Foo - The Da Vinci Code part 2 & 3, Milestones & a book review.

http://freemasoncyclist.blogspot.com/

The last 4 postings. I welcome any & all comments & feedback.

http://freemasoncyclist.blogspot.com/

The last 4 postings. I welcome any & all comments & feedback.
WAit a minute, WEVE ALREADY BEEN DOwn this path once before :p

I enjoyed it. I found this comment most interesting (as stated in your comment section).

"The practical problem with boycotts, and even harsh criticism of a film, is that it winds up drawing more attention to the movie in question, they figure."

No! Really? :D

I'm gonna see the movie specifically b/c the Masons, Opus Dei and the Vatican tell me not to. And it'll annoy all those christian conservatives.

Actually the Mason's are probably telling you to go see it. If they are telling otherwise, well now there is one telling to go see it. We want people to see it then ask us questions about it so we can set the record straight about the fraternity & the movies impact on it.

I'm gonna see the movie specifically b/c the Masons, Opus Dei and the Vatican tell me not to. And it'll annoy all those christian conservatives.
I take offsense to the word "Conservative" i think they are more radicals :p

I'm gonna see the movie specifically b/c the Masons, Opus Dei and the Vatican tell me not to. And it'll annoy all those christian conservatives.
I take offsense to the word "Conservative" i think they are more radicals :p

I take offsense to the word "Conservative" i think they are more radicals :p
Yeah, they are definitely off the edge. As for the Masons, of course they want us to see this movie. It's all part of their evil plot to continue their domination of the world. ;)

Yeah, they are definitely off the edge. As for the Masons, of course they want us to see this movie. It's all part of their evil plot to continue their domination of the world. ;)
I wonder when the Masons will realize its the Saudi Arabians actually running/dominating the world. Or maybe the Masons are run by the Saudi Arabians. Hmmm I will have to investigate.

The Saudis are actually really pi$$ed off Templar Knights and they're in cahoots w/ the Masons to dominate the world's oil and banking industries. This is totally true cuz I just made it up.

Its a Freakin movie. Ya know "Made for entertainment" That means story not facts. People seam to confuse reality with fiction way to much. As for free masonry. It the oldest fraternal order. Because its a secret order like the churches Knights Templar. The mystery of these orders adds to the fiction of the movie. Because the writer can only speculate what goes on within the orders. The members of these orders are sworn to secrecy. Which some dont seem to abid by now adays. They need to review their degrees and remember there jewels. So writers pick up bits and pieces to use in there stories. Just remember its a damn story. Thats all.

As a Mason I can tell you the only thing I can not reveal is what our called our modes of recognition. Anything else I can reveal. I took an oath not to reveal those secrets & I will not do so. But if anyone asks about the degree conferral I explain it to them, the only part I leave out is the esoteric part, which is when the candidate or brother learns the modes of recognition & the the word or words associated with it.

Last night on the National Geographic Channel there was a program about the Freemasons. One of the things the kept saying is a lodge in Washington D.C. let their cameras in during an officer installation. Take my word for it when I say this is not an esoteric ceremony. It is actually an open & public ceremony. There is nothing secretive about an installation of officers in a Masonic Lodge. The National Geographic Channel was incorrect is stating they were let in to learn what secrets the Masons hold.

They lied cause it sounds cooler.

If I remember correctly, and I sometimes don't, the Library of Congress has the lowdown on all "secret" rituals of fraternities, fraternal orders, secret societies, etc. At least they're supposed to.

If I remember correctly, and I sometimes don't, the Library of Congress has the lowdown on all "secret" rituals of fraternities, fraternal orders, secret societies, etc. At least they're supposed to.
The wikipedia probably has tons of rumors too

I'm gonna see the movie specifically b/c the Masons, Opus Dei and the Vatican tell me not to. And it'll annoy all those christian conservatives.

In particular, it annoys us because it doesn't just play around with facts. Instead, it presents a story based on falsity. The Catholic organization Opus Dei (Latin for "Work of God"...essentially its mission as well as its name) is neither secretive nor subversive, although it is very traditional in its common spiritual practices.

Fiction is fine. Fiction is fun. Fiction can be taken too far, however. In this case, Dan Brown pretty harshly misrepresents Opus Dei and to a lesser degree the Catholic Church itself. Dan Brown's reply to the pointing out that there has been quite a bit of confusion generated by his story by people who believe the false elements to be true was simply, "so what." Ok so what if I write a novel about how Hitler's reform of the German government fixed Germany's many social problems, that Belgium attacked first, and that the Holocaust was actually perpetrated by secret US forces acting in Germany to make Hitler look evil and people believe that? It's doesn't break any laws (at least not in the US), but it is incorrect, and to the extent that I deliberately allow others to believe it, I am perpetrating a lie.

So then it should come as no surprise that I have no intention of giving my money to a person who is happy to let further falsehoods be spread about my faith. Nor should it be any surprise that I ask my fellow Catholics to do the same. It shouldn't even be a surprise that I don't think non-Catholics should go to the movie if they aren't aware that it is very liberal about playing with the facts.

If anyone cares to learn more about Opus Dei, the Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_dei) looks very good, although there is a dispute about the nuetrality of recent contributions to the article by authors both critical and favoring the church, they are in general minor. You can also look up Opus Dei's website (http://www.opusdei.us/sec.php?s=8).

Fiction is fine. Fiction is fun. Fiction can be taken too far, however.

Fiction can be taken too far? Yes, let's vet all books from now on and if that fiction is taken too far then let's not see them published. No, you can't write that - you have too much imagination!

What a boring life you must lead. It's a story, it's not real, get over it. :rolleyes:

I read the book a couple times and it surfaced enough questions that made me question the foundations of Catholic faith. It made me look at the biblical story of Jesus as just a story. Keeping questions of faith out of it, if you analyze the story itself, a number of questions arise such as, "Why was a 33 year old jewish man unmarried?" and "Why was there a smear campaign against Mary Magdalene?" The questions have to be divided between the politics of the church and the faith itself, but by critially analyzing your own faith and questioning the beliefs, you engender greater interest in the faith which can lead to an even stronger faith or a loss of faith. It's not something that should be avoided, but rather something that should be openly encouraged. And I'm still gonna see the movie cuz it's got a chase scene w/ a Smart car and that's always cool.

Yes, but the Catholic church doesn't like being questioned, whether that results in a stronger faith or not. The Smart car chase could be fun, be more fun if it was an A-Class.
"Watch out for that Elk!"
"What Elk?"
"That one!"
*topple*
"Fat Tom Hanks, I'm arresting you for murder, etc"

Christians and Masons both believe in a whole lot of fiction as reality, ("Creationism", anyone?) Therefore, it is really no surprise they're all getting hurt feelings about a bestseller that is now a high-budget movie, but is also a work of fiction, just like their worldview. LOL, Maybe if the movie had claimed the earth is 6000 years old there wouldn't be any protests. :rolleyes:

For the record, the fact that some Christians believe the world is 6,000 years old says nothing about whether or not God exists. Christian faith certainly does not hinge upon that contention, but that is a topic much better suited for P&R, so I'll leave it at that for now.

I don't doubt that The Da Vinci Code is well written and has a very intriguing plot (the embedded codes sound particularly interesting), but I find it sad that a lot of people are willing to so easily take the fictional parts as truth and villify in their minds organizations such as Opus Dei. I find it downright disappointing that Dan Brown is cool with that.

N_C, you're right that calling for a boycott like that draws extra attention to the film. I guess it's kind of a no-win situation in that respect. Regardless, I see it as better to personally avoid them film than to offer my money as support for this and future publications along the same lines.

I noticed some quotes in your journal about people considering it inappropriate for people to criticize the film and book without having read it. To a degree that is incorrect. Quite a few very well educated Catholics have read it and seen the movie and have discussed the areas where it misrepresents the faith. Some of them are also quoted in the articles you reference, and since their comments are consistent with those of non-Christians who have read it, I have no reason to doubt their criticizms. Additionally, I personally have had discussions with people who have been unfairly critical of Opus Dei based on things they "learned" from the book. It is clear that misunderstandings caused by its fictional elements undermine its value for entertainment.

Christians and Masons both believe in a whole lot of fiction as reality, ("Creationism", anyone?) Therefore, it is really no surprise they're all getting hurt feelings about a bestseller that is now a high-budget movie, but is also a work of fiction, just like their worldview. LOL, Maybe if the movie had claimed the earth is 6000 years old there wouldn't be any protests. :rolleyes:
Hmm
intelligent design
versus
a big bang created everything

Who's talking magic and fiction here ;)

Intelligent design really is a poor concept though. It basically leaves out all the elements of both religion and science. It's a rather empty starting point for theology. Scientifically, it's not verifiable and therefore not appropriate for science classes. If people want to discuss beliefs of how the world came into being in public schools (and I think they should), it should be as a high level overview in social studies or philosophy.

I think, however, that I can safely make the following contentions: Regardless of how the universe came into being, the general indications of science are that it is roughly 13.7 billion years old and developed due to a gradual evolution from a singularity we call the Big Bang. Almost all observations and models support this. No observation or model answers the question of why or how it started, and it is very doubtful that science will ever prove or disprove directly that God was behind it because presumably the principles of science are the result of that creation, so there is no inherent reason why they should reveal as much.

Alright...I am officially off-topic. Shame on me. Let's see, where were we...oh yes, The Da Vinci Code! Dan Brown is teh suxors. :p

Intelligent design really is a poor concept though. It basically leaves out all the elements of both religion and science. It's a rather empty starting point for theology. Scientifically, it's not verifiable and therefore not appropriate for science classes. If people want to discuss beliefs of how the world came into being in public schools (and I think they should), it should be as a high level overview in social studies or philosophy.

I think, however, that I can safely make the following contentions: Regardless of how the universe came into being, the general indications of science are that it is roughly 13.7 billion years old and developed due to a gradual evolution from a singularity we call the Big Bang. Almost all observations and models support this. No observation or model answers the question of why or how it started, and it is very doubtful that science will ever prove or disprove directly that God was behind it because presumably the principles of science are the result of that creation, so there is no inherent reason why they should reveal as much.

Alright...I am officially off-topic. Shame on me. Let's see, where were we...oh yes, The Da Vinci Code! Dan Brown is teh suxors. :p
It suits me fine though because I'm NOT big on religion and I'm big on science.
There is no explanation for how a world, so perfect, and so beautiful is here. Somebody a hell of alot smarter then the smartest men and women on this world had to play a part. I envision something like the Star Trek (Original) movie about the device that resurrected planets. Makes alot more sense then "some magical dude poofed" and makes alot more sense then "some magical explosion went poof"

The conception of "God" is one as depicted by people who were writing at/before the birth of the alphabet. And now it is accepted by "blind faith" by many religions. IMHO it fits in the equation very well and explains alot of things that neither evolution nor religion answer.

Blind faith is scary. If you don't use your rational mind to question things, how can you create a strong argument for or against faith? How's this for a poser. What if God gave us rational minds so we could find him? Not just believe in him, but seek him out? Anyways, that's way off topic as well. I liked the book and I plan on seeing the movie. The book is entertaining and I plan on seeing the movie. As for Opus Dei, while they do use a cilice, apparently it's not required or to the extent mentioned in the book. Either way, I don't think they're anymore evil than the Masons. :D ;)

And even if they were, it's fiction for the love of God.
if i state and write a book about God being a space alien does that make it true?
People need to understand fact from fiction. I don't believe the book ever claims to be a fact ? If it does i retract my first statement. :p

Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do!
Who leaves Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the martians under wraps?
We do! We do!
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do! We do!
Who robs the cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do! We do!

(-Stonecutters)



Someday maybe I'll actually read this thread...

Then you'll get scared, have a blackout and wipe the memory from your brain and then wish you would actually take the time to read the thread. Repeat until the thread disappears off of the first page of BF :p

According to A&E, the Templars and the Illuminati took over the fledgling Masons and they're out to take over the world. It must be true because a conspiracy nut is going on about how the Catholic Church and the Freemasons are enemies.

Hmm
intelligent design
versus
a big bang created everything

Who's talking magic and fiction here ;)"Evolution" and "The Big Bang" are two totally seperate areas of science, big guy, but they are similar in that "cuz God sez so" is not part of the theory. Read up on it.

As a Mason I can tell you the only thing I can not reveal is what our called our modes of recognition. Anything else I can reveal. I took an oath not to reveal those secrets & I will not do so.

Black people figured that one out a long time ago...

http://www.peterschaaf.com/schickele/schickelemeetspdq01/highfive.jpg


...I have myself taken a vow not to reveal the "down low, too slow" portion of the ritual, however.;)