Brou’ha ha on “The Da Vinci Code”

gill sahib,

who am i ?...... chopped liver?

look, the twelve wise men entrusted me with mary when she was twelve and she lived in my house till the age of fourteen without me laying a finger - cross my heart and hope to die ..................she was a good girl and a good mother to james ............ i was gone for a couple of months and i came back to find her pregnant ........... i said, ``holy shit!``...........``No``, they said, ``it was the holy spirit!``....... i don`t know shit from shinola but it scared the crap out of me ........... but then gabby appeared on the scene (he has the habit of conveniently appearing whenever a prophet needs him) and he said, ``joseph, son of david, fear not to take mary as thy wife: for she has conceived of the holy spirit; and she will bring forth a son, whose name shall be called jesus``............. ``phew``, isaid, ``that was a close call !``............. you know they used to stone adulterers in those days ..........

urstruly,

joseph the carpenter

Re: # 6
Gill Saab,
It is not possible to measure a controversial book`s degree. However it is my opinion that this book certainly classifies as A+ controversial book regarding Christ.
Otherwise, why is it on TV every other day, why a movie is being discussed on this subect?
Why did even Boston`s Catholic Diocese had to protest against the PBS program that came few years ago.

This is the first time when somebody has actually tried to make a case for Mary Magdelene and it`s French connection. His case is more stronger these days due to lot of interest in Dead Sea Scrolls and Vatican is trying to win the support of women.

Maybe the writer is just like the one in UK(Behjti type), who wants quick and dirty fame.
Maybe he is speaking the truth, who knows.

Why the hype? I enjoyed the way you answered this question, but you seem to get a bit excited about the code thing yourself.

ShoreSahib:

Thanks for providing a leaf from the history of early Christianity. I had produced the ``motion`` of the First Council of Nicaea in my article from Karen Armstrong`s ``A History of God``. Karen said that the vote did not have majority, the Da Vinci Code says, it had only marginal majority while many others believe there were only two dissenters out of 318. I am concerned as to how can the issues pertaining to divinity be settled by a show of hands?

Do you really understand the doctrine of trinity? I don`t although I have tried quite hard to comprehend it. The biological father of Christ was not known. It was a social slur in those days as it is even today in conservative societies. This gave rise to the conepts of Immaculate Conception, Virgin Birth, Sonship of God and Ascension. It doesn`t make much sense. People were shut up for fear of heresy and consequent death.

Ghalib called Christ Ibn-e-Maryam (Son of Mary).

Ibn-e-Maryam hua karay koi
Meray dukh ki dawa karaay koi

and so did many others.

There are specific verses in Quran which state ``God begets not....`` See in the following:

112:3 He begets not, nor is He begotten [Neither did He give birth to any one, nor is He Himself a product of the process of procreation. He has no children (2:116, 6:101, 16:57, 19:35, 112:3), no parents (112:3) and not any wife (6:101). He is the One, Unique, Single (112:1). He has brought into existence every living being through the process of creation (6:101), not by procreation from Him]
112:4 There is none who is or can ever be His equal, His like or comparable unto Him.``

How can Son of God be God? If you read my article ``Bishop Spong`s Critique of the Traditional Christianity`` at chowk (December 20, 2004), you`ll see how a bishop feels about theism, and the above issues. With regards,

Mohammad Gill

Re: # 9
She most certainly Rocks!!!

maureen dowd rocks !

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/opinion/27dowd.html?8hpib

as she points out :``The novelist is not the first one to conjure romantic sparks between the woman usually painted as what one writer calls ``the Jessica Rabbit of the Gospels`` and the eligible young Jewish carpenter and part-time miracle worker. ``

.............. i am now waiting for the sequel :`` The Medina Code`` which challenges the myth that muhammad did not have any surviving male offspring ............. it should be a hoot if the author survives ............

Gill Sahib,
As a student who majored in Religious Studies and studied the First Four Centuries of Christianity in much detail, The Da Vinci Code is nothing but erroneous, hyped up, and not to mention fraught with ridiculous theories.
I like the fact that you included the Nicean Creed in your article. In the Seminar I took on Early Christianity as well as my class on Chrisitian Philosophy, the concept of the trinity was discussed and dissected at length.
Here is the Apostle`s Creed,

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, God`s only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. AMEN

A seemingly minor difference in the wording of this simple text had a profound impact on European history. The Nicene Creed, or Symbol of Faith, was written by the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea in 325 C.E., with additions (the 3rd paragraph and following) by the first Council of Constantinople (381). There is an unresolved controversy over the words `and the Son` (in Latin filioque). This language was added in 587 by the local council of Toledo, Spain, in an attempt to combat the Arian heresy. Pope Leo III (795-816) forbade the use of the filioque version and had it engraved without `and the Son` on the walls of St. Peter`s Basillica. After a failed attempt to unite by marriage Charlemagne`s Frankish holdings with that of the Byzantine Empress, Charlemagne challenged Byzantinium`s claim of universal jurisdiction as the successor to Rome by claiming in 792 that among other things, that the Byzantines had omitted the filioque from the original text. The filioque was finally accepted by the Romans in the year 1014, and the revision has been part of Catholic doctrine ever since. The ``filioque,`` the significance of Roman primacy, and geo-political conflict led to the the Great Schism of 1053. To this day, the Eastern Orthodox Churches do not accept the filioque and raise this as one of many reasons that prevent re-unification with the Roman Catholic Church.

The Arian Heresy and the Nicene Creed as the Response:_
At The First Council of Nicea: The first council of Nicaea came to an end on August 25, 325 A.D. Lasting two months, and held in Bithynia, the First Council of Nicea was attended by 318 Church Fathers.

Opposing Images of God: Trinitarian Church fathers Bishop Alexander of Alexandria and his deacon Athanasius believed there were three persons in one god. The Trinitarians were pitted against the Monarchianists, who believed in only one indivisible god, and included Arius, Presbyter in Alexandria, and Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia.

Homo Ousion (same substance) vs. Homoi Ousion (like substance): The sticking point at the Nicene Council was a concept found nowhere in the Bible: homoousion. According to the concept of homo-ousion, Christ the Son was con-substantial (sharing the same substance) with the Father. Arius and Eusebius disagreed. Arius thought the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were materially separate from each other, and that the Father created the SonHe and his followers, the Arians, believed if the Son were equal to the Father, there would be more than one God. The opposing Trinitarians believed it diminished the importance of the Son to make him subordinate to the Father.

Constantine`s Wavering Decision : The Trinitarian bishops prevailed. Emperor Constantine was not himself a Christian. Despite this, he had recently made Christianity the official state religion of the Roman empire. This made heresy akin to revolt, so Constantine exiled the excommunicated Arius to Illyria.

Constantine`s friend Eusebius, who eventually withdrew his objection but still wouldn`t sign the statement of faith, and a neighboring bishop, Theognis, were also exiled -- to Gaul. Constantine reversed his opinion about the Arian heresy, and had the two bishops reinstated three years later (in 328). At the same time, Arius was recalled from exile.


Constantine`s sister and Eusebius worked on the emperor to obtain reinstatement for Arius, and they would have succeeded, if Arius hadn`t suddenly died - by poisoning, probably, or, as some prefer to believe, by divine intervention.
Arianism regained momentum and survived until the reigns of Gratian and Theodosius, at which time, St. Ambrose set to work stamping it out.

St. Athanasius - Four Discourses Against the Arians: `The essences of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, are separate in nature, and estranged, and disconnected, and alien(6), and without participation of each other(7)` St. Athanasius - Four Discourses Against the Arians

Anniversary of the Nicene Creed: August 25, 2000 marked the 1675th anniversary of the creation of a controversial document cataloging the basic beliefs of Christians -- the Nicene Creed!

After being on the waiting list at the local library (my number? 1400th) I was able to get it much sooner than expected due to `forgot` cancellations. I was waiting for the paperback edition, and I believe it is still not there, and was reluctant to part with 60/70 $ for the one in hardcover.

I am delighted that I did so. The book is for ``pop`` & immediated-gratification crowd who have grown up in the ADD syndrome--the intellectual Belumia of TV-scholarship and TV-dinners.

I am very much fascinated by this subject(s) and have done some sizable reading on it. In fact, the best book I would recommend for beginners is `` The Ark of the Covenant`` [it is what Quran has mentioned & muslims know it as ``taaboot-e-Sakina`` (not the sakeena of Karbala--mind you) by Graham Hancock.

The movie ``Raiders of the Lost Ark was also about it & was based, mainly, on the true story when the western thieves ( heros in the movies) got in the tunnels below the Dome of the Rock by bribing the Turkish security guard.

This book by Dan Brown is very John Grisham-ish. If it was not for the silly ``adventure`` that was spun around the `mystery` and the `search` for what is sometimes referred to as the `holy-grail` (no it is not the wine-cup used by Hazrat Eesa(pbuh)] it would have been an OK book.

The problem with such books(D-code) as these ( & movies) where fiction is presented as fact, lies are muddled and presented as truths, half-truths, and `fiction`, simply to deliberately confuse & confound the reader/viewer is that the unwitting highly ``parrhay-likhhay`` masses accept them as gospel.

Because it is here that it is the last impression that is the lasting impression.

delhiwala:

``...to bring to attention of the readers to a most controversial book ever written about Christianity.`` This is a very general and inaccurate statement. Although I haven`t read much about Christianity, I know many other authors, current and old, have written quite critical accounts of Christianity. The Da Vinci`s Code is a fictional story and many unwary readers may not register ite critical content. The Christian readership in the west are however well aware of these issues.

Bishop Spong has written several books criticizing Christianity. One of his books has a title of ``Why Christianity Must Change or Die?`` I had posted an article ``Bishop Spong`s Critique of the Traditional Christianity,`` at chowk on December 20, 2004. Some of his critical ideas are distilled in my article.

Mohammad Gill

Re: # 3
Correction DehliWala Sahib,

This statement of yours is erroneous:-
``It is a unversally accepted fact that First Bible was written by St Paul 250 years after the birth of Christ and there is a good possibility that things were appended/deleted from the original scrolls, safeguarded by faithful Christians of that time. `` Dehliwala


St Paul lived in the same time as Jesus and the other apostles. He is reputed to have written many books now included in the New Testament such as Letters to Corinthians, Letters to Hebrews and letters to Romans. The Four gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were compiled almost 30- 75 years after the cruxifiction of Christ.

I think the genius of Brown lies not in his craft, but in his deft use of Christian lore and conspiracy theories, which he wedded to straight fiction. As a classic murder mystery its pretty thin, but that extra bit of spice changed the whole thing around. So you have mainstream fiction with fantasy fiction guidelines.

I dont know what your reading habit`s like, but the next time you want some extra light reading just make your way over to the Fantasy Fiction aisle and look it over. There are so many books inspired by the Abrahamic faiths that it`s startling. You talked about the farcical council proceedings - others in the fantasy genre have noticed it too, David and Leigh Eddings for eg in their Sparhawk stories wherein they recreate Catholic heirarchy.

Lately Da Vinci`s code is being on the TV on History Channel. Only protests about this came from Catholics in Boston. Otherwise, mainstream Americans have accepted this book without any anger and it is making Christians to look scientifically and critically at their belief about Christ. They are gaining more acceptance due to fact that Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in 1940s also speak about Mary Magdelene as being the original 10 Apostles.

It is a unversally accepted fact that First Bible was written by St Paul 250 years after the birth of Christ and there is a good possibility that things were appended/deleted from the original scrolls, safeguarded by faithful Christians of that time.

This article also took my thoughts around to our present day world as my mind just cruised to the plight of Salman Rushdie when he wrote something controversial about Mohammad.

A Muslim could not write anything about his Prophet freely while living in the West due to Fatwa issued by people of the East.

Whereas Mr. Gill, a Muslim living in the West can enjoy the freedom of West to bring to attention of the readers to a most controversial book ever written about Christianity.

God bless the Freedom of the Western World bestowed upon all who are it`s Citizens!

I think you were one few Muslims (there are others too but only in the closet and afraid to talk!) who are absolutely honest , courageous and have the humility to examine one`s faith, history, culture, strength and weaknesses.etc. and talk openly!There will be little conflicts in the world if there were more Muslims like you.

Now go back and have a good cup of Darjeeling Tea and think about some new ideas.!

You`re continuing to educate the readership of Chowk! I thought it was a good enough book; I read it soon after it was published in 2003, and the furore over the last year or so has left me bemused. If I had realised that every man and his dog(I don`t mean you, just look around on public transport)would have an opinion on it, I would have seen it differently. It tries to be at least middlebrow, but has been dumbed down considerably in the public discourse. The Church obviously planned to ignore it; it is one of Dan Brown`s biggest feats that they actually came out to denounce it.
As to the historical accuracy of the book, who knows? We do know that there were many other Gospels, and the ones included in the New Testament were edited. I truly appreciate the fact that so many people are trying to get to the truth, if at all there is only one truth; therein lies the greatness of Western civilisation.