View Full Version : Da Vinci Code discussion (everything available)
Ned
1st February 2006, 22:55
A couple of days ago, a friend of mine told me that he saw The Da Vinci Code Decoded and that he was shocked by it.
In 1917 Berenger Sauniere was burried in a small churchyard in Rennes-le-Chateau. How many of you know the secret behind this priest? Or were those people right, who said that in his tomb there is also a treasure? And what is it? Is Nicholas Poussin's Et in Arcadia ego painting representing the tomb of Sauniere?
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/621/poussinorig0po.jpg
Many books were written about this, including Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Henry Lincoln, Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent. It is known that Sauniere was extremely wealthy and nobody knows the secret of his fortune.
Have you seen any Da Vinci Code documentary? Or have you read any of the books involved? I would really like to see what you all think about this.
Nestonia
1st February 2006, 23:31
Nope... i haven´t seen documentary of Da Vinci Code and never read that book... but i´m going to do it soon :P... and of course, i´m waiting for that movie... :twisted:
Le Fidèle
2nd February 2006, 03:22
First : angles and demonds > the da vinci code
2nd: i thought most of the stuff that that guy wrote was a bunch of booboo crap.
Snatcher42
2nd February 2006, 05:58
Many books were written about this, including Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Henry Lincoln, Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent.
Ah, glad you mention this book because I feel so many people give The Da Vinci Code un-due credit for originality. It's a cool book, yeah, but all its pseudo-history is lifted from here. As an aside, the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail recently came out and said they basically pulled the book out of their arses. It's mostly all made-up.
It's still interesting, though. And it's the inspiration for one of my favorite video games, Gabriel Knight 3: Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Dammed. In the game you explore Rennes-le-Chateau and the surrounding French countryside, uncovering the mystery of what Sauniere found there and the secret of his fortune.
http://gamelist.co.kr/up_img/small/2214_GAB-LLL.jpg
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3/GK3.shtm
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3/GK3Scoripa.shtm
More on the Gabriel Knight series as a whole:
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3Way/GK3Way.shtm
ArlettyFan
2nd February 2006, 06:06
According to Indochine, "Jesus Christ died" and so "so much for nothing". ahhhh :lol:
fallenONE
2nd February 2006, 06:08
*reminisces back to the days when I played those Sierra games*
Thought I havnt tried out Gab Knights tho 8)
Moco
2nd February 2006, 10:52
First : angles and demonds > the da vinci code
Agreed. Angels and Demons was a much better book and would probably make a better movie too. It was fast paced, had lots of action, great atmospheric "scenes", and felt a lot more cinematic in general than The Da Vinci Code. I'm not saying I didn't like DVC, I did. But I just feel that A&D often unfairly gets lost in the shadow of its more popular sequel. Probably because the subject matter of DVC is so much more controversial. I'm still looking forward to the DVC movie, but I'd like to see them make one for A&D as well.
Ned
2nd February 2006, 16:29
Ah, glad you mention this book because I feel so many people give The Da Vinci Code un-due credit for originality. It's a cool book, yeah, but all its pseudo-history is lifted from here. As an aside, the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail recently came out and said they basically pulled the book out of their arses. It's mostly all made-up.
It's still interesting, though. And it's the inspiration for one of my favorite video games, Gabriel Knight 3: Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Dammed. In the game you explore Rennes-le-Chateau and the surrounding French countryside, uncovering the mystery of what Sauniere found there and the secret of his fortune.
http://gamelist.co.kr/up_img/small/2214_GAB-LLL.jpg
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3/GK3.shtm
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3/GK3Scoripa.shtm
More on the Gabriel Knight series as a whole:
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/GK3Way/GK3Way.shtm
I believe Richard Leigh wanted to sue Dan Brown for plagiatory on his book from Holy Blood, Holy Grail.
Many religious experts told me that in Ancient Israel no young man with more than eighteen years of age couldn't live in the Israeli society without getting married, so I believe Jesus Christ was married.
According to the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail he survived the crucifiction and traveled with his wife (Marry Magdalene) to southern France (somewhere near Lyon, I believe, more specifically in the nowadays village of Rennes-le-Chateau) where they had a family, I mean children. Their children had descendents too, which formed the known clan of Merovingiens (Charlemagne was one of them, I think). Later they created the known Priory of Sion which were also known as The Knights Templar, the ancestors of the freemasons nowadays.
Snatcher42
3rd February 2006, 03:48
Many religious experts told me that in Ancient Israel no young man with more than eighteen years of age couldn't live in the Israeli society without getting married, so I believe Jesus Christ was married.
According to the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail he survived the crucifiction and traveled with his wife (Marry Magdalene) to southern France (somewhere near Lyon, I believe, more specifically in the nowadays village of Rennes-le-Chateau) where they had a family, I mean children. Their children had descendents too, which formed the known clan of Merovingiens (Charlemagne was one of them, I think). Later they created the known Priory of Sion which were also known as The Knights Templar, the ancestors of the freemasons nowadays.
Yup, that's what you learn in Gabriel Knight too. The problem with Holy Blood, Holy Grail is that its "research" is phony baloney. The premise that Jesus married and had children could certainly be true (and wouldn't surprise me), but there's no real evidence for that. The Priory of Sion especially has been debunked as a hoax started in mid 1950s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_Sion.
Orion
3rd February 2006, 06:36
Oh, you guys are makin my mouth water with this subject:
Let me make a few things clear for ya:
The document behind the Sauniere contoversy was proven false and this was stipulated by the authors.
The book has been debunked and was just a money grabber because people like mysteries of this sort (me too).
Since Christ began walking the earth there have been attempts to discredit him and the gospels soon after. So much for that bright idea, because the challenge hasn't even made a dent.
After all these stories of conspiracy and contoversy of every kind you can think of to throw at Jesus, not even one thing has stood the test of time except him;
Yet, they keep comming and comming in droves because something about Jesus really bugs them . . . or because their pockets are empty.
Ben even goes as far to say that there is a fair possibility that jesus could have married and had children . . .
but, people that don't know the mission of Jesus or that fact that he died on the cross can still think such things
That's the true phenomenon here . . . that people still fail to see behind the mask "religion," and take the time to prove top themselves (or disprove) what they think they know.
The Bible tells us that these days will come; that people will lose faith and that only a small number will remain; that we will be attacked from all sides for believing in Him. . . we are seeing it and it is a shame that people let these ideas come into thier heads from those that have become rich with their theories ( :roll: )
And once the theories fail to do what the Bible does (withstand the test of time, the internal evidence test and extrernal evidence tests, etc), once they cannot get anymore believers in their theory, the books stop and the movies begin. And then it all starts again as if the books and movies and what they portray Jesus as, have withstood the test of time.
I challenge any Woman/Man to disprove that Jesus died on the cross; to disprove that He is who He says He is . . . he said, NOT THE "HOLY BLOODERS" WHO ARE TOO BUSY BLOOD SUCKING
And for those that say that the Bible has been changed over time: to you I say this, that if even oine syllable, one letter, one word were to be removed fromn the Bible, then the pattern of sevens would not manifest.
NOT EVEN THE MOST POWERFUL COMPUTER ON EARTH CAN DUPLICATE THE PATTERN OF SEVENS FOUND IN THE BIBLE . . . AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THOSE HEBREW CODES . . . AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT NUMEROLOGY
and can you believe those bible scholars who discredit for themselves almost everything that is written in the Bible?? Yes we have taken care of them too, just like the authors of "the holy blood . . ." yet they still refuse to go, just as stubborn as the Bible, I guess (they have no real idea of what they are meddling with . . . it's a shame)
Mark MY WORDS> when the movie comes out, watch CNN and you will see them discussing the Jesus that is portrayed in the movie . . . they will actually discuss something that has been conjured up in people's heads for the quick buck . . . I hope so many people watch the movie and believe it (I really do) because I am tired of all this pop culture crap that is ruining the youths of this world . . . time to filter those people out . . .this is too much
Remember whgat I told you about CNN (and don't forget what they do every Christmass and Easter . . . what you see opn news stands and on tv stations such a s CNN and A&E etc . . . they talk about the same damn thing EVERY YEAR. IT SELLS. I hope I will not remain the last Christian on Earth . . . but if it comes to that, well, then so be it . . . I will not turn my head against the truth . . . I dare them all, for they all shall dare me . . .
Ned
3rd February 2006, 11:44
First of all let me ask you this: do you believe in symbols, signs of any kind, such as the crucifiction of Jesus, even? I do. All of them are signs. The Bible shows them every path of the way. And I'm not talking about the Bible Code but the signification behind every words written there. The nowadays Bible I don't think is as original as the Bible written back then, for they could might as well hide some things or interpreted it subjectively.
There is a big, long story about Jesus and the world surrounding us, with some people that believe in Him and others that don't. The "conspiracies" that had happened before, and will happen again are real from one point of view to another. Like I said, subjectivity again. But this time the fact, the evidences are real.
I'm not a standard religious guy, I mean I don't believe in what the masses believe, which is a religion induced by the "great religious leaders", a religion so rigid that even after centuries of controversy they didn't want to lose their wrong ideas when certain things are concerned. I myself am a religious guy, but I have my religion, I believe in God, in Jesus and Virgin Mary, things like that, but I look for the hidden words, hidden meanings, which are behind the words shown. I tell you read between the lines, look for the hidden truth, because it may be the one we are looking for.
Like the Scripture says: "many called, few chosen" or something like that. Ofcourse they will be a few people that will survive. People deny more and more the fact that this is getting more and more occult, symbolistic, mysterious. They say that this is just fake, is not real. But they forget that the nowadays religions are inducing these hidden messages, hidden facts that will rule our world in the near future. The result? Like you said, people will lose their faith, the real faith, and will start believing in someone or something that has behind it nothing but lies and deceptions. It is not only the religions who are doing it but the world leaders behind the curtains.
All in all this mistery of Rennes-le-Chateau, Sauniere and Da Vinci Code is exploited by some people for the interest of getting money out of it, saying that it is just a hoax. Others don't believe that. But the truth behind it I don't think we will find out, because these people wouldn't allow us (somehow) to find it out, covering it all up. :roll:
Steve
3rd February 2006, 12:37
Just remember guys Orion 'predicted' 9/11!!
oh but yeah only told everone afterwards!! nice work! :roll:
Tyza
3rd February 2006, 13:01
First of all let me ask you this: do you believe in symbols, signs of any kind, such as the crucifiction of Jesus, even? I do. All of them are signs. The Bible shows them every path of the way. And I'm not talking about the Bible Code but the signification behind every words written there. The nowadays Bible I don't think is as original as the Bible written back then, for they could might as well hide some things or interpreted it subjectively.
There is a big, long story about Jesus and the world surrounding us, with some people that believe in Him and others that don't. The "conspiracies" that had happened before, and will happen again are real from one point of view to another. Like I said, subjectivity again. But this time the fact, the evidences are real.
I'm not a standard religious guy, I mean I don't believe in what the masses believe, which is a religion induced by the "great religious leaders", a religion so rigid that even after centuries of controversy they didn't want to lose their wrong ideas when certain things are concerned. I myself am a religious guy, but I have my religion, I believe in God, in Jesus and Virgin Mary, things like that, but I look for the hidden words, hidden meanings, which are behind the words shown. I tell you read between the lines, look for the hidden truth, because it may be the one we are looking for.
Like the Scripture says: "many called, few chosen" or something like that. Ofcourse they will be a few people that will survive. People deny more and more the fact that this is getting more and more occult, symbolistic, mysterious. They say that this is just fake, is not real. But they forget that the nowadays religions are inducing these hidden messages, hidden facts that will rule our world in the near future. The result? Like you said, people will lose their faith, the real faith, and will start believing in someone or something that has behind it nothing but lies and deceptions. It is not only the religions who are doing it but the world leaders behind the curtains.
All in all this mistery of Rennes-le-Chateau, Sauniere and Da Vinci Code is exploited by some people for the interest of getting money out of it, saying that it is just a hoax. Others don't believe that. But the truth behind it I don't think we will find out, because these people wouldn't allow us (somehow) to find it out, covering it all up. :roll:
You are right!
The ultimate truth lies beyond the garden of tears.
Orion
3rd February 2006, 18:15
Just remember guys Orion 'predicted' 9/11!!
oh but yeah only told everone afterwards!! nice work! :roll:
Oh you guys are so nice to me . . . thanks!
I told YOU guys after the fact, NOT OTHERS . . . I told OTHERS before the fact . . . not you! OTRERS outside this forum . . . haven't you read?? Anyways, I don't go looking for anyone's approval . . . I am so fu****g beyond that shit, man. I am talking about real people and real worries not some crap about lying about that shit.
You don’t have top believe me because I don’t give a damn. In fact, I would rather you didn’t because then life would be son much simpler. I just thought that people would know that I wouldn’t lie about stuff like that . . . I am telling you that when I read your post, Steve, it really hurt because I am sincere yet surrounded by those who don’t think before they talk. AND 9/11 happenened on WHAT date?? Oh yueah that’s right . . . And this forum was up on what Date??? Oh Yeah, that’s right.
Lastly, Please explain who “everyone”is that you refer to. Who did I tell “afterwards?” I would really like to know what you are saying because you seem to know more than I do about myself and the situation. Have you read my post. Did you read how I told everyone at work about what was going to happen 2 weeks before the fact? Have you read anything Steve? Thanks, I really appreciate your disrespect, even though I said that I would love some day to spend some quality time with people on this forum. Thanks whatr you said has really made my heart blossom full of joy in this Fricken world once again because of all the shit I have to put up with, I still have to answer to your damn accusations that make no sense and remind me of when Jesus was on the cross and they spat on him and mocked him and yet he still forgave them while he was bleeding. Well I am bleeding now, but MY blood is full of venom; venom of what I have seen and what I see and what I see in people.
Thank you very much for your 2 cents . . . literally.
Orion
3rd February 2006, 18:48
Ned wrote:
First of all let me ask you this: do you believe in symbols, signs of any kind, such as the crucifiction of Jesus, even? I do. All of them are signs. The Bible shows them every path of the way. And I'm not talking about the Bible Code but the signification behind every words written there. The nowadays Bible I don't think is as original as the Bible written back then, for they could might as well hide some things or interpreted it subjectively.
There is a big, long story about Jesus and the world surrounding us, with some people that believe in Him and others that don't. The "conspiracies" that had happened before, and will happen again are real from one point of view to another. Like I said, subjectivity again. But this time the fact, the evidences are real.
I'm not a standard religious guy, I mean I don't believe in what the masses believe, which is a religion induced by the "great religious leaders", a religion so rigid that even after centuries of controversy they didn't want to lose their wrong ideas when certain things are concerned. I myself am a religious guy, but I have my religion, I believe in God, in Jesus and Virgin Mary, things like that, but I look for the hidden words, hidden meanings, which are behind the words shown. I tell you read between the lines, look for the hidden truth, because it may be the one we are looking for.
Like the Scripture says: "many called, few chosen" or something like that. Ofcourse they will be a few people that will survive. People deny more and more the fact that this is getting more and more occult, symbolistic, mysterious. They say that this is just fake, is not real. But they forget that the nowadays religions are inducing these hidden messages, hidden facts that will rule our world in the near future. The result? Like you said, people will lose their faith, the real faith, and will start believing in someone or something that has behind it nothing but lies and deceptions. It is not only the religions who are doing it but the world leaders behind the curtains.
All in all this mistery of Rennes-le-Chateau, Sauniere and Da Vinci Code is exploited by some people for the interest of getting money out of it, saying that it is just a hoax. Others don't believe that. But the truth behind it I don't think we will find out, because these people wouldn't allow us (somehow) to find it out, covering it all up.
Did Jesus make the signs you speak of through his words, Ned? Jesus said to read the signs, but his words were not signs. I understand what you are saying about signs though, believe me; if there is anyone that understand, it’s me. I just don’t see how you can give the story line behind the D’avinci code any more weight. What have you studied about it? Just curious. Have you not heard that it is all lies and now that they have gotten rich, they want to get rich some more; because the authors of “the royal Blood” are suing Brown for copyright infringement (or whatever it is) for taking their book and turning it’s central ideas into a movie.
About the Bible’s originality you speak of:
The Bible has not been changed and if you check the original Aramaic version, you will see that not one syllable can be changed or the pattern of sevens cannot occur. It is fact. And also note that these patterns of sevens occur even though many people have written the Bible, and at different times.
What people believe “subjectively” means nothing without proof. And then you have to ask yourself where is there proof and then you have to test that truth, as they have done with the Bible.
If things seem to be getting more occultish etc, then blame those that have brought “proof” of things mysterious over to the masses built upon lies, deception, and greed. And then you have those suckers that believe anything without taking the time to study what they believe in or are basing their beliefs on. That’s why “few will be chosen” because as Jesus said there are those that say they are righteous because they believe in God, but they do not do His will. And besides, there are many “Thomases” in this world who want to see Jesus in order to believe, but they don’t apply the same logic to those theories about Him put out by moronic bloodsuckers such as those who wrote “Holy Blood.” With those, they would just rather pass on the tests for authenticity and truth and would rather just believe because it is fun and exciting and mysterious and interesting. I think it is too; I love those mysteries, but that’s all they are, though . . . fiction. I spoke about this in my previous post.
All in all this mistery of Rennes-le-Chateau, Sauniere and Da Vinci Code is exploited by some people for the interest of getting money out of it, saying that it is just a hoax. Others don't believe that. But the truth behind it I don't think we will find out, because these people wouldn't allow us (somehow) to find it out, covering it all up
No. those stories aren’t exploited, those stories exploit Jesus. You have it reversed. You are saying that the exploiting is being exploited. There is no mystery about Rennes,; nor is there any truth in the “Code.” Like I said, people believe in that or they don’t, but why don’t they study it and pass that through scrutiny/test as they have done with the Bible and with the life of Jesus.
And about the cover ups you speak of: don’t forget that the “Holy Blood” book has been uncovered. And if it has been uncovered as a pack of lies and deceptions, then . . .
(^I will let you finish that premise^)
All I ask is that people test what truths they are given, and then decide.
@ Steve: I was just venting some steam . . . I don’t hate you (it’s all about respect)
Take care all.
Ned
3rd February 2006, 21:35
So far I was more objective then subjective. I haven't actually given my opinion, yet. You got what I said a little bit wrong, Orion. I didn't mean to startle this, to fuel a fire that has been burning for millenia. I only wanted to know all of your opinions, guys, including you. And I respect that, but I would continue on asking if you have other evidence besides what the media told us, meaning books, newspapers written, or even broadcasted TV shows to prove that? I don't think so. I don't have proves either. One thing I don't like is someone to base their assumptions on something other people said. I myself don't believe in things before I see them.
Did Jesus make the signs you speak of through his words, Ned?
You think that I think that Jesus made the signs? Believe it or not signs are everywhere. Even Jesus is a sign for us. Misteries are somethings hidden (or ment to be hidden, and never unrevealed) that fascinates us more and more. There are and will be people who will exploit them. You are right about the Da Vinci Code story that exploited Jesus. But aren't we the ones that disobeys the rule "believe and thou shall not search"? We are searching and we are asking questions that we aren't supposed to ask. Why? I'll let you all answer that.
When I said about the Bible and the ones that were writting it and still are, I ment specifically King James version and not the aramaic version. It is a tradition among jewish scholars to make copies of the original. I believe that, I can asure you.
And to finish your premise:
And about the cover ups you speak of: don’t forget that the “Holy Blood” book has been uncovered. And if it has been uncovered as a pack of lies and deceptions, then . . .
.. I say what's next? The truth about U.F.O.'s?
Orion
5th February 2006, 03:03
I am just going to refer you to what I said earlier . . it's all there. And, about relying on TV and books for proof etc???? Did you mean me?? I hope not because I actually trust the actuial evidence and NOT what people tell me . . . One again, let me asy that I understand what you mean but you could be a bit more clear . . . even when quoting me because I have touxched on many important things about what you have mentioned in your wearlier post . . . but I feel as if it has all gone into hyperspace, for some reason haha.
I don't like to discuss things this way because, what I say in return ( I feel) is not being adressed.
I would rather drop this discussion and instead go on and respect ewach other (not that we weren't doing that before, it's just that nothing is getting accomplished) I do not understand why people still want to believe, for instance, in the "Royal Blood" theory, when even the most celebrated Historians on the subject of the Templars says that it is hogwash; when even the authors of the "Royal Blood" themselves admit to forgery and deception; when even the evidence for Jesus and the Bible is immense, to say the least; So immense, in fact, that the Bible is the most studied and most backed documant of historical, primary source, arheological and historical evidence tested work in the world . . . No other book comes close to having as much primary source material (original text and evidence of, etc, than the Bible . . . .) With all that, the book now known to be a lie and a forgery is being made into a movie (D'vinci Code -via "Royal Blood" book) and even still debated today even though it was all made up.
They once said that King David did not exist: then they found his royal seal (bullah) etc, and the scholars changed their toon.
They said that Moses never crossed the desert (that it is a lie)because the Bible teaches us that Moses took the long way around the Desert instead of taking a short cut, even though they werer outracing the Egyptians. It wasn't until the archeologists found Military posts along the short route, that they then understood why the Bible tells us that moses took the long way. Then the scholarsd changed their toon again.
They said that the Gospels were written hundreds of years after Jesus' crucifixion. Then they have incontrovertible proof that they were wroitten only short years later in a world where importance was given to the need to copy things down. Then the scholoars chnged their toon again.
They said that the Bible has been changed throughout history. Then they find that it would be impossible for the Bible to have been changed and for the patern of sevens to continually ocurr in the New and Old testaments if this were the case. Well, the Bible is the unchanging word of God. Scholars have no answer for this . . . nor does IBM's Big Blue or any other suoper computer in teh world today or yesterday!!!!
They said that Jesus married Mary Magdalen and had children together and that she moved to England were her descendants would eminate from. Documents have been proven forged and authors have been proven lyars, yet Scholars remain silent (who gives a shit about them anyway) but the books, movies and "debates" continue on because people choose to be hypnotized and walk the earth as zombies . . . I see it every day).
I could go on. I will not debate those that do not test what they believe. Because when I do that, then my arguments and points become part of the normal game . . . but I do not play games.
(this wasn't directed at you Ned, or anyone in particular . . they are just facts that cannot be denied and I don't care who tries to deny it.) Don't forget internal, external evidence tests (as well as others) before determinin g if something is true or not. The Bible has passed them all and continues to answer to those that doubt, respectfully. The doubters have been PROVEN false, but whocares . . . the damage is done . . . and people seldom read the correction page.
I respectfully sign off from this debate because I have spilled enough truth over in the religious debate a while back . . . .
If anyone posts directed at me, I will not answer because I have toucherd upon this D'avinci code for long enough . . . I will not be a puppet to those rich bastards that only want blood money. . . Jesus spilld enough blood for you me and even the non believers who he gas forgiven.
I suggest that people do not debate this any more and rather move on and have a beer on me instead . . .
But if you wish to go on, then by all means do so if it is your will . . .
I just want to respect others and for oithers to respect me . . and I assure you all that you guys have a friend. Forget this subject and forget the controvercies because those poeople that got rich of them are still vying for more but I will not let them ruin any friendships here . . . I just want to respect and be friends with those who will have me.
^Now there is something you guys can tst for yourselves :wink:
Peace out!
Ned
5th February 2006, 23:12
When I countinued your premise I ment uncovering the truth about UFOs by some people, which in some interesting case scenarios would say that they didn't mean to tell the truth and that they apologies, they are sorry for lying the public. It would by like they would have been payed by someone to say that, on no other evidence but the one which shows only that the statements are false on purpose. It's like this subject discussed so far, about the Da Vinci Code and especially the"Royal Blood" book are deliberately declared false. Even if you said you wouldn't post anymore on this subject, I had to reply to this, and give you my opinion in this case, and you would probably see it and read it too. Like I said I don't believe something unless I see real prove. You said that they declared the Priory of Sion false too. I wouldn't count on that. Let me tell you something, my friend. When a certain "truth" (yes "truth") is somehow revealed by someone on anything including about a secret society in this case, the world leaders, the ones who have real control over us, over the world (or at least over the people easily controlable), are trying to cover it up, and to make it like it never happened, and so that it can be easily forgoten, and more so they can continue with their evil plan upon us. Every hush up made in the history has a background, no matter what anyone says. I learned that in the past six years of my life. I think you noticed that in any case everyone is trying to cover the truth. Abou what? About anything related to us, as far as it can really go. Whoever finds the truth, is a lucky person. And will know where are we heading.
I haven't read Dan Brown's book. But I wanted to know all your opinions on this. Some of them very interesting, I have to say. I even searched a lot on the internet on this matter. What have I found? Different opinions like here too.
Yes, the Bible is the best human history book in the world, with lots of proven facts. So far, even if many of us are going on a wrong direction, we are following the plan written there. Throughout the history there had been some changes in some of the copies of the Bible, although, but it remains the holiest book on Earth.
Wrong directions, wrong fate? I don't know. Some people said that we are the ones who are doing it for ourselves. So what will happen to us in the near future (or in the far future)? Things will go worse. The only thing that is left for us: love, frienship, respect and peace.
Yes, peace to you too, Orion! And to all of us! :thumbup:
Orion
6th February 2006, 06:37
You said that they declared the Priory of Sion false too.
To stick with what I said earlier, let me just say that I never mentioned Sion . . .
And I know what you mean about leaders having control over us . . . That is why I have taken control over my life . . . it has been easier for me to do because of the things I mentioned on earlier threads I won't mention here . . . that's why I used the term "zombies" in my earlier post . . . I see right through people, and sometimes it isn't a pretty sight what you find on the other side of them.
What you said about truth: Sometimes there exist truths that cannot be denied due to the evidence that we can touch and see, not having to rely on othre's say so. In some cases, the "hush up" they want you to believe is itself false, that is why you always rest on the evidence, because it will always lead you to truth . . . study it, test it and you cannot deny what it then tells you. Were the Cathars a secret society? How about the Templars?
I suggest that if people want to read up on the Templars, they do so with Malcolm Barber's "The New Knighthood: A History of the Order of the Temple," and not by what those authors of the "Royal Blood" have to say on them.
This is what one man said upon listening to Casaubon's Thesis on the Templars
"For him, everything proves everything false. The lunatic is all idée fixe, and whatever he comes across confirms his lunacy. You can tell him by the liberties he takes with common sense, by his flashes of inspiration, and by the fact that sooner or later he brings up the Templars."
I am glad that you agree on friendship Ned . . . that's what I am about. I have friends that are Atheists, Muslims, Jewish . . . and when we get together we are as brothers and sisters. With my Turkish friends . . . when we see each other it is always a hug and smiles around. It is the most wonderful feeling; to be friends with people that belong to those groups that argue and fight through the ages, yet for some reason I see beyond that and so do my friends. People are wonderful and should be respected, the only trouble is getting them to respect you . . . that is the downfall of this world . . . Live and let live; believe what you want as long as you can honestly say that you have tested what you believe, or risk being controlled by "the leaders."
no one stops to smell the flowers anymore . . . . no one except me! I hope you all do to. . .
(Casaubon: "The Templars have something to do with everything" - "I believe that you reach the point where there is no longer any difference between developing the habit of pretending to believe and developing the habit of believing.") . . . . . . . . :cheesy:
I can't wait to see this movie . . . I love this stuff, so I thought I'd bring this thread up again for those movie buffs . . .
(don't foprget to use respect guys . . . and think before you speak, just becaus the others that might find offence are simply nice people . . . so think twice before opening the mouths :wink: )
http://www.davinci-the-movie.com/gallery.html
http://www.davinci-the-movie.com/priory-of-sion-1.html
Audrey Tautou is very beautiful . . I have GQ magazine with Depp on the cover in which Audrey gives a personall interview . . . very cool . . . . I will post it for anyone, once I get a new scanner ( the current one has gone on a permanent vacation :cheesy: )
this is one rare occasion where I might just go to the movies . . . I had a bad experience there once and stopped going . . . . I had to hurt somebody . . . and now I regret it.
Anyway, don't forget what I said about the respect part :wink:
And this coming from you who hate the book Brown wrote. :D Hey, anyway, as long as you'll love the movie. Btw, yesterday this great movie just appeared on a DVD (a friend told me). I can hardly wait to see it.
Here's the review from IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382625/).
Nah . . . I loved the book . . . I love the story. Being Catholic has nothing to do with anything in this case . . . I am VERY secure :wink:
EDIT: damn . . . I didn't know jean Reno is in it too . . . excellent!!
Nah . . . I loved the book . . . I love the story. Being Catholic has nothing to do with anything in this case . . . I am VERY secure :wink:
EDIT: damn . . . I didn't know jean Reno is in it too . . . excellent!!
Yes, of course, although not one of the leading actors. :D Audrey Tautou is the one I really wanna see, after I saw Pas sur la bouche (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0356999/) and Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211915/). :brow:
I have the Amélie DVD, but have not seent the other you mentioned . . . . I will have to see it now
btw . . . the Da vinci code DVD is for sale now?? pre order I guess . . . I did the same thing with "Jurrasic Park," ordered about a year in advance hehe
Well, this friend of mine told me he saw it on stands in the media stores. I guess I'm gonna look for it as soon as possible. :)
Bootleg DVDs... :wink:
No way a major movie studio releases a movie on DVD before it hits theaters.
Bootleg DVDs... :wink:
No way a major movie studio releases a movie on DVD before it hits theaters.
they released darkness on dvd before it came out in theaters....
The potential money maker with the Da Vinci Code, though, is way beyond
what most other movies can muster . . . There will not be a legal release before/durring the movie's release in theatres . . . ir's just not going to happen, unless China has something to say about it, hah
One thing's for sure though . . . the bats are going to be out when this movie is released :roll:
If you guys can get past the turd trailer with that guy talking in that deep voice, this movie will be amoung the best ever. . .
I like that stuff too :). I have read both Da Vinci code and Angels and Demons, dont forget guys that this books are only stories based on facts, not facts. They make good stories even for people that dont believe in God (like me ) ,people that aren't christians and it seems only the vatican reacts to the books. I wanna see the movie, and i like Audrey Tautou too. Amelie is one of my favourite movies...
I like that stuff too :). . . dont forget guys that this books are only stories based on facts, not facts. . .
:doc:
I am glad the movie and an author/authors are writting history for you
:laughbounce:
:P
Going to see the movie, cause of Tom Hanks mostly
They couldn't have picked a better actor for the part . . . and while in France, why not Audrey too 8)
Bootleg DVDs... :wink:
No way a major movie studio releases a movie on DVD before it hits theaters.
Bootleged or not, I looked today in one store for the DVD, and I haven't seen it. If I don't find it in any store in my city, I'm gonna whoop my friends ass for lieing to me. :P :lol:
Anyway, if I don't find it, I will look on Bit Torrent for the DVD (when it appeares :cheesy: ) and then burn it.
I like that stuff too :). . . dont forget guys that this books are only stories based on facts, not facts. . .
:doc:
I am glad the movie and an author/authors are writting history for you
:laughbounce:
:P
hmm i dint understand that :)
I like that stuff too :). . . dont forget guys that this books are only stories based on facts, not facts. . .
:doc:
I am glad the movie and an author/authors are writting history for you
:laughbounce:
:P
hmm i dint understand that :)
me too :wink:
you said that "the books are only stories based on facts, not facts."
I think you meant to say false facts, maybe? I don't understand what you mean there.
me too :wink:
you said that "the books are only stories based on facts, not facts."
I think you meant to say false facts, maybe? I don't understand what you mean there.
I thought he ment stories based on facts, not facts based on stories.
me too :wink:
you said that "the books are only stories based on facts, not facts."
I think you meant to say false facts, maybe? I don't understand what you mean there.
I thought he ment stories based on facts, not facts based on stories.
notice he said "only" there too, so you know whqtthat means, right? I guess it's time for him to tell us what he meant because I am only interested in stories based on facts, not facts.
:lol:
He could ahve been saying that these stories are based on facts that are not facts :explication:
yingying
9th May 2006, 16:17
I am interested with that park in Paris they past in rthaty evening. :lol: :lol:
oh i downloaded the documentary about it, watched a feel minutes enuff to understand what was going on with this best seller book, and about the Holy Blood Holly Grail, very interasting..i enjoy learning history although at times is boring such as the renaissance period etc..
Ekasra
10th May 2006, 01:08
For the love of god ( no pun intended) stop with the large posts
oh i downloaded the documentary about it, watched a feel minutes enuff to understand what was going on with this best seller book, and about the Holy Blood Holly Grail, very interasting..i enjoy learning history although at times is boring such as the renaissance period etc..
The Holy Blood, Holy Grail was written by Richard Leigh, Michael Baigent and Henry Lincoln and it was based on Pierre Plantard's Priory of Sion hoax.
Pierre Plantard was one of the grand masters of the Priory of Sion back in 1950's and a very good ally of Charle de Gaulle.
The book was published in 1982 by Jonathan Cape in London.
In summary, the authors argue that there is evidence that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, had one or more children, and that those children or their descendents emigrated to what is now southern France (presumptively Languedoc region). Once there, they established what became the Merovingian dynasty, which is represented today by a secret society called the Priory of Sion.
I have the book in .pdf format. If any of you wants to read it, feel free to contact me and I will upload the file somewhere where you can get it. :wink:
Pakos
10th May 2006, 15:20
me too :wink:
you said that "the books are only stories based on facts, not facts."
I think you meant to say false facts, maybe? I don't understand what you mean there.
I thought he ment stories based on facts, not facts based on stories.
notice he said "only" there too, so you know whqtthat means, right? I guess it's time for him to tell us what he meant because I am only interested in stories based on facts, not facts.
:lol:
He could ahve been saying that these stories are based on facts that are not facts :explication:
okay what i meant was that the book is a story, not a fact, Dan Brown of course took some historical elements and added them to the book, but the book itself should not be considered historical source. Thats what i meant and sorry for the bad english there :)
okay what i meant was that the book is a story, not a fact, Dan Brown of course took some historical elements and added them to the book, but the book itself should not be considered historical source. Thats what i meant and sorry for the bad english there :)
No problem! :)
Of course Brown made the facts a story (therefore fictional) and attributed to himself discoveries he never made, competing (wrongfully) with Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln and others who contributed to the research and to the writing of the books.
Achilles
11th May 2006, 11:11
I had ever read over that novel,and waiting to watch the film.
loveherfromusa
12th May 2006, 11:58
It's a novel :!: :!:
I read the book as if it were a novel. Does the author of a novel make things up?
I enjoyed the book, but didn't assume that it was based on any facts. A novel, movie, comic, ...whatever must be real enough to relate to you in some way, but it is still fabrication.
Enjoy it as an interesting story.
It's a novel :!: :!:
I read the book as if it were a novel. Does the author of a novel make things up?
I enjoyed the book, but didn't assume that it was based on any facts. A novel, movie, comic, ...whatever must be real enough to relate to you in some way, but it is still fabrication.
Enjoy it as an interesting story.
Henry Lincoln described it as a thriller, although he wasn't the first one to do that.
Parts of Brown's book are fictional, like it was discussed, a story based on real facts. If it's a story then it has parts made-up. But it is not entirely a fabrication.
Orion
12th May 2006, 15:22
The fabrication is Jesus and Mary having children etc. But other things he talks about in the novel, such as the fibonacci numbers (unsure of name) are a real occurrance in nature. The Sion, I think, was invented in 1956, and has no real truth. The grand master lists naming Da vince and other famous artists and scientists on the list is also a fabrication.
The main docment used in the "Holy Blood and Holy Grail" book in 1982 was a forgery and the authors have come forward to say that they even invented facts just to finish the book etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Needless to say, it is a great movie, for sure, but I liked the books better.
But, anyway, you guys should investigate this yourselves if really interested.
The fabrication is Jesus and Mary having children etc. But other things he talks about in the novel, such as the fibonacci numbers (unsure of name) are a real occurrance in nature. The Sion, I think, was invented in 1956, and has no real truth. The grand master lists naming Da vince and other famous artists and scientists on the list is also a fabrication.
The main docment used in the "Holy Blood and Holy Grail" book in 1982 was a forgery and the authors have come forward to say that they even invented facts just to finish the book etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Needless to say, it is a great movie, for sure, but I liked the books better.
But, anyway, you guys should investigate this yourselves if really interested.
How about the Nag Hammadi scrolls (http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/naghamm/nhl.html), the Gospel according to Judas? Do you know details about them? :)
Pakos
12th May 2006, 16:26
It's a novel :!: :!:
I read the book as if it were a novel. Does the author of a novel make things up?
I enjoyed the book, but didn't assume that it was based on any facts. A novel, movie, comic, ...whatever must be real enough to relate to you in some way, but it is still fabrication.
Enjoy it as an interesting story.
Thats what i was trying to say with my previous posts :)
Orion
12th May 2006, 18:36
The fabrication is Jesus and Mary having children etc. But other things he talks about in the novel, such as the fibonacci numbers (unsure of name) are a real occurrance in nature. The Sion, I think, was invented in 1956, and has no real truth. The grand master lists naming Da vince and other famous artists and scientists on the list is also a fabrication.
The main docment used in the "Holy Blood and Holy Grail" book in 1982 was a forgery and the authors have come forward to say that they even invented facts just to finish the book etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Needless to say, it is a great movie, for sure, but I liked the books better.
But, anyway, you guys should investigate this yourselves if really interested.
How about the Nag Hammadi scrolls (http://www.webcom.com/gnosis/naghamm/nhl.html), the Gospel according to Judas? Do you know details about them? :)
The "Gospel" according to Judas is an Agnostic text written by agnostics probably around 300AD (not sure of the date) . . . there are many agnopstic texts from those peoples still waiting to be found also . . . nothing to write home about :wink:
As I remember Henry Lincoln said that their entire research for the books involved (including The Holy Blood book..) lead to the conclusion that all they know is based on presumptions. He said that they know nothing about all they researched, because they had no evidence whatsoever. So they didn't make anything up, they just presumed.
Orion
13th May 2006, 03:36
They "presumed," knowing it was false :wink:
Whatever, I am not going to argue with anyone about this (with respect) just because it pointless . . . I just hope that people look into it for themselves instead of getting things at face value from some rich guys and confessed liars etc etc etc . . . .
Those pop culture morons are going to be out in droves . . . . f*** them!
8)
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/da_vinci_code/ 00%! LMAO
Yeesh! I think it's inevitable that reviews of the movie are going to be on the negative side. The book was such a huge success and people are bound to have already seen their ideal movie in their head while reading the book. And after all this hype and anticipation, people are going to be disappointed that it wasn't as they had imagined it (not to mention all the religious conservatives who will hate it no matter what). Then again, they could be right and it could be a horrible film. But I really want to like this movie, so I'm going to try watching it with an open mind setting the novel aside, and in the meantime, avoid any reviews.
Ekasra
18th May 2006, 02:11
You can't doubt Ron Howards direction, or Hanks, Keller, or Tautou's acting power. Those reviews were probably made by christians that thing the movie is just big lie and they can't get past that its fiction. Its actually pretty funny, but media don't even get the advanced screenings yet since the premier is at the Cannes film festival today and it hasn't even been an hour since the film got out. :|
Pakos
18th May 2006, 13:03
yeap, Ekasra is right The Da Vinci Code may be a good movie, the reviews dont mean much in this case..
Orion
18th May 2006, 15:01
You can't doubt Ron Howards direction, or Hanks, Keller, or Tautou's acting power. Those reviews were probably made by Its actually pretty funny, but media don't even get the advanced screenings yet since the premier is at the Cannes film festival today and it hasn't even been an hour since the film got out. :|
Ekasra, it's not just a matter of the "christians that think the movie is just big lie and they can't get past that its fiction." Yes it's fiction, but if you read the novel, as I did, you will see in the facts section one big lie that stands out: the "fact" that the Prior de Sion is an ancient organization dating from 1066. That's not the case, though. It was invented in 1956 from a guy who also forged documents from the help of someone esle. This is just one false information that was being passed on as fact when all it turns out to be is a big lie and forgery.
So, the Christians aren't mad because they can't get passed that it's fiction . . . on the contrary they KNOW it is fiction more than anyone else, as well as historians and etc, it's just that there is nothing done to stop those who pass it along as being fact and we have to stand by and take it. They have been passing this story as fact for so long, even when the author himself Baiget has said that there is absolutly no evidence that Jesus fathered children. That's just not a revelation, that is simply less than a moot point because there was no evidence in the first place to even suggest that Jesus married Magdalen. The only evidence that exists is the one that has been invented since 1956.
I have also read the book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" that mentions the Poussin artwork depictng the grave (et in arcadia ego) . . . well that grave was built in 1903 that had a wife and grandmother of Jean Galibert. NOT the body of Jesus.
Don't mean to get so long winded here, but I just wanted to make a point about your comment I quoted.
btw, I loved the Baigent book and Brown's too . . . and I will probably love the movie, but I have heard that it is all just a long conversation and does not do the book justice. Understandable . . . movies rarely are better than the book . . . except for the movie the "bridges over madison county" . . . much better than the book.
Ekasra, it's not just a matter of the "christians that think the movie is just big lie and they can't get past that its fiction." Yes it's fiction, but if you read the novel, as I did, you will see in the facts section one big lie that stands out: the "fact" that the Prior de Sion is an ancient organization dating from 1066. That's not the case, though. It was invented in 1956 from a guy who also forged documents from the help of someone esle. This is just one false information that was being passed on as fact when all it turns out to be is a big lie and forgery.
So, the Christians aren't mad because they can't get passed that it's fiction . . . on the contrary they KNOW it is fiction more than anyone else, as well as historians and etc, it's just that there is nothing done to stop those who pass it along as being fact and we have to stand by and take it. They have been passing this story as fact for so long, even when the author himself Baiget has said that there is absolutly no evidence that Jesus fathered children. That's just not a revelation, that is simply less than a moot point because there was no evidence in the first place to even suggest that Jesus married Magdalen. The only evidence that exists is the one that has been invented since 1956.
I have also read the book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" that mentions the Poussin artwork depictng the grave (et in arcadia ego) . . . well that grave was built in 1903 that had a wife and grandmother of Jean Galibert. NOT the body of Jesus.
Don't mean to get so long winded here, but I just wanted to make a point about your comment I quoted.
btw, I loved the Baigent book and Brown's too . . . and I will probably love the movie, but I have heard that it is all just a long conversation and does not do the book justice. Understandable . . . movies rarely are better than the book . . . except for the movie the "bridges over madison county" . . . much better than the book.
So you found out from what the media said about the Priory, or do you have facts to prove that it was a hoax? Just because Plantard is the "inventor" of this "hoax" doesn't mean that we have to trash hundreds of years of history. Just remember what Henry Lincoln said that secret societies are ment to be secret, so I think this "masquerade" is pretty understanding.
It's not about that those who reviewed it were Christians, it is about another "dirt shooting spree" by the media. They throw mud at it so they can mess with people's minds again. I always say not to trust the media and anything it does. And ofc the movie is a fiction since it's based on Brown's novel.
Evidence? How many evidence are for most of the historical events happened in the past? How many presumptions were written about them? How many lies, even? History as we know it has twists and turns intentioned made by those who "wrote" it.
Like I said, there are many facts shown and still they say that they have no evidence whatsoever. I stopped believing what I find out from the media (in any possible way), and I sarted believing in what I want.
If Jesus had children or not, been married with Mary Magdalene or not, I don't care that much since it belongs to the past. But to research about them, write stories that probably are fake or not, and to make such a fuzz about it in the media, it is way to much.
I believe that the movie will be good, not as what it shows us but as a movie, as a cinematographical work, since Reno, Tautou and Hanks are playing in it. :brow:
Orion
18th May 2006, 16:16
umm, no Ned . . . I don't get my stuff from the media or novels. I heard it from the mouths of the conspirators themselves and also from French official court records etc . . . .
You have to realize that if it wasn't for Plantard in 1956, you would not even be saying the stuff you said . . . even after there is proof that the prior de sion never existed and was actually invented in 1956 . . . even after you have proof of it's birth in that year, you still question that because your miond has been filled with this pseudohistory. And that you use quotation marks around the words 'hoax' and 'inventor' tells me that you have not understood what others have proven. and it isn't even a case of rpoving anything anymore now or before :arrow: the forged documents, the priest who wasn't really rich, but died a poor man (I have seen the actual primary source evidence (church records), the prior de sion and the bigot and criminal man behind the hoax . . . and the court records that show everything including his admittance to a Frech judge that it was all a hoax . . . . it just boggles the mind that people still want to believe . . . and it even boggles the mind that 1/3 of Canadians think that the DaVinci code is true . . . it even boggles the mind that there have been 24 documentaries disproving the davinci code and we don't here of them, but we do get to see the ones defending the davinci code
it also boggles the mind that seemingly all historians agree that the facts in teh davinci code and the Baigent book (holy blood holy grail) are falsehoods and pseudoscience. yet these being experts in ancient documents and forgery experts and people who have PHDs in History, it boggles the mind that it turns out that people get to pick and choose their experts in the field.
I respect you Ned (you know that) but if you are going to keep at it with this prior de sion hoax etc, then I have nothing else to say since it appears that you did not do any research on the matter.
I could go on about other falsehoods concerning what Brown and Baigent et al have said about the church and constantine and about the gnostic gospels and how he presumes to be fact that the gnostics wou8ld have agreed about Mary Magdalen's seemingly higher status in the da vinci code . . . when the gnostics weren't even close to accepting women etc
Read the "gospel" of Thomas and read the part about Magdalen . . . to understands you have to study the texts and the history or you are better off arguing with children (not you specifically, but those who take things in at face vbalue just like sheep beeheheheheeeheehebebebebbbbhheeee :arrowl: more sheep for you)
:wink:
edit:
Evidence? How many evidence are for most of the historical events happened in the past? How many presumptions were written about them? How many lies, even? History as we know it has twists and turns intentioned made by those who "wrote" it.
I will have you know that there is not one book nor ancient document that comes close to the historical primary evidence backing the Bible. It is simply amazing . . . but like you said, Ned, beleive what you want. YES!! but please research, or don't believe in anything. I don't want to argue with you or to have you think that I am posting in an angry manner etc . . . just want to let you know that since you can't see me, I am happy and not angry with anything you said (sometimes people read and think they are being talkked down to so I just anted to make it clear :wink: )
Alright, here's what I have to say. I have researched, enough just to last for a life time. But yet I see all these people arguing which one is right, and I come to the conclusion that all of these are fabrications of the people behind the scenes. I don't know what is the truth but I'm gonna find it out no matter how, but not like I did it so far, but in a different manner.
This year I have witnessed many symbolic things that made me understand that all we have is ourselves and our believes, our knowledge, our faith. We have to hold on to these, because in the end it's like the last things we'll ever hold on to.
I'm not taking it the wrong way, Orion, I'm just intrigued by how the facts are bumped against the wall by the people who have discussed them in the first place. Like I said, they are fabrications by the people behind the whole thing. It's like a side plan (just-in-case-something-goes-wrong plan) made especially for discrediting everything and everyone.
Btw, I would like to know what is the name of that book that you mentioned, that is backing the Bible...
Orion
18th May 2006, 22:28
Ok Ned . . but I still think that you are missing the point . . . there was never any history before the said fabrications . . . nothing! There was nothing to hide before and there is nothing to hide now.
There are many books backing the bible! But that's not where you should get your evidence, if that evidence isn't primary source and backed heavily. I am talking about archeological records, eyewitness records from different sources and non Christian sources, the amount of ancient documents that back up the bible . . . and all those times that doubters have said that what the bible has said is false, regarding historical events, only to have archeological evidence etc make the biblical claims factual . . . they are endless.
btw Ned what exactly have you researched . . . I only ask because I am interested to know what other research there is that you speak of (would like to take a look and see what you mention)
thanks!
I have recently seen the movie, The Da Vinci Code and I have to say it is very good. I don't know whether it is based on real facts or not but one thing I know: it symbolises one truth, that anyone can fabricate a lie or a truth, but as long as one can believe it then it is reality.
Great performance (I tip my hat :D ) from both Hanks and Tautou (she actually is quite charming :brow: ) which makes me wonder if this movie would ever be nominated for Oscar or at Cannes.
It got me confused first when Sir Leigh turned against Robert and Sophie for his "quest" of the grail. I thought he was one of the Opus Dei.
Oh and...
btw Ned what exactly have you researched . . . I only ask because I am interested to know what other research there is that you speak of (would like to take a look and see what you mention)
thanks!
... I was talking about the truth and the search for it in my own way. I have spent several years searching it in many occult writings such as King Solomon's Ars Notoria and Ars Paulina, Masonic symbolism and Initiation in Occultism by a very well known Romanian occultist, or even The Talmud, Koran, Bible or The Code of Hammurabi.
It made me realise that the truth lies in ourselves. The symbolism shows the truth in a way that no possible christian religion could ever do it.
Christianity nowadays is not the real christianity. This religion wants for it's believers, material wellfare, whcih firstly means money (and we both know that money is the eye of the devil, so they say.. :roll: ). This religion commits iconoclasm (the materialising of the image of the divinity in a hand made work[of art]) when the ten commandments speak of it as a sin. This realigion isn't spiritual anymore and lies on the surface, but what's beneath it, are ugly secrets.
How much blood does it need to be spilled for religion? We all know that it was much too much. People are killing eachother for it every day. It's a truth, a real fact.
Read The Bible with different eyes. And maybe you will see something.
I don't think this Da Vinci code is fake. It shows us what a symbol has to show: a secret. If and only if someone will ever decipher it will be a lucky man or woman. But a damned one too. Because he/she needs to keep it a secret as it was first told.
This is the search I was talking about, Orion. The truth!
I have lost my first religion because I have seen it was a huge lie. I don't want to live with a lie. I believe in something different now. The truth? I don't know about you all, but for me is my truth. As long as I believe it, it's fine with me. It's my reality. :)
Orion
7th June 2006, 18:40
Well Ned I loved the book and will probably like the movie . . .
As for the other stuff you mentioned, I will leave you at peace with your thoughts and your "truths" But as far as Christianity is concerned, you have no clue, with all do respect.
I will leave it at that . . . this thread is boring now :zzz: too many clichés for me . . . too many of the same ol' same ol' for me :wink:
I will stay with my truth because it has actually been investigated to death . . . now the Davinci scandal has been proven a farce and lie, yet people still go ahead like sheep to the slaughter . . . . behehehehe behehehe
p.s took you long enough to reply :wink:
FIN
Well Ned I loved the book and will probably like the movie . . .
As for the other stuff you mentioned, I will leave you at peace with your thoughts and your "truths" But as far as Christianity is concerned, you have no clue, with all do respect.
I will leave it at that . . . this thread is boring now :zzz: too many clichés for me . . . too many of the same ol' same ol' for me :wink:
I will stay with my truth because it has actually been investigated to death . . . now the Davinci scandal has been proven a farce and lie, yet people still go ahead like sheep to the slaughter . . . . behehehehe behehehe
p.s took you long enough to reply :wink:
FIN
At first I didn't want to reply because I knew you would disagree my opinion, so it had no need to be posted. I posted now because I recently saw the film and I loved it.
As for "the other stuff" I say that anyone believes what they want to believe, and don't you think for a moment that I don't have my feet on the ground anymore. :wink:
I noticed one "mistake" or something I don't know how to describe it, in the movie (I hope I saw it well enough). In the armoured truck scene, when Robert didn't feel very well (due to the fact that they were in a small and dark place). Sophie told him how her mother used to reach out and touch Sophie's temples with her hands when she was scared. So she did the same to him. She reached out, touched his temples with both her hands, and during that he was holding a hand. It was a hand of an old woman. A small, feminine, old hand. That's what I saw, and I hope I wasn't halucinating :blink: . Did any of you guys see it? I mean it for those of you who saw the movie. Or was I seeing things? I'm very curious to know if I am not the only one who saw it.
Orion
7th June 2006, 21:48
so, both Sophies hands were on his temples the whole scene? haha if nobody has an answer to this, then I will want to see the movie even more lol
sometimes it could be an editing artifact . . . or maybe you went for popcorn just before that scene commenced :wink: and missed a possible answer to your question :lol:
anyway, I am glad that you mentioned the "feet on the ground" 8)
That's all I want to know :D
so, both Sophies hands were on his temples the whole scene? haha if nobody has an answer to this, then I will want to see the movie even more lol
sometimes it could be an editing artifact . . . or maybe you went for popcorn just before that scene commenced :wink: and missed a possible answer to your question :lol:
anyway, I am glad that you mentioned the "feet on the ground" 8)
That's all I want to know :D
Yeah, actually I didn't see it at the cinema. I saw it home. Hanks was holding (for 1 or 2 seconds) a woman's hand (I guess they kinda missed that at the video editing or I don't know..). That hand was a hand of an old woman. I figured what the hell, it can't be Audrey's hand since both her hands were on his temples. That's kinda odd.
I will download the movie one more time and try to make a screenshot and post the time (in minutes and seconds) when that happened.
Edit: got it!
I must've been blind! It's his hand. He was holding his hands together all along. :? I gotta say, he has ugly hands. No offence but he almost fooled me.
The time was 49:01.
I couldn't make a screenshot.
Orion
7th June 2006, 22:44
:lol: I was going to say "are you sure he wasn't holding his own hand?" but then I didn't because I didn't want to look dumb :P
It was hard for me not to ask that question . . .
:lol:
:lol: Yeah but his hands shocked me a little. I thought it was an old woman's hand. :blink:
Orion
7th June 2006, 22:49
Yeah, I must admit, that if his hands truly look that bad, then I can understand how you could think what you did . . . I remember shit like that happening to me too.
vBulletin® v3.7.5, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.