NationStates Jolt Archive

A lot of people were angry about the Left Behind series, right? All that talk of sinners being punished and biblical prophecy and everything "offended" some people because it presented ideas that could lead many to follow a "misguided" belief system: biblical/Evangelical Christianity.

If this anger is considered valid, why is the anger of Christians against the Da Vinci Code considered primitive or uninformed? After all, the book's fiction, just like the Left Behind series.

A lot of people were angry about the Left Behind series, right? All that talk of sinners being punished and biblical prophecy and everything "offended" some people because it presented ideas that could lead many to follow a "misguided" belief system: biblical/Evangelical Christianity.

If this anger is considered valid, why is the anger of Christians against the Da Vinci Code considered primitive or uninformed? After all, the book's fiction, just like the Left Behind series.
Who said one group's bitching is any more valid than the other's?

Hmm.. I've never read/saw the book/movie. However, yes, it is a fiction. And I think how the Christians (or any other religious group for that matter) are protesting this one movie is a bunch of bologni. Its a fiction, no one's going to believe in a fictional thing, unless of course they're really gullable. And... why don't they just protest every Hollywood movie that ever came out? Jurassic Park and E.T. are good examples of things Christians don't believe in. What makes sci-fi/fantasy movies any more different than the Da Vinci Code?

I never had a problem with the Religious aspect of DVC.

Purely the bastardisation of history was my issue.

I'm a Catholic and I'm not offended. I read the book and saw the movie. I loved the book. I'll say this: Anyone who takes the theories in the book are complete morons. But, if the book does anything it gets people to think and talk. It's a piece of fiction with some hiustorical facts and theories in it.

Who said one group's bitching is any more valid than the other's?

Any one of the "learned" persons in my school who insist that the Da Vinci (should there be a space there) presents some interesting points which shake the foundation of Christianity. And if you ask many persons around the country (US) they will have generally the same opinion. And everyone keeps coming back and saying that the book is fiction. But the same perons talk about how horrible Left Behind is (Actually, I'm not a big fan either) and think no one should read it, even though it's fiction.

I'm not asking about the facts. I'm asking about how certain persons can justify the reading of the Da Vinci Code because it's fiction, but condemn other books even though they are fiction also.

Feel free to discuss the book (I've never read it, and I don't intend to); I'm just pointing out what my question was meant to be.

I'm not asking about the facts. I'm asking about how certain persons can justify the reading of the Da Vinci Code because it's fiction, but condemn other books even though they are fiction also.

Feel free to discuss the book (I've never read it, and I don't intend to); I'm just pointing out what my question was meant to be.

No! He manages to successfully blur the lines between historical fact and fiction. It confuses people and they tend to believe his 'facts'.

No! He manages to successfully blur the lines between historical fact and fiction. It confuses people and they tend to believe his 'facts'.

Anything not true and told to an audience that has been told it's not true = fiction

However, Brown (is that his name?) very succesfully blurs fiction to make it appear as fact to the average reader. I read a passage and I didn't notice anything wrong with it historically or theologically until I read the passage a third time. That's why I won't read the rest and I discourage others from reading it.

It's beginning to storm so I need to get off. I really wanted to see what you all had to say, but I guess I'll have to wait until Monday. :(

Any one of the "learned" persons in my school who insist that the Da Vinci (should there be a space there) presents some interesting points which shake the foundation of Christianity. And if you ask many persons around the country (US) they will have generally the same opinion. And everyone keeps coming back and saying that the book is fiction. But the same perons talk about how horrible Left Behind is (Actually, I'm not a big fan either) and think no one should read it, even though it's fiction.

See, I fall into the first group but not the second. I liked tDVC, and think that even if the MM-had-Jesus'-kid-in-France thing isn't true, the background leading up to that involving how much of the Bible and Christianity is piecemeal, sociopolitical, drawn from pagan sources, etc. should at least cause you to strongly question your faith in the JudaeoChristian religious complex.

On the other hand, while I personally would never read the Left Behind books, being an atheist, I don't think they are 'offensive' or shouldn't be read. They're not offensive; they're religious fiction. [shrug] NBD. If fundies want to read those books, go them. It doesn't matter to me. I suppose you might have the objection that in the hands of a kid or someone else religiously 'unformed', they constitute a sort of scare tactic aimed at pushing Christianity based on apocalyptic fatalism and fear, but it's a weak argument.