the da vinci code - very controversial

[Anonymous]

i am currently reading this interesting book. it has brought me here to your forum to get some infomation from you. i am a christian - however i am finding the very basis of my belief system a little shakey. so my questions are as follows: do any elders or ministers know of any truth regarding the Roman Catholic Church back in 150 AD burning other gospels giving testament to the life of Jesus? there is alot in the book, which I DON'T believe (like Jesus was married, and had children) - what is bothering me is the historic evidence that the Roman Catholic Church, and more importantly the Constatine who was in power at the time - voted on the books that were to be put together in the bible... and many were opted not to be added so as to keep the Roman Catholic Church in power. I am outraged. Does anyone have any more facts regarding this. I have been on the net all day, and am getting angrier by the minute, because more and more evidence is popping up supporting this. Ok, sorry to cause a stirr in this rather peaceful forum, but I am keen to hear what others have to say on this. By the Way, very cool user friendly n informative website you have

[Kurieuo]

Hi milla,

Did you check out the page at http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/trinity.html? It contains some information and there seems to be some good links to responses on this topic at the bottom of the page.

Kurieuo.

[Anonymous]

"The Emperor Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire in A.D. 325. It happened under Theodosius 50 years later."

Thank you Kurieuo - the links are very interesting. The above quote answers my question. I have another now (as is the case as always), if Christianity was made the official religion, how did the Roman Catholics branch so far away from it, burning and killing anyone in their path? Many pagan beliefs were simply stolen and made Christian. Surely that is not the Christian way? I read in Deuteronomy this morning that it is God's will that Christians should go out and kill anyone opposing them because God despises those who oppose Him! (I'm sorry I can't remember the chapter) Nowadays we know that one can't simply kill people who disagree with you. My trust in the Roman Catholic church doesn't exist anymore for obvious reasons, so how can I trust what they declared 2000 years ago to be fact, out of greed and power? I know man can often get it wrong, because we are not perfect. And I know my faith should be in God, not in men. Where does one draw the line? I understand we must change with the times, what was acceptable years ago is not now. In today's world it is getting harder and harder to trust the immense information that is out there. Man changes, but the word of God doesn't change - yet Man changes the word of God to suit his own selfish needs, and misleads others. Who do we trust to discern the truth? Ourselves? Our Leaders? I would be terrified of being a leader in these times, for fear of getting it wrong, as so many did before us!

Any comments?

[RGeeB]

God will work through leaders if they allow Him to do - and He will do it, because He has a heart for humanity. If the leaders succumb to the resulting pride and give in to their selfish desires or trying to please everyone - they make compromises. So, in secular circles, either you are a people pleaser or a dictator. In Christian circles, either you are termed conservative and legalistic or liberal and open-minded. As you said, its a tough job - that's why I feel we should respect people in authority - whether they are right or wrong. God will have His way in the end!

[Kurieuo]

...if Christianity was made the official religion, how did the Roman Catholics branch so far away from it, burning and killing anyone in their path? Many pagan beliefs were simply stolen and made Christian.

Were they? I must say, I've been studying early history and this is the first I've heard Christianity stole pagan beliefs. Infact, early Christians are recorded as being Atheists by some.

<withdrew comments>

Kurieuo.

[Kurieuo]

I read in Deuteronomy this morning that it is God's will that Christians should go out and kill anyone opposing them because God despises those who oppose Him! (I'm sorry I can't remember the chapter)

I'd recommend finding the exact passage for others to read and respond to, as it likely didn't say what you just said it did and so likely requires further clarification. "Christians" didn't even exist back then.

Kurieuo.

[RGeeB]

...if Christianity was made the official religion, how did the Roman Catholics branch so far away from it, burning and killing anyone in their path? Many pagan beliefs were simply stolen and made Christian.

Were they? I must say, I've been studying early history and this is the first I've heard Christianity stole pagan beliefs. Infact, early Christians are recorded as being Atheists by some.

Christians brought Christianity into Christmas and now some Christians want to take Christianity out of Christmas. They say that this Christianised pagan festival reduces Jesus to a baby in a manger in the eyes of the world.

As far as events like the spanish inquisition are concerned - I think it was politically motivated religious officials rather than the other way around. Anyway, there seems to be a similarity between Moses's laws about stoning and the tolerance of heresy in medieval times.

Portuguese armies conquering South America in the name of God - again seems politically motivated - unlike Israelites destroying the Caananites, which was God's promise and command.

[Felgar]

I read in Deuteronomy this morning that it is God's will that Christians should go out and kill anyone opposing them because God despises those who oppose Him! (I'm sorry I can't remember the chapter) Nowadays we know that one can't simply kill people who disagree with you.

I believe that in the New Testament we are told how Jesus altered our role as followers of God. Above all we must Love, and to me that means that we don't start wars in the name of Christianity. Much of the fighting and war in the OT I believe should not apply to us today. Jesus replaced 'an eye for an eye' with 'turn the other cheek', right?

John 18:36
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

Seems pretty clear to me. As members of Jesus' heavenly kingdom on Earth, war is no longer to be our path. In this kingdom where the first shall be last, and the last first, we're to love and tell other's about the Gospel.

[Anonymous]

"Deuteronomy 7


Driving Out the Nations

1 When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations-the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you- 2 and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. [1] Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. 3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4 for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the LORD's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. 5 This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles [2] and burn their idols in the fire. 6 For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession"

- this is the chapter i was talking about. I understand the reason for the new testament and agree with Felgar - Jesus replacing "an eye for an eye" with "turn the other cheek". I just feel that a chapter like this from the bible can be used out of context by people in power to justify going to war etc etc and stealing from other people's religions/beliefs, and this frustrates me.
Kurieuo, I am reading books, as I mentioned earlier I'm reading the Da Vinci Code at the moment, not a christian based book I know. That is why I am questioning everything. I thought it was common knowledge that Pagan beliefs were stolen and replaced with Christian titles. I will look for some evidence to support it though - perhaps you have some evidence that they didn't? Like I said before, there are alot of things I don't believe in the Da Vinci Code, but there are other things that have got me thinking.... and that is why I'm here: to gather some facts so I can come to my own conclusions!

I really appreciate everyone's feed back - I really believe more people out there should be hungry for knowledge and be talking about these things more

[Anonymous]

Mainly, the Catholic bible has 73 books while the Protestant bible has only 66. So if the bible is the infallable word of God why did he let one version of the bible contain 7 more or less books?

I just read this is the other forum. Is this true? If so, why? I never knew this. Is our bible (NIV) from the Protestant or Catholic origin? As I've said, I have very little trust of the Catholic's history at this point. This new evidence just adds to my slow becoming belief that the Catholics had their own agenda for putting the bible together 2000 years ago! Too many versions = too many mistakes = too much of MAN's intervention in the bible = this is dodgy = i need to find out more

(PS. Kurieuo, I have actually read a book a while back regarding the history of the church, and how modern christianity came about - it was a while ago, so I am a bit rusty... but this much I know: The Roman Catholics started the whole shabang... and history proves that they have got a few things wrong over the years - hence The Anglicans, Protestants, 7 Day Evangilists, and so on and so forth)

[Christian2]

Hi milla,

Please take the time to read the following article. I think it will set your mind at ease. It is 40 pages long with lots of links.

The book "The Da Vinci Code" is full of inaccuracies. The author of that book said that he intended to "challenge beliefs and compel changes of mind." The problem with Mr. Brown and his book is that he brands his erroneous "facts" as FACT. You can read what is wrong with that book at: http://www.tektonics.org/davincicrude.htm

At the top of the page you will see: "Get a stripped-down copy of this page." I recommend that you do that.

Good luck and God Bless

[Felgar]

I just feel that a chapter like this from the bible can be used out of context by people in power to justify going to war etc etc and stealing from other people's religions/beliefs, and this frustrates me.

I share in your frustration milla, and I've also experienced how these passages are used by satan to blind nonbelievers from the truth that God is love. You might be very interested to read my Defence for OT Violence thread http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... .php?t=108 which I started to specifically address this issue. In fact, that's the reason I initially signed up - to discuss that particular matter with fellow believers.

I think we've got a pretty good handle on it, though we must always recognize that in the end people are not saved by reasoning and wisdom, but by Faith. My general strategy then is to break apart satan's lies and go from there. If I can spare the time I'm going to form a lengthy write-up on the issue and I'll be sure to post it back here if I do.

[Kurieuo]

"Deuteronomy 7
Driving Out the Nations... this is the chapter i was talking about. I understand the reason for the new testament and agree with Felgar - Jesus replacing "an eye for an eye" with "turn the other cheek". I just feel that a chapter like this from the bible can be used out of context by people in power to justify going to war etc etc and stealing from other people's religions/beliefs, and this frustrates me.

Yet, this verse does not say what you said originally, although I do understand what you are trying to say. However, this passage in particular is regarding land God promised to Israel. Also wrapped up with Israel is God punishing the sin and rebellion of other nations. Norman Geisler commenting on this issue has said, "He's a righteous judge; that's undeniably part of who he is. But, second, his character is also merciful. If anyone wants to turn from their way and escape - he will let them." This latter point is something I'd defend.

Allow me to bring up an example sometimes used by skeptics, which is the case of the Amalekites. The people in this nation were far from innocent. I'm sure if we saw what they practiced that we wouldn't consider them very nice people to say the least—being utterly and totally depraved. Their mission was to destroy Israel, in other words, to commit genocide themselves. What also was hanging in the balance were the Israelites, God's chosen people through whom God would offer salvation to the entire world through Jesus Christ. We as Christians should not forget this point! With them gone, or entirely diluted into other cultures. God's plan to redeem us would be destroyed!

Kurieuo, I am reading books, as I mentioned earlier I'm reading the Da Vinci Code at the moment, not a christian based book I know. That is why I am questioning everything.

As long as you're consistent with your questioning, and even question the content within the book (which appears to be the case anyhow). It's not just a matter of examining and testing out Christianity, but it should also be remembered that other beliefs don't have a priviledged default position. This is something people I've discussed things with often forget. They ask me why I believe such and such, and I ask them why the don't believe such and such and instead prefer to believe this and that. It astounds me how much people just think somehow their position has a priviledged position.

I thought it was common knowledge that Pagan beliefs were stolen and replaced with Christian titles.

You need to be careful to define what beliefs you believe to be stolen. For example, Christianising a pagan day for Christmas to celebrate Christ's birth. This is not exactly stealing pagan beliefs. Or the fish symbol, which I've heard was apparently taken from pagans. Your statements seem strong as they imply (at least to me) that Christianity essentially came from Pagan beliefs, which is just flat wrong. Virtually no historical scholar with a PhD accepts any sort of Jesus Myth, or that Christianity was an invention from pagan myths and beliefs. If that is essentially what you're getting at, then I encourage you to cite a few highly educated scholars who take seriously any sort of thing. On the other hand, if further interested I'll just reference two pages I found to be enlightening here—Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History? by Edwin M. Yamauchi and Refuting the myth that Jesus never existed.

Maybe I've read too much into your writings, but then you never really qualified your statements, only making what appears to be broad unqualified assertions (i.e., "Many pagan beliefs were simply stolen and made Christian.") This is what I'm reacting to, not because I haven't examined the issues at hand (although I'm sure I haven't heard of every one), but because I think it is just flatly wrong and misleading to make such an unqualified assertion.

Kurieuo.

PS. I mean everything I say in respect, and do not wish to come across as derogatory in any way. I think I may have come across this way in my previous post, and perhaps even this one, but it is entirely unintended.

[RGeeB]

Firstly, I want to say that God controls history and the fate of nations. Even though countries like Assyria did not have the law of Moses, still God held them accountable. He had written a moral code in the heart of the people and the leaders. He was also very patient with them through Jonah but by the time of Zephaniah and Nahum, His period of mercy was over. He used violence to judge, in this case the Babylonians. So, we have this scenario where God judges - either by direct command (as to the Israelites in Caanan) or by allowing conquering pagans (the Babylonians, God called Nebuchanezzar His servant!).

Secondly, I accept that Christianising pagan festivals is OK. That is however not a biblical concept. Christians are not encouraged to have festivals to celebrate anything, except the communion. Again, there is no point in judging epople who observe festivals in faith. However, I think the danger is that it encourages people to go through religious phases. For example, be more charitable at Christmas or giving up chocolate for Lent. It encourages pride in religious activities and comes dangerously close to 'works' required for a Christian walk. Christianity is a relationship with Jesus, not a religion (by definition).

[Mastermind]

Didn't Jesus fulfill the old laws? Which, if I understand correctly, means the old testament does not necessarily apply to us.