![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Um...
Why is it that days of quiet and contemplation make the children be 10 times noisier than usual? *sigh*
But - I thought that today might be a good day for posting a link to
Jesus Decoded.
It is a website set up to put right the bizarre claims put forth by 'The Da Vinci Code' - it's well put togther and with a nicely wry tone (thank you to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wisemack for the link!).
A few snippets:
What’s also important is what Brown doesn’t use. There are scores and scores of texts that have survived from the mid-1st century through, say, the era of Constantine in the 4th, that tell us very clearly what early Christians believed. Brown uses none of these.
[...]
Besides, just keep repeating… There was no Priory of Sion. There was no Priory of Sion. How could Leonardo be working on behalf of a group that didn’t exist?
[...]
If the Church through history were determined to silence and demonize Mary Magdalene, again, they failed, considering that by the 8th century her feast day had been established, she was, after the Blessed Virgin, the most widely-revered saint of the Middle Ages, and she’s called, in Eastern Christianity, “Apostle to the Apostles,” among other honorifics.
[...]
Along with trashing Christianity, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is a veritable museum of errors where Renaissance art is concerned. Art historians have been slow in responding, mostly because it is difficult to know where to start.
[...]
Above all, The Da Vinci Code is missing the realization that the Christianity which converted a pagan empire did so not by tantalizing it with secrets but by the stalwart announcement of the “good news” that “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life” (Jn 3.16).
~~~~~
Whether people believe in what the Church teaches or not is entitrely up to them - but at least they should be aware what the church *actually* is on about and what is complete fiction.
And I like this bit very much:
But when you actually sit down and read a Gospel, what do you see? Or rather… who?
You meet a man who was born of a woman, who, it is said in the Gospel of Luke “grew in wisdom.” He eats with his friends, goes visiting, gets into arguments, has to get away from people at times, weeps, and is even afraid. He dies. On a cross, in agony, he dies.
You’re going to tell me that’s not human?
Think about Christian iconography, as well. What are the two most frequent ways of depicting Jesus that you see in 2000 years of devotional art from this church intent on suppressing the humanity of Jesus?
An infant on his mother’s lap…and a man suffering his death throes.
You’re going to tell me that’s not human?
Anyway, that's probably the most religious I've ever been in my LJ - I hope you don't mind. Must go look after this family of mine again now...
But - I thought that today might be a good day for posting a link to
Jesus Decoded.
It is a website set up to put right the bizarre claims put forth by 'The Da Vinci Code' - it's well put togther and with a nicely wry tone (thank you to
wisemack for the link!).A few snippets:
What’s also important is what Brown doesn’t use. There are scores and scores of texts that have survived from the mid-1st century through, say, the era of Constantine in the 4th, that tell us very clearly what early Christians believed. Brown uses none of these.
[...]
Besides, just keep repeating… There was no Priory of Sion. There was no Priory of Sion. How could Leonardo be working on behalf of a group that didn’t exist?
[...]
If the Church through history were determined to silence and demonize Mary Magdalene, again, they failed, considering that by the 8th century her feast day had been established, she was, after the Blessed Virgin, the most widely-revered saint of the Middle Ages, and she’s called, in Eastern Christianity, “Apostle to the Apostles,” among other honorifics.
[...]
Along with trashing Christianity, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is a veritable museum of errors where Renaissance art is concerned. Art historians have been slow in responding, mostly because it is difficult to know where to start.
[...]
Above all, The Da Vinci Code is missing the realization that the Christianity which converted a pagan empire did so not by tantalizing it with secrets but by the stalwart announcement of the “good news” that “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life” (Jn 3.16).
~~~~~
Whether people believe in what the Church teaches or not is entitrely up to them - but at least they should be aware what the church *actually* is on about and what is complete fiction.
And I like this bit very much:
But when you actually sit down and read a Gospel, what do you see? Or rather… who?
You meet a man who was born of a woman, who, it is said in the Gospel of Luke “grew in wisdom.” He eats with his friends, goes visiting, gets into arguments, has to get away from people at times, weeps, and is even afraid. He dies. On a cross, in agony, he dies.
You’re going to tell me that’s not human?
Think about Christian iconography, as well. What are the two most frequent ways of depicting Jesus that you see in 2000 years of devotional art from this church intent on suppressing the humanity of Jesus?
An infant on his mother’s lap…and a man suffering his death throes.
You’re going to tell me that’s not human?
Anyway, that's probably the most religious I've ever been in my LJ - I hope you don't mind. Must go look after this family of mine again now...
no subject
no subject
Thanks for posting the link and the snippets. As you said, it's important for people to know what Christianity really is all about so they can decide to accept or reject it for what it really is.
no subject
no subject
no subject
And as [I forget who] said - when people don't believe in something, they'll believe anything!
no subject
no subject
Check it out!
no subject
no subject
How did his book become a bible for church-haters all of a sudden? Grr, I feel like ranting on and on, mainly because I enjoyed the book as a cleverly written thriller - and I don't understand how people lost that perspective *sigh*
Sorry about that, it's just so - weird -
no subject
I do think the disciple on the left of Christ has a slightly feminine look - but as it for sure wasn't painted from life(!) this tells us perhaps more that Leonardo had a model/friend/whatever who looked somewhat feminine, than anything at all about what the people who were actually there! And, as it points out on the website, had it been obvious, when the painting was still clear, new and untouched, that one of the disciples was painted as female, as opposed to the 'guest-list' as given in the gospels, the monks might have been somewhat annoyed!
Why people try to turn fiction into factual religion I don't know. Hmm - perhaps we should ask Tom Cruise...?
no subject
no subject
Re. St John looking femine, here's a snippet from the website:
A classic type, common to many Renaissance paintings, is the "student." A favored follower, a protégé or disciple, is always portrayed as very youthful, long-haired and clean-shaven; with none of the hard, determined physiognomy of more weathered men, to show that he has not yet matured to the point where he will question his teacher.
Throughout the Renaissance, artists habitually portray St. John in this fashion.
Hmm - perhaps we should ask Tom Cruise...?
Bwahahah! Scientology is weirder, you're right! :)