the da vinci code/HBHG etc etc etc

Discussion in 'Modern Religions' started by bananabrain, Jul 7, 2004.

  1. lunamoth

    lunamoth Episcopalian

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,915
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haha, I quite agree with you about the chromosome thing. I was just having fun. But now that you bring it up again, maybe Mary was an XXY female...hmmm.
     
  2. China Cat Sunflower

    China Cat Sunflower Nimrod

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    1
    I didn't know he was bahai. I loved the book!

    Chris
     
  3. Devadatta

    Devadatta New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of picking up on ideas, it’s strange to me that hardly anyone else has picked up on this one. I saw the movie last night and it confirms my previous impression that what this movie is really about is the suppression of the feminine in the Christian tradition. The idea that Jesus may have had a girlfriend/wife is in that sense just a vehicle for this larger theme. Maybe it’s too obvious, considering the name of the protagonist’s book? Certainly it’s nothing new. Feminist writers on comparative mythology & religion have been making these points for decades. I think that if this movie does ultimately have any measurable impact beyond entertainment value it will be in further motivating women inside and outside the church to change the status quo. As far the marital status of Jesus goes, I don’t think it has any legs. Like most aspects of his life, it simply can’t be verified one way or another.

    But here I’d like to add a pet peeve. It’s these Christian/Catholic apologists coming on with their hurumphs! hurumphs! condemning the book for its poor scholarship. Here the implied if not openly stated contrast is between a pop novel and the centuries old intellectual heritage of the church. Clearly this is peddling deception. The true comparison is between the plausibility of what Brown says about Jesus and some of the equally untestable doctrines the church represents. The evidence runs rather thin on either side. But this is a very old game: intellectual rigour put not to the service of truth but to the diversion of intellectuals and to the bafflement of the rest.

    Sincerely,
    Devadatta
     

Share This Page