How to be "brave" in Hollywood --- attack Christianity

[Powerman]

Maybe this will cause Christians and the Church to start speaking out against this crap and pushing back.

Or maybe people will get interested in the history or their faith and start doing some investigating of their own.

God forbid they do that.

Would you rather them just blindly accept man made dogma is fact in some ignorance is bliss state of existence?

 

[Abbey Normal]

OK, let's write a book entitled "Big Ugly ******* who rape White Women"....

or "The Flaming Faggot --- adventures in hair dressing, group sex and cruising for young boys"

It will all be fiction of course, so no one should be offended.

Or perhaps Hollywood would make a movie suggesting that the Holocaust never happened. Throw in a bunch of historical places, events and facts, so many people will assume the movie's premise must be true.

Just fiction, right? Why should anyone be offended?

 

[Dr Grump]

OK, let's write a book entitled "Big Ugly ******* who rape White Women"....

or "The Flaming Faggot --- adventures in hair dressing, group sex and cruising for young boys"

It will all be fiction of course, so no one should be offended.

For a start, you are using inflamatory words (and that second one, hey that might be a hit!!). There are no inflamatory words in the Da Vinci Code. Just a book abotu an idea. Nothing more, nothing less. Certain words tend to inflame (such as yelling "fire" in a theatre for example). Putting an alternative thesis out there in fictional form should be no big thang....

 

[Abbey Normal]

For a start, you are using inflamatory words (and that second one, hey that might be a hit!!). There are no inflamatory words in the Da Vinci Code. Just a book abotu an idea. Nothing more, nothing less. Certain words tend to inflame (such as yelling "fire" in a theatre for example). Putting an alternative thesis out there in fictional form should be no big thang....

You mean like my "The Holocaust Never Happened" example? It's just an alternative thesis, right? Do you think that would ever get made into a movie? Not a chance.

There are vastly different rules in this country about what is considered unacceptably offensive. Anyone who can't admit that the only religious group that can be criticized with impunity are Christians, is being, well, what is it libs on this board are constantly accusing others of- oh yeah-"intellectually dishonest".

 

[Dr Grump]

You mean like my "The Holocaust Never Happened" example? It's just an alternative thesis, right? Do you think that would ever get made into a movie? Not a chance.

There are vastly different rules in this country about what is considered unacceptably offensive. Anyone who can't admit that the only religious group that can be criticized with impunity are Christians, is being, well, what is it libs on this board are constantly accusing others of- oh yeah-"intellectually dishonest".

So we're comparing the death of 6 million jews, blacks, gays, gypsies to whether Jesus might have married Mary Magdeline. The fact that 6 million people died is provable (and abhorrant if you deny it). Whether Jesus married Mary Magdeline is open to interpretation and no big deal. If Christians do not believe it, then no harm no foul....

 

[Abbey Normal]

So we're comparing the death of 6 million jews, blacks, gays, gypsies to whether Jesus might have married Mary Magdeline. The fact that 6 million people died is provable (and abhorrant if you deny it). Whether Jesus married Mary Magdeline is open to interpretation and no big deal. If Christians do not believe it, then no harm no foul....

Come on Dr., it's just an "alternative thesis". Perhaps the wackos and anti-Semitic haters who spread these lies have uncovered a vast conspiracy to fabricate the Holocaust. Or perhaps not. Either way, it's just fiction tied up in a factual bow. It's just a movie. Right? No big deal, right?

But thanks for proving my point about the vastly different standards as to what is unacceptably offensive.

 

[dilloduck]

Come on Dr., it's just an "alternative thesis". Perhaps the wackos and anti-Semitic haters who spread these lies have uncovered a vast conspiracy to fabricate the Holocaust. Or perhaps not. Either way, it's just fiction tied up in a factual bow. It's just a movie. Right? No big deal, right?

But thanks for proving my point about the vastly different standards as to what is unacceptably offensive.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Abbey Normal again.

 

[Abbey Normal]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Abbey Normal again.

 

[Dr Grump]

Come on Dr., it's just an "alternative thesis". Perhaps the wackos and anti-Semitic haters who spread these lies have uncovered a vast conspiracy to fabricate the Holocaust. Or perhaps not. Either way, it's just fiction tied up in a factual bow. It's just a movie. Right? No big deal, right?

But thanks for proving my point about the vastly different standards as to what is unacceptably offensive.

You are comparing apples with oranges. As I said, it is easy to prove that the holocaust happened. Not so that Jesus was the son of a god....

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You are comparing apples with oranges. As I said, it is easy to prove that the holocaust happened. Not so that Jesus was the son of a god....

Oh yeah. Holocaust denial is a thoughtcrime. WHy do you love big brother, dr. grump?

 

[Hobbit]

You are comparing apples with oranges. As I said, it is easy to prove that the holocaust happened. Not so that Jesus was the son of a god....

Maybe not, but it is pretty easy to prove that he never married or had a family. The only 'gospels' that even imply it are the gnostic gospels, which were written over a hundred years after the fact. If I wrote a 'historical' book that I claimed came from 'eyewitness' evidence that claimed Lincoln left a bunch of notes about how the South was supposed to rule the country and that he was going to retract the Emancepation Proclamation, but that all of the politicians close to him covered it up, how credible do you think it would be?

Then there's the lack of a true bloodline. According to all the theorists and all the people who study this bullcrap, the line of Jesus ended up in the Marovingians, the first royal line of France. The confirmed surviving Marovingians have been genetically tested and have been found to have no trace of semitic DNA of any kind anywhere in their genetic makeup.

There are only two 'solid' pieces of evidence they lean on. The first is that, at some point (can't remember when), somebody mixed up Mary Magdeline and the prostitute Mary that Jesus saved from the angry mob (you can even see this in "The Passion of the Christ"). It's an easy mistake to make, but conspiracy nuts point to this as proof that the Catholic Church intentionally labeled her as a prostitute to discredit women in the church (wtf? Then why'd they leave in the record in Paul's writings that indicated that the early church gave women more rights than any other organization?).

The other bit of 'proof' given is that Mary stayed behind at the crucifixion, possibly risking her life (by association with a 'heretic') to mourn Jesus, and that she was the only one to go with Mother Mary to the tomb the day of the resurrection. This is supposed to prove they were married because only a wife or mother would show such dedication. Well, Mary was obviously one of Jesus' more dedicated followers. As a woman living long before women's lib, she was far less likely to be arrested and executed than his male disciples. Attending to his tomb was also a very 'feminine' action to do, as well as mourn publicly, rather than wander off in shock and mourn later, as is the typical reaction from a man. Then, there's the fact that I, personally, know several females I would take a bullet for that I wouldn't marry on a dare.

The last bit of 'proof' I've heard of is that John looks feminine in the painting of The Last Supper. Well, any art student would know that if you look at, well, every other depiction of the apostle John from the same era, and you will see that everybody depicted him as being feminine. Either it was fashionable at the time, or every single artist from that period was a member of the fictional version of the Priory of Scion, an organization that actually started in the 1950s, not the 1000s.

This downright blasphemous idea that Jesus made a family doesn't stand up to scrutiny and is just a cheap effort to detract from the divinity of Jesus. Jesus was both fully divine and fully human, but the gnostic gospels and this new wave of 'alternate' versions of Jesus would have you forgetting the first part.

 

[Dr Grump]

Oh yeah. Holocaust denial is a thoughtcrime. WHy do you love big brother, dr. grump?

I don't persoanlly believe holocaust denial is a thought crime. I just think that holocaust deniers are a bunch of idiots due to the huge amounts of physical evidence....

 

[dilloduck]

I don't persoanlly believe holocaust denial is a thought crime. I just think that holocaust deniers are a bunch of idiots due to the huge amounts of physical evidence....

People who question the "official" version of the holocaust are in prison. Those who question the "official" version of the Bible are rich, free-thinkers. You're just not going to get this hypocrisy stuff are ya ?

 

[Dr Grump]

This downright blasphemous idea that Jesus made a family doesn't stand up to scrutiny and is just a cheap effort to detract from the divinity of Jesus. Jesus was both fully divine and fully human, but the gnostic gospels and this new wave of 'alternate' versions of Jesus would have you forgetting the first part.

You make some really good points, and I just saw a doco about the hoax re the Priory of Scion, and the hoax does seem to stand up to scrutiny on what I saw (IOW, the two Frenchmen responsible for it were trying to dupe people). However, the bible itself (IMO and my opinion only) doesn't hold up to scrutiny in that there is no proof that what happened did indeed happen. It might have, but nobody knows for sure (only those that have faith, which is a whole different subject). So, the thought that Mary M and Jesus could have been married might be true. I have no idea. But to get het up about a piece of fiction that hurts nobody and then compare it ot an event that affected millions is just silly IMO. As for Jesus himself, I think he existed, was a good, pious person by the sounds of it, but was not devine...

 

[Dr Grump]

People who question the "official" version of the holocaust are in prison. Those who question the "official" version of the Bible are rich, free-thinkers. You're just not going to get this hypocrisy stuff are ya ?

David Irving is an idiot, but he doesn't deserve to be in jail. Again, comparing the holocaust to a piece of written paper is comparing apples and oranges. You really don't see the difference do ya?

 

[dilloduck]

David Irving is an idiot, but he doesn't deserve to be in jail. Again, comparing the holocaust to a piece of written paper is comparing apples and oranges. You really don't see the difference do ya?

We're not comparing the holocaust to a piece of paper--we're are comparing the holocuast to an attack on a group of people who believe the something.

 

[Dr Grump]

We're not comparing the holocaust to a piece of paper--we're are comparing the holocuast to an attack on a group of people who believe the something.

Dan Brown has not attacked anybody. he put an alternative theory in a fictional book. Big deal. Did he tell Christians to stop believing? Did he say people should not believe in the bible? Hell, even the characters in the book didn't say "this is definitively what happened". Christians need to get a thicker skin IMO...

 

[dilloduck]

Dan Brown has not attacked anybody. he put an alternative theory in a fictional book. Big deal. Did he tell Christians to stop believing? Did he say people should not believe in the bible? Hell, even the characters in the book didn't say "this is definitively what happened". Christians need to get a thicker skin IMO...

OK, Grump--I got a great plot line for ya ( all fictional of course).
There is this group of Jews who secretly collaborate with the Nazis. Their motivation is to gain access to the miilions of dollars of thier fellow Jews' assets. They cruise all over Europe ratiing on thier brothers and sisters. Do you think there would be any protests by the Jewish community if a movie with this plot was premiered? It's just fiction.

 

[Hobbit]

You make some really good points, and I just saw a doco about the hoax re the Priory of Scion, and the hoax does seem to stand up to scrutiny on what I saw (IOW, the two Frenchmen responsible for it were trying to dupe people). However, the bible itself (IMO and my opinion only) doesn't hold up to scrutiny in that there is no proof that what happened did indeed happen. It might have, but nobody knows for sure (only those that have faith, which is a whole different subject). So, the thought that Mary M and Jesus could have been married might be true. I have no idea. But to get het up about a piece of fiction that hurts nobody and then compare it ot an event that affected millions is just silly IMO. As for Jesus himself, I think he existed, was a good, pious person by the sounds of it, but was not devine...

By legal standards concerning burden of proof, reasonable doubt, and credibility of testimony, the biblical account of Jesus' life is can be considered true while the gnostic account cannot. If the Bible doesn't meet the standard of proof, we need to rethink the entire legal system and possibly disqualify any case that relies solely on eyewitness testimony.

As far as getting bent out of shape, the thing that's getting us bent out of shape is how many easily duped people believe this perversion of scripture and try to tell the world how evil the church is for covering up 'the truth.' I wish it was just a piece of fiction like any other, but you don't need to tell me that it's fiction. You need to tell the people walking around proclaiming the evils of the Catholic church and how chauvanistic it is for covering up the 'true' role of Mary Magdeline.

 

[jillian]

By legal standards concerning burden of proof, reasonable doubt, and credibility of testimony, the biblical account of Jesus' life is can be considered true while the gnostic account cannot. If the Bible doesn't meet the standard of proof, we need to rethink the entire legal system and possibly disqualify any case that relies solely on eyewitness testimony.

As far as getting bent out of shape, the thing that's getting us bent out of shape is how many easily duped people believe this perversion of scripture and try to tell the world how evil the church is for covering up 'the truth.' I wish it was just a piece of fiction like any other, but you don't need to tell me that it's fiction. You need to tell the people walking around proclaiming the evils of the Catholic church and how chauvanistic it is for covering up the 'true' role of Mary Magdeline.

OK, I can see where it would bug you to the extent that you don't buy it. But to be honest, it isn't blasphemy. No where does it say one shouldn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah if that's their belief, just a flight of fancy based on the acknowledgement that he was also flesh. In fact, if you read the book, it talks at the end, about faith being good for people and how it shouldn't be shaken. I think part of the problem you're having with it is a cultural thing....understandable. But for non-believers who see it as "just a book" or "just a movie", it doesn't rise to that level of importance any more than Godspell or Jesus Christ, Superstar, should be taken as gospel truth (pun intended). Should you not see it? Perhaps. Should you tell the people who believe as you do that they shouldn't see it? Sure...if they find it offensive. I guess I just see the possibility of Jesus having been married as interesting. Also interesting, to me, anyway, is that since Jesus was an Essene, (at least seems to have been the case based on the Dead Sea Scrolls) his body couldn't have been attended by any woman but for his mother and/or his wife. His body was attended by both Mary's. Just a side-note.