solong said:
I really strongly disagree that the catholic church should have taken another approach. The Da Vinci Code was written as fiction for the purpose ONLY of "getting away with dissing Christ and Christianity." There is otherwise NO OTHER REASON for publishing a bibliography in the book as references to justify the plot!
So? They're not beyond criticism. Take a hard look at the Roman Catholic's coverup of the pedophelia scandal (generations-old) here in Boston (and beyond) orchestrated by none other than Cardinal Law
and the Vatican until the vast hew and cry of the victims and their families finally made that fucking institution as accountable as any other. High time I say. The rules apply to all or they ought to apply to none.
So while I am NOT a catholic...
Not much difference between a traditional R.C. and a fundamental Christian these days.
I applaud them for taking measures. The Bible clearly states that any who offend a babe in Christ, it is better for that person that he was never born.
<---- See what I mean? What you fail to grasp is that many don't appear to subscribe to your sense of blind faith in that handbook of yours.
We are talking eternal death.
Your use of the first person plural here is disturbing. Perhaps "you are talking" here but this 'we' isn't.
So this book is not true. It is a lousy book. The references are just to impress you and make you think there's substance to it, but the authors are mostly occultists.
Dan Brown is an 'occultist'??
HUH?
He's simply a lapsed Protestant! Are you cracked dude? Who's feeding you this shit?? Damn! You'd have been a natural during the Salem Witch Hysteria of the 1690s here in Massachusetts. You'd been certain to have gained judge status at Goody Nourse's trial.

Hang the eighty year old heretic I say!
It was about
politics in the 1690s and it's about
politics today. Same beef - different century. TEDIOUS!!!!!!!!!
When you go strictly by its success at the box office you make a fatal error, because then you will judge everything that way--
Just like you do in all things?
All of this is interesting, but will not change anybody's mind who in fact was swayed by the "Code." It isn't a dangerous book to a well-grounded Christian, at all! And that's the exact point I intend to make.
Then you truly don't need to appear so threatened by it do you?
What about the tens of millions of people who know nothing at all about Christianity but after having seen Da Vinci Code, will want nothing more to do with it?
Then perhaps, just perhaps, they'll realize that Christianity is as flawed and open to speculation as all religions.
What about all the Muslims and their own rife opinions about Christians reinforced 100-fold?
They didn't need
The DaVince Code to form those opinions. All they need do is look at Dubya pictured at prayer to know most Christians are fucked. (notice I said '
most')
And if no church ever stood up for their beliefs, we all would be saying, "Typical gutless Christians. They don't have the balls to even stand up for what they believe in, even when this book is obviously written to discredit them and slander the Catholic faith at the same time."
Yeah good for them thar Christians!! Poor things. They suffer so. I don't see Christians as 'gutless' I only see many as myopic.
Fiction? Of course! What does that have to do with anything, when you base your work on blasphemy, and call Christ and God the Father liars?
Where once does the book/movie call God or Christ liars? The rumors around Christ's relationship with Mary Magdalene have been swirling around for centuries. The town of Rennes-le-Chateau has been a pilgrimmage place for those who believe Christ has descendants for eons. This shit isn't "hot off the presses" of Dan Brown's imagination solely you know. He simply took the material and flew with it.
Fiction is never based against a religion--NOT EVER-- much less God Almighty, unless there's a far more sinister reason than entertainment.
Sure it is. Look what Mel Gibson did in his
Passion of the Christ.
That horseshit (which is redolent with thinly-veiled anti-Semetisim) is only the
opinion of its author.
I assume, therefore, Gibson's movie is heresey in your view too? :33: