Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code

[kyuusai]

---

here's already an existing topic:Â* Â* https://www.istorya.net/forums/index.php?topic=41699.0

[psycké]

tsada gyud ni nga book, pero mas tsada ang angels&demons!

[sheka]

tsada gyud ni nga book, pero mas tsada ang angels&demons!

i love da vinci more... bot2x man gamay ang angels and demons! hehe.. kato lang niambak si robert langdon from d chopper granted na 20% sa iyang fall ang mu less if naa something objject like kato free fall tube sa CERN.. but grabe sad wa ghapon siya naunsa. hehehe...

but in fariness nndt jud angells.... but mas nindt da vnci ug deception. digital fortress ok lang!

[psycké]

lagi noh? nikatawa lang bitaw si dan brown sa mga critics niya kay padayon man japun ang benta sa book. Pero para sa ako mas tsada man jud ang angels & demons.

[Molokai]

lagi noh? nikatawa lang bitaw si dan brown sa mga critics niya kay padayon man japun ang benta sa book. Pero para sa ako mas tsada man jud ang angels & demons.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____

mao jud...mayg ang mga critics makakwarta! Dan Brown earned alot in royalty like AudioBook for Da Vinci & sa upcoming movie this may 2006...

[Ironside]

hi guys.. wala jud ko kasabot sa isturya sa da vinci code. ako ra na tan-awan sa national geographic na sulod sa da vinci code kay tungkol ni lade magdalene ug ni Jesus.. hmm.. fiction or not?

it's actually a combination of fact [some distorted] and fiction. The danger lies in the interweaving style of fiction and fact in the book, you just don't know where fiction begins and fact ends.


These books like the gospel of Judas are actually taken from gnostic writers. These guys [gnostics] were the cultic groups that exised during those times.

Don't be surprised if books like these appear in the future: 'Gospel of Thomas', 'Shepherd of Hermas' and etc. The early orthodox christians certainly knew about these books. They did not consider it as inspired writings. Why? because they knew it did not came from orthodox writers.

You certainly would not believe a book to be orthodox if Reuben Ecleo, the head of Philippine Benevolent Missions Assoc. would write a book right? Members of these guy considered his father to be god like the Rizalites considered Rizal to be god. Transport these group [PBMA] to the time when writings were written on papyrus and placed on clay jars for preservation.

Give it rust and tear time, say 1700 years, archaeologist discovers the jars, examines it, proves to be authentic antique, sensationalize the find through media [knowing the natural inclination of the public for the so-called "mysterious"] and BOOM!!!!


The truth of the matter is that these are not new. It is just new to our generation. But these 'attacks' against the orthodox Bible have certainly appeared intermitently over the centuries before us. Repackaged deals. As they say: Same dog. New tie.

[aimzweb]

naa koy pdf, audiobook and documentary

cn i have a copy?

[aimzweb]

naa koy pdf, audiobook and documentary

can i have a copy any of these?

[HoundedbyHeaven]

hi guys.. wala jud ko kasabot sa isturya sa da vinci code. ako ra na tan-awan sa national geographic na sulod sa da vinci code kay tungkol ni lade magdalene ug ni Jesus.. hmm.. fiction or not?

it's actually a combination of fact [some distorted] and fiction. The danger lies in the interweaving style of fiction and fact in the book, you just don't know where fiction begins and fact ends.

I would say it's mostly distorted facts-- lies, more accurately --woven into fiction. And the danger is even exacerbated because not only will you have difficulty telling where fiction begins and fact ends, but you'll also have difficulty knowing how distorted the facts involved are.

As I've said several times, the history-- particularly the one presented in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln --that Dan Brown used as the source material for his fiction and that he claimed to be factual and accurate is considered by mainstream historians and academics as a concoction. Thus making this history a pseudohistory at best, if not simply fiction. No respectable encyclopedia would dare present such history as fact.

And true enough, Leigh and Baigent, who in 1982 marketed "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" as a "historical fact", now admits the consensus of these historians and academics by claiming-- in order to sue Dan Brown for "copyright infringement" (and obviously rake in fortune from a legal victory) --that "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is historical speculation-- guesswork, in other words. Leigh and Baigent had to change their position on "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" from historical fact to historical guesswork to possibly charge Brown of infringement for his own fiction. If they had not change their position, Brown would easily win the case, because who could be so stupid to accuse somebody of using an indisputable "historical fact" in a fictional work? In fact, there would be no case to begin with; historical fact is not an intellectual property now, isn't it?

And people who still consider works like "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" to contain "historical fact" should take note of this cunning reversal of claims by its authors.

So in closing, I say the "Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction based on works of fictional history.

By the way, the very foundation of the Catholic faith IS NOT the Bible-- it is the Word of God, the Verbum Dei. Sacred Scripture is only one of three foundations of the Catholic Church. With Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church), the Catholic faith stands.

Pax.

[Molokai]

tumpak! :mrgreen:

BTW: i love the da vinci vode audiobook! great way to listen!