User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:45:21 PM EDT
[#1]
INCOMING!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:45:48 PM EDT
[#2]
I bought it to read, and my GF finished it and I have yet to begin. She said it was a good book.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:46:57 PM EDT
[#3]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:48:32 PM EDT
[#4]
And to think all this time I thought it was about a fucking cup.
 For the first time all the Holy Grail stuff makes plausable sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:49:48 PM EDT
[#5]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 4:51:50 PM EDT
[#6]
 ..Too funny!! Can't wait till the religious fanatics read this....
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:01:23 PM EDT
[#7]
Not even worth the time and effort of a reply.
But I thought I would at least post this note to let y'all know that it wasn't worth the time and effort! So, the Early Christian Church was skeered to place a 'mere woman' in a position of some sort of prominence in the Church? Because the Early Church was soooo mysogynistic, right? Yeah. R-i-g-h-t ! Eric The(EverHearOfThe'VirginMary')Hun 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:04:12 PM EDT
[#8]
The book discusses how the Christian church demonized other religion to ensure their own survival. Also dicusses how real knowledgable Christians know the Jesus was not a "god" or immortal being, but a mortal profet who became a martyr. Most religious people just cant seem to handle the idea, however, as its not what they have been incorrectly taught their entire life. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:08:56 PM EDT
[#9]
I'm a devout Christian, but I'm not going to flame away for three reasons: 1) I haven't read the book myself. Just haven't been interested. 2) I'm not a Church scholar, so I'm afraid my offerings would be on the weak side. 3) (and most important) It's a fucking NOVEL. I find it hysterical that those who claim that the Bible is entirely FICTIONAL and therefore cannot be trusted somehow find a NOVEL to be historically accurate!  That is all. I may read it someday because I hear it's a good read, not because I think there is one bit of historical truth to be found in it. If I want history, I'll go read a history book. Atlantis is in Antarctica! The Library of Alexandria is buried in Texas! There is a Viking fleet buried in a cave in the NJ Palisades! Clive Cussler said so in his books!
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:11:49 PM EDT
[#10]
"All claims in the book are historically accurate." Right in there. and yes, i went and researched all claims in the book after I read it, many scholarly books do back up his claims in the book. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:12:12 PM EDT
[#11]
AGNTSA
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:13:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Eric that is not the premise of the book. It says something else entirely. Furthermore your example of the virgin is also not a good one to contradict church mysogyny. The very mysogynistic religion of Japan has a FEMALE Sun God, Amateresu. Both are needed for a divine birth of a principle diety, in Christianity Jesus and in Shinto the first Emporer. A revered female is required to birth these special men. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:14:49 PM EDT
[#13]
I am about to start it...tonight as a matter of fact. I know nothing about it other than the writing style as I have read Angels and Demons.
I have noticed the book tends to make zealots squirm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:14:55 PM EDT
[#14]
Uh-huh. Right. So why isn't he writing a history book instead of a novel? The examples I cited above by Cussler also have histoprically accurate details in them. Just because the author says it and a bunch of "scholars" agree with him doesn't make it true, ESPECIALLY when it is as devisive a topic as this. Read the book, and by all means enjoy it. If it tickles your fancy to do research, then go right ahead, but don't expect me to line up and salute a novel as a historical work. Will not happen. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:15:39 PM EDT
[#15]
J_J, dont talk about this book like it's some kind of serious historical study. It is a fictional novel. I'm not a Christian, but it really bugs me when people use a pop novel to discredit something as serious real and deep like the Christian faith or the Catholic Church. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:16:35 PM EDT
[#16]
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:18:10 PM EDT
[#17]
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:19:33 PM EDT
[#18]
And shown to be false by many other respected scholars. As such, it's just a novel, and the author probably threw that little bone on the front page because he knew it would sell books. After all, what causes more controversy (and generates more press) in this country than attacking Christianity and then making fun of them as they react?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:21:06 PM EDT
[#19]
I heard Bill O'Riley and one of his guests blow holes all throught the book. 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:21:38 PM EDT
[#20]
Let's believe a fictitious book written by a 21st century author instead of the most read book in history that dates back thousands of years. Yep, makes perfect sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:22:30 PM EDT
[#21]
And which has quite a bit of scientific evidence backing much of it up..... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:22:51 PM EDT
[#22]
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:26:22 PM EDT
[#23]
Ah! So you ARE open-minded! Good! Sadly, there are too many who have clung to this book as if it were, er, Scripture, in a desperate attempt to discredit......... Scripture. I love a good yarn as much as the next person, and if someone wants to spin a bizarre story of Christ being married and secret societies and all that, then good for him. Where I blow a cork is when people shove the book in my face (and they have) saying, "SEE! The Bibsle is WRONG!", but when I mention Scripture, their response is, "Well, that's just a fairy tale anyway..."
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:27:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Haven't seen that. But I did see a documentary on the facts of the book (and not the book itself) and the scholars seemed pretty universal in their opinions on the facts. This one is kinda like Unitended Consequences which was ALSO a fictional novel premised on recorded history and fact. Can we now reject all the historical facts in that novel out of hand because it contains some fictional characters and a future that hasn't happened yet? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:30:11 PM EDT
[#25]
I read my girlfriend's copy, I just flat out thought it wasn't a very well written book and I read some pretty awful stuff from time to time.
 My g/f really liked it though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:30:41 PM EDT
[#26]
I had never delved into the whole Holy Grail history before, but after this book, I read a few documentaries about it, a few from both sides, and to me it just seemed that the ideas put forth in this novel that seemed to pan out according to other non-fiction books, some more than likely that were used for this author's reasearch, seemed more true to me. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:31:37 PM EDT
[#27]
The Holy Grail is.... wait for it, Eric....
A METAPHOR The only time this becomes a major problem in theology is when the theology is taken as literal, historical occurances. It is a matter of fact that myths, legends, and fairy tales grow up around people who were once real. Some well-known examples of this are that of King Arthur and the Grail Quest as well as American folklore. Paul Bunyan was probably a real guy, but a myth grew up around him. The same can be said for George Washington and the cherry tree. Just think of all the ubarn legends which transmogrified from actual events. It happens all the time and in every culture. Myths of all types, including Judeo-Christian myths, are metaphors. It is as simple as that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:32:13 PM EDT
[#28]
I found it entertaining. The premise was a stretch, to say the least. I got the illustrated (photos) edition which has photographs of the Louvre, the paintings mentioned, and the churches. The ones in London and Scotland are impressive. I find that architecture fascinating, especially given the tools available at the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:33:03 PM EDT
[#29]
Please disregard ETH on this thread, he still has his blinders on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:33:16 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:37:25 PM EDT
[#31]
Hell, I'm tempted to read it simply because I've heard so many people say it's a good read (regardless of the topic).
The thing is that this novel, as well-writen and entertaining as it may be, is still a novel. One can take several historical facts, legends, theories, and the like, and spin them together into one hell of a story. Clive Cussler excels at that. The REALLY sad thing is that there are so many out there who will jump at anything, ANYTHING, that even remotely seems to counter Christian dogma. The media are at the top of this list. So, the author mentions that the facts in his novel are true. Well, WHICH ONES? Not all can be true, else it wouldn't be a novel. But that doesn't stop those hell-bent on knocking Christianity down.... Read it. Enjoy it! But remember what it is.... ETA: Concerning the Holy Grail: How many people, when watching Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, would have picked INCORRECTLY at the end? I know I would have. Makes sense it would have been a simple cup or bowl rather than a beautiful gold chalice, but that's not what we learned over the years, was it? Gotta be careful with history because it's so easy to distort.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:39:09 PM EDT
[#32]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:41:44 PM EDT
[#33]
Amen. BTW, I am Christian, but it would never occur to me to throw a Bible in your face. Not because I don't want you to be saved, but rather because I recognize that the journey must be done by oneself. I'll help if you ask, though! Don't get me started on Bible-thumping, street-corner-screeching evangelicals.... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:43:35 PM EDT
[#34]
Jeez, guys...this work has been thoroughly discredited by scholars. Of course, it's fiction, so...
Remember, just because we want something sensationalistic to be true doesn't necessarily mean that it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:46:10 PM EDT
[#35]
Post from SteyrAUG -
Sorry, Steyr, but I'm way ahead of you on this! The so-called 'secret marriage' of JC with Mary Magdalene was the lie that was propagated in the 1983 book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln, and Richard Leigh, and this theory is the one taken up in The DaVinci Code.
Yes, it is, let's just look at your following 'example', which you tried using to refute it!
You do understand, I hope, that the Virgin Mary is an historical figure, whereas Amateresu is not??!!! Right? And that the many, many women followers and disciples of Christ were actual living, breathing human beings, I suppose? So, now, why would you try and use a made-up female diety to try and refute the noble position that real women had in the Early Christian Church?
Huh? I have no idea what point you are trying to make here.
Mary was NOT revered until after the Birth of Jesus, not before! See the difference? Eric The(EverHopeful)Hun
|
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:47:12 PM EDT
[#36]
Thank you. But.. uh.... Judging by your previous posts, I don't think you got what I said. But that's okay. I'm not quite finished fitting my new flame-proof suit yet. I could use the extra time.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:53:31 PM EDT
[#37]
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:57:51 PM EDT
[#38]
It's still a little too early in this thread for me to jump off this particular cliff. I'm sure I will eventually, however. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 5:59:50 PM EDT
[#39]
Jungian Metaphorical Theory is so passé! What Century are you living in, anyway? Eric The(FirstCentury)Hun
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:05:26 PM EDT
[#40]
Will someone who has read this book please give us a synopsis?
I mean, what's it basically about? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:06:38 PM EDT
[#41]
as NOT revered until after the Birth of Jesus, not before!See the difference? Eric The(EverHopeful)Hun Luke 1:28 contradicts this. SOMEONE revered her.
|
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:10:16 PM EDT
[#42]
It is about codes that learned people in the Renaissance left disputing the Catholic & fundamentalist views of Christ.
If anyone has read up on the early Church and the great debates they had deciding which of the Gospels to use many Christians would be surprised. I have no problem with the idea that Jesus was mortal, Mark even calls him the "Son of Man". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:18:57 PM EDT
[#43]
just read it, it is very entertaining. One of his other books Angels and Demons blows it away though, much better.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:19:33 PM EDT
[#44]
Like I said the only thing which gets your dander up more than the Mormons is me. I'm just that special.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:20:01 PM EDT
[#45]
I liked the book
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:26:35 PM EDT
[#46]
Hope this helps: I read it, but was too lazy to type my own synopsis  A murder in the silent after-hour halls of the Louvre museum reveals a sinister plot to uncover a secret that has been protected by a clandestine society since the days of Christ. The victim is a high-ranking agent of this ancient society who, in the moments before his death, manages to leave gruesome clues at the scene that only his granddaughter, noted cryptographer Sophie Neveu, and Robert Langdon, a famed symbologist, can untangle. The duo become both suspects and detectives searching for not only Neveu's grandfather's murderer but also the stunning secret of the ages he was charged to protect. Mere steps ahead of the authorities and the deadly competition, the mystery leads Neveu and Langdon on a breathless flight through France, England, and history itself. Brown (Angels and Demons) has created a page-turning thriller that also provides an amazing interpretation of Western history. Brown's hero and heroine embark on a lofty and intriguing exploration of some of Western culture's greatest mysteries--from the nature of the Mona Lisa's smile to the secret of the Holy Grail. Though some will quibble with the veracity of Brown's conjectures, therein lies the fun. The Da Vinci Code is an enthralling read that provides rich food for thought. --Jeremy Pugh |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:27:38 PM EDT
[#47]
I got halfway through the book. I was swallowing all the pro-feminism and pro-French bullshit when the author decided it would be plausible to have the main character use a FUCKING PAINTING as a shield from a man with a gun to evade capture.
Haven't picked it up since. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:28:00 PM EDT
[#48]
You have 'no problem' with the idea that Jesus was mortal? Oh, cool! Mainstream Christianity can now breath a collective sigh of relief! And 'Son of Man' doesn't mean to the Jewish ear of the First Century what it sounds like to a Gentile ear in the 21st Century! The 'Son of Man' designation was one used more than 88 times in the New testament, most often by Jesus Christ Himself! This Messianic name comes from Daniel 7:13-14, which reads: "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." The description "Son of Man" was merely a Messianic title. Jesus Christ is the One Who was given Dominion and Glory and an Eternal Kingdom. When Jesus used this phrase related to Himself He was assigning the prophecy to Himself. The Jews of that era would have been intimately familiar with the phrase and to whom it referred. He was simply proclaiming Himself as the Messiah. He was NOT claiming to be 'merely a man'! Understand? Hmmm, I was afraid of that! Eric The(SeldomDisappointed)Hun
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:31:32 PM EDT
[#49]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2005 6:34:33 PM EDT
[#50]
Well then how about you explain what I missed instead of being a dick about it? |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
