockets BBS. We disagree, that's all that needs to be said...