Posted by alexandra_k on October 8, 2005, at 19:14:03
In reply to Re: Da Vinci Code, posted by gardenergirl on October 8, 2005, at 17:57:34
hmmmm
interesting...yeah. so the 'historical facts' are supposed to be accurate. and so that got me thinking about just where he meant to draw the line between 'historical facts' (where i guess all you can hope for really is majority consensus from the scholars in the field) and 'historical theorising' (where he is allowed to engage in speculation which may well not be accepted by most scholars in the field).
the stuff about paganism... and what paganism was like (as a religion or spiritual view) sounds fairly right to me (in the sense that i have heard fairly much the same stuff across multiple sources). with respect to christianity before Constantine came onto the scene... well... i guess there you are dealing with historical texts, and more specifically which historical texts get to be considered 'authorative' or accurate (so as to be include in the bible etc).
i'm not sure about the jesus was married to mary claim.
i'd want some independent verification of that.
i also want to have another look at da vinci's 'last supper' and 'madonna on the rocks'.
but of course, just because that symbolism may (or may not be found) in da vinci doesn't tell us anything about whether da vinci's beliefs were true or false...but the encounter interested me a great deal.
paganism (bit different to how we think of it today)
christianity (bit different to how we think of it today)
oh sh*t Rome is divided and what o what are we gonna do???
and so of course the obvious answer is to attempt a merge...
and of course to ensure the pope is authoratative...
etc.i have encountered that stuff in other contexts.
one other context (hardly the most authoratative one) was within the context of protestant church propaganda. about constantine subverting christianity to satanism (i think they mean paganism) because of the conflict.
but it is interesting to me...
i'm not so sure on that interpretation of the holy grail too...
but i have to admit...
it does sound fairly plausible to me.
the only danger is that if the texts contained are the texts that shows that mary and jesus were married and that he wanted to leave the church to her and that he was just a mortal man after all... well... then how do we know whether this is right or not until we find the darned thing? at the moment... is it just speculation or do they have independent evidence?
i'd be keen to check the sources...yeah...
so not much of a plot...it reminded me a little...
of a historical version of "Sophie's World"
the story is kind of underdeveloped
(fairly stereotyped characters)
because the point...
is in the historical claims.but without a reference list...
it is hard to know what to make of it...
poster:alexandra_k
thread:564385
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/books/20050728/msgs/564663.html