17 May, 2006

Of Da Vinci and Darwin . . .

    I think it's about time for me to weigh in on this Da Vinci Code mess.  I find the uproar in the Christian community to be utterly ridiculous.  It's a movie.  It is fiction.  If people watch this movie and believe it (or much of it) is true, they are mindless buffoons whom natural selection will deal with accordingly.   But I think you'll find the majority of people want to see this film for the purpose of escapism: a smart action flick is what they're looking for.
    And there's nothing wrong with that!  A person can enjoy a fast-paced mystery film whether or not it agrees with his theology or worldview.  If you are interested in the movie, bully for you!  Go see it and have a good time!  If you're not interested in the movie, that's great, too!  Just don't see it.  And for the sake of my sanity and your physical condition, don't tell me that I'm risking the triumph of God's Kingdom if I decide The DaVinci Code is worth my hard-earned money.  Christ will prevail against the gates of Hell no matter what you or I do to "help" or "hinder" it.
    Personally, I think I would enjoy the movie . . . to a point.  By all accounts, it's an engaging mystery (a genre we don't see a lot of anymore), with twists and turns that will make one's head spin.  The trailers and clips I've seen kind of remind me of the earlier seasons of ALIAS.  But I digress.  However much I would enjoy the treasure hunt aspect of the film, I think it's conclusion would drive me mad in that it doesn't jive with my beliefs.  I would most likely leave the theater wanting to do violence to the film's creators and that is something I would like to avoid.
    Therefore, I will not be seeing the much-anticipated Da Vinci Code.  If you want to see it, go ahead, but don't come crying to me that it ticked you off.


  1. It's kinda like evolution...it was cute for a while, and the Christian community didn't do anything about it...then it steadily gained credibility within society at large and suddenly became science. That's the concern- that so many people have already displayed that they don't know the difference between fact and fiction.

  2. The ChristopherMay 18, 2006 7:26 AM

    No,no. Evolution was taken as fact by most from the beginning. Though I see were you're going. Love the post BB

  3. It IS like evolution, but not in the way you state. Evolution wasn't a problem in the beginning because it was laughable to most people since the overwhelming majority of Americans believed the inerrency of Scripture.

    The reason evolution -- and, likewise, this film -- has risen in esteem is because the church is preaching "social Gospel" instead of Christ crucified, "a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles". We don't train up our children in the way they should go, teaching them about Creation, church history, and Christ's dominion over all. We send them off to government-run, (for all intents and purposes) pagan schools and expect them to be followers of Christ despite the bull they are spoonfed for eight hours a day.

    This is foolishness and this is why both evolution and The Da Vinci Code are such big issues today.

  4. Wow, you all realy question evolution? I have to say that I am a bit stunned and it isnt due to some baffling liberal mind set, I am as conservative as they come, but evolution didnt just catch on because the church ignored it. Evolution is a concept stating that entities change because they experience and either learn or perish. It is far more complex when looked at over time and as per how it discusses species, but as a rank observer of life I have to say that I see evolution at work everywhere. And in all honesty I cant say that I see it adding to or taking away from Christ's message to humanity at all. If you are talking about it disprovining aspects of the Old Testament and this upsets you... You have read Christ's statements about over throwing the old laws and coming to god in a new way through him, right? That pretty well means that you follow the New Testament and treat the Old as the mythological text of the Jewish faith that it is. The very idea that we share aspects of the Old testament with Islam is enough to make me question it thoroughly but then the Koran is a very scary tome, read it and wake up. Anyway, Evolution is just the way life works, I am sorry if reality upsets you, but it also disproves nothing that Jesus said to us. I dont see the problem.
    I dont have an account but will check back so please post your thoughts, I am interested in seeing them.

  5. First, it’s not the concept of a natural sort of evolution that I question, that is, as you say the “concept stating that entities change because they experience and either learn or perish”. I heartily agree with that and witness it everyday. The evolution that I take issue with is macro-evolution, the theory that this world came about by chance and some sort of primordial ooze, or a big bang, or some other irrational explanation of that sort and subsequently evolved from lower species to greater over billions of years.

    Besides the fact that evolutionary theory is completely contrary to the Bible, when carefully looked at, it is also contrary to reason. I won’t belabor my point as this tends to be a fruitless argument for both sides, but I would like to give on example, namely, knowing the complexities and intricate design of all life on this earth, to assert that life came about by chance is unreasonable and ridiculous.

    Second, Christ NEVER stated anything about “over throwing the old laws and coming to [G]od in a new way through him”. On the contrary, in Matthew 5:17, Christ stated that he fulfilled the law: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

    The Old Testament is NOT mythological, sir, but a history of the wondrous works of our Most Holy God, teaching us what man is to believe concerning God and what duties God requires of man through making known what God is, the persons in the Godhead, his decrees, and the execution thereof and by pointing out our need for a salvation more sure than the rituals of the Jewish people, namely: Christ.

    I have never personally read the Koran, but if in does have much in common with the Old Testament, it is reasonable to assume that the similarities in middle Eastern cultures and the fact that the “Prophet” Mohammad is descendant from Moses’ son, Ishmael, could easily account for the supposed commonalities.

    Your “reality” doesn’t upset me one bit, for is not reality at all, but unreasonable and unsupported theory and conjecture.

    I look forward to your response and ask that you endeavor to use proper punctuation and grammar this time.

  6. Your “reality” doesn’t upset me one bit, for is not reality at all, but unreasonable and unsupported theory and conjecture.

    I look forward to your response and ask that you endeavor to use proper punctuation and grammar this time.

    I think what you meant to say is that "IT is not reality"... We always shoot ourselves in the foot when playing the grammar police card. Its actually a rather cheap shot as well as my ideas where not obscured by my "lack" of quotes, et al.

    And also, the Old Testament is filled with enough mythological elements, humans living past 300 and people turned into pillars of salt, that I feel quite secure in my opinion. It is based, as is yours, on faith. No one knows who wrote these texts, but, I promise you it was a human being.

    Please don't let this statement sound like a dismissal of the Old Testament and your faith, it isn't meant as such. I have faith that the nature of the Old Testament doesn't matter, it is what it is. Millions of people live and die without it and they will continue to do so. It is a faith based document and unless it has instructions in it that no other human can live without (remember to breath) then it isn't really an issue. I have faith in my point of view and I know that you have faith in yours. I like it that way.

    My mention of Islam and the old testament was more of a side issue that has more personal baggage. Islam treats the old testament in the same light in which you treat it, in other words, "but a history of the wondrous works of our Most Holy God, teaching us what man is to believe concerning God and what duties God requires of man through making known what God is, the persons in the Godhead, his decrees, and the execution thereof". They stop before you do and go on to state that there is no God but Allah and Mohammad is his Prophet. They then mention that it is thier duty to "instruct" all others and bring them to the only way, thiers, and that the holy are shaded my the sword of Allah which is a subtle encouragement to the Holy that the sword is an ok method by which they may encourage others. I am not a big fan of this mind set.

  7. You know... I completely forgot to mention my stand on Macro Evolution aka fish to apes to humans. Skipped my mind as I was a little more focused on laughing about the mis-type and the grammar police thing. I have to side with you on this matter. It is a matter of faith, I just don't know.

  8. I'm sorry, sir, but there is a significant difference between one missing pronoun and your complete absence of syntax, which makes it very difficult for one to understand the writer's intent. I had to read your first comment a number of times before I could rightly understand what you were saying.

    Frankly, it makes me think less of you. If a person cannot organize their thoughts in such a way that they may be properly understood it implies that he doesn't hold his own thoughts as important enough for others to read and understand. If that is the case, why should a person bother reading it?

    Just a thought.

    But, this, of course, was not intended to be a discussion of evolution or worldviews related to it, but of the Church's response to The Da Vinci Code, so I'll leave it at that.

  9. I re-read the first sentence. It was long. I am sorry if you were confused and or bothered by it. The syntax was flawless but it was rather complex. I am sorry that you found it challenging. If you are thinking less of me because I challenge you then, frankly, it makes me think "I am on the wrong blog as ideas and their expression in thoughtful ways is not appreciated".

    But, of course, you are right. This is about the Da Vinci Code. You also sound like a person who has to be right. I doubt you would enjoy the knowledge of ever being wrong and, therefore, you are not the person I need to be talking to.

    Also your name is misleading. A Player is a person that plays, one who moves fluidly and approaches situations with an open mind, as an open mind encourages creativity and furthers the play. You strike me as more of an Organizer. Once again, there is nothing wrong with Organizing. I do it myself all the time. Please consider a change, if anything we must be accurate at all times.

  10. Also, Why do you suppose I am a "Sir"? Is that to lend a firmness to your statements? You dont have to do that. Sounding official and sounding bullying are similar in many ways and with your writing abilities you dont need either.

    I went to your main blog page and was quite impressed. I am quite pleased that someone your age has such good syntax, by the way it is excellent. I enjoyed reading your articles. I do have to look into making a page myself and becoming a little less Anonymous.