Da Vinci code

[johntheplamf]

How many of the theories, Including what the Grail could actually be, and Christ being named a Deity as the result of a vote actually be true?. I've always been sceptical of a book which was written a couple of thousand years ago.

[kempie]

I presume the book you are sceptical of is the Bible which is actually made up of a number of books, all written centuries after the events purported to be the truth.

I think this is where faith comes into play.

[Clanad]

Not wishing to generate a lengthy debate... however it is simply not true concerning the statement by kempie... scholarship clearly indicates the New Testament documents were written within a very few years of the events.  The earliest is probably Mark, written by 55 to 60 AD, some study indicates perhaps as early as 42AD.  The latest book of the New Testament is probably Revelation, written by John, and eyewitness to the events and given the date of about 90AD when he was known to be alive on the island of Patmos in exile...  The majority were written before 60 to 65 AD...

[kempie]

I stand corrected... 'eye witness accounts' written 20-plus years after the crucifixion. I would doubt the veracity of eye witness testimony related after 20 minutes of an event occuring.

[Clanad]

That is certainly your choice, kempie...however, you then discount a fundamental tenet of criminal law... the value of eyewitnesses... especially if they are in agreement.  The point is, the argument has always been made that too much time occurred between the events described and the setting these events to paper, so to speak, allowing for myths to develop.  Firstly, the written autographs of the events followed  oral transmission, which is primary, and secondly, many other eyewitnesses were still alive to dispute the evidence had it been disputable.  The Jews of the day were among the world's best at recording events affecting them directly, yet there is no contradicting testimony to the Scriptual evidence.  This, again, is an important fact in all textual study of ancient documents.  I think what you are actually trying to convey is that you don't wish to grant veracity to this event...and I emphasize again, that is your choice...

[kempie]

It is my choice, as you too make yours, but please do not think I make judgement over any other person's opinion. Live and let live is my tenet, but I still voice my opinion.

And yes I do discount the value of eyewitness testimony as it is a common human trait to interpret facts, not report them. Just as we all can have different opinions we also have different perceptions.

1 fact perceived 2 different ways = 2 different facts

[jno]

I've always been a bit sceptical of the Da Vinci Code, written 2000 years after the event; why people find it easier to believe than the Bible is a mystery to me. It's a novel. It's fiction.

[johntheplamf]

What about the claims that in those days it would have been seen as very strange for a Jewish man of Christs's age not to be married, and remember that nowhere in the bible does it state that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.

[jno]

quite agree about Mary M not being named as a prostitute - that seems to have been a later gloss - but less impressed by the theory that Christ must have been married because it would have been mentioned otherwise. The gospels are meant to be a record of his ministry, not a Heat-mag-style probe of his sex lilfe. He might very well have seemed 'very strange' at the time; after all, he was claiming to be the son of God!

[Didwot]

Is this a debate about the Bible, or the Da Vinci Code? If the latter please hide my computer, or you may end up with pages of criticism.

[QmunkE]

The DaVinci code = fiction.

The Bible - possibly also = fiction.

The Bible is a set of stories, some of which may be true, others of which may be symbolic in meaning, others of which may be downright made up. I think it would be unreasonable if anyone tried to present it as fact (I'm looking at you six-day creationists).

As to the stuff about Christ being named a Deity by popular vote, you'd have to check some history textbooks about the Catholic church.

[netibiza]

No comment as haven't as yet read the DVC - but would like to praise you all for your debating skills and not for resorting to personal attacks - nice work and pleasure to read - your comments that is.

[flava]

ur all wrong the bible is a pretence. theres no such thing as nefin innit. y do u akll speak as though u got a dictioinsary in ur mawf