Do you believe in Da Vinci's Code?

[The_Child]

---

@regnauld

exactly my point when i said:

either because theyre the usual average joe who gets excited with something that is not even exciting or the pompous wandering idiot attempting to dress up as an intellectual.

and a symptom that is more likely to be frowned by scholarship, its very rare to have a scholarly work to be praised and consumed by the millions - because it would imply that such a work would have trimmed down the rigidity and breadth that is a quality of what is scholarly.

[The_Child]

thats precisely the point you dont have the eye to appreciate what is hidden there & onle see what you consider as truth to you & the rest who claim to appreciate it as pompous, weird,
If you are a mason you would pierce through the seeming contradictions & see where dan browns insert the fiction, & that would make you more appreciate Dan brown, his artistic ability to make it palatable to both plain fiction readers & to those who are knowledgable of the craft,

& by the way being sincere doesnt have to follow that you make foul statements to people of differing opinions, sincerity has an element of kindness,
& your choice of words is for me not kind, you sound the very words your describing

fine if you say i dont have the eye for the truth. but dont totalize masons, i dont think many of them wants to be placed in the category that may consider them as "conspiracy theorists"

artistic ability to make it palatable? --- > it is? have you read Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum?
if you differentiate the two, which do you think is better with the interweaving of history and fiction?
read it, after you do, tell me - which is truth in that book and which is fiction. He is far from Eco's work and to think the themes are the same.



those who knows with the craft? they dismiss it, most of them as BS. Eco himself an expert of medieval history, Templar and gnostic and occultic history, finds it as BS. di ako nagsulti ana, thats Eco.

besides, i was not referring to people who have differing opinions to me, i was referring to people who actually enjoyed it with the pretense that it is scholarly.

[regnauld]

Let's take the detractors of the book first. These are generally divided into certain subgroups. First, there are those who consider Brown's books to be historically inaccurate and poorly researched. Then there are those who see in Brown's novel a major challenge to Christian dogma and orthodoxy. It's not too hard to see why, when one flicks through the pages of The Da Vinci Code, its main premise being that the Christian Church has been hiding something from us all for two millennia. Powerful stuff indeed, and strong enough to draw venomous attacks from fundamentalists, apologetics, and Christian liberals like.

[The_Child]

Let's take the detractors of the book first. These are generally divided into certain subgroups. First, there are those who consider Brown's books to be historically inaccurate and poorly researched. Then there are those who see in Brown's novel a major challenge to Christian dogma and orthodoxy. It's not too hard to see why, when one flicks through the pages of The Da Vince Code, its main premise being that the Christian Church has been hiding something from us all for two millennia. Powerful stuff indeed, and strong enough to draw venomous attacks from fundamentalists, apologetics, and Christian liberals like.

you forget, the common folks from academe who happens to know a little but way better than most, in regards to the topic.

[regnauld]

A quick flick through some pages on the Internet will show you that Brown has raised the ire of more than one Christian scholar, with page upon page being dedicated to "breaking" his novel and its adjudged attack on the Christian faith. Indeed, some of these selfsame Christian apologists are bringing into print their own books, denouncing Brown's novel as a sham and a heinous crime against God-fearing folk the world over.

I really love this book, anyway!

[The_Child]

A quick flick through some pages on the Internet will show you that Brown has raised the ire of more than one Christian scholar, with page upon page being dedicated to "breaking" his novel and its adjudged attack on the Christian faith. Indeed, some of these selfsame Christian apologists are bringing into print their own books, denouncing Brown's novel as a sham and a heinous crime against God-fearing folk the world over.

I really love this book, anyway!

yes, and ive said Umberto Eco, an Atheist, consider the book as basically unfounded and nothing more.

[regnauld]

Adoration of the Magi Leonardo da Vinci, 1481

"Everyone loves a conspiracy." Dan Brown prefaces his snippet of information the Leonardo unfinished masterpiece, Adoration of the Magi. In the The Da Vinci Code, Brown, through his narrative, retells the story of how a Florence-based art diagnostician (a modern-day art archaeologist, one might say) called Maurizio Seracini had found that layers of grime and overpainting actually covered a very different composotion by Leonardo that the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, embarrassed by these findings, had "banished" the painting to a nearby warehouse. For this inforamation, Brown has his characters quote from a New York Times Magazine article titled "The Leonardo Cover-Up."

[flying fish]

fine if you say i dont have the eye for the truth. but dont totalize masons, i dont think many of them wants to be placed in the category that may consider them as "conspiracy theorists"

artistic ability to make it palatable? --- > it is? have you read Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum?
if you differentiate the two, which do you think is better with the interweaving of history and fiction?
read it, after you do, tell me - which is truth in that book and which is fiction. He is far from Eco's work and to think the themes are the same.



those who knows with the craft? they dismiss it, most of them as BS. Eco himself an expert of medieval history, Templar and gnostic and occultic history, finds it as BS. di ako nagsulti ana,

thats Eco.

besides, i was not referring to people who have differing opinions to me, i was referring to people who actually enjoyed it with the pretense that it is scholarly.

ah ok so you have eco as your basis, again this conversation falls under the category of my claim is better than yours,etc. w/c is natural, & what do i have? varied sources sir,sound very pumpous? i dont care,
if you read carefully i have nothing against your claim, but its your way of discounting other peoples opinion just because its not w/n your standard, now if people enjoyed it w/ pretense that it is scolarly, then its their opinion,
Much as you enjoy your own pretense of your own accepted way of thinking,
the way you write speaks of the pretentions that you dearly abhor,
im sorry but i dont like your execution, its fuming w/ unconscious grudge,

[The_Child]

so why make a fuss about the style of my point, its not the style that is the point, but the point itself.
Why Eco, as ive said, Eco is an expert on that field, whereas Brown is not, it lends more credibility to listen to eco rather than brown on the contention.

i know why your so irritated with my post, because you assume that you are not the average joe, but the rather pompous wandering idiot attempting to dress as an intellectual?
im sorry sir to hurt your feelings if that is the case.

so if you dont have anything against my claim why do you criticize it, just because i called the opposite as a pompous wandering idiot attempting to dress as an intellectual? because i think thats what they really are, they could hvae their opinions with the risk of either saying something that they really dont have any knowledgeable depth on or that they actually know what theyre saying, the former makes them in its essence pompous wandering idiots attempting to dress as an intellectual because if they dont know what theyre saying then i means theyre pompous saying something what they dont know about, the latter is another story.

so you feel therefore that i am categorizing you in that level sir? im sorry. but i am not, im just stating a general statement. its up to you were to place yourself according to classification. my general claim is really logical, and its not insulting, for how else are you suppose to describe somebody who talks about something that he doesnt know about but pompous or assuming or whatelse is there? so my choice was what it was.

[regnauld]

One of the anti-heretical Crusades, carried out by the Christian Church in the 13th century against the Cathars, also known as Albigensians after the Cathar stronghold of Albi, a town in the Languedoc, France. The stroy of the Cathars is central to the themes raised in The Da Vinci Code. The main 'secret' at the heart of the novel - the theory that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married - is a Cathar belief. It is the the Church's suppression of these heretical theories that forms the basis of Dan Brown's plot.

Cathars being expelled from Carcassonne in 1209.



Albigensian Crusade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia